|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. Only thing I'll say is there is nothing new about this version of "equality"-- it's been like this for centuries.
Bachelorhood: the cure for the divorce-time blues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probably this one of the pathetic male losers that supports marriage and criticizing men that do not commit, the respectable traditional male, somehow they deserve what happens to them, bad new is good news, sure that know he is not pro-marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The realationship between men and women are no more than an slave/parasite relationship, there is nothing else, but this can only keep on as long as most men accept it voluntarely, MARRIAGE, and a minority are forced into it, taxes, child support, and other forms of wealth transfer from workers, (men), to parasites, (women).
Married men have the ilusion of having a house and having children, they have nothing, all belongs to the parasites that owns them, they realize that as soon as they divorce. If all this would take place at the moment of getting married no men would marry, (losing his earnings, read slave labor, his properties, his house, etc).
It is imperative that this ilusion dissapears in order to become for men to become free human beings, so i would like tougher and more humilliating laws for married men, wearing shakels, electric devices controled by their wives to punish their slaves/husbands, whatever, the worst the better.
Once most men are single, never married or divorced, the reality will slap them in their faces, they will know the truth, men are just slave labor, cannon fodder, prision meat, and chattle without reproductive rights.
And once there, the system will collapse, female parasites and their male collaborators will have their days numbered and will have to pay for their crimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot bear this.
American society would destroy its most productive members merely to placate a woman.
I need at least a day away from the boards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Bachelorhood: the cure for the divorce-time blues."
Not only divirce is disgusting for men, but marriage it self, first of all marriage does not exist, exist only in traditional countries, what is called in the west marriage is just a criminal contract that allows one person to become a parsite that profits from the work of another person in return of nothing.
"My problem with marriage isn't a fear of divorce; it is that the whole thing sucks divorce or not."
Why men should not marry.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
All the older guys I know, guys that are 55 and older are telling me the same story; don't do it. It just turns to crap no matter what you do. They'd rather be independent. At best it's a tedious bore. At worst a living hell with financial ruin thrown in for good measure. The problem is that when you're young, you just naturally fall into this mind set where your whole self image is based on how women regard you, and so you spend all your money and energy trying to make yourself acceptable to them. Then later in life the shine wears off and you finally realize that you've wasted yourself on a bunch of crap.
Children - "the ultimate human experience"
I couldn't even begin to list all of the older folks i know from work or through my family with kids they either don't get along with, are disappointed in, or are so distant as to not even be a factor in each other's lives.
I'm really skeptical about the idea of children as "the ultimate blessing." How many friends do you have with little or no meaningful contact or relationships with their parents?
I would wager the statistic for happy child/parent relations would be as bad, if not worse, than the marriage numbers. Who wants to deal with TWO bitter, unfulfilling relationships?!
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Marriage is a sham for men. There is no benefit. If you are about to get married, think it over. Don't let your dick do your thinking for you. Don't let your punch-drunk I'm in love euphoria put you on auto-pilot. You will wake up in a hell of a hangover staring at this woman who will control your life.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
A few years ago I went through a major depression over this until I started talking to all the older guys I knew...and they all said the same thing; "don't do it, it's shit. Even when it's not bad, it's shit". You end up being closely tied to an old woman. Think about that. I can go to Europe or the south seas tomorrow. If I was married I wouldn't have the money and I'd have to ask HER permission. Don't get married unless you are absolutely religiously in love with her. Like carry her sick aged body to the toilet and wipe her ass and be happy to do it kind of love.
What I'm saying is that human beings are nasty weak treacherous creatures that are for the most part totally untrustworthy. Experience is my basis for this statement, both mine and others who I know or who have written reliable histories. If you can find a woman to be your companion who is not treacherous, a deceitful little actress, a sly whore or a manipulative nag or a shrieking hag, then you are among the lucky few. Congratulations. I hope your luck continues to hold out.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Ok, assume that you will end up divorced and won't see your kids and lose half of your assets, how different is that from being married?
Most married guys I know are working their asses off to pay bills, rarely to get to spend time with their families, mediocre or no sex life, and have wives that spend as much of their money as absolutely possible.
My problem with marriage isn't a fear of divorce; it is that the whole thing sucks divorce or not.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
What security is there for men in marriage?
If I cheat on my wife, she gets half my shit.
If she cheats on me, she still gets half my shit.
Why the fuck should i get married?
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Fuck it man, it's easy to get depressed about not being married when we live in a society that constantly feeds us the image of the happy couple. It's one big lie. The happiest person alive is someone who isn't a prisoner dependent on another human being... We only have 80 or so years on this rock to achieve true freedom
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Very few marriages last nowadays, and even guys older than me are telling me not to even think about it... It's a grossly overrated source of happiness. And for the 80% that do go through divorce, it will financially ruin you for life. Period. You can take your best 10 earning years from say, 35 to 45 and take all the wealth you would have accumulated and flush it down the toilet. Because it will go to her and her lawyer. If it happens naturally and it's good then great, good luck. But the worst thing is to force it, to make gross exertions and ignore all sorts of red lights going off just to be hooked up and "normal". Get some hobbies. Relax. Hang out. Enjoy. Take life as it comes.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
As men, we all know that a woman's primary objective is to marry. After years of experience I've discovered their most commonly used strategy. here it is:
1. Girl pressures guy for marriage.
2. Guy delays.
3. Girl gradually starts destroying guy's self-esteem and eliminating his friends.
4. Guy becomes too weak and too much of a loser to find something better than what he has.
5. Girl starts to limit sex. In effect controlling the only good thing in the guy's life.
6. Guy is in despair. Capitulates to marriage.
Then 5-10 years later the guy is an empty shell of his former self. Girl is a ruthless manipulating machine. Girl divorces loser husband. Girl takes 80% of guy's stuff because the guy is too brain dead to find a good lawyer. Girl lives happily ever after. Guy becomes bald alcoholic who dies of heart attack at 45 years old.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:48 PM September 7th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Will only get you 25 to life.
With good time you could be out in 8 and a half.
In the long run will actually make you feel quite good.(I think)
Just make sure when you do it you have witnesses that can prove you were talking to dogs (the four legged type), carrying imaginary sheep, or constantly rambling and muttering things under your breath.
Besides business school, the only bigger scam in higher education is the awarding of degrees for psychology and or psychiatry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do not forget drugs as an excuse!!.
Anyhow much easier just to avoid the whole shit, do not sign a contratc that turns you into a slave, the society in wich we live is so pathetic, men are supposed to voluntarely sign this criminal contract and not only that, they should pretend they are happy while doing it.
Realted to killing parasites some an article from Angry Harry:
Time To Castrate Judges?
Fact 1. At least 90+% of people - both men and women - would rather be forcibly raped, sexually assaulted or heinously abused than lose their children.
Fact 2. Some judges are now exonerating women who have killed their partners on the grounds that they have been 'abused' by them.
From these two facts, it should follow that judges should be exonerating men who kill women who have taken away their children (because - as both sexes agree- this is worse than being 'abused').
Indeed, it should follow that judges should be exonerating men who kill judges who have taken away their children.
And when the men's movement is strong enough, it will surely be argued by many men that men who have killed judges who took away their children should be exonerated.
And, no doubt, many men will engage in highly vocal and aggressive public campaigns to have released from prison any men who have been imprisoned for killing judges who took away their children.
And, do you know what?
Their campaigns will be successful.
Because that's how a world works when it is not based on justice but on the demands of powerful activist groups.
And in the same way that the feminists and the women's groups have cheered loudly outside of the courtrooms as women who have killed their partners have been set free on the grounds that they were merely responding to 'abuse', men's groups will cheer as men who have killed judges will begin to walk free.
They will be heroes.
They will have fought the oppressors who have taken away their children and who have helped to destroy the fabric of their own societies by making it impossible for men to be fathers; or even to be men.
They will be given medals and bravery awards.
(Just as was given to Kiranjit Ahluwalia by Tony Blair's wife because she killed her husband while he was asleep; e.g. see Does The Home Office Willfully Stir Up Domestic Violence?)
But, Angry Harry.
Exonerating men who kill judges is encouraging violence! It is encouraging murder!
Nooooooooooo.
Silly man.
Of course it isn't!
It such a thing was encouraging murder, then these most noble and just of judges would not now be exonerating women who have killed their partners.
They would not doooo such a thing.
For they are just!
No. No. Women are not encouraged to commit acts of violence or murder when they know that they will get away Scott free.
No Sirreee.
Those good judges and politicians have told us so - by both their words and their actions.
Their views are unmistakable!
But, Angry Harry.
The majority of people are not going to support exonerating men who have killed judges! - or even politicians.
Why not, if they took away their children?
That's even worse than rape!
And just about everybody says so.
(And, in a few years time, it will actually sound like it's a lot worse than rape!)
Anyway.
Who needs the support of the majority?
A few thousand persistently angry men will do the trick.
You see. As the organism of 'men' grows, and thousands of men begin to demand their rights back, and thousands of men begin to understand what they have lost by having been denied contact with their very own children, some of them will be none too pleased.
To say the least.
Some of them will be very hurt.
Yes indeed.
Very hurt.
All those lost years!
Never to return.
They will be positively fuming.
And some of them will even be genuinely crazy.
You should see some of them already in the movement!
Boy. Would I hate to be on the wrong side of them if they got too fired up.
And the organism that is the men's movement will gradually be winding them up - unwittingly, of course.
There is no way of avoiding this.
And there sit the smug-faced judges who claimed that they were dishing out justice when they took away the children from these fathers, exonerated women who killed them, and who even corrupted the whole system of justice so that they would be at the mercy of whoever might accuse them.
These judges won't have a moral leg to stand on.
And, even more importantly, they will have no address where they can hide.
But there you are.
What do you expect?
This is the kind of thing that happens when judges and politicians are morally corrupt.
Ho Hum.
And then, of course, after a couple of killings (totally justified, of course, judging by today's notions of justice) the judges and the politicians will back off.
"Hmm," they will say. "Perhaps it would be better after all if we do not exonerate women or give them bravery awards for the cold premeditated murder of their partners. And perhaps it would be best if we gave a little more support to fathers. And, come to think of it, the whole system is being stacked against men. We need to change it."
But let AH make it very clear that he never advocates violence unless it is absolutely necessary to prevent worse violence.
Never!
But many men will soon be arguing most strongly that a man who killed someone who was involved in taking away his children should be exonerated.
And that's not advocating violence.
There's a difference!
Indeed, the noble judges and politicians tell us so.
And AH is merely following their lead and bowing to their superior moral wisdom.
If they say that it is OK to kill men because they have 'abused' you, then, so be it.
And if they think that it's OK to applaud and to hand out bravery awards to women who have killed their partners, then, so be it.
Shhh!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And despite her 'mental condition' she will still get custody of the children. I assume so because it talks about the 2,500 in month child support.
4,500 total dollars tax free a month she rakes, not half bad. 54k a year, for doing nothing but being a woman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women do not work to support their children, FUCKING PARASITES, custody and money for women, slave labor and jail for men, first class citizens, second class ones.
PD: The people that gets paid to have children have abortion rigths, the ones that have no rights and must pay for having children are not allowed to abort, coincidence?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why bother two figth feminits? their days are numbered:
Human males. We are born to have as much sex as possible with as many females as possible.
In America today, we still have not come to terms with these facts of our nature. We are sexual creatures. Our culture however, conditions us to view sex as bad and wrong, or dirty. This is a major part of the Christian moral tradition, this despising of the body and its evil pleasures of the flesh. The lures of Satan! The Christians basically incorporated this Platonic idea into their doctrine along with the rest of Plato and his mind-body dualism. In the Phaedo dialogue especially, Plato made clear that the lustful body is the source of evil and corruption, and that its pleasures are dirty temptations to the pure soul, and can only weigh it down. The soul aspires to separation from the loathsome flesh.
This despising of the body and its pleasures, such as sex, which Christianity has traditionally made into a sinful and guilty act, is still with us today.
Sex is as natural and necessary as eating, and yet, Americans have this strange obsession with it. I believe this stems mainly from the fact that sex is a forbidden and dirty act in Christianity, America's religion.
People who like sex are immoral. Men who desire women other than their wives are immoral, even though they are genetically programmed to desire them.
The American obsession and taboo with sex is ludicrous. People skirt the subject, deftly dancing around it in the media, pretending it's somehow wrong or unnatural yet dwelling on it like a bunch of little boys making fart jokes. It's all over TV and film, magazines, everywhere. American men spend over $4 billion on pornography.
For feminits child support, alimony, marital properties, is BUSINESS, for christians PUNISSMENT for "evil" men that had sex,( children), or want to have sex with a different woman, (divorce). Different reasons, same objectives.
Meanwhile Europe is dying, western values, feminis and christianity is not being defeated is just dying out, is a dead end, future european male generations will have custody rights, property rights and so on, the end of female parasitism, good news ....... :
France is Not a Western Country Anymore
By Guy Milliere
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 31, 2003
French-bashing is everywhere in the American media. I am French, and I must say if Americans knew completely what's happening in France, the French-bashing would be far harsher.
Jacques Chirac has been a friend of Saddam Hussein for more than thirty years. and Chirac is not the only politician of this stripe in France. These days, it is becoming hard to find a French politician ready to speak about human rights, freedom or democracy. All of them seem to have the same speechwriter or to belong to the same totalitarian political party; all of them are anti-American, anti-Israel and "pacifists." They regard Western civilization as something filthy and abhorrent.
If you read the newspapers, it's the same. At times it seems the only difference between the Soviet Union twenty years ago and France today is that in Soviet Union you had only one Pravda, and in France you now have at least ten such propaganda outlets: Different titles, same content. Their party line is clear in reporting on the personalities found in the present Middle Eastern crisis. Saddam Hussein, the "President of Iraq"? Well, maybe he has been brutal, but you know, in "those" countries... George W. Bush? He’s a "moron" - a former alcoholic, who has become a crazy fanatic, in fact the most dangerous man on the face of earth. Ariel Sharon? A fascist who loves to kill Arabs. Arafat? A great freedom fighter. When an American general speaks, it is merely propaganda, but when Tariq Aziz pontificates, it is pure truth. Almost everyday you hear anti-Semitic remarks, to boot.
The anti-Semitism has created a threat to the physical safety for French Jews. Almost every week, some Jews get mugged, simply for being Jews. Almost nobody pays attention to it. When an anti-Semitic act is so disgusting it is impossible to hide it, journalists will speak of "confrontation between communities." When confronted with the reality that these "confrontations" are always Muslims attacking Jews, the editorial response: "Just because there has yet to be a single documented case of a Jew attacking a Muslim yet doesn't mean it will never happen. . . ."
And Jews are not the only victims of France's new identification with radical Islam. In many French cities with a growing radical Islamist population, no teenage girl can go out in the evening, at least not without a full burqa. If she does, it will mean that "she is for everybody": in short, a whore. In the same cities, every teenage girl - regardless of religion - has to wear the Muslim veil if she does not want to be harassed or killed. Almost every month, a young woman is mugged and raped in a suburb of a big city. Gang rape has become so frequent that a new word, used by the rapists themselves to define their hideous actions, is used by everybody: tournantes (revolving). To the rapists, the woman is nothing, a mere object to be thrown away after use. The people who speak about "revolving" seem to forget a human being is involved as the victim. Policemen do nothing. Every decent person knows the problem is Islam, but no one dares to say it. It could be dangerous. The streets are not safe.
One year ago, a French Muslim decided to create a new business: he was tired of seeing people drinking Coca-Cola - all this money going to Americans! He found a factory and started to produce Mecca Cola. On the label, he put a picture of the Al Aqsa mosque, with a large part of his profits would help to support the Palestinian cause. In some suburbs of Paris, Coca-Cola has disappeared; Mecca Cola has replaced it. A few days ago, another Muslim businessman announced he will start to sell Muslim-Up. It will have the taste of Sprite or Seven-Up, but it will be a Muslim drink - and naturally the profits will go to the Palestinian jihad, as well.
Three radio stations in France are Muslim radio stations, and if you listen to them, dedicated to broadcasting the voice of hate and racism all day long. One radio station belongs to a friend of the rightist Jean-Marie Le Pen, and curiously, if you listen to it, you will hear the same voice of hate and racism. Rightists and radical Muslims have discovered they have many things in common.
If you want to understand why all this is happening, you have to understand one thing: thirty years ago, French governments started to have a new foreign policy. They called this new policy, "Arabian Policy." France became closer to Arab countries - all of them disgusting dictatorships. France "benefited" by doing business easily in these countries. In exchange, France had to push Europe to unknot its ties with Israël and the United States. In exchange too, "professors" came from the Arabian dictatorships to teach the Arabic language to the young Arabs living in France. The only book they used to teach the Arabic language was THE book, Al Kuran.
PD: Human rights in Europe?, lol, where half the population have no reproduction rights, their children are stolen from them systematically, their properties, their houses, forced to become homless, and exploited as slave labor.
Don´t make me laugh!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:50 PM September 7th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
his former wife monthly child support of $2,500 and monthly alimony of $2,000.
The ex-spouses have joint custody of the two kids and the man is ordered to pay the woman "child support" of 30k/year? Oh, I get it, it's in the "best interests of the children" for them to understand the best welfare racket going.
Too bad about all the hungry, starving children who don't get a dime of help from the government. It's all in the best interests of the children. Their mommy had sex with a poor man, so the government won't do anything for them!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
