|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:41 PM October 31st, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to say that this case is a real shame.
The sad part of this all is that feminist will see this murderer (this woman) as just another "victim of the male patriarchy". I just know that in the coming weeks (or months) we are going to hear such rhetoric as:
"She was abused as a child"
"Her husband hated her"
"She was doing it for her children"
"She was really left with no other choice"
and, of course the classic "it was in self-defense".
and on top of all that, she's going to be tested for mental illness (as some high profile female murderers are). "Uh, docs no need to diagnose this one, she's just a selfish, evil woman"
Was it really in her son's best interest for his father to be killed in one of the most horrendous ways imaginable? I don't have a degree in child psychology or anything, but I'd have to say no. What will this woman (or whom ever has the responsibility to tell the news to this kid) say to her son when he asks where his father is? How will this boy turn out knowing that his mother killed his father? That's a question a feminist will have a hard time answering.
How anyone will (or can) defend this is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:58 PM October 31st, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I read this story and a woman was sitting next to me. The woman's only response was "That's what he gets. Too bad she got caught."
The woman went on to say that the father deserved this fate because most husbands do not really want custody of their children. When I asked her where she got her facts from, she said that "this murderer was probably abused by her husband".
Funny that in an egalitarian society like the United States, a woman would applaud the murder of another human being.
The sad part of this all is that feminist will see this murderer as just another "victim" of the male patriarchy. Would this woman who sat next to me be saying the same thing if a husband killed his wife for custody? Not likely.
We are more likely to here the usual rhetoric:
"She was abused as a child"
"She was doing it for her son"
"She was really left with no other choice"
and of course, the classic, "she did it in self-defense.)
Was it really in the best interest of her son to kill his father in one of the most atrocious ways imaginable? No, not likely.
What are they to say to this child when he asked where his father is?
How will this child turn out knowing that his mother killed his father?
These are questions that a feminist will have a hard time answering (they'll probably dodge them by stating false facts like 1-in-4 women are abused and crap like that)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'The woman's only response was "That's what he gets. Too bad she got caught."'
No big surprise really.... men guilty even when proven innocent, women innocent even when proven guilty. The life of a man is worthless if taken by a woman, esp. his wife. If taken by another man, maybe justice will be served. If taken by a child, again, it is worthless and he is not a crime victim but a good-riddance dead man. He could be the world's holiest man, it still wouldn't matter.
People used to ask me some years ago why I am single and never been married. My short answer has always been, "It's too risky and the success rate is too low." 10 years ago people would say I was being cynical. More recently, they didn't. They would nod in understanding and usually not say anything. Nowadays though I almost never get asked why I am not married and I am not any younger than I was 10 years ago. :) I think people in general know the truth about what is going on. They just don't want to discuss it and so don't bother asking questions like that anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:18 PM November 1st, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
"men guilty even when proven innocent, women innocent even when proven guilty"
Man, that is a good saying.
~Joseph Quincy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is the extent to which misandry has taken over the world. It is commonplace to hear such statements from normal women, that have husbands, fathers, sons...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would make sense and fit the general pattern of bump-off-the-old-man-with-help-of-boy-lover routine that is so well-worn in the history of marriage!
I am soooo glad to be single.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:04 PM October 31st, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
...shocking her husband Timothy Schuster repeatedly with a stun gun until he lay on the ground motionless, putting him under with chloroform-soaked rags, binding his hands and ankles with zip ties, placing him in a plastic drum and then pouring bottles of hydrochloric acid into the barrel until his body dissolved while he lay in the drum unconscious."
I went to a victims conference in Sacramento where CA, Attorney General Bill Lochyer spoke. He made the statement that when women committ domestic violence, "It's just throwing a pencil of something."
Is the Attorney General of the State of CA really that supid or is he just biased?
As Glenn Sacks and many others have often mentioned, "Women use weapons to level that playing field," as is clearly evident in this story.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:06 PM November 1st, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
No, Attorney General Bill Lochyer is not biased, he is incompetent, but then the whole government is incompetent. At this very moment, the state is being run by an amoral drug user and womanizer who was elected in one of the most disgraceful elections in the nation's history--the California recall.
I'm getting quite sick and tired of the way stupidity has taken over our lives. We have high approval ratings for a governor who knows absolutely nothing about the state he governs, yet we wonder why it is hard for our children to respect our government. We allow women to (effectively) get away with anything (or become martyrs for commiting murder), yet we wonder why our society is under scrutiny around the world.
In order to make meaningful change around here, we had better wise up, or else we're done for.
~Joseph Quincy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:33 PM November 1st, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
I can't really confirm this, but I heared that one of the problems that the Taliban have with America is how the men are so whipped by their women.
Anyone else hear about that?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:59 PM November 1st, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
"I heared that one of the problems that the Taliban have with America is how the men are so whipped by their women."
American men are whipped (physically, emotionally, and spiritually) by their women with the help of the man hating domestic violence industry. I wouldn't be surpirsed if they knew that and were repulsed by it. It's the truth.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:19 PM November 2nd, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Ray-
yeah, I wouldn't be suprised either.
It disgusts most of us, and we're Americans...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, Joe, but your emotional engagement with your political views is obviously downgrading your own ability to reason.
Otherwise, you wouldn't be trying to draw an incorrect, pointless, and worst of all *counterproductive* distinction between sexist bias and incompetence. They are in no way mutually exclusive, and in fact quite arguably mutually reinforcing.
We're a smart bunch around here, so trying to tell us that it's incompetence *instead of* sexist bias only serves to make you look like just another irrational political hatemonger, *in preference to being* a genuine men's issues supporter, advocate, and/or activist.
Thus, if you're all that 'sick and tired of the way stupidity has taken over our lives', then I suggest you start fixing your own stupidity first. *You* had better wise up, Joe -- and a good beginning in that regard would be to develop some meaningful emotional separation from your psychopolitical compulsions.
Because the media's character assassination attempts against Schwarzenegger were straight out of the standard femelitist anti-male playbook, and thus it is extraordinarily stupid and unwise of you to try to use them to persuade men's issues supporters, advocates, and activists of your point of view.
You can either put your political prejudices first, or your committment to men's issues first. But not both. Because there *will* be times when those *are* mutually exclusive -- like now -- and we *will* be watching to see which one is your *real* priority.
*Like now*.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
