Monday, August 17, 2015

What If Rape Were Legal?

So, I heard about this article bashing Roosh V. for ALLEGEDLY supporting rape. For the record, I am not into the PUA scene. My entire life I have been getting spoon-fed bullsh*t of "How to Pick up Chicks". From what I have read of it so far, it is the same B.S. that was going around 25 years ago.

Some of the higher liked comments are nasty... (Gotta love the CAT AVATAR in the first comment!)

Laura Thomas Under his own advice, he should have known to protect himself from the thrown beer and it's his own fault it happened. No charges should be filed because in his eyes, he should have known better.

Alex Faircloth Laughing at how he thinks throwing beer at someone deems aggravated assault, yet rape is entirely fine. Absoloutely ridiculous.
Laura Katherine Smith if somehow these charges are actually taken seriously, we should start a GoFundMe to pay for every cent of her legal bills.

I'm sorry - but are these women ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN?
feminism
That is funny, because I thought, that as a man, I have a built in gizmo or something that makes me want to be violent towards women - hence - all the public service announcements on T.V., and all the laws like V.A.W.A. are in place to teach me not to beat a woman every 1.7 seconds. And of course - women IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM WOULD EVER IN A BILLION YEARS ADVOCATE FOR VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN...
feminism

Anyway, that article links to the so-called inflammatory piece that Roosh V. wrote.

I suggest that you read the article by Roosh V. It is very good reading. It made me wonder something...

What if rape were legal?

How much would change in everyday life? Honestly...

I know for a fact, that myself and everybody I know would just go on - continuing to not rape anybody.

Brianna Dennison - would have still been killed by James Biela. How many women's lives were saved because rape is illegal? Just that one - or hundreds?

If you believe that Bill Cosby really did drug and rape those women - then ALL of them still would have been raped - right?

Now, in case any fruitcake fruitelles are reading, I do not think rape should be legal. I just wonder - would things really change that much if it were legal?

Here is a quote from Roosh V's article - which sheds light on his inner character...

I also read that men must be taught not to rape, which means that they are all born with the capability to rape and have zero instinct to know that taking a woman with violence is improper.

He goes on to say that nobody ever taught him that the sky was blue or something like that.  He is clearly being sarcastic - and rightly so.

NOT RAPING WOMEN I believe is INHERENT to the MALE PERSONA, and NORMAL MALE HETEROSEXUALITY.

Funny isn't it... Saying that makes me a misogynist. Suggesting that rape IS inherent to male persona does not make one a misandrist.

feminism
Rape (real rape, not the feminazi definition) is due to people with bad wiring in their heads. Likewise, I have already stated on this blog that rape is a sick woman's fantasy. I stick by those assessments.

rape
Another good quote from the article by Roosh...

I learned that if a man and a woman both drink at a party and have sex, she was in all likelihood raped since she could not give full legal consent. This made me confused because a woman who drinks and has sex is not responsible for her actions, but if that same woman gets into a car and drives it into someone else, causing a loss of life, she would be prosecuted and sent to jail. I couldn't find an explanation for this inconsistency.

Again, I am not fond of the PUA scene - but I have to admit - Roosh V certainly does point out the double standards in our society as well as the intense hatred of men and male heterosexuality.

I'll have to browse the other articles on his blog - so I can remind myself why he is not in my list of links...

Monday, August 10, 2015

J. Garcia Bolsters New Line of Ties That Look Like SH*T

So, I occasionally shop for clothes. I am not typically a fancy dresser – just pants and a T-shirt. However; my job sometimes requires that I wear a full-fledged dress suit.

So, I need to buy fancy dress clothes every now and again.

I have been looking for a new tie lately. I noticed that there is a new "line" of ties called "J. Garcia".

They look like somebody asked, "Do you have any ties that do not even go with themselves?"

The response was for somebody to eat some skittles and then vomit on silk – and – POW – the "J. Garcia" collection of seriously ugly ties was born.
Ugly Ties
PUKE – GAK – RALPH

I have been looking for a new matching pocket square and tie for about 3-4 months now.

Every time I visit a store, I notice that the “Garcia Collection” is always there – and has not diminished.

In other words – I do not think anybody is buying these f*ck ugly ties. I know I certainly am not.

What is worse – few retailers bother with matching pocket squares anymore – they are a bitch to find.

Anyway, why would Macys, JCPennys, Kohls and other major retailers stock a line of ties that nobody wants to buy because they look like My Little Pony did some explosive diarrhea on them?
J. Garcia Ties are Pony Diarrhea

My current hypothesis – is that the CEO’s (or the people in charge) of these retail stores are functional retards.

My taste in semi-formal dress...

Light blue shirt with black tie, grey sports coat, gold tie clip.


Light purple shirt with dark purple tie, grey sports coat
 

Grey shirt, green tie, black sports coat.


Black shirt lavender tie with matching pocket square, grey sports coat - finding a store that actually sells pocket squares with their ties is a bee-otch..

Please do not tell me I look like a Mob Enforcer – I get that all the time and I hate that.

I usually wear these suits to court for my company - and to a less extent - to social events - and to a less extent - family court.  Based on the judges name (male or female), and reputation - is what prompts me what colors to mix (I have not had the need to wear standard white shirt with red power tie and either black or grey sports coat - I send these pics to my GF - because she likes seeing me dressed up - and when I am dressed up I usually leave for work after she does) .

Many would say this is off topic from anti-feminism. Is it? The fact that people in high places are so detached that they stock f*ck ugly clothes that nobody wants to buy (at least no straight men) is not relevant to a post-feminist society?

I get approached by retail employees, "Can I help you sir?"

I reply, "Yeah, do you sell clothes for heterosexual men?"

No - nobody gets offended, I usually get a laugh - to a less extent - I get a confused look.

I think the f*ck ugly clothes that most stores try to pawn off on men for outrageous prices is relevant to post-feminism.

The so-called "big wigs" in our society are dimwits. They believe that newer is always better, and that men will buy crass ugly ties that looked like they were jismed on by a group of masturbating M&M's with special needs


Is it me - or are these f*ck ugly ties???
.

I found that the best way to buy ties is online - there are many sites - BuyYourTies, TheTheBar and Ties are good sites to purchase ties (there are many other good sites too) - and they actually offer the matching pocket square - AND - unlike Macys, JCPennys, Kohls et al - they do not want $55 to $120 for their silk ties - you can get a quality silk tie for about $10 to $20.

Although, the problem I have with online sites, is that the color on a computer monitor is not quite the same as the color in person - I have done 2 returns in the last month. Third time is a charm...

Anyway, I am frustrated with tie shopping, hopefully, the ones I ordered online will work with the rest of my wardrobe (got a patent infringement trial coming up - I have been deposed as always).  Sorry for the rant - but - dang - I get pissed when shopping for clothes.

Is it just me???

Friday, August 7, 2015

Just Think About These Things...

Looks like I picked up a troll called "godFREE".  Ugh.  I hate trolls.  Please do not feed the troll.

As far as "Gay Bashing"goes - I think that like feminists, the LGBT community over-plays the "victim card".

There are bars that are for Gay People - they are called "Gay Bars".

What would happen if somebody opened up a "Straight Bar"?

And, Eric pointed something out to me.  Many Churchians tell older men that they are not supposed to pursue younger women.
If I remember Churchians correctly, they tell men to not pursue women - EVER.

I think that the main quote they use (in order to justify their straight-male bashing) is something like, "if your eyes follow a woman merely to lust after her flesh, you have already committed adultery with her in your heart".

That is all fine and well, but what if the woman your eyes are following is your wife?

How can you be committing adultery with your own wife?

Doesn't make sense - can anybody out there make sense of that?

I do not have time to list the hugantic items that Churchians use to bash straight men - here are a few...

"The MEN of Sodom are wicked sinners..." - How come the WOMEN of Sodom were NOT also wicked sinners?  If they were not - why did God kill all of them too?

"If your eyes follow a woman to lust after her flesh..." - So - men cannot glare or gaze at women - but women CAN glare and gaze at men?  Is this a double standard?

Sorry, I am tired - it is Friday, and I am planning a long sleep this weekend.  I was talking with a Bible Thumper on Wednesday - it seems like the Bible really does point out how many "bad and evil" men are out there - and rarely places any kind of spotlight on the misdoings of women - except to say "whore" every now and again.  And that word "whore" is usually taken by the Churchians to mean "woman who enjoys/craves sex"  - or engages in sexual intercourse (with straight men of course NOT lesbians) for pleasure... "It is an abomination for a man to lie with another man" - it does not say anything about a woman lying with another woman.  And why does it say "lie with" - how come it doesn't say "have sex with"?

Anyway, I do not bash Christianity - but I do question the motives and "end results" the Churchians are having on people.  I have noticed that cackles of men-haters seem to flock to Church these days.

There are blogs out there that suggest that feminism simply enforced the male-hatred that already existed in the Church.

Did it?

Or - did the male-hatred that existed in the Church spawn feminism?

I personally think that it is a combination of the two - like a feedback loop.

Anyway, enjoy your weekend - and enjoy burning in hell for eternity for looking at this woman
P.S. Try to remember that Churches are all about Gay-Bashing - according to Gay People.  They have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with bashing straight men...

Anybody want to buy a bridge?