As the hysterics rises in the slut feminist corner, the other pugilist is tightening the gloves for anther bout. Only this time it's a "WOMAN" doing the waring, erm, the sparing. There is nothing more fruitful for the feminastie movement to make outlandish claims in regards to their own sex as they are victims ofcourse, the number one cardinal rule. It is via this victimhood mentality that excuses and encourages all that bad behaviour and unaccountability as they have something or someone else to blame everything on..

If you are a victim, than you can not be an abuser. That is the claim the slut feminist cadre rely on for their justification of destroying male rights and promoting endless female privileges..

They are enhanced victims. So it is good to see one of their own fighting against that insanity and readjusted some laws which the slut feminists hold so dear, so close to their black hearts. The slaughter of helpless unborn is their mainstay and they have honoured that interest ever since Roe and Wade was forced down societies' throat. Now apparently, apoplexy will fester as they realise that not everyone is interested in murdering unborn willy nilly. Let the games begin, again..

Brewer Signs Law Banning Most Late-term Abortions

Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer signed into law on Thursday a controversial bill that bans most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, giving Republicans a win in ongoing national efforts to impose greater restrictions on abortion.
The measure, which state lawmakers gave a final nod to on Tuesday, would bar healthcare professionals from performing abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in the case of a medical emergency. Only a small number of these abortions are performed in the state.
With Brewer's signature, Arizona joins six other states that have put similar late-term abortion bans in place in the past two years based on hotly debated medical research suggesting that a fetus feels pain starting at 20 weeks of gestation.

Through favouritism the UTIRATI win..

Here is an exercise - Type in "War on Women" in Google and then hit the images option and that will demonstrate how huge this debate really is as the slut-feminist movement pulls out all stops to favour their very own sycophants in the democratic party plus a few others as well as they cowtow(sic) to the magic "V" for vote..

One wonders how slut-feminists can claim anything about the female vote having anything to do with the conservative vote. It has already been demonstrated as plain as day, that the "Vagina" vote is just about guaranteed for the socialist side of politics and it is their worry that somehow, that voting choice may change. Making those type of false claims is what they are really all about..

The UTIRATI: A practiced methodology and utilised whenever they want to argue any topic pertaining to the privileged sex..

One single claim that the conservatives are loosing their grip on the women's vote is just another fantasy they have dreamed up, to once again argue their "Special Benefits" privileges. The claim that if feminist doctrine is not adhered to, then it is all basically against every female on the planet even though they have never tested the water that they even speak for a minority, let alone the rest. Another false assumption the slut-feminist movement makes..

Now that the "War on Women", their very own made up battle, is rearing it's head in US politics where some reality is trying to be applied to all those ridiculous laws that the slut-feminists and their wimpy enablers have introduced, look like being curtailed, is just not acceptable as they continually chase their number one favourite idol "Abortion". It is apparently unheard of as far as they are concerned that there may be other people on this planet who may have a differing opinion or view, one that was originally ignored, but that has never stopped the feminastie movement attacking anyone who has a purview differing from theirs..

So as the stops are being applied to their murderous doctrinal intrusions on society, they are up in arms as all those illegal policies, they forced onto the public, are coming under scrutiny. That is ofcourse the major issue here. One cannot have anyone taking a closer look at anything they have forced through, like VAWA, to be scrutinised as it will expose all that corruption and favouritism that once again those nay sayers have always been involved with and continually introduce. They do not want anyone being held accountable or answering the obvious tough questions, that are bound to follow. They have been building the "War on Wimmin" argument now for a few or more weeks, in the hope they can either generate some attention or force legislators to once again turn a blind eye to the bleeding obvious. Their version of democracy does not encourage that at all..

Slut-feminism up to it's usual hysterics. More privileges for women..

This article really covers the crux of the matter in relation to what women demand and what they actually end up with. Both are out of kilter ofcourse, as one cannot demand larger incomes, extensive and over the top privileges and respect, while one is promoted as being a perpetual victim. One cannot presume to be respected or demand it, if one's behaviour is directly opposite to what actually inspires respect. The fact that it is earned, has not yet dawned, from the look of it and neither will it while over-demanding women behave the way they have been over the last 50 years, with the last couple of generations being even worse. Not something I thought possible..

 Peggy Noonan calls this “the coarsening of discourse in public life.” But that’s generally a complaint made by those who want to dish it out but can’t take it. To paraphrase Shakespeare, men have been called dogs for decades, now women have to beware their fangs.

 I quite agree that women up until recently, have not had any demonstration of how men would react towards them, were they to make every male an enemy, which they have done over the last few decades. They are now witnessing that response and reaction and they are at a loss to understand it or even come close to comprehending it..

Who dreams this crap up..

It is in total ignorance that women forced men into a corner via government license, kick him in the groin by using the law against him, smear him with sewage by the way of denigration and verbal abuse,  and then wonder why there would be a negative response, a backlash. To any grown adult, that would indeed be understandable, but obviously to a slut-feminist, their enablers and supporters , they baulk with indignation and demand that we should just take it like a man and not utter one single word of complaint..

As women have entered positions of power, equaled men in earnings, and outstripped men in education, men have begun to fight back against this ongoing assault. In doing so, they have begun to treat women  — well, as roughly as they treat one another.

So do women still deserve better treatment or be spared any competition, while they just destroy our lively-hood, our education and generate illegal laws that take away our basic human rights. Tell me you are joking. It is already in progress of being answered and that is why there is a war on. You started that and we are going to end it. The eventual outcome is entirely up to you. Either way, you are not going to like it. That old saying applies "be careful what you wish", as you will have to deal with the additional responsibility that comes with it..

Is There a War On Women?

There’s been a lot of talk lately about a war on women. Much of this has been devised by the Obama administration and its cronies in order to divert our attention from their unprecedented and illegal attack on our Constitution’s guarantees of religious liberty. At its core is the old leftist canard that says if people won’t be taxed to pay for your goods and services, they are somehow denying you access to those goods and services. It’s low and dishonest garbage and the people who promulgate it should be kicked first out of office and then downstairs.
But this weekend, one of the Wall Street Journal’s better columnists, Peggy Noonan, while largely agreeing with the above, opined that there really is a war against women nonetheless. By this she means the rather frequent use of sexual slurs, mostly by leftist men but sometimes by men on the right as well, to denigrate women in high-profile positions. “The words used are vulgar,” Noonan says, “and are meant to tear down and embarrass.”
I enjoy Noonan’s column a lot, but I can’t agree with her here. It seems to me, in fact, that there has been an ongoing and wickedly offhanded war against men for the past forty years at least. It’s not just the outright insults that have been permissible in respectable outlets: i.e., calling men collectively and individually “pigs.” The war has been waged in far more subtle and disgraceful ways as well.
Consider the common phrase “he objectifies women,” which casually belittles and denigrates men’s sexual yearnings. Or think of the almost universal depiction of fathers and husbands in movies, television shows, and advertisements as weaklings and fools under their wife-mommy’s control. Imagine the knowing laughter that would follow if I were to remark that “women are smarter than men,” then imagine the furious outbursts that would result if I said, “men are smarter than women.” The war is waged not only in what is said and shown, but in what is not said, what is considered

As women have entered positions of power, equaled men in earnings, and outstripped men in education, men have begun to fight back against this ongoing assault. In doing so, they have begun to treat women  — well, as roughly as they treat one another. The insults are different because the genders are different — in much the same way I will call a woman “sweetheart,” when I would call a man “pal” — but the feeling behind them is largely the same. Peggy Noonan calls this “the coarsening of discourse in public life.” But that’s generally a complaint made by those who want to dish it out but can’t take it. To paraphrase Shakespeare, men have been called dogs for decades, now women have to beware their fangs.
You can’t expect men to treat women with the special respect they once earned by being ladies if women are no longer going to behave in the way that earned them that special respect. A lady was an elevated personage precisely because she kept out of the workaday fray. She exhibited greater gentleness and generosity in the full knowledge that men would provide the muscle and money to protect her — and for that protection she returned deference and respect. You may say, well, then it’s a good thing women aren’t expected to be ladies anymore. Fine, but everything comes with a price. If feminists are going to verbally assault men then misogynists (a misogynist being the flip side of a feminist) are going to fire back. If women are going to compete in the market place using their beauty and sex appeal, men are going to compete using their aggression and toughness. No fair complaining. You can’t have women linebackers but say it’s not right to block them because, after all, they’re just girls.
Listen, personally, I believe in treating people with kindness and respect whenever possible. I believe in good manners and feel too many people mistake bad manners for strength when they are almost always evidence of a weakness. But there’s plenty of unkindness, disrespect, and bad manners to go around in both genders and I don’t see why I should feel that women suffer from them specially. Indeed, as I understand it, women don’t want to be special anymore.

H/T Percy..