« First « Previous Comments 1,476 - 1,515 of 1,615 Next » Last » Search these comments
Michelle Herczeg, a 43-year-old Secret Service agent, was reportedly hospitalized after fighting other agents.
Secret Glock and a vest
Secret Glock and a vest
Sunglasses and a ponytail
Sunglasses and a ponytail
5'3" and a badge
5'3" and a badge
Hey Amy, what's YOUR personal cheer?
aching, swollen, lubricious pudenda
More mask-ology for the unwary?
It’s too late for me. I followed the feminist lie through most of my life, only to wake up much too late to have lived it a better way. You see, it takes a while to realize that it really is about the warm body next to you. It is about the laughing children and grandchildren. It is about the stories, the recipes, the memories, the picnics, the vacations. ...
And me, well, I can barely clip the leaves off of a basil plant without feeling bad about it. I save spiders. One video of an abused dog will ruin my entire year. It’s a curse—too much empathy.
But that’s what I feel when I think about JD Vance, what he’s gone through in life, and how he’s come out of it such a fine young man with a beautiful family and a promising future. ...
If the worst thing he ever did was generalize about “Childless cat ladies,” that’s not that big of an offense. The second part of it was specifically about politicians who have less of a stake in the future. Yes, it will probably alienate some voters, but honestly, is that really how you go about voting? Something someone said turns you off so you’ll vote for the totalitarians?
Whatever your thoughts on the original feminists of Seneca Falls and the like, the unmistakable character of feminism since the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s is rebellion against the natural world, of reality itself. Namely, it is the belligerent rejection of sex differences, even to the paradoxical end of women rejecting traditional feminine strengths as weakness and embracing masculine flaws as strength. Who is the “strong female character” the feminist loves? She is hard-drinking, promiscuous, profane of speech, irresponsible, and violent; in other words, a low kind of man, albeit one with a great rack.
From claims of radical equality spring even more radical claims of superiority: “Anything you can do I can do better.”
The political and social causes championed by feminists have always sought to inject women into men’s spaces, to antagonize, browbeat, and bully them with a combination of legal force and the spectre of humiliation from the social order that the feminists outwardly reject but are happy to use to their advantage. Title IX is an excellent example of this. For decades, men’s intercollegiate sports were compelled by the force of federal law to accept women if they didn’t also have a woman’s-only team, the danger to both these women and the social fabric be damned. Subversion was law and common sense and prudence was illegal.
Now, amid the squalid, Satanic spectacle known as the 2024 Summer Olympics, we see an Algerian man beating an Italian woman into submission in less than a minute, leaving her bawling on the ground. But isn’t this what they wanted? Is it any different than forcing a high school boy to square up against a girl on the gridiron, or in a wrestling match in the 1980s or 1990s?
It transpires there is a difference. In the bygone era of 15-20+ years ago, this presented a no-win situation for the man. If the young man lost, he was humiliated for getting beat by a girl. If the young man won, he was mocked because he beat up that same girl. If he refused or forfeited, he was called a coward or a sexist or both. And the Girl Power crowd was just fine with this arrangement.
Not so today. The phenomenon of male-to-female transgenderism, enabled at a grand scale mostly by women who have overwhelmingly bought into the ideology and nostrums of Current Year progressivism, is not popular with the sort of men who’d feel ashamed to strike a lady. On the contrary, they are low-status men of no ethical compunction, ruthlessly pursuing athletic glory that would be denied to them in all-male divisions. ...
Much as I detest the men-in-wigs, it is impossible to lay all the blame at their feet. This is the logical end of what the feminists said they wanted; that they weren’t thinking logically about that end when they advocated it hardly matters. What they are really upset about is that the double standard that allowed them to humiliate men at zero physical or social cost has evaporated. Now that they may not escape with all their teeth and neurons intact, the tears are flowing.
But even now, huge numbers—if not an outright majority—of modern western women are vociferous defenders of transgenders. “Transwomen are women,” they bleat, whether they are beaten in the ring or in the beauty pageant. Against a normal man in the same situation, all of womendom would rise in a frothy-lipped, murderous rage, but should he put on a dress or rougeshis cheeks in the manner of a circus clown, they will trample their sisters for the chance to publicly adore him.
Clearly, they have not yet learned their lesson.
This is why I urge men to restrain their instinct to rescue western women from their predicament. Under normal circumstances this instinct is righteous and proper, but the circumstances are far from normal. Perhaps God is giving them the chance to learn something, to repent and reform not merely by rejecting the insanity of transgenderism, but the lies of feminism as a whole, in the same manner that he allowed the Babylonian Captivity to reform the Judeans. Prematurely relieving them from the consequences of their own actions will not only stunt them, they will hate you for it. However painful it is to watch, there is no good alternative. You cannot repent for others.
The Dangerous Rise of Men Who Won't Date "Woke" Women
Why not? Aren't "woke" women more likely to put out?
Not dating but 'hooking up'.
Men can not be solely responsible for the maintenance of masculine self-definition and responsibility, because we are not solely dependent on it. Men and women are interconnected, part of the same Whole, not meaningfully separable in real terms. Women can not perpetually defect, holding abstract freedom as the highest good in their own life, and expect the social structures that sustain them to hold up. If women do not decide what their mutual responsibility to men will be, as a cultural construct, and willingly take on a gender role that emphasizes that mutuality, prosocial masculinity will disappear, and with it, so will any method of organizing society that we currently recognize.
We have had a women's rights movement, and many men, including myself, supported it wholeheartedly. I do not mind admitting that I was a progressive in my 20s and 30s and that I still hold many of those ideals of freedom and equality close to my heart. Now, men need women to finish their hero's journey, return from the wild, and put their newfound gifts into service: to their communities, and to the men who love them and exist in interdependence with them. The world as we know it depends on a women's responsibilities movement - if such a thing is possible, and if it's not too late.
« First « Previous Comments 1,476 - 1,515 of 1,615 Next » Last » Search these comments
Using Hijab as a symbol of the Women's March: This garment is a symbol of FREEDOM! for Women.
Mike Pence doesn't go to social events without his wife to avoid temptation and possible honey traps or false accusations: MUH SOGGY KNEE