She’s got balls.

Via Drudge, a tragic story from the local CBS station in Chicago: Family Attacked By Teens Who Cut In Line At Six Flags “Fright Fest”

The melee started about 8:45 p.m., when a group of young people cut in front of a 50-year-old woman in line with her 51-year-old husband and 12-year-old son in the park’s Southwest Territory, near the Raging Bull and Giant Drop rides, Smith said.

The woman asked the group to stop using foul language in front of her son…

The thugs retaliated not against her, but her son.  Her husband was then obliged to get involved to protect their son, and this lead to all three of them getting a serious beat down:

…one of the teens “sucker-punched” the boy, Smith said.

The boy’s father stepped in, as did his mother, but the group overpowered them, continuing to kick, punch and stomp them as they went down to the ground, Smith said.

Almost certainly the wife thought she was protecting her son when she provoked the beat down, and she probably also thought she was doing the job her husband was failing to do.

The scenario above is strikingly similar to one I read about on a gun forum a number of years ago.  In the gun forum scenario three families were walking back to their cars on a dark street and a group of thugs was walking behind them talking loudly and cursing amongst themselves. A woman in the group turned to the thugs and told them to stop cursing and learn some manners, since there were women and children (the gun owner’s son) present.  I described the gun forum scenario in 2011 in my post Chivalry and protecting the weak*.  In that post I pointed out that the woman who told the thugs to stop cursing was not protecting the group, but putting the group in danger.  This observation provoked an outraged emotional response from a woman in the comment section:

The example the man used of punks cursing and using foul derogatory language around his family and him doing nothing was appalling. I mean if you are at a little wayne concert okay (no business bringing kids there). However if you are at a family friendly event you should expect your family to be treated with a certain level of respect. I call it a manitude. You should be able to exude enough manliness to make other men back down, especially if they know they are in the wrong. If you won’t protect your own family from punks what good are you? And it’s wrong to blame the woman for wanting to be able to walk back to her car IN THE COMPANY OF MEN, and not have her kids ears assaulted.

In both scenarios a group of thugs was cursing around a family, and a woman in the family group decided to put the thugs in their place since (to her mind) the men were failing to protect the group.  Luckily in the gun forum scenario I shared in 2011 it didn’t escalate into violence.

This is an area where feminism, conservatism, and chivalry mix to create a prescription for disaster.  Feminism tells women they are just as tough as men, and conservatives tell women they are kick ass gals who show more balls than men.  Lastly chivalry promises that men will step in and solve the problem if a kick ass gal miscalculates how a group of thugs will respond to her tough talk.  Most of the time the men are able to keep the kick ass gal’s actions from creating a catastrophe, but as the Chicago scenario demonstrates this isn’t guaranteed.

*See also my follow up post at the time, Lets you and him fight

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Chivalry, Guns, Manliness, Moxie, Traditional Conservatives. Bookmark the permalink.

204 Responses to She’s got balls.

  1. Gunner Q says:

    Women aren’t going to adjust well to their Brave New World. If these feral teens limited themselves to hurting the women then I’d just shrug… but…

    “The thugs retaliated not against her, but her son.”

    They were looking for trouble and breaking the rules; an incident was inevitable. It’s a coward’s act to hit a bystanding child.

  2. Pingback: She’s got balls. | @the_arv

  3. SnapperTrx says:

    Me: “That’s a whole nest of hornets, lets walk around it.”
    Her: “No, let me poke it.”

    Sounds like, in both situations, the men knew that the assault of foul language on their sons ears was preferable to a possible (and in one instance, delivered) assault of fists. Sorry, ladies, your in a public place. People will talk how they talk and act how they act. In typical fashion, however, women and liberals like to try to bend reality to fit their needs, and we all suffer when reality bites back. Unfortunate event for this family.

  4. Otto says:

    Years ago a car cut me off. At next red light, wife, in passenger seat rolls down window and starts to give them hell. Guys get out of driver and passenger side and head toward me. Suddenly driver calls to other guy and they both get back into car and drive off.

    Had a long “educational session” with my wife about choosing your battles.

  5. Dave says:

    I still can’t figure out why most women are poor at judging the threat posed by others who are physically stronger than themselves.
    It is so common for a 125-pound woman to taunt, provoke, insult, and challenge a burly 250-pound bouncer to a fight. Meanwhile, a guy who looks exactly like her, realizing that the man could break him in two with perfect ease, would quickly judge the situation, and “play it cool”, even if the bouncer were clearly in the wrong.

  6. ys says:

    This is easy. Women get to feel courageous because they can be sassy without physical blowback. I’d never belt a women, especially in public.
    As society descends, though, different story. My childhood was perhaps peak “girls can play with boys but still give the girls chivalrous special treatment.” That time is ending.

  7. ys says:

    Also, not to hijack, or trying to offend, but…
    I played a little game called, “Guess the race of the attackers.” I am a winner.
    PS Nine attackers? On two people in their 50s and their kid? Insane.

  8. Hazelshade says:

    Makes you worry about those European countries with female military leaders. And females in a military at all, for that matter.

  9. Frank K says:

    I still can’t figure out why most women are poor at judging the threat posed by others who are physically stronger than themselves.

    Probably because she figures that she’ll get away with it because she’s a woman, and that even if he does escalate that there will be no shortage of white knights rushing to her rescue.

  10. RecoveringBeta says:

    It’s a consequence of single motherhood; the vulgar teens, I mean. You bring up a good angle with the “bad ass woman” trope, I hadn’t thought of it that way before.

  11. Frank K says:

    Makes you worry about those European countries with female military leaders.

  12. Caspar Reyes says:

    The woman’s behavior in that scenario is far more unseemly than bad language from a bunch of punks, which is not unseemly at all if you think about it. I mean, thugs gon’ thug.

    To go heads-up into a no-win situation is not manly but foolish. It is more manly to keep one’s women in line. I wonder if the best response may be to deal not with the toughs but with her, with a “shut up, woman!” or perhaps even a “shut the f**k up, woman!”.

  13. earlthomas786 says:

    Probably because she figures that she’ll get away with it because she’s a woman, and that even if he does escalate that there will be no shortage of white knights rushing to her rescue.

    I was watching a Netflix documentary ‘Last Chance U’ where the QB that came to the JUCO was kicked out of Florida State for punching a woman in a bar. De’Andre Johnson is his name.

    There was actual survellience video with the altercation. It looks like he brushed up against her (not very hard), she gets mad, makes a fist, and then strikes him first. He then punches her back and she gets a dose of reality. It was nonstop coverage of white knights playing the holier than thou card saying how could he do that to a woman.

    Now he could of handled the situation differently…but I never saw anyone in the major media mention or even allude to the fact she provoked it.

  14. thedeti says:

    women shouldn’t write checks with their mouths they can’t cash. Worse yet, they shouldn’t expect husbands to cash said checks.

    What happened here was that wife knew the thugs wouldn’t beat her; but either didn’t think about or care that the thugs would beat her husband and son. Or she expected to be able to say what she wanted and that her husband would back her up.

  15. earlthomas786 says:

    I still can’t figure out why most women are poor at judging the threat posed by others who are physically stronger than themselves.
    It is so common for a 125-pound woman to taunt, provoke, insult, and challenge a burly 250-pound bouncer to a fight.

    Bill Burr did a bit about that…it’s because men can’t hit them. He said do you know how big of a jerk I’d be to people much larger that I am without any fear of being knocked out…but men don’t get that ‘privildge’ because we know a man can go and knock you out if you poke them enough.

    And then other guys would tell him…’are you nuts…that guy is bulit like a linebacker, what did you expect’?

  16. Chris says:

    “Probably because she figures that she’ll get away with it because she’s a woman, and that even if he does escalate that there will be no shortage of white knights rushing to her rescue.”

    Pretty much this, although the tide may be turning. Remember that whole incident with the Cleveland bus driver?

  17. Jason says:

    Oh…..but you all forget years of watching “CSI” and “Law & Order” and countless movies, TV commercials,”police dramas” and other media we have learned that “girls kick ass” with no training!!!! They’re hot, sexy, and sassy! I knew a Tae Kwan Do instructor who was a “kick ass girl” and it took years of practice and dedication. Effort to get where she was with these skills (kills?). She wasn’t “hot” by the way. She was pretty, but nothing like you see on TV where the ten bad guys come upon her, and she takes down all of them without breaking a sweat, or “reasons” with them and of course, they see the “error” of their ways.

    I took a severe beat-down ONCE for running my mouth at a nightclub during my college years. Sure, I was drunk….but I learned QUICKLY after that: “don’t write checks your body can’t cash” and I had bruises that purple and guady-yellow. Blood was present as I recall. Pain too. Man…..it hurt!

    There is a time for straight-up “self-defense” and “standing up for yourself” but those times are rare, and strong discernment of the situation is needed. I am no street fighter, but I could take a punch or two before going down unless said dude is a top-face marine, or kick-boxing type…..

    Today’s modern woman plays both hands. She’s “one of the guys” and “can hold her own” and “doesn’t need a man to protect her” but with the same hand, will expect someone (a man) to come to her defense at her own undoing (running her mouth with snarky remarks usually, or throwing a drink in another mans face). She forgets that the criminal…..be it teenage thugs, a rapist, a mugger, or a robber doesn’t respond to the moral codes of feminism, of chivalry (a misused term btw). The world outside and within the forays, morays, and taboos of culture don’t apply to people who have no qualms or codes to begin with. She assumes it does.

  18. Caspar Reyes says:

    Reminds me of Cane Caldo’s post a couple of years back called “Find the Lady in Weighting”.

  19. Hazelshade says:

    @ Otto, well played. My younger brother got into a situation like yours once at the bowling alley. Close to midnight, plenty of cheap alcohol. Four of us guys were bowling next to a mixed group of Vietnamese people, including a dozen or so roudy guys. He said something or they said something, I don’t know, but suddenly they were all rolling up their sleeves and mouthing off at us. We apologized and continued bowling and my brother realized before it was too late that his comrades did not “have his back.” On the way home he repeated all the nasty stuff the Vietnamese guys said to us and scolded me for being a coward. Next day told him he was an idiot and good thing he wised up in time. He said yeah sorry I was too drunk etc.

  20. jjsaz says:

    Anybody else notice she’s 50 with a 12 year old son? Had her kid at 38. Had to lean forward! Heaven help her dumb ass husband.

  21. Jason says:

    Bill Burr. Video of the year. language warning:

  22. Here says:

    Queen Bee attitude. She assumed she could command others to obey her.

  23. earlthomas786 says:

    ‘Queen Bee attitude. She assumed she could command others to obey her.’

    Or trying to be a mother to everyone. They often don’t stay in their lane.

  24. GregMan says:

    “Women get to feel courageous because they can be sassy without physical blowback.”

    That isn’t always the case when “Teens” are involved.

  25. Cane Caldo says:

    This is an area where feminism, conservatism, and chivalry mix to create a prescription for disaster. Feminism tells women they are just as tough as men, and conservatives tell women they are kick ass gals who show more balls than men.

    And from “Chivalry and Protecting the Weak”:

    Our feminized society is horrified by the tendency of men to protect themselves and others using violence.”

    Black racism should be added to the list of the ingredients. Those black men thought the line rules didn’t apply to them because those rules are for pompous and faggy white weaklings.

  26. White Guy says:

    My wife has almost pulled this shit before. My concern is her ‘road rage’ is going get my kids hurt when they are out driving around.

    Have all women in America lost their collective minds????

    (Jason, that video was a hoot) I’m all about being a gentleman now!

  27. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    Or trying to be a mother to everyone. They often don’t stay in their lane.

    Exactly. Men who fail to limit the scope of their wives “MoM!” status can wind up in any number of bad situations. Don’t expect “MoM!” women to self-limit, either. They must be taught, and reminded regularly.

  28. Cane Caldo says:

    Colin Flaherty covered this attack, and a couple other recent incidents in this video

    To go back to the OP: many people want whites government to “do something” about blacks and other (not for long) minorities, but the first fight that must be won is in one’s own household if a man’s wife is a feminist who is “horrified by the tendency of men to protect themselves and others using violence.” and who is mouthy and haughty.

  29. Opus says:

    We weren’t there but is it possible, the way the negroes talk (at least the way I have seen it in your movies), that their bad language was NOT swearing as such but the usual way of black talk. If so, then this ex carousel rider’s, as I take her to be, mouthing at the Negroes was a form of white middle-class cultural supremacy?

    The worst example that I have had the misfortune to witness – and I had only been in the United States a few days – was in a bar outside of D.C. when a female companion and A Grade slut took it upon herself to morally berate, and virtue signal at, the owner of the Bar. Any man trying that would firstly have been barred and then physically evicted but on that occasion the Bar owner said and did nothing.

    The frequent plea of female fear of men always washes a little thin, at least I have never seen it.

  30. Dalrock says:

    @Caspar Reyes

    To go heads-up into a no-win situation is not manly but foolish. It is more manly to keep one’s women in line. I wonder if the best response may be to deal not with the toughs but with her, with a “shut up, woman!” or perhaps even a “shut the f**k up, woman!”.

    Right. The men (or “youths”) she was beaking off to are most likely going to see the offense as not coming from the woman, but from the man (who bitch is this?). In Lets you and him fight I quoted a story from Marc ‘Animal’ MacYoung:

    And once again, guess who was getting the hard looks? See along with that cultural bias about how women should behave in public, also comes the assumption that it’s the male who is responsible for a woman’s bad behavior. So although she had just insulted them, they’d be wanting to discuss the insult with me.

    When women do this they not only provoke the thugs, but they lower the status of the men whom the thugs see as protecting them.

    However, what she had done by first moving ahead of me — is in their eyes — lessened my status.

    But most women have no idea what they are doing when they do this. They aren’t really thinking it through, they are just lashing out emotionally expecting this to provoke the men around them to make them feel safe.

  31. bob k. mando says:

    thedeti says: September 29, 2017 at 10:01 am
    What happened here was that wife knew the thugs wouldn’t beat her;

    what happened was that what she “knew” was completely false to reality. you know, delusional. like chicks usually are.

    and she doesn’t have any excuses either. this is a ChicagoLand theme park. PorchMonkeys PorchMonkeying has been an annual feature of the summer festivals in both Milwaukee and Chicago for something like five years now.

    she damn well knew better.

    if she didn’t know better, she’s too incompetent to vote. or bear children.

    or raise them.

  32. Boxer says:

    Dear Dalrock:

    But most women have no idea what they are doing when they do this. They aren’t really thinking it through, they are just lashing out emotionally expecting this to provoke the men around them to make them feel safe.

    I disagree. I think the average woman knows exactly what she’s doing when she does this.

    Note that women have inherent communicative abilities which are inherently more complex, and the ability to discern emotional states and manipulate others via rhetoric only gets more pronounced through puberty. See Marlene LeFever’s work on this and related topics.

    Women end up masters at projecting concepts, both verbally and non-verbally (through clothing, for example), and to assume they are ignorant about the consequences when they attempt to manipulate men (both strangers in a parking lot and her male companions) with offhand remarks is to play into their hands.

    Best,

    Boxer

  33. Dalrock says:

    @Boxer

    But most women have no idea what they are doing when they do this. They aren’t really thinking it through, they are just lashing out emotionally expecting this to provoke the men around them to make them feel safe.

    I disagree. I think the average woman knows exactly what she’s doing when she does this.

    Women end up masters at projecting concepts, both verbally and non-verbally (through clothing, for example), and to assume they are ignorant about the consequences when they attempt to manipulate men (both strangers in a parking lot and her male companions) with offhand remarks is to play into their hands.

    Fair point. To clarify, at one level she understands that she is lowering the status of the men around her. This is the intent, with the expectation that it will prod them into white knight status, a duty she perceives them as neglecting. What she doesn’t understand is that her feeling of fear provoked by the outside group isn’t just a feeling. She thinks that if she provokes her menfolk she can make them make the bad feeling go away. What she doesn’t understand is that she is taking a bad feeling and turning it into a real risk, and that in the process she has made it harder for the men protecting her to be able to do so. She isn’t hoping to provoke a beat down, especially to herself. She is hoping to provoke a different outcome, where the men in her group exhibit what the commenter I quoted calls “manitude” to magically make the outside men back down.

  34. earlthomas786 says:

    ‘I disagree. I think the average woman knows exactly what she’s doing when she does this.’

    I think it’s their inherit mom complex. Well unless they are your own children or you have the title given to you by the church…you don’t have motherly authority over random teens anymore than I have any fatherly authority.

  35. wander in Houston says:

    “Youths” (lest I trigger word filters) were responsible for the destruction of six flags Houston. They pushed away the paying customers by fear of violence, often not paying admittance themselves, and trashed the park physically and financially. The last straw was two gang fights and a murder in the parking lot in the same week (if I recall correctly.) This coupled with poor management on the corporate end caused them to overvalue the real estate surrounded by a war zone. I enjoyed fond memories there but as things were getting rough people were going to six flags San Antonio and Dallas instead.

  36. feeriker says:

    This took place in Chicago, so we can assume a few things here.

    1. The thuglets were ghettospawn.

    2. The family taking the beat-down was as lilly white as they come.

    3. The family should have known better than to 1) attend a public event like this in Chicago, a city thst is now owned, lock, stock, and barrel, by feral ghetto thugspawn; and 2) do anything other than give said ghetto thugspawn they widest berth possible, especially if the family is unarmed (which most white sheeple in Chicago are).

    This family was given a very painful and expensive lesson in what used to be known as “common sense.” Let us hope that they buck the current trend and internalize it.

  37. Damn Crackers says:

    Here is how you take care of a Sarah Silverman-type who plays “Let’s you and him fight!”

  38. Forbes says:

    That’s not balls she’s got–that’s naivety. There’s a reason to avoid public venues like amusement parks–unsupervised teens (and older) that exist to ruin the experience for everyone else. Foul language is to be expected.

  39. Boxer says:

    Dear Dalrock:

    Thanks for this. A deeper reading provides even more material for discussion.

    at one level she understands that she is lowering the status of the men around her. This is the intent, with the expectation that it will prod them into white knight status, a duty she perceives them as neglecting. What she doesn’t understand is that her feeling of fear provoked by the outside group isn’t just a feeling. She thinks that if she provokes her menfolk she can make them make the bad feeling go away. What she doesn’t understand is that she is taking a bad feeling and turning it into a real risk, and that in the process she has made it harder for the men protecting her to be able to do so.

    I suppose my question now is whether women are blind to real-world consequences from birth, or whether contemporary mores have induced in them (and, if we’re honest, in men too) a false state of consciousness, in which everywoman thinks she can mouth off without any comeuppance.

    I know what Anon would say: they don’t understand cause and effect. I just wonder where the root of this ignorance lies.

    Any conjectures from the audience?

    Boxer

  40. Gunner Q says:

    “But most women have no idea what they are doing when they do this.”

    “I disagree. I think the average woman knows exactly what she’s doing when she does this.”

    It doesn’t matter. Throw her to the wolves whether she’s guilty or not and get another wife before participating in a 9-on-1 street fight. No point in dying for a lost cause. But of course, the dindus started with the little kid. The father couldn’t let that pass.

    I’m impressed security got it under control quickly enough to prevent serious injury.

  41. Boxer says:

    The thuglets were ghettospawn.

    In other words, it’s a “negro problem”. This despite the fact that the dreaded darkies lived in North America for 300+ years, and they didn’t behave poorly before, say, 1966 or so. I thank LBJ and the “great society” for imposing lawlessness on the shantytowns, rather than melanin content.

    Placing blame where it’s due: The thuglets were almost certainly raised by single moms, and came of age without any consistent male presence in their lives (even uncles and grandfathers tend to be absent). Indeed, the ghetto is a matriarchy. Look there for the practical future of feminism.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  42. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer – While returning the minority population back to a two-parent household would help out a lot, there were still many problems associated with crime among the black populations in the US vs. others.

    http://theinjusticefile.blogspot.com/2011/07/black-males-historical-crime-rates.html

    This fact was know even by the most famous Negro writers of the time:

    W.E.B Du Bois:

    “In the city of Philadelphia the increasing number of bold and daring crimes committed by Negroes [since 1890] has focused the city on this subject. There is a widespread feeling that something is wrong with a race that is responsible for so much crime, and that strong remedies are called for. One has but to visit the corridors of the public buildings, when the courts are in session, to realize the part played in law-breaking by the Negro.”
    Book: The Philadelphia Negro – 1898 (pg. 241)

  43. Heidi says:

    It is accepted as truth that nothing is more powerful than the verbal beatdown of a Strong Woman. When I was a kid, I assumed that offenders (male or female) would melt before the awesome power of my righteous indignation. It wasn’t until 7th grade, when I provoked a girl who was bigger and stronger than I, that I realized I might actually get my clock cleaned if I didn’t learn a little more discretion; another girl bailed me out on that occasion.

    I fear this woman has never had such an epiphany, and as Dalrock says counted (unconsciously or consciously) on her man to get her out of the danger she’d brought upon herself. And now she has brought down serious harm on her young son.

  44. Pingback: She’s got balls. | Reaction Times

  45. Oscar says:

    @ Boxer says:
    September 29, 2017 at 12:47 pm

    “I suppose my question now is whether women are blind to real-world consequences from birth, or whether contemporary mores have induced in them… ”

    I’ve never seen this “let’s you and him fight” behavior in countries where men feel free to beat women. I don’t want the US to become that kind of country, but that’s where we’re headed.

  46. Boxer says:

    Dear Damn Crackers:

    This fact was know even by the most famous Negro writers of the time

    Uh, no.

    I read that work a long time ago. It seemed like it was apologia for Black social problems due to discrimination; but as with everything, a deeper reading is more illuminating. It’s freely available on the web, by the way.
    http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-philadelphia-negro/

    What he’s talking about is not widespread negro misbehavior, but misbehavior specific to urbanized, deracinated negroes, who have suddenly been uprooted from extended families in the American South, and transported north without any notable community structure to support them.

    Moreover, I’d bet you (and I also) would feel much more comfortable walking around the negro ghetto in 19th Century Philadelphia, than in contemporary Chicago. That’s another discontinuity in your rebuttal, but it’s neither here nor there.

    In short, Du Bois tends to back my position, rather than yours. People need community. The ghetto doesn’t offer any community to speak of. It’s composed of shiftless single mothers. Children are not called to account for small things, and so their behavior escalates. As it was then, so it is now, multiplied…

    Boxer

  47. earlthomas786 says:

    I just wonder where the root of this ignorance lies.

    Any conjectures from the audience?

    Well if we still have the effects from the fall (and I believe we do)

    She’s more easily deceived and can be more easily deluded. Combine that with a academia system that fills their head with you go grrl feminism, Hollywood kick assery and sassy retorts and blame man when things go wrong and she can think she can do whatever she wants with no consequences. I think we discussed earlier how women have a harder time seperating fantasy from reality espeically when it comes to cinema and televisonbrainwashing.

    You may have seen the latest of Heartiste’s videos…apparently in Finland the women have telekinisis power to subdue men.

  48. earlthomas786 says:

    And no joke…a news station facebook posted about Hefner whether he helped or hurt women.

    The majority of women said he helped women…because of feminism and empowerment and other nonsensical terms. Here’s a guy who by all definitions is a cad, exploited women for profit, and basically treated them as much as objects as you can get…and you get deluded women thinking this guy is a hero. No wonder game can work if you find the right broad who is so deluded in sexual immorality she thinks a pimp or a cad is a hero.

  49. Boxer says:

    Dear Earl:

    I don’t really visit Heartiste much, and haven’t for years. This is a hilarious video. The power of the purse. lol

    Regards,

    Boxer

  50. Random Angeleno says:

    There was a time when most women knew to not start confrontations with strange men, for they learned early the power of male violence, usually at the hands of their brothers and sometimes fathers, but sometimes other bigger people in their environment. It’s best if women were like Heidi, they would learn this lesson early in life.

    The potential for violence is very well understood among most men. An example of this: it shows up frequently in the quick apologies offered when men bump into one another at the bar or on the dance floor. Don’t tick the other guy off, especially if he’s bigger than you. Or there is more than one of them. That’s why that husband kept quiet at first, he knew the potential for violence. Hope the wife got the lesson loud and clear that is not always good to open your mouth, even if you’re right, sometimes it’s better to live another day physically unscathed.

  51. John Q Public says:

    Dalrock, I don’t disagree, but you’re missing the most important aspect: different groups seem to have different ideas about what is acceptable behavior!

  52. Trust says:

    I’ve seen this in my upbringing. I have a gamma father who was always trying to become the ultimate alpha, a bipolar mother who thought she was both never wrong and the universal martyr, and two drama queen sisters who have four children by three convicted felons.

    I remember one time about 30 years ago, I was literally the smallest boy in school at the time, and three other boys yelled an insult at me as we drove by. My mother mashed the brakes turned to me and said “get out and bust one in the mouth.” I told her that any one of the three were twice my size. She advised me “bust the leader in the mouth and the other two will take off running.” I refused and was subjected to extended insults from my own mother that she raised a wimp. Fact is, I wasn’t so much afraid of them as knowing I was outmatched and it wasn’t worth it. The next day in school was one of the worst I ever had though. Thanks mom.

    A few years later, I was cut off in traffic by a pickup truck with three large men. Was annoying, but not personal. My dear sister reached over and laid on the horn. I kept knocking her hand away, and she kept reaching over and honking, declaring “I won’t be intimidated by them.” I said “You? I’m the one who will get yanked out of the car and squashed.” I was once again called a wimp.

    Women have spent a lifetime freely saying things to others that would earn a man saying the same a black eye. A false sense of security coupled with an air of superiority can literally be dangerous.

    These situations truly present a no-win for husbands. If you keep the altercation from escalating to physical, you are a wimp. If it becomes physical, you don’t have to be a coward to be outnumbered and outmatched…. and lose.

  53. Cane Caldo says:

    @Boxer

    In other words, it’s a “negro problem”. This despite the fact that the dreaded darkies lived in North America for 300+ years, and they didn’t behave poorly before, say, 1966 or so. I thank LBJ and the “great society” for imposing lawlessness on the shantytowns, rather than melanin content.

    The Great Society plans were terrible. I believe GS was a trial run. Guaranteed Minimum Income is the next step–coming to every shade!

    But we also have to recognize that many blacks have chosen their behavior; both individually and corporately. GS was a stumbling block for blacks, but they were not a roadblock. Many blacks choose to believe that there exists a Black Way to Live, and that Authentic Blackness is best expressed as what any Christian ought to call sin.

    3 But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. 2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, 4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. 6 For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, 7 always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth.

    We see these things in people of every complexion, but in America these traits are lauded most vociferously among blacks. Black-produced entertainment concerns itself with these sins: exactly, and precisely. When the concept of “White Privilege” is examined, it almost appears there is nothing really there; no one can lay a finger on exactly the thing “White Privilege”, and say, “Here! Luke gave a job to Larry that should have gone to LaShawn!”.

    That leads many to discount White Privilege as silly or phantasmal. That’s wrong too. It’s not a whole bunch of nothing. It’s envy masqueraded and propagandized.

  54. Gunner Q says:

    Boxer @ 12:50 pm:
    “In other words, it’s a “negro problem”. This despite the fact that the dreaded darkies lived in North America for 300+ years, and they didn’t behave poorly before, say, 1966 or so.”

    Blacks voluntarily self-segregated from whites even when blacks were well-behaved. We didn’t naturally get along at the best of times.

    Whites don’t do well in captivity. Blacks don’t do well in freedom. Exceptions don’t disprove the rule and 150 years is long enough to know that another attempt at racial harmony won’t end differently.

  55. Random Angeleno says:

    I grew up being very short for my age until I got to high school. So I got bullied, but I always fought back and they backed off eventually. Both parents were okay with me fighting back though they wanted me to avoid that if I could. Later in high school and college, I learned to avoid confrontations to begin with as I found that grownup fists and weapons can do a lot more damage. Now I think the total suppression of fighting on school campuses may have some undesirable side effects on boys growing up.

  56. Frank K says:

    You may have seen the latest of Heartiste’s videos…apparently in Finland the women have telekinisis power to subdue men.

    Strong with her the force is!

  57. earlthomas786 says:

    I was once again called a wimp.

    It’s easy for them to yell insults and dish them out because they don’t have to take a beating. It’s easy to say how tough you are if you don’t have to back it up. When men are nothing but big talkers my BS meter goes up…for women doing that it should be no question. Most logical men would agree…trying to go 1 against 3 is a best an idiotic idea and at worst a death wish. Which is more dangerous for civilized men now…women’s mouths or feral men?

  58. earlthomas786 says:

    I was bullied in high school as well…and if it was 1 on 1 I’d fight. If it was a group, I’d get out of there. Bullies don’t often operate alone, they are usually big talkers or insulters in a group. Big deal about insults, unlike the easily offended who can’t take it…words hurt less than fists. I still wouldn’t confront a group of guys or try and take a guy who is clearly bigger than me…I’d try to diffuse or get out of there.

    The other lesson I learned from bullying…I hit the weights and I still do them to this day. They pick on the weak for a reason.

  59. honeycomb says:

    Oscar ..
    I’ve never seen this “let’s you and him fight” behavior in countries where men feel free to beat women. I don’t want the US to become that kind of country, but that’s where we’re headed.

    Agreed Oscar. And, refresher training whenever required.

    I’ve told many a violent woman .. “if you decide to take a man’s position .. you will take a man’s punishment.”

    [I have had more women attack me for saying NO to having sex with her than when I refused to commit to a serious relationship with her. Yes, they are that stupid.]

  60. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer –

    “What he’s talking about is not widespread negro misbehavior, but misbehavior specific to urbanized, deracinated negroes, who have suddenly been uprooted from extended families in the American South, and transported north without any notable community structure to support them.”

    Maybe we are saying the same thing ,you didn’t read the link I attached, or you misunderstood what I meant. I agree an urbanized dispossessed class of people are going to be in a world of hurt.

    “Moreover, I’d bet you (and I also) would feel much more comfortable walking around the negro ghetto in 19th Century Philadelphia, than in contemporary Chicago. That’s another discontinuity in your rebuttal, but it’s neither here nor there.”

    True again, but what is the discontinuity you see? Do you know what my argument is?

    I’m a nature and nurture type of guy. Human phenomena tend to be a mix of both. I think the problem we’ve had since at least Marx is that the social/economic/educational nurture explanations of history and problems tend to be seen as the only explanations of those problems.

  61. Trust says:

    @earlthomas786 says:

    Which is more dangerous for civilized men now…women’s mouths or feral men?
    _______________________

    Depends on the context. In and of themselves, women’s mouths are less dangerous.

    However, when the woman’s mouth is directed at other men, they may very well get even angrier at being provoked by someone they are unwilling to retaliate against But they’ll have no such restraint towards the man she is with…. and he may get it worse than he would have if he had provoked them directly.

    It’s like when Ron Artest (later known as Metta World Peace), took crap from Ben Wallace and then attacked a fan. He felt he couldn’t retaliate against Ben, but when a little fan mouthed off he was like “there is someone I can whoop.” He took his anger at Ben out on someone he could. Same with mouthy wives. A lot of males just don’t do that, certainly not with witnesses…. so they direct it at a target they see as both beatable AND legitimate.

  62. earlthomas786 says:

    I think the problem we’ve had since at least Marx is that the social/economic/educational nurture explanations of history and problems tend to be seen as the only explanations of those problems.

    Whereas Scripture points out we are all sinners and we have deceitful hearts. Fights and wars start from the desires within is. All Marx did was try to blame it all on the outside world in order to either overlook the inside or cover it up…he basically created a system that legitimized envy.

  63. Oscar says:

    @ earlthomas786 says:
    September 29, 2017 at 2:13 pm

    “It’s easy for them to yell insults and dish them out because they don’t have to take a beating.”

    For now. Civilized men don’t beat women. But Americans are becoming less civilized, so….

  64. Damn Crackers says:

    Actually prior to Marx, Rousseau had a lot to say about social educational theory, General Will, etc. But I am sure someone hear can point out other sources of error (e.g., Sabbatean Jewish heresies, Diggers, Gnostics…)

  65. Anon says:

    Boxer.

    I just wonder where the root of this ignorance lies.

    Any conjectures from the audience?

    Women get tingles from violence.

    Plus, ‘let’s you and him fight’ is a mechanism via which a woman can decide whether to switch sides. Remember, in prehistoric times, this is how women decided when and where to switch sides.

    Women are extremely obsolete. Unfortunately, the men who fail to hold women accountable are as well.

  66. earlthomas786 says:

    For now. Civilized men don’t beat women. But Americans are becoming less civilized, so….

    And to this point there’s still plenty of blue pill white knights seeking to rescue a damsel and a justice system seeking to ruin those guys…but the numbers of white knights are shrinking and the justice system is getting worse…so…

  67. Anon says:

    The incident described in the main article is exactly why the diffusion of AI will be disastrous for women. This is simply because AI will treat men and women equally, that too at a speed that female antics and waterworks cannot effect.

    No, an AI will not be present at the altercation itself, but as it analyzes video, and produces a recommendation for the court, it will simply treat both genders equally. This will also be pervasive in other sectors of the economy, as AI takes over millions of little decisions and simply is not biased by FI.

    And no, AI will not be ‘programmed to account for the FI’. People who act in accordance with the FI do not know that they do so. Plus, AI tasked with business productivity will always beat out one tasked with lower-productivity priorities (like the FI).

  68. Oscar says:

    @ earlthomas786 says:
    September 29, 2017 at 2:32 pm

    “Whereas Scripture points out we are all sinners and we have deceitful hearts. Fights and wars start from the desires within is.”

    James 4:1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? Do they not come even from your lusts that war in your members? 2 Ye lust, and have not; ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain. Ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

    “All Marx did was try to blame it all on the outside world in order to either overlook the inside or cover it up…he basically created a system that legitimized envy.”

    Marx was a lazy, despicable, human parasite. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that his philosophy attracts people like him.

  69. Anon says:

    Lastly, note that incidents like this comprise of the true cost of associating with most women. The true cost is hidden from men in most instances, but will become visible once alternatives (like VR sex) tend to win just because of the much lower cost/risk/hassle.

  70. Casey says:

    @ Earl Thomas

    The video from Finland is laughable.
    Those techniques works great on a paid actor executing a script.

    As the video further upthread of an altercation between a man and a woman in a bar clearly shows…..moxy is no damn good against a mean right jab.

  71. Pingback: Hefner and the Thots of Hell. | Dark Brightness

  72. necroking48 says:

    @Dalrock

    Looks like Artisanal Toad was right about you all along….You are nothing but a gutless coward who can’t handle any opinion that differs from your right wing fascist garbage

    As soon as you come across a comment you don’t like, you delete it and ban them….I could never understand why you do that, now I know why…..It’s because you’re a FAGGOT, and a closet FEMINIST, who is pushing your pro Catholic, right wing fascist Ideology in your blog, and you won’t have anyone challenge your sick views.

    You are NOT a Christian Dalrock, all I see you as, is a cowardly LOSER who spends his whole life whining and bitching how done in you are by women, instead of manning up and taking responsibility for the terrible way you and your brainwashed Catholic sheeple treat them

    Yeah I admit I infiltrated your pathetic blog under false pretenses in order to post a few comments and see what you retards talk about, and I even pretended to agree with you by making comments that I thought sounded just like you losers, but the game is up and my conscience wouldn’t let me tolerate how much of a bunch of whiny, entitled, cry babies you all truly are, no wonder women behave they way they do!! they need REAL MEN who show sacrificial love to them….once you do that THEN women will be the beautiful creatures that God created, it’s you idiots that turned women into enemies but you’re such mangina’s you can’t see that

    I gave you a chance to grow up Dalrock, but you didn’t take it, Artisanal Toad and I exposed you for what you truly are: a sissified cowardly FAGGOT who is pushing an exclusive pro Roman Catholic, pro SJW garbage, pro right wing asceticism Ideology, while pretending to be a Christian….You’re a joke! and a loser….you might fool your bunch of deluded brainwashed Catholic retards, but you never fooled me

    How did I infiltrate your blog?………..Tor is awesome isn’t it!!!

    Enjoy your whole lonely life whining about women, instead of being a REAL MAN

    UNSUBBED AND GOOD RIDDANCE

    [D: You mad bro?]

  73. Oscar says:

    @ Anon says:
    September 29, 2017 at 2:36 pm

    “Plus, ‘let’s you and him fight’ is a mechanism via which a woman can decide whether to switch sides. Remember, in prehistoric times, this is how women decided when and where to switch sides.”

    Again, I’ve never witnessed that kind of behavior in uncivilized places where men freely beat their women. And I’ve been to a lot of uncivilized places.

  74. Boxer says:

    Dear Damn Crackers:

    True again, but what is the discontinuity you see? Do you know what my argument is?

    I assume you were mirroring the thesis of the link you provided (you certainly seemed to be). If I’m wrong, feel free to expound.

    Note that the author of that article is wrong on nearly everything. His idea, that urbanized whites “provided for their families” is contradicted by all manner of historical evidence. Read Hobbes for a start. This is also a good primer:
    https://www.bl.uk/georgian-britain/articles/the-rise-of-cities-in-the-18th-century#

    I’m a nature and nurture type of guy. Human phenomena tend to be a mix of both. I think the problem we’ve had since at least Marx is that the social/economic/educational nurture explanations of history and problems tend to be seen as the only explanations of those problems.

    We definitely don’t disagree on this part. I don’t think that urbanization is particularly good for White folks, either. Most of the SWPL type skinny-jeans pajama boys are deleting themselves with birth control and hedonism, and perhaps that’s for the best. Even so, urban Whites have yet to reach the behavioral sink that urban Blacks enjoy. Give it time, my brothers. Another few generations of child-support based family model (TM Dalrock) will see all manner of bad behavior take root into the norm.

    As an aside: IMO Marx’s biggest mistake is believing that people are inherently good, and inclined to be helpful and peaceable (see Capital Vol. 1). Marx’s economic theory posits material forces that blind us to our true natures, and channel our decency into exploitation. Later Marxists and post-Marxists (Althusser and Adorno, for example) righted him on this. People really aren’t inherently good. People are shit. They need to be socialized. Patriarchy (that Marx took completely for granted) is one of the prime movers in this regard.

    Good argument,

    Boxer

  75. Anon says:

    Oscar,

    Again, I’ve never witnessed that kind of behavior in uncivilized places where men freely beat their women. And I’ve been to a lot of uncivilized places.

    Those places are still patriarchal places. Hence, the women there are actually better behaved.

    I am talking about prehistoric times, when people lived in tribes of 50, and the most violent man was usually on top. That is the base level that the female psyche operates from.

    Remember that in the US, a serial killer gets thousands of love letters. In Afghanistan, this does not happen. Think about going even further down in repealing civilizational conditioning.

  76. White Guy says:

    NecroKing, aka SecretKing wins again.

    Dude, Gamma rage much?

    (Timely that he posts his ragequit on a post about women mouthing off, hum)

  77. Boxer says:

    Dear Necro King:

    Jeez, what a looney tirade…

    Artisanal Toad and I exposed you for what you truly are: a sissified cowardly FAGGOT who is pushing an exclusive pro Roman Catholic, pro SJW garbage, pro right wing asceticism Ideology, while pretending to be a Christian….You’re a joke! and a loser….you might fool your bunch of deluded brainwashed Catholic retards, but you never fooled me

    Artisanal Toad got into an argument here, and he lost the argument on its merits. Rather than use the feedback to hone his positions, he went off to curse all and sundry. It wasn’t an impressive showing. I expected much more from him.

    The proper thing for both of you to do, right now, is to apologize, then STAWP POASTING for a while. Come back when you can debate like men.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  78. Anon says:

    nekroking48’s comment isn’t even standard cuckservative grandstanding. It is just contradictory in an embarrassingly inept way.

    He doesn’t even know that Dalrock is a happily married man.
    He holds himself out as a Christian, but then says ‘faggot’ way too many times.
    He says Dalrock is ‘pro Catholic’.. Then he says Dalrock is an SJW.

    Remember the ultimate truth about projection :

    Any vastly off-base accusation is really just projection on the part of the accuser. In this particular case, calling Dalrock a ‘faggot’ and a ‘lonely misogynist’ comprise the projection that nekroking48 can no longer contain in his id.

  79. White Guy says:

    Boxer, they can’t stop, you know that.
    -From that nasty movie “I can’t quite you” yech.

    The Gamma is strong in both of them, it takes lots of introspection to kill the inner-gammatude, neither of these boys have the fortitude.

    But I’ve been proven wrong many times in the past.

  80. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer – “Later Marxists and post-Marxists (Althusser and Adorno, for example) righted him on this. People really aren’t inherently good. People are shit. They need to be socialized.”

    Is this akin to what Adorno meant by primitivism? My memories on these Cult-Marx folk are hazy. Are they who you teach?

  81. Trust says:

    @necroking48 says: right wing fascists right wing fascists right wing fascists etc etc
    ___________

    Funny how often lefties throw out the word fascists, especially since fascism is a far left ideology, not much different from marxism, socialism, and communism.

  82. earlthomas786 says:

    Nothing like Catholic bashing to find out the root of hatred.

    I doesn’t bother me if people are ill informed about the faith but at least respect the fact it is there and don’t go on rage dumps. Going on an emotional tirade with no basis in reality is the definition of gamma rage.

    Whining about women is nothing compared to whining about a 2000 year old religion.

  83. thedeti says:

    Off topic

    Dalrock’s post “Are Women Done with Men After Age 55?” has now passed the 6 1/2 year mark as a “top post” on this site.

    I’m amazed that it’s remained there as long as it has.

    It’s closely followed by that “Women Dating after 30” post which has fallen off the list.

    But the “Mother-in-Law” post and the “Grim News for Carousellers Hoping to Jump at the Last Minute” have been there a long while too.

    Carry on.

  84. RecoveringBeta says:

    This Necroking Dude is so mad that he unsubbed before he could be notified of responses destroying his secret kingdom…I’ve had women on dating apps do that…hmmmm

  85. Casey says:

    Necroking’s rant sounds just like an upset woman.

    In other news……….another woman has see fit to marry herself, being as men are not needed/useful/manning up.

    https://news.ayekoo.com/1.11333277

    Take heart Necroking……….the perfect mate for you is out there. And it’s you.

  86. Boxer says:

    Dear Damn Crackers:

    Is this akin to what Adorno meant by primitivism? My memories on these Cult-Marx folk are hazy. Are they who you teach?

    I’ve never taught Adorno before, though I’ve read him and written on him.

    Basically he identifies a problem with Kant’s aufklärung ideal. Enlightenment as the pinnacle of humanism has led to humankind thinking a lot of itself. The problem is that we idealize humankind, while deprecating human beings. Think of Pico Della Mirandola’s Oration on The Dignity of Man as a standard example of what we think of humanity right now, for an idea. Human beings like to deify an ideal image of themselves rather than seeing themselves for who they are.

    Adorno’s antithesis (he expounds on this in Dialectic of Enlightenment is to posit myth (including things like the New Testament) as the actual enlightenment. We always had the enlightenment with us. We didn’t need to deify ourselves. Unfortunately, myth has led us to this enlightenment/humanism (it was one of many avenues we took, and it was the wrong one, in his opinion) and it’s difficult to know how to get ourselves back from it. Adorno certainly doesn’t have an answer. In the mean time, we continue to worship at the altar of the ideal human, while ignoring things that are truly important (i.e. individual human beings).

    Anyway, this is a butchered, stream-of-consciousness answer, but it’s all I’ve got in the span of ten minutes, and I hope it is somewhat helpful.

    Best,

    Boxer

  87. earlthomas786 says:

    Any vastly off-base accusation is really just projection on the part of the accuser.

    If only more men would understand that’s what women like to do when they accuse (especially without witnesses). The classical Biblical case of projection is Potiphar’s wife and Joseph. She was the sexually immoral one trying to get him to lay with her and he ran off. So rather than admit her thottery tingles to her husband, she claimed Joseph tried to rape her.

    Gamma men it’s a lot easier to see for men…we’re not as easily duped by them unless they have a great position of power.

  88. Oleaginous Outrager says:

    “The thuglets were almost certainly raised by single moms,”

    Maybe in the old days (1980s or prior), but now the odds are very high they were raised by no one at all. They really are feral in the most literal sense.

  89. earlthomas786 says:

    Another story in the modern American woman going nuts file…

    ‘Ohio woman ties herself up, rips off her clothes and puts a gag in her mouth in a bizarre bid to fake her own kidnapping’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4933706/Ohio-woman-posts-fake-kidnapping-photos-videos-online.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailus

  90. freebird says:

    Self sacrifice is not self sacrifice if it done upon demand from an outside party.
    Women seem to think they can demand a man to self destruction upon THEIR command.
    They get furious when that Privilege is called into question.

    Bitches: Demand/bitch all day, this homeboy ain’t your property to direct.
    Men done leaving the plantation,how very frightening for the slave owners.
    Note to Dr. Helen – Wimmin do your own police/military work.
    You and HER go fight (instead)
    Once again,NOT YOUR PROPERTY

  91. Anon says:

    Is necroking48 the same person at Artisanal Toad?

  92. Lost Patrol says:

    Yeah I admit I infiltrated your pathetic blog under false pretenses in order to post a few comments and see what you retards talk about, and I even pretended to agree with you by making comments that I thought sounded just like you losers,

    “There’s a man who leads a life of danger
    To everyone he meets he stays a stranger
    With every move he makes another chance he takes
    Odds are he won’t live to see tomorrow”

  93. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    To clarify, at one level she understands that she is lowering the status of the men around her. This is the intent, with the expectation that it will prod them into white knight status, a duty she perceives them as neglecting.

    While this is true, I doubt that much of it, or even any, is conscious. It has been clearly demonstrated that women’s fitness testing is often unconsciously done, like scratching an itch. This MoM! didn’t set out to lower her husband’s status in the hope of prodding him to take on a group of ‘youth”. She just wanted someone to do something because her child was being exposed to foul language (probably the same thing he hears in school, but nevermind that).

    And because she clearly is middle class with zero street sense, she put her husband into a no-win situation. Because “momuh bear” wanted her cub protected, but had no clue what the real situation was. Perhaps she learned something from this experience, but it is not guaranteed.

    Women often have no clue what they are actually asking for. “I’d like a sink on this side of the laundry room” she says, thinking only of convenience and what color it should be. The ripping out of drywall, the removal of floor tile, the jack hammering a trench in the cement slab foundation, the drilling holes to run pipe, the repair work to floor and wall – none of this occurs to her. Especially if she’s not paying the bills to the plumber, drywall finisher, tile man, etc.

    As a society we used to know this. Then sometime in the 80’s women got to pretend they were uber-competent and everyone else had to go along with the story. Now women’s fantasies have been catered to for 30 or more years, and the bills are coming due in Scandanavia & elsewhere.

    There comes a point in a family where a man has to tell his wife “Butt out! This is between me and our son!”. The day is coming when women at the societal level will be told the same. One way or another.

  94. Original Laura says:

    @earlthomas786: Maybe the mittens that the blonde lady is wearing in the Finnish video have magical powers! Actually, the video encourages the use of body language combined with saying only the word “no.” The video thereby makes it obvious that the likely attacker will NOT be a native speaker of Norwegian. RACIST!!!!

    How naïve would someone have to be to believe that a woman attacked in the street could use this stupid technique to alter the outcome of the encounter? Wouldn’t it be more likely that the attacker would simply run up from behind and tackle her to the ground as his first move?

  95. Anonymous Reader says:

    Original Laura
    How naïve would someone have to be to believe that a woman attacked in the street could use this stupid technique to alter the outcome of the encounter?

    Extremely so. There is a major disconnect in the modern world between “is” and “ought”.

  96. Aaron says:

    I never leave the house without a folding knife in my pocket. Something that is at least sharp enough and long enough to defend myself and do some serious damage, if need be. I also keep a large, about six inches long, hunting blade on the passenger seat, or somewhere close enough to reach quickly, in case of weirdos approaching my car. I also keep spare knives and swiss army knives in the glove compartent. Can never have too many knives!

  97. armenia4ever says:

    Some background info: I live about 15 minutes from Gurnee, IL where this happened and I’ve gone to Six Flags there plenty of times. This kind of behavior isn’t surprising in the least bit.

    Even more surprising is that some of the older couples haven’t realized that the teenagers in our area are often vicious. The nearby surrounding areas are essentially the Ghetto ranging from Waukegan, North Chicago, and Zion to “white trash areas” like Round Lake, Wadsworth, etc.

    I’ve seen fights between adults and teenagers several times. There is no respect for adults and often the adults themselves will yell, scream, and fight in public. You would think public places are safe, but the Six Flags attracts people from all over the area, so the worst types often show up.

    Of particular note is that there are A LOT of single mothers all around the area and many broken families. Even some of the heavily dominated hispanic areas like Round Lake and Mundelein have the same issue, often with drugs.

    Many of the women in the area will also fight at the drop of a hat. It’s even effecting the behavior of the lower middle class women. The destruction of the family is showing in leaps and bounds. We all have taken for granted that people will behave in a semi-civilized manner in public. It’s not true where I live. Always be prepared.

  98. dvdivx says:

    To ignore the race of the participants is to ignore the problem. You can only rearrange the deck chairs of the Titanic for so long before the reality of the sinking ship hits you.

  99. Carlotta says:

    I can not think of one time my Mother would have ever done this, and I can think of at least 3 seperate incidents like this that my parents handled. My Dad and Mom had plans and signals in place and we shut up and followed instructions. My Husband and I do the same. I think Dalrock is right, but I would also add that I agree with the commenters who say some women think they can tell anyone what to do, because they try it with me all the time. And I mean strangers. It is bizarre. Last, and this is maybe just me, but there are a lot of really big, strong men in my family who are excellent fighters that enjoying trying to nearly kill each other for fun at family get togethers. I can not imagine any wife or daughter thinking she could take a man on after seeing what they do to each other for fun. We also trust them. Just my two cents.

  100. Carlotta says:

    Oh, Necroking is a girl. Maybe one of AT’s girl assasins.

  101. PokeSalad says:

    Necroking couldn’t have hit the “Gamma’s Secret Kingdom” bell harder if he’d had a hundred tries. Somewhere, Roissy is smiling.

  102. Carlotta says:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4935168/I-wish-say-surprised-m-no.html

    @Earl
    I will see your fake kidnapping/panty eater and raise you a single mom who left her four children 12 and under alone while she went on an 11 day trip to Germany.

  103. Original Laura says:

    If there is no father in the home, the boys are more likely to be delinquent, and the girls are more likely to become unwed mothers themselves. But when you have two or more successive generations of no father in the home, the girls are themselves at high risk of becoming felons.

    An unwed mother who still is part of an extended family containing a number of intact, functional households may be able to guide her child to follow in the footsteps of some of the upstanding members of her family. She may also be able to get a decent guy to marry her and help her raise the child . But the women from families where almost no one has children within wedlock are locked into a never-ending cycle of dysfunction, and the children of both sexes are doomed. This seems to be true even in smaller towns with no ghetto.

  104. Scott says:

    That was a really weird comment from nekroking.

  105. EmpireHasNoClothes says:

    This all goes back to original sin. The sin of Adam was not to correct Eve when she was going astray out of fear of losing her. He’d rather sin against God than correct her. Patrice O’Neal had a good bit on Opie & Anthony on teaching your woman how to understand the consequences of her actions by using teachable moments from other couples in public. A biblical anecdote to teach your woman is the story of Ahab and Jezebel. Ahab let Jezebel run her mouth and she was ripped apart by wild dogs.

  106. Anonymous Reader says:

    Carlotta
    Oh, Necroking is a girl. Maybe one of AT’s girl assasins.

    Heh. Thread winner. Without question.

  107. pb says:

    He took his anger at Ben out on someone he could. Same with mouthy wives. A lot of males just don’t do that, certainly not with witnesses…. so they direct it at a target they see as both beatable AND legitimate.

    “Whos bitch dis is?”

  108. They Call Me Tom says:

    I still remember the moment in high school when at a lifting meet, I saw what the strongest female lifter from our school was lifting. I was maybe top 20% in my weight category and I was outlifting her by 60-100 lbs in all three lifts (bench, squat and deadlift). I was shocked after years of being told there weren’t any major differences between men and women. Since then, every time a girl starts talking about how tough she is… I can only write it off to naivete.

  109. Anon says:

    Scott,

    That was a really weird comment from nekroking.

    Pwned! From someone as polite as Scott, that was a sledgehammered shellacking.

    Necroking48’s comment is fascinating. There is so much incoherence and internal contradiction that it makes us wonder what the depths of the human mind are. Much like how when we see a picturebook version of the Guiness Book of World Records, we immediately turn straight to the picture of the world’s fattest person, just to see what the extreme really is.

  110. Anon says:

    Carlotta,

    Oh, Necroking is a girl.

    No.

    1) The comment is not one long page-length paragraph.
    2) The word ‘mangina’ is used. Almost no woman would ever use that word (unless they are among the 8 anti-misandry women in the world).
    3) The word ‘faggot’ is used extensively. Women don’t do that (neither to normal men).

  111. Damn Crackers says:

    @EmpireHasNoClothes –

    Every young man should watch every YouTube clip from Patrice O’Neil about women. He truly spelt out Game in a great and humorous way.

  112. Anon says:

    front of a 50-year-old woman in line with her 51-year-old husband and 12-year-old son in the park’s Southwest Territory,

    I am surprised no one caught this.

    Why did the woman wait until age 38 to have a kid? There appears to be no older kid (age 14, or 16) who might have been with them, so it appears this is her only kid.

    If she was a carousel rider who found a schlub provider the same age as her at age 36, and then pushed out a solitary kid at 38 (IVF paid for by the husband) to use as a status symbol, then it is unsurprising that she craves drama, and does a lot of ‘lets you and him fight’ sort of baiting.

    We don’t know all the details, but the age gap increases the odds of other FI elements being part of the story.

  113. Höllenhund says:

    If she was a carousel rider who found a schlub provider the same age as her at age 36, and then pushed out a solitary kid at 38 (IVF paid for by the husband) to use as a status symbol, then it is unsurprising that she craves drama, and does a lot of ‘lets you and him fight’ sort of baiting.

    I don’t know. If I were an old and already infertile hag with only one child, I’d be avoiding such drama for sure. I’d at least try not to expose that child to danger with my own actions. Then again, I’m thinking like a man.

  114. earl says:

    A biblical anecdote to teach your woman is the story of Ahab and Jezebel. Ahab let Jezebel run her mouth and she was ripped apart by wild dogs.

    Given how independent, empowered, and sassy Jezebel was I’m very shocked he let that prize be ripped apart by wild dogs.

  115. feministhater says:

    Nekroking’s rant was pretty epic in an anticlimactic way..

    Dalrock is a closet feminist who hates women, who is also secretly a Catholic.. the memes are real!

    Thank you for the laugh. You should join the KGB with those sorts of infiltration skillz and deductive reasoning abilities.

    I can’t help but think that Nekro is having us all on. That rant is just too good a parody of the token Christian feminist that all too often roams the Churches of Western lands. I mean, come on, when have you not heard the classic ‘real men show sacrificial love for women’ and the usual ‘you will all die alone’ rants? Perfect in pitch and prose. Bravo!

  116. earl says:

    Self sacrifice is not self sacrifice if it done upon demand from an outside party.
    Women seem to think they can demand a man to self destruction upon THEIR command.

    They got that bad idea when Eve gave Adam the forbidden fruit.

  117. Heresolong says:

    Without knowing the circumstances or what she actually said, I wonder if a polite “could you guys do me a favor and tone down the language in front of my son, I’d really appreciate it” might have gone further. Of course we don’t know if she did that or if she lit into them. I have found with my high school students that “shut up and stop being a dick” doesn’t work nearly as well as “do me a favor so that everyone can be more focused”.

  118. UK Fred says:

    @ feministhater
    The problem nowadays is that the comments by the SJW/feminazis are beyond parody.

    @earl
    The woman in question very nearly did get ripped apart by a pack of wild dogs, just like Jezebel. Perhap[s she just forgot what Dave Chappelle said, “Chivalry is dead! And women killed it!”

  119. earl says:

    Perhap[s she just forgot what Dave Chappelle said, “Chivalry is dead! And women killed it!”

    Oh yeah that was a great bit by him. His other quotable one is…’Ok fine, ladies you are not a whore, but you are wearing a whore’s uniform.’

  120. Anon says:

    Hollenhund,

    I don’t know. If I were an old and already infertile hag with only one child, I’d be avoiding such drama for sure. I’d at least try not to expose that child to danger with my own actions. Then again, I’m thinking like a man.

    Of course you are thinking like a man.

    To a woman, the child is just a social status prop. She doesn’t want the child to die, but moderate risk is just the cost of doing business.

    Plus, as a drama-seeking woman, she was probably attracted to those young thugs and their ZFG attitude, and her primate ‘lets you and him fight’ instinct set in. Remember, the female human’s brain differs from that of a female chimpanzee by far less distance than the male human’s brain differs from that of a male chimpanzee.

  121. Anonymous Reader says:

    Heresolong
    Without knowing the circumstances or what she actually said, I wonder if a polite “could you guys do me a favor and tone down the language in front of my son, I’d really appreciate it” might have gone further

    Possible, but unlikely. While gradual escalation from ‘polite request’ on up is the wise way, a group of eight in an amusement park line ant night won’t respond the same way as one or two in a high school class. She probably did run her mouth in a “I’m MoM!” manner. Perhaps she just spoke to them in the fashion that she routinely speaks to her son and to what’s-his-name? Not everyone is willing to “yes-dear” and walk on eggshells, as she found out.

  122. Anonymous Reader says:

    Anon
    Plus, as a drama-seeking woman, she was probably attracted to those young thugs and their ZFG attitude, and her primate ‘lets you and him fight’ instinct set in.

    Doubtful, given all the evidence in view. Overthinking is not analysis.

  123. Jason says:

    Color me ignorant……what does “MoM” spelled this way signify in the context of this blog? Just asking.

  124. Reminds of me of the woman in the crowd calling out to LeBron James “how does it feel to be a p***y a** bi***?!!”

    A man would never get away with that. He would rightfully be picking up his teeth with a broken hand and limp off crying to his mommy.

    This is exactly why women, in general, are regarded as children. They don’t and won’t take any responsibility for their actions, instigations and brawls that they cause, and they most certainly won’t STFU when it’s most required.

    That women are “protective” of their children is understandable. That’s even a feminine virtue.
    But the manner in which she protects used to be removal, walking away or running away.
    We live in an era of “kick ass women” who honest believe from Hollywood and media that they can fight off thuggish sons of single mothers.
    Bad idea.

    Even in a less civilized society, like the Old West, the most masculine of men would do what they must to avoid fist fights and gun fights in order to live and fight another day.

    Women responding instinctually and emotionally to situations where they are slighted, insulted almost always creates a lot of collateral damage that was easily avoided.

    And they do it with their mouths, which they never learned to control. Their mothers and fathers never disciplined them in this regard.

    And just like a mouthy child, they can’t back up anything they say when the sh*t goes down..

  125. Anonymous Reader says:

    Jason
    Color me ignorant……what does “MoM” spelled this way signify in the context of this blog? Just asking.

    Doesn’t signify much of anything. It’s just me, thinking about middle aged women who decide they are uber-Mom to the whole world, starting with everyone around them, who expect obedience from any random man or child “because I’m a MOM!”. The kind of overbearing, foolish woman who oversteps any boundaries unthinkingly, because she is A Mother and therefore the most special snowflake possible. Like a middle aged woman mouthing off in public, writing checks with her mouth that she won’t be able to cash physically. For example.

    Or maybe it’s just me typing too fast once, and finding the result funnylooking. Could be that, too.

  126. earlthomas786 says:

    Perhaps she just spoke to them in the fashion that she routinely speaks to her son and to what’s-his-name? Not everyone is willing to “yes-dear” and walk on eggshells, as she found out.

    Especially if the broad making demands isn’t even your mother or in any position of authority. If that happens to me I either ignore it or laugh however there are some groups of people who will escalate things quickly. Despite what feminism deludes them into women truly have few positions of authority and it usually stems from motherhood…when they get out of their lane, trouble develops.

  127. Jason says:

    Ah Thanks!

    I get you……..the sexually neutral hairstyle. The hands on hips with the swaggar and always loud voice of “Because I’m the mom! That’s why!”

    Usually 20-40 pounds overweight. Is bossy, very passive-aggressive, annoying and her husband usually is a silent, deflated punching-bag type. In fact this is what a lot of married church-women my age look like.

    Most of these women always talk down to you and have a condescending semblance and reminder of a school teacher you had in the elementary grades that hated little boys.

    Thanks man! Makes the whole picture cyrstal clear

  128. Oscar says:

    @ earl says:
    September 30, 2017 at 5:48 am

    “Given how independent, empowered, and sassy Jezebel was I’m very shocked he [Ahab] let that prize be ripped apart by wild dogs.”

    Ahab died in combat years before Jezebel’s death, so….

  129. earlthomas786 says:

    It’s a microcasm…but you may have remembered when this exchange happend when some blonde sports chick decided to go after Lavar Ball’s parenting skills. I didn’t know much about the race thing either…but it seems black men have just as much pain with white women as white men do.

  130. Mychael says:

    Gentlemen, I wasn’t really sure where to put this. I am at work right now so I won’t really get to check your comments much. I just wasn’t really done with this thought the last time I commented. Scott let me use his site to vent a bit. I hope you are all well.

    https://americandadweb.wordpress.com/2017/09/30/another-weekend-killing-it/

  131. Pingback: Politically Motivated Slut Shaming is Stupid | ‘Reality’ Doug

  132. melmoth says:

    Physical confrontation is a male space, Holly Holm aside. Most guys did learn the hard way. Mouth off when you’re overmatched, either in size or number and it’s not a good day for you at all. Then you look back and weigh a drunken, throwaway comment versus your own life. Altercations among grown men are potentially fatal and that’s why most guys let things go. It’s animal behavior, really, and most men know how to handle this part of life. You don’t take another guy’s bait.

    9 on 1 if you discount the child and the frump. And it sounds like the thugs were in their own world anyway, not even addressing the family of 3. So dumb. Why not dump out buckets of bloody chum during your family swim 100 yards off the coast of San Luis Obispo. “Honey, that’s not a good idea.” “WIMP!!”

    I can’t imagine taking a nearly fatal beating for an idiot of a woman who has NO CHANCE of getting me to achieve and certainly not maintain. Eastern Europe exists for a reason, lol.

  133. earlthomas786 says:

    Ahab died in combat years before Jezebel’s death, so….

    I read up on the story after I made my comment. There was also the part where she was trampled under horses before her corpse was fed to dogs.

    Either way there was no man to protect her before she was shredded…since all her sons died too. Never a good idea to go from Yahweh to Baal.

  134. honeycomb says:

    Fella’s ..

    Th Wimminz are just not equipped physically or mentally to accept / receive the consequences of their actions.

    And .. these examples are proof .. (please remember exceptions don’t make the rule regarding those few bad-ass wimminz you’ve heard of .. all 1 of them .. lol).

    ..
    ..

    Grown men should be assessing their threat matrix at all times .. and when all else failed to prevent the fight .. they should behave like the knife .. felt not seen .. your ufc / mma skills will get you killed in real conflict .. the rules are act hard & fast .. kill with speed & no emotion. Men respect, most men, and act within the guidelines of civility because we are in fact men of war and are not thugs .. and thugs should be dealt with on your terms .. not theirs.

    Frankly I haven’t had a problem with thugs in a long time .. I give off a vibe of please .. make my day. Though I strive to avoid physical conflict with sound judgement.

    Youtube is full of woman on woman violence. More so than male on female .. (sarcasm on) so maybe they will get a clue .. (refer to my original statement .. lol .. sarcasm off)

  135. Oscar says:

    @ earlthomas786 says:
    September 30, 2017 at 6:45 pm

    “Never a good idea to go from Yahweh to Baal.”

    Amen.

  136. info says:

    Notice the sex inversion. Men obligated to act like women and women encouraged to act like men. This goes for headship in marriage and in society. Military and any situation that is stereotypically male or female.

    Masculine and feminine.

    @melmoth
    ”Physical confrontation is a male space”

    Many trying to do otherwise it seems. For example leftist groups using women in combat.

    @honeycomb
    ”Men respect, most men, and act within the guidelines of civility because we are in fact men of war and are not thugs .. and thugs should be dealt with on your terms .. not theirs.”

    Well thugs were quite efficiently dealt with:
    http://evoandproud.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/making-europeans-kinder-gentler.html

  137. honeycomb says:

    This is a typical (cheating) woman and her idea of combat (with a typical beta cuck) ..

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/girlfriend-sends-twins-seduce-boyfriend-11258509

  138. necroking48 says:

    As expected from the spineless FAGGOTS that infest this site, the ad hominem attacks on me started to flow after my rage rant
    The usual accusations of being a girl, or a cuckservitive or the standard belittling of me is laughable

    1: Only faggots, or those who have something to hide delete comments that disagree with their position

    2: Dalrock calls himself a happily married man, but spends 24/7 on his whiny bitch blog berating women, whining about how bad women are etc….I wonder if his “wife” knows that Dalrock spends most of his time hating on the very gender that his wife is comprised of

    3: Dalrock calls himself a Christian but tolerates the extreme anti sexual ascetics that plague his blog, propagating their doctrine of devils

    4: Dalrock calls himself a Christian but supports and tolerates the WHORE OF BABYLON…the disgusting heretical Roman Catholic Church whose adherents comprise 90% of his deluded followers in here….Hey Dalrock why don’t you take a stand against the papists, Romanists, marioloters, Idolaters, in here and speak out against them?
    In fact why do you even let them post in here?……Aren’t you supposed to be a bible believing Christian? you’re a liberal compromising Laidocean as far as I’m concerned

    Why don’t you be a man and rebuke earlthomas and his ilk for their wicked Romish garbage?

    Why don’t you publicly come out and rebuke the celibacy asceticism that is promoted on your blog? COWARD

    Why don’t you admit that Artisanal Toad thoroughly destroyed your patently un biblical position on marriage?….got any proof of your special “sauce” as Toad puts it….you never can handle Genesis 2:24 and you know it

    5: Why don’t you be a REAL MAN and show Christ’s sacrificial love towards women, and take responsibility for women’s bad behavior…..women act they way they do because men are failing to man up and be gentle and kind towards them

    6: You’re a joke Dalrock, and all your deluded brainwashed followers in here are a joke….you LOSERS will spend the rest of your lives being alone, whining and bitching about how bad women are instead of taking responsibility and treating women correctly

    How’s that for a “gamma rant” you pussies…..bunch of LONELY LOSERS you all are….pathetic

    Get a life, go out there in the real world, and find some real women, and love them, and you will see how they will melt and be the cherished creatures that God created

    Close your pathetic blog, stop whining and bitching like pathetic, entitled babies about how bad women are

    Coming in here day after day was what convinced me what a bunch of losers you all are….at least the PUA crowd go out and get pussy and be nice to women in order to accomplish their goals, but you guys stay forever locked in your bitterness and anger and frustration at women and spend your whole lives bitching and whining and railing on women and the system….VOMIT

    Actually the real problem that makes you guys so angry is you’re locked into your retarded celibacy, anti-sexual belief paradigm that forbids you to get some sexual release
    For fucks sake, just go out and get laid…..Once you experience the pleasure of having your cock buried deep inside a woman as she sensually rides you to sexual ecstacy, you will stop your whining and bitching and start to love women

    It’s your fucked up religious beliefs that have ensnared you and made you hate women so much……JUST GET LAID!!!!!

    I bet you’re too much of a faggot coward to post this comment

    Goodbye and good luck on your lonely existence

  139. honeycomb says:

    necroking48 ..

    It’s called “DECAF” .. give it a try

  140. Boxer says:

    Dear Necro:

    As expected from the spineless FAGGOTS that infest this site, the ad hominem attacks on me started to flow after my rage rant
    The usual accusations of being a girl, or a cuckservitive or the standard belittling of me is laughable

    I actually agree with this. The Carlotta – Anonymous Reader exchange was particularly ironic, since both were indulging in girly backbiting, about someone who was gone, by (get this) calling you a female. Laughable and pathetic.

    The rest of your stuff, well, it’s just more of the same.

    1: Only faggots, or those who have something to hide delete comments that disagree with their position

    You have not been deleted here. This latest goony tirade is proof enough of that. If there was a comment which disappeared, it’s possible that you posted too many links (If I put more than two or three hyperlinks into a reply, my comments disappear too).

    The spamcatcher here is also hit and miss lately. In short, you appear to be insulting your host over something he’s not even aware of.

    As for the rest of this nonsense…

    STAWP POASTING

    Regards,

    Boxer

  141. Boxer says:

    Dear Honeycomb:

    This is a typical (cheating) woman and her idea of combat (with a typical beta cuck) ..

    tl;dr, bitch who is cheating with all and sundry wants evidence that her boyfriend is as big a scumbag as she is, so she sets trap. Boyfriend does not fall for it, because unlike her, the fellow has standards and is monogamous…. sooooooo bitch is victim, somehow.

    Great find. I have to wonder how any man, anywhere, is not at least partially redpilled at this point.

  142. honeycomb says:

    Boxer ..

    I have to wonder how any man, anywhere, is not at least partially redpilled at this point.

    Life is funny .. a dog will return to his vomit .. so if they don’t have a strong environment (e.g. a RP mentor) to grow in red-pill confidence they will lapse.

    Most RP aware men don’t offer or try to free his matrix BP minded friends or others due to the possible backlash from their minds unwillingness to accept and process your help. It’s frought with danger for sure (re: mentoring)

    So even if you can mentor someone .. do they really want to be free?

    They love the very chains they protest .. and continue to place women as the pinnacle of achievement in life. So can they really be freed?

    I do agree .. it’s growing (RP among all men) .. it can’t be contained .. but I feel a lot of men are invested in their own down-fall thru self-decit in their ability to tame the viper.

  143. Jay Fink says:

    I would prefer a society that killed off these type of thugs. If none if these primitive young men were are allowed to exist we would live in a quasi-utopia.

  144. Anonymous Reader says:

    Jason
    Most of these women always talk down to you and have a condescending semblance and reminder of a school teacher

    Yes. Exactly. That, along with the extra poundage, the mannish haircut and the attitude. Everything flows from the attitude. Putting up with lousy attitude from a woman for short term “keep the peace” simply means the longer term will be miserable for him.

    You can see it in church after church.

  145. Anonymous Reader says:

    necrorking
    I bet you’re too much of a faggot coward to post this comment

    It appears that you lose. What did you bet, anyway?

    Goodbye and good luck on your lonely existence

    You’ll be back. It’s what drama queens do, and xie are clearly into the drama.

  146. rugby11 says:

  147. earlthomas786 says:

    ‘Boyfriend does not fall for it, because unlike her, the fellow has standards and is monogamous…. sooooooo bitch is victim, somehow.’

    Another example of trying to blame or trap the man in order to cover her sins. Snares by the devil are truly real.

  148. earlthomas786 says:

    Most RP aware men don’t offer or try to free his matrix BP minded friends or others due to the possible backlash from their minds unwillingness to accept and process your help. It’s frought with danger for sure (re: mentoring)

    I liken that to being a white knight for men.

  149. earlthomas786 says:

    Why don’t you be a man and rebuke earlthomas and his ilk for their wicked Romish garbage?

    Why don’t you be a man tell us what ethos you ascribe to.

  150. earlthomas786 says:

    That, along with the extra poundage, the mannish haircut and the attitude. Everything flows from the attitude.

    The story about woman who got beat up in the Denver theatre is a good verification of this.

  151. Opus says:

    Living as I do in the centre of town and up on the second floor (that is third floor in American) you will thus understand that I have a ring-side seat of what is going-on below in the street. Maybe it is different in Chicago – perhaps the people are different – but when there is to be a fight this is what happens: first, I am drawn to my window by loud voices shouting. I see that there are two men cursing each other and usually with one or more in their entourage including one or more females. The two men move closer to each other but one or other will back away and as this happens the cursing resumes. This may continue for not a little while. Then, as if one or the other has decided that he would be able to best his rival he moves in quickly and at last punches are traded or rather the one who moves in does the punching, and the other lamely attempts to defend himself. Then it is all over. At that moment the women who have been standing around uselessly begin to scream and rush to their man. A variant of this is when the more aggrieved of the contestants is nevertheless overcome by fear and failing to go for it is told by his woman and so that all may hear: ‘leave it out Fred, he’s not worth it’. Having thus been given female approval not to fight and risk a beating he does indeed leave it out.

    I never see girls fighting.

  152. earl says:

    OT: ‘The Pill is at the Root of This Marriage Mess’

    The marriage mess is, of course, the result of the most revolutionary and radical invention of mankind: the contraceptive pill.

    This invention has changed everything.

    Once sexual relations were separated from procreation everything else has disintegrated.

    I’ve even noticed in the last post about White Knights noted cad/game supporter Heartiste give a mention about the pill being involved. Everything from abortion (because of contraceptive failures) no-fault divorce, same sex marriage, and now transgender marriage…this root is the pill. You could even make the case that’s why the US and many European countries are falling apart.

    http://www.ncregister.com/blog/longenecker/the-pill-is-at-the-root-of-this-marriage-mess

  153. Jason says:

    I’ve seen girls fight a few times. Always over a crusty-turd of a guy

  154. Kevin says:

    If you try really hard you can find a way to shoe horn this event into a manosphere story. But I think there is a simpler and more important story. Most people are not accustomed to violence. This woman wasn’t thinking her husband was failing, she just did not like the language and in her calculations the usual response in a civil society is respect for elders, maybe swearing back. However as society breaks down people will quickly learn that violence is more likely than not. Also, if you want this to be a manosphere story than the most likely thing is that the teens in Chicago were all black without fathers (the one picture they have is a black teen) and it’s an example of future fatherless feminist world we are heading for.

  155. Moses says:

    “Group of teens…”

    Yes. We all know what “teens” is code for.

  156. honeycomb says:

    “Group of teens…”

    Yes. We all know what “teens” is code for.

    Yes .. almost everyone knows that when a color is missing .. or a non-racial component is present .. it’s code for BLACK American or Muslim.

    ..
    ..

    This is a good example ..

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/bart-sharts-on-crime-victims/

    All the usual sterotypes are present and accounted for.

  157. Oscar says:

    @ Kevin says:
    October 1, 2017 at 10:21 am

    “This woman wasn’t thinking her husband was failing, she just did not like the language and in her calculations the usual response in a civil society is respect for elders… ”

    Exactly. As I pointed out above, civilized men don’t beat women. Likewise, civilized people (even adults) respect their elders, even those they’ve never met before. Also, civilized men refrain from using foul language around women and children.

    But, Americans are becoming increasingly uncivilized. This is the result. What’s the cause? Single motherhood.

    Have you heard that women civilize men? That’s a load of crap. There’s no shortage of women in the ghetto. How civilized are the people who live there? There is – however – a severe shortage of married fathers in the ghetto.

    Married fathers – not women – civilize boys AND girls. Married fathers produce hard working, productive, constructive autonomous adults (with exceptions, of course). Single mothers produce thugs and tramps (with exceptions, of course). Those thugs and tramps then produce more thugs and tramps, and the death spiral perpetuates itself.

    But, everyone knows that single mothers are heroic, and married fathers are the real problem.

  158. Scott says:

    Oscar-

    Your comment reminds me that whenever I hear the canard “…men in black robes deciding what abortion law should be” I think to myself “yes, that sounds about right.”

  159. Anon says:

    This is a good example ..

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/bart-sharts-on-crime-victims/

    All the usual sterotypes are present and accounted for.

    Yes. But note that the mastermind is a white middle aged woman, who appears to be a full WASP. Not even an Italian or something.

    The Nationalist-Leftists fail to take that into account amidst their goddess-worship (especially in the comments section of Heartiste). White women are goddesses who can do no wrong, to them. Nevermind that BART official creating this problem is one.

    Hence, putting women in positions of power (which is the natural byproduct of democracy) is the source of all problems. Other problems are just downstream byproducts of that.

  160. coloradomtnman says:

    @necroking48 – who bitch this is?

  161. Gunner Q says:

    Kevin @ 10:21 am:
    “If you try really hard you can find a way to shoe horn this event into a manosphere story. But I think there is a simpler and more important story. Most people are not accustomed to violence.”

    Most people are not allowed to be violent. Government agents, noble savages and all women excepted. Who came up with that system, I wonder? And who is left to comprise the group “most people”?

  162. earlthomas786 says:

    Have you heard that women civilize men? That’s a load of crap.

    It is a load of crap first because of the generalization. The only scenerio where a woman can legitimately civilize a man is a mother and son…and a lot of that is still based on the fact a father is there.

    But, everyone knows that single mothers are heroic, and married fathers are the real problem.

    If we repeat that lie enough you’ll have more thugs and whores in the streets.

  163. Dad of Homeschoolers says:

    Um, Necro?
    So you lied when you said you unsubbed and good riddance?
    Lying gets you sent to hell just as quick as anything else.

  164. Jason says:

    The center is unraveling…….and has been……..after a limp sermon today in the Corps…..have not heard a real “blood and fire” sermon in almost two years that called us to action.

    Closing song of “Amazing Grace” but no, sadly the “new” version with that verse / chorus “my chains are gone” we sang the first verse, and then it went into the “new” version….fits the mold of ANY contemporary worship song today in any toothpaste-Christianity non-denominational church…….seven lines, and a chorus repeated eleven times or more. Everyone’s hands raised, arms outstretched…….

    After two minutes of leaving the Corps, I had to strain to remember what the sermon was about…..oh yeah…..Jesus loves you and God has a plan……….variations of this sermon I have heard almost every Sunday for so long………oh yeah, a football reference to all the “real men” who came to Holiness instead of watching football………and the ones who did stay home and watch football, Jesus loves them so very much……..it’s okay!

    Fewer members are wearing the Uniform now. The brass band and songs are becoming more infrequent…..it’s guitar and drums, and keyboards because you know, the “young people won’t come if we don’t change / we’re gonna reclaim the Millennial generation” (even though over half of them are well into their thirties now)

    I have a heart to serve, a boldness to tread on to the dangerous streets (and I have done this), but no else one wants to go. No one wants to DO. Everyone talks how “bold” they are for Jesus…….the Corps should be filled instead of the fifteen to twenty of us left.

    The center is unraveling, the “balls” are kept in a purse now, in a closet at night under lock and key that “she” only has. I don’t need to have a bunch of “christian guy friends” but I do need Holiness, blood and fire, action, and repentance.

    If The Salvation Army behaved like it does NOW on the streets of Victorian London in 1865. It would have died a quick flash, and it would have been forgotten very quickly.

    How does one man like myself who reads the Bible and believes it get along in church today? I feel like I am actually going crazy at times. It’s unraveling.

  165. Oscar says:

    The basic difference between civilized and uncivilized men is that civilized men see their greater size and strength as evidence of a God-given responsibility to protect the weak, starting with their own wives and children, and radiating out from there in concentric circles.

    These concentric circles are agreements between civilized men. For example, Scott and I are both Army officers (I’m in the reserves these days). If we were neighbors and I was to deploy again, I might ask Scott if he and Mychael could look in on Aimee and the kids while I deployed, and they’d surely oblige. Even if not deployed, I’d instruct my kids to “respect Mr. Scott and Mrs. Mychael”. Remember when parents used to police each other’s kids? That’s the foundation on which civilizations are built.

    By contrast, uncivilized men see their greater size and strength as evidence of a god(ess)-given right to prey on the weak.

    Ironically, feminists – who incessantly whine about the allegedly abusive patriarchy – are creating millions of actually abusive men by removing the most powerful civilizing force from their lives – married fathers (i.e., patriarchs). These young men, at best, feel a visceral contempt for women, and at worst they outright hate women. Hell, feminists are even importing such men.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3247831/Rape-child-abuse-rife-overcrowded-asylum-centres-huge-surge-migrants-pushes-Germany-s-services-breaking-point-claim-womens-rights-groups-politicians.html#ixzz3mliDCL4p

    “A culture of rape and sexual abuse is being allowed to take hold in asylum centres across Germany as Europe struggles to cope with the migrant crisis, it has been alleged.

    And they suggest such incidents may be widespread, with many going unreported to the police.
    Campaigners also claimed some men saw unaccompanied women as ‘fair game’, and also blamed conditions in which occupants were unsegregated by gender or nationality.”

    Feminists won’t like the world they’re creating. Neither will the few civilized men (and women) left in it, but at least we warned them.

  166. necroking48 says:

    @earlthomas786

    Well it looks like I lose the bet…for some reason I cannot ascertain, I haven’t been blocked or deleted like I thought I was

    What ethos I ascribe to?……..Does it really matter?
    The fact remains that Dalrock who is supposed to be a bible believing Christian, allows YOU and all the rest of you heretical Roman Papists to come in here in this blog and spread your anti-sexual asceticism, celibacy filth, your Mariolatry, Idolatry, and for preaching another gospel Galatians 1:8

    I read somewhere that Dalrock has made some sort of truce with the Roman Catholics who infest his blog?…..well to me, you can’t compromise the truth, there can be no truce between darkness and light
    As soon as you guys start teaching your celibacy crap, which you guys do all the time, then Dalrock and others should have immediately pounced on you and rebuked you to your face, and not allowed those doctrines of Devils to gain a foothold in his blog here
    But I was practically the ONLY one who ever confronted YOU and others when I saw it

    The only conclusion I can come to, is that Dalrock himself believes in the Satanic doctrine of celibacy…..This filthy, despicable doctrine alone has accounted for the massive vomitous flood of pedophilia and sexual abuse of little boys and children from Priests in the Catholic church….celibacy has been directly responsible for the massive flood of promiscuity, sexual frustration, and sexual deviancy that has flooded the west…..In fact I can’t think of any more pernicious doctrine than the 1 of celibacy which YOU PRACTITIONERS either teach or support

    As long as I continue to be allowed to post on Dalrock’s forums, I will fight celibacy with every breath I have

  167. Oscar says:

    Remember that crazy chick who claimed she hated you, but wouldn’t stop following you around?

    Yeah, it’s like that.

  168. honeycomb says:

    Oscar it’s more .. pot meet bunny .. jus sayin

  169. PokeSalad says:

    As long as I continue to be allowed to post on Dalrock’s forums,

    Dal sure has one funny sense of humor….

  170. earlthomas786 says:

    What ethos I ascribe to?……..Does it really matter?

    Answer my question.

    And celibacy is responsible for sexual immorality…how about sexual immorality is responsible for sexual immorality. Nothing like blaming something that has nothing to do with it when the responsible party is staring you in the face.

  171. Anonymous Reader says:

    Necroking
    Goodbye and good luck on your lonely existence

    Anonymous Reader says:
    September 30, 2017 at 11:49 pm
    You’ll be back. It’s what drama queens do

    I win.

  172. honordads says:

    Women’s egos writing checks for men to cash.
    What else is new?
    HD

  173. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    celibacy has been directly responsible for the massive flood of promiscuity, sexual frustration, and sexual deviancy that has flooded the west…..

    1. Paul was celibate. So was Christ.

    2. The West hasn’t been celibate for a long time. It even stopped pretending, a long time ago. So you can’t blame the West’s problems on celibacy.

    3. Ancient pagans rarely preached celibacy, yet their nations were full of promiscuity and sexual deviancy, including pedophilia.

  174. Yet Another Commenter, Yet Another Comment ("Yac-Yac") says:

    necroking48 (October 1, 2017 at 6:38 pm) wrote:

    As long as I continue to be allowed to post on Dalrock’s forums, I will fight celibacy with every breath I have

    .Matthew 19:12:

    “For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” [KJV]

    So, dude: you don’t have to receive it. But don’t puff yourself up pretending Jesus didn’t say it.

    Because, that would be, like, a lie, yo.

    Father of Lies and all that.

    Take it in, yo. Or else you are literally fighting Scripture. So, take it in, or take it up with Christ Himself.

    Pax Christi Vobiscum

  175. earlthomas786 says:

    Ancient pagans rarely preached celibacy, yet their nations were full of promiscuity and sexual deviancy, including pedophilia.

    I’ve noticed more and more that the sexually immoral blame the chaste for their own sexual immorality…instead of the thing staring them right in the face.

    ‘For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality;
    that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God;’

    1 Thess 4:4-5

  176. Hmm says:

    A depreciation of Hugh Hefner:
    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/09/30/opinion/hugh-hefner.html

    With which I heartily agree.

  177. earl says:

    More light reading for those who fight for sexual immorality…time and time again it has been proven they are actually on the ‘wrong side of history’.

    “So in the end, human societies can view sex in two ways: for pleasure – in which case the society will die out – or for family, in which case it will survive.”

    https://reginamag.com/short-story/

  178. Dalrock says:

    In just three comments Necroking went from

    1) Declaring himself a troll and laughing that I hadn’t figured it out and banned him.
    to
    2) Complaining that I’d unfairly banned him.
    to
    3) Vowing to disrupt the discussion until I ban him.

    Necroking desperately wants me to ban him, when he isn’t complaining that I banned him. Either way, he has repeatedly made it clear he is here to disrupt so he’s gone now.

    I was curious what prompted necroking’s sudden meltdown, so I looked to see what his last comment was before the meltdown. It was a request for a way to contact me privately.

  179. Adam says:

    Dalrock,

    He probably wants to ask you out on a date.

  180. BillyS says:

    “So in the end, human societies can view sex in two ways: for pleasure – in which case the society will die out – or for family, in which case it will survive.”

    Why must it be limited to only one? How about celebrating the pleasure of sex withing a stable marriage? I would probably argue that trying to say it is only for reproduction (in effect, if not in exactly those words) leads to a prudish attitude that is also not helpful. Sex should be celebrated as great within the context of what God has created it for – bonding married couples AND bringing about the next generation.

  181. herbie31 says:

    Yeah I admit I infiltrated your pathetic blog under false pretenses in order to post a few comments and see what you retards talk about…

    So you “infiltrate” someone else’s blog under “false pretenses”, go on a rambling, emotional rant and yet somehow find the moral high ground to use such words as “pathetic” and “cowardly” to describe someone else. Just mind your own business and keep pleasuring all those woman who appreciate a smug, emotional fruitcake.

  182. earl says:

    How about celebrating the pleasure of sex withing a stable marriage?

    That’s in an ideal world…what we got now is a society only promoting the pleasure of it regardless of what state you are in.

  183. earl says:

    In the family the pleasure part is covered under the uniting…while keeping the procreative part. What we got now is all about pleasure and trying everything to prevent procreation.

  184. Bart says:

    I’m glad my wife has enough sense not to do things like that.

    Also, stories like this remind my of why I carry a concealed pistol everywhere (where legal) I go and stay away from places where I can’t carry.

    A couple rounds of 9mm or 38 special would have changed these punks behavior pretty quickly.

    It also reminds me that I really should carry my 15 round Glock 19 instead of my 5 shot snubnosed revolver.

  185. Anonymous Reader says:

    Just an FYI Bart, that event occurred in Chicago, where there are no CHL’s for anyone not very well connected to the political machine.

    Everyone: always be aware of the laws that are in effect wherever you go.

  186. Bart says:

    Anonymous Reader –
    It is my understanding that Illinois’s concealed carry law has changed to “shall issue”, following a court order. Regular folks in Chicago can now get carry permit.

    Still, I imagine that 6 Flags wouldn’t allow firearms anyway. That is a good reason for me to to give them my money.

  187. Anonymous Reader says:

    Bart

    It is my understanding that Illinois’s concealed carry law has changed to “shall issue”, following a court order.

    Seen what the law actually looks like? It is not quite as restrictive as, say, DC law after Heller. But it is nothing like the CCL law of Florida or Texas or even Ohio.

    Regular folks in Chicago can now get carry permit.

    I do not think that is the case.

    Still, I imagine that 6 Flags wouldn’t allow firearms anyway

    It would not surprise me if a Chicago-area park like that had metal detectors.

    That is a good reason for me not to give them my money.

    FIxed your typo in full agreement.

    FWIW some people consider a short-barreled .38 to be a good concealed carry firearm as a backup to something else; a second gun, in those jurisdictions where it is legal (not all states allow CHL of multiple firearms).

  188. Bart says:

    Anonymous Reader-
    Thanks for your comments. I’m sure you are right about Illinois carry law. I’m glad to live in a Western state where we have a pretty good carry law (and where private businesses “gun free” signs don’t carry the weight of law).

    Regarding carry, I’m a little lazy and generally just pocket carry an Airweight .38 revolver, or a LCP .380 pistol.

    I know they are both a little underpowered, but I live in a low crime area, avoid going to stupid places, with stupid people, and doing stupid things. In short, I live a low risk lifestyle and figure a pocket gun is a lot better than nothing.

  189. buckyinky says:

    @earl

    More light reading for those who fight for sexual immorality…time and time again it has been proven they are actually on the ‘wrong side of history’.

    Maybe you’re fatigued at trying to point this out, and just want to look on the bright side for just a little while, but that article is yet another typical entry from one in a long litany of publications by our fellow Catholics that whisper to women that they are victims of their circumstances, nebulous and uncontrollable outside forces working against their fulfillment and happiness.

    My thoughts: I’ve got nothing against the discussion and counsel the authoress gives to her friend Jessica, at least not upon my first reading of it. It’s probably not the prudent thing at this point to make explicit how ridiculous and selfish Jessica has been with her boyfriend. No, the problem is in the authoress’s insatiable need to publish the whole thing, giving an air of normalcy to what is in the article a particular crisis mode application. What stands out to the typical self-absorbed minds of other young women reading this article will not be “I’ve got to be certain to make virtuous choices or it will go ill with me,” but something more along the lines of “if a man makes me pregnant, he’d better take care of me and the baby or he’s no man, full stop.”

  190. earl says:

    What stands out to the typical self-absorbed minds of other young women reading this article will not be “I’ve got to be certain to make virtuous choices or it will go ill with me,” but something more along the lines of “if a man makes me pregnant, he’d better take care of me and the baby or he’s no man, full stop.”

    I don’t disagree with that assessment. Too often women are told or encouraged to be as sexually immoral as they want (because of equality or something) but when the natural consequences of sex come to a head…it’s the man’s fault if he doesn’t step up. Instead of pointing out the numerous reasons why sexual immorality is a bad idea for women and why the virtuous path is better for them.

    The other thing I’ve learned…often when sexual immorality is involved I tend to take what the woman says with a grain of salt unless there is definitive proof from the other party. She could be projecting what she really wants onto her boyfriend/family/etc.

  191. Oscar says:

    @ earl says:
    October 2, 2017 at 9:28 am

    “…what we got now is a society only promoting the pleasure of it regardless of what state you are in.”

    I’d say that what we have now is a society promoting the pleasure of sex in every form EXCEPT that of a chaste, monogamous, one man, one woman, for life marriage. Which – by the way – was also true of Greece and Rome.

  192. Bart says:

    Oscar,
    Our society is not only against sex within a lifelong faithful man-woman monogamous marriage.

    It is also totally opposed to sex within a lifelong faithful man-woman patriarchal polygamous marriage as well. (Like those of Jacob, Abraham, Moses, David, Gideon, Josiah, Elkanah, Caleb, etc.)

    Covenantal male headship in marriage must be avoided at any cost. 🤗

  193. earlthomas786 says:

    Yeah especially with the media and academia mediums it’s 24/7 you should be able to have sex with anyone and anything to your degenerate heart’s desire because your pleasure is a right. Anyone who tries to inject morality or celibacy into the picture is deemed ‘backwards’. (even though in the long run it protects you from a lot of the negative consequences you see often from going the sexual immoral route)

    You even see it with a recent particular article where a happy monogamous marriage isn’t safe from infidelity. That was probably brought up to put doubts in people who try to keep sex in the licit form.

  194. David says:

    Dalrock,

    so I looked to see what his last comment was before the meltdown. It was a request for a way to contact me privately.

    I second the comments that say necroking48 was romantically interested in Dalrock. He said the word ‘faggot’ a suspicious number of times, and then declared that his highest goal was to fight celibacy (I am unaware that anyone here is advocating celibacy).

    Necroking48 was a paragon of faggotism. I hope he is still reading this.

  195. Caspar Reyes says:

    I gather that necroking as a youth suffered some evil attributable to RC clergy.

  196. We’ve come to a point in fempowerment where women are so convinced of their entitlements and default expectations of protection and respect that it creates a false sense of security which they never put an afterthought to. Men using a judicious caution with regard to physical safety of themselves and the women around them are instantly seen as pussies if they try to be the calmer head in a conflict. So even if no fists are thrown and he avoids a physical confrontation he goes home to a wife that has no respect for him for not beating down the party she initiated the fight with – based on that false sense of security.

    Women will do this with other women without a thought because they think they’re in the right and their husband/BF will be there to make sure the wheels don’t fly off when things escalate.

  197. Anon says:

    Rollo,

    We’ve come to a point in fempowerment where women are so convinced of their entitlements and default expectations of protection and respect that it creates a false sense of security which they never put an afterthought to.

    Which is why this bubble is going to burst very soon.

    Just today’s example : A woman who is happy to make sandwiches for her husband, gets attacked on Facebook.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/277722/

    This would actually be a good future article for Dalrock, as it gives us an idea of how pervasive this is, and how it is not just a fringe number of ‘feminists’.

  198. Anon says:

    We’ve come to a point in fempowerment where women are so convinced of their entitlements and default expectations of protection and respect that it creates a false sense of security which they never put an afterthought to.

    I should also point out that much of this would collapse like a house of cards, if government spending were just cut by 15% (matching taxes, with no deficit). Taxes are already too high, but we spend well above that. A 15% cut would just eliminate the budget deficit.

    Millions of women would be cut off, and many who spent their youths at the gubmint trough are now too old to marry. It will be glorious, if it could happen.

    Sadly, even Trump does not seem interested in cutting government spending by this 15% (even more would be even better).

  199. feeriker says:

    A woman who is happy to make sandwiches for her husband, gets attacked on Facebook.

    The silver lining here is that any quality woman such as this one just might be smart enough to realize what a moral septic tank FemBook is and shut down her account.

  200. Anon says:

    The silver lining here is that any quality woman such as this one just might be smart enough to realize what a moral septic tank FemBook is and shut down her account.

    Perhaps. But any man considering marriage should look at the ratio of women attacking this woman, to the ratio of women defending this woman. That should tell him whether marriage should be risked in this day and age. Remember, even a ‘good’ woman faces social media pressure at all times.

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