The Reality Blog

Feeding the endless lies to women is ofcourse a main passion for feminists, as they believe that they are the epicenter of all wisdom and sage advice. One cannot falter to flatter, condone and encourage women more than by recommending and suggesting that the recommended path they have to follow will eventually, somehow, within a particular length of time, will meet with their euphoric predictions. Meanwhile they have waited in vain for decades for it to eventuate but it never appears to arrive. Feminists and women generally, will ofcourse never admit that they are on the wrong road in trying to fulfill their "mommy track with the picket fence", dream. They are of the opinion that regardless of what they do, how they behave or what they promote, everything will eventually come their way automatically..

Cause the feminists said so. They have been lied to for so long that they actually believe the drivel they have been fed. Unfortunately, the facts are not out there to back it up. Those same females are now witnessing that in their daily lives as they continually hide their heads in the sand and live in constant denial. It truly is a sad sight..

What the feminasties do not tell, is that there is actually a preferential scale that men generally follow to find a partner of choice. One would hazard a guess that being attached to a feminist would be missing on that list altogether or be down amongst the crippled and lame as they suffer from the same..

A Man Wants a Wife, Not a “Co-Worker”

Studies and real life has already clearly demonstrated that females want to have kids, want to work part time and be a wife. mother and everything that that entails. But feminists demand the opposite, feminists want women out in the workforce so they can continually keep changing the rules, knowing that they have a lot of women out there who would in most situations, condone their actions. They can also guarantee that some level of that income will come their way and also ensure that funding and privileges will keep flowing while they have politicians by the balls. That has so far worked a dream..

We can always rely on the New York Times to keep pushing the feminist theme as they have for so long.

As Kate Bolick wrote in a much-discussed article in The Atlantic last fall, American women face “a radically shrinking pool of what are traditionally considered to be ‘marriageable’ men — those who are better educated and earn more than they do.” Educated women worry that they are scaring away potential partners, and pundits claim that those who do marry will end up with unsatisfactory matches. They point to outdated studies suggesting that women with higher earnings than their husbands do more housework to compensate for the threat to their mates’ egos, and that men who earn less than their wives are more likely to experience erectile dysfunction.

Link to the above article in the NYT.. 



This is the typical ego feeding that female journalists are mostly into, especially when they are feeding the feminist agitprop in ooze covered drool. Never cease to feed the ego and don't forget to pat them on the head for being good girls and doing as they are told..

How many times have we witnessed "high flying female exectutives" quit their jobs just to be stay at home moms. What does that tell you ?

Meanwhile, and as we have seen time and time again, it's those women who want to make a different life for themselves who are still marginalised and berated. They have to be seen to be doing the feminist's bidding, even if it is at their own expense and that is what this is all about. As we have witnessed right from the beginning, the feminists have a standard FU response aimed at anyone who dares to think or act differently to their demands and it's this girlthink that is basically causing all the problems. So the ball is in the girls court but they fail to pick it up and run with it, meanwhile feminists are screwing their lives even further into the ground..

It truly is pitiful..

One of the many issues that I have had time to ponder would have to be situation that if the feminist's attitudes towards man and boy, had of been a little friendlier, than we would not have had any reason to mount any opposition. If feminists had of been more about "equality" than what they have so successfully demonstrated as being precisely the opposite, there would have been no argument. If they had of been a little more reasonable with their demands, we would have had nothing to fight. If they had of been a little more considerate about obvious issues that afflicts society, the MRM would have nothing to do. It would not have warranted it's existence at all..

But just like the spoilt child, that selfish individual who has tasted what power and control they had via it's screaming and hysterical demands, feminists have been in that exact period of childhood, but never realised that sooner or later, that type of behaviour would no longer be tolerated as it would draw attention to itself, from the same people who may have originally decided to give feminism it's full backing and support..

What has happened now is that they have called in that "Nanny", you know that program where some individual is called in to control the uncontrollable child. That child having already reached the limits of bad behaviour and it's behaviour has now become so toxic, that desperation now demands that something has to be done. The option of ignoring it or letting the child have it's own way is no longer an option. That is precisely where feminism is at today..

The efforts by the current group MP's in the American Parliament(Congress/Senate) demonstrated just that when they hit VAWA on it's head and put it's maliced and misandric impulses on the shelf for some more scrutiny. Whenever anyone bothers to have a closer look at VAWA, one becomes aware of the fact that hundreds of millions of dollars disappears into dark holes where no one is held accountable, no explanation is required and that money ends up in the pockets of those same rent seeking scum who control the domestic violence/Sexual Assault/All women are victims, industry. Needless to say that that same industry is responsible for those same establishments called "Women's Shelter", which have been demonstrated to do precisely the opposite of what they claim to do. For more information on that see Prof. Carey Roberts' expose of the goings on in that department..

The other major issues regarding VAWA is the total denial to any man or boy, after having any claim made against them, and I mean any claim, false or otherwise, with no proof required or witnesses or even a medical report. Any male is automatically deemed to be guilty because of their sex. Tell how this is not akin to the Communist party response to anyone not kowtowing the party line and sentenced to Siberia. The comparable outcome is the same. The methodology is the same..

Feminist Lackey..

VAWA also ensured a lot of other issues need to be raised. The one other issue that stands out from the use of VAWA's laws was the fact that an illegal Mexican female could and has made claims against American Male citizenry, by claiming false assault/abuse and thereby guaranteed access to a green card, accommodation, funds, legal advice and automatic citizenship application to the US. How is it possible for an illegal citizen, can make a false assualt/abuse claim, be guaranteed assistance, accommodation, free legal assistance against a citizen of the country they have entered illegally and yet win that claim with the help of that same government. How screwed up is that, how many other countries in the World does this apart from America ? NO ONE..

That is how far and deep VAWA runs and has reached and is acted upon and it's a piece of malice that feminists have installed in place solely to put more US male citizens in prison. The US has now the highest prison population per capita in the western world for this precise reason..

And feminists wonder why they have opposition !! 

VAWA is the one single document that has declared war on men, this one single piece of legislation has over the last couple of decades determined that discrimination and sexism will be the order of the day against all men plus be the standard behaviour. This document promotes hate and violence against all men and boys under the claim that it is to stop "Violence against Women" which is in itself a sexist and discriminatory title as well as action.. 

It is designed to remove the fundamental basic human rights of one sex at the complete and total cost and expense of the other. VAWA is also a funnel that directs a Billion dollars per year to the feminist cause as Phyllis Schlafly states. VAWA has to go..

Day of Reckoning for Violence Against Women Act
Phyllis Schlafly
February 7, 2012

The reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 2 on a straight party-line vote. That proves again that the feminists control the Democratic Party, and also is a refreshing indication that Republicans are no longer intimidated by feminist demands.
VAWA was originally passed by Congress in 1994, with Bill Clinton pushing the law as a payoff to the feminists for supporting his election as President. Joe Biden claims credit as a major sponsor and likes to say it is the legislation of which he is most proud.
In its 17 years of operation, it has done little or no good for real victims of domestic violence, while its funds have been used to fill feminist coffers and to lobby for feminist objectives and laws. Although every spending bill should be subject to rigorous auditing procedures in order to curb waste and fraud, VAWA has somehow ducked accountability for the nearly a billion dollars a year it doles out to radical feminist organizations.
Despite rigid feminist dogma that there are no gender differences, VAWA is totally grounded in feminist-created gender stereotypes. Starting with its title, Violence Against Women, its fundamental assumption is that men are naturally batterers and women are naturally victims.
In other words, men are always guilty, and women must always be believed without fear of being punished for perjury. VAWA assumes there is no violence against men, and VAWA doesn’t provide services for men who are victims of domestic violence.
The feminists have so broadened the definition of domestic violence that it doesn’t have to be violent and can be whatever a woman alleges. Definitions of domestic violence include vague and overbroad concepts such as emotional distress, harassment, annoyance, or merely unpleasant speech.
Feminist recipients of VAWA’s handouts use the money to train legislators, judges and prosecutors in feminist ideology and goals. This has resulted in dozens of state laws calling for mandatory arrest (i.e., the police must arrest someone, so guess who), and no-drop prosecution (i.e., the man must be prosecuted even in the large percentage of cases where the woman has withdrawn her accusation or refuses to testify).
Instead of promoting divorce, breakup of marriage, and hatred of men, VAWA should be revised to encourage counseling when appropriate and voluntary. Some VAWA money should be used for programs to help couples terminate use of illegal drugs and reduce the use of alcohol.
Any man who is accused of domestic violence effectively loses a long list of constitutional rights accorded to ordinary criminals. These include due process, presumption that he is innocent until proven guilty, equal treatment under the law, right to a fair trial, right to confront his accusers, freedom of speech, right to privacy in family matters, custody or visitation with his own children, and even the right to bear arms.
The woman is provided with legal representation even though she has not presented any evidence of injury or harm. The man gets no such help.
About a fourth of divorces involve an allegation of domestic violence, which in many cases is false or without any evidence. Those allegations usually result in the issuance of restraining orders which the Illinois Bar Association has referred to as “part of the gamesmanship of divorce.”
It’s no surprise that VAWA is often referred to as the hate-men law. The attitude of many judges and prosecutors who have been trained by the feminists with VAWA funds was expressed by one New Jersey judge whose extravagant statement was even reported in the New Jersey Law Journal: “Your job is not to become concerned about all the constitutional rights of the man that you’re violating as you grant a restraining order. Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back, and tell him, ‘See ya’ around.’”
Judges are required to consider allegations of domestic violence in awarding child custody, even though no evidence of abuse is presented. This usually results in the complete severing of child’s relationship with his father.
VAWA should be completely revised to provide meaningful definitions of domestic violence that are specific enough to identify real victims, to stop the over-criminalization of minor partner discord, to emphasize counseling rather than incarceration, to assure that training programs for prosecutors and judges are objective, to assure accountability by tracking the large flow of taxpayers’ money, to respect fathers’ rights, to inspect shelters to evaluate success and fairness, and to develop programs to address the common problem of mutual partner abuse.
If VAWA is not reformed to respect constitutional rights, it will turn out to be a major embarrassment to all Members of Congress who vote for it.
Source:

A Voice for Men Radio..

Republicans Say No to VAWA!

There is one guarantee in life and that is manginas like Dr Phil will stab his own sex in the back without relenting. This feminised "all women are victims" toady relentlessly spent valuable time siding with the "victimhood" queen of hysteria Oprah, promoting discord and disharmony to a world wide audience without so much as looking at the other side of his ridiculous accusations. Compulsive lying and exaggeration is the order of the day while he loads up his bank account cowtowing to the feminist hegemony and it's doctrine..

There is no greater traitor to his own sex and he stands side by side with the greatest male hating and male bashing feminist hegemony..

He is a disgrace to society..

Dr. Phil's Testimony was 'Reckless and False,' Group ChargesWASHINGTON, July 25, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a national victim-advocacy organization, is charging that Dr. Phillip McGraw, a TV personality known to many as Dr. Phil, made claims at a recent Senate committee hearing that were "reckless and false."
Dr. McGraw's testimony was given during a July 13 hearing on the Violence Against Women Act held by the Senate Judiciary Committee. McGraw, a psychologist, often appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show.
During his testimony, Dr. McGraw made repeated statements about violence against women, but glossed over the widespread problem of abuse against men. McGraw made a number of claims that were flatly wrong, SAVE alleges.
Dr. McGraw asserted that "Domestic violence is now the most common cause of injury to women ages 15 to 44." But the actual leading causes of injury to women are falls, overexertion, and car accidents. McGraw told the senators that "In too many situations violence against women, young and old, is almost treated as an 'acceptable crime.'" But that statement ignores research showing over 90% of Americans abhor domestic violence.
Dr. McGraw's testimony "is reminiscent of the Jim Crow rape scares that focused on black-on-white rape, while studiously ignoring the problem of white-on-white sexual assault," the SAVE letter explains.
"Two weeks ago Catherine Becker allegedly sliced off her husband's penis and tossed it in the garbage disposal," notes SAVE spokesman Philip Cook. "The gruesome incident took place just miles from Dr. Phil's southern California home. But by the time Dr. McGraw arrived in Washington for the hearing, all awareness of male victimization seemingly had vanished from his mind."
Women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners, according to a research summary compiled by Dr. Martin Fiebert of California State University.
A copy of the SAVE letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee can be seen here:http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/Reckless-False-Statements-Made-to-Senate-Judiciary-CommitteeStop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to partner abuse: www.saveservices.org

Biden reminds me of the saying "Can't walk and chew at the same time" as this mangina (male feminist supporting female superiority) has to be enemy number 2 on the scale of leaders determined to ensure that all Men are jesttisoned to third class position after women and children and I am almost inclined to say after the dog as well. Bearing in mind ofcourse that enemy number One is Obama as he has installed the male haters directly into the White House just to ensure that task is completed..

We cannot have Men free and being responsible as that just won't do. It is a good example of how far and wide that feminist hegemony has reached and how they are determined to destroy existing rights that Men once had

Disappearing at a rate of knots never before seen or heard of but people keep voting for those feminised cretins like they are saviours of the world when in reality they are directly opposed to it..

Gender 101: Biden is Biden 

from The False Rape Society  

by Archivistby Connie Chastain* 

For several weeks, I've been the recipient of some emails from a group called change.org. I don't remember signing up for these emails, although maybe I did. The two or three notices I've received have been about issues I care not one whit about. Until the latest.
It was about our illustrious vice-president's April comments about rape. "Rape is rape is rape," he said at the University of New Hampshire. I admit to being awed by such perspicacity. And I always thought Joe Biden was as dumb as a box of hammers.
Biden cited a story about a college freshman he called "Jenny" who was raped after a campus party and met with resistance from the university when she tried to pursue a case against her "assailant" (the word used in the email).
Now, pardon my skepticism, but that's not enough to go on. All we have is her word for it -- or his claim of her word for it. I know there are people who swallow this stuff without blinking, but I'm not one of them. Aside from the fact that I've heard this one before -- and heard it and heard it -- I'm also a reader of the FRS blog, and I know things that true believers don't know -- and wouldn't believe if they were told.
Rape -- as terrible as it is -- simply isn't that prevalent, certainly not on college campuses. Which explains the next part of the change.org email. They want to redefine rape, to include more ... things.
According to the email, the "FBI omits hundreds of thousands of rapes from its Uniform Crime Report (UCR) because it’s using an 80-year-old definition of rape. ... The FBI’s outdated definition of rape is limited to 'the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.'"
Well, golly. That's what I always thought it was. What has happened in the past 80 years that would make folks want to change the definition of rape? Well, how about feminism? How about women demanding "sexual freedom" so they can be just like men (or how they imagine men to be, although they hate men, so why would they want to be like them? I know.) -- only to find out it's not all its cracked up to be.
Anyway, change.org wants me to sign a petition to tell the FBI to "update" its definition of rape.
Ah, no. Rape is what it has always been -- a crime and a horrible experience. It is NOT drunken consensual sex that a woman regrets afterward. Attempting to redefine rape is just another salvo in the feminist war against men -- an effort that also relegates women to helpless victimhood, without responsibility for themselves or their actions.
Naturally, the e-mail from change.org says not one syllable about how such consensual sex gets called rape, and some man then gets arrested and investigated, and called "rapist" in the newspaper, and maybe TV reports -- for doing what? For doing the same thing the woman with him did. It says not a word about the outright false accusations of rape that get reported in this blog day after day after weary day.
Being a rightwing religious fundamentalist, I frankly disapprove of premarital and extramarital consensual sex. But I'm not so blinded by the light that I can tell the difference between that and rape.
 So, no. I'm not signing anything that seeks to equate some sorority chick's morning-after regret with the experience of a woman (or a man) who has been brutally raped, by the real definition of it. I don't hate men, so I'm not enthusiastic about making laws designed to make criminals out of men whose behavior is no different than their partners.
Yes, Joe. Rape is rape. Lies are lies. Parts is parts, and stupid is stupid.
*Connie is an FRS contributor. Her personal blog is http://conniechastain.blogspot.com/