[The Lizard of Oz]

I posted the story here but I think it deserves its own thread.

Just in case someone thought things are about to get better with this -- the White House is now stepping in and ratcheting up the pressure for colleges to hound and ruin the lives of normal dudes all over the country because of an imagined "rape epidemic" on college campuses:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/29/us/tou...ml?hp&_r=0

Quote:

WASHINGTON — Reacting to a series of highly publicized rapes on college campuses, the White House is increasing the pressure on universities across the country to more aggressively combat sexual assaults on campus.

Administration officials released guidelines on Monday that colleges should follow, including recommendations that administrators conduct anonymous surveys of sexual assault cases. The White House is likely to ask Congress for measures that would enforce the recommendations.

Quote:

The report will also urge universities to better ensure that sexual assault reports remain confidential. Sometimes fears that reports will not remain confidential can discourage victims from coming forward.

The task force further found that many assault prevention training efforts are not effective, and it will recommend that universities and colleges institute programs like those used at the University of New Hampshire and University of Kentucky, which train bystanders how to intervene.

Quote:

The task force says that one in five college students has been assaulted, but just 12 percent of such attacks are reported.

“The American people have kind of woken up to the fact that we’ve got a serious problem when 20 percent of coeds say they’ve been sexually assaulted,” said Representative Jackie Speier, Democrat of California.

Quote:

Under the new crackdown, the White House will urge colleges and universities to conduct “climate surveys,” in which participants anonymously report their experiences with unwanted physical contact, sexual assault or rape, and how their schools responded. Some lawmakers would like to see such surveys mandatory and to possibly make federal funds like Pell grants contingent on their being carried out.

Ms. Speier would like to see the government do more, liked requiring schools to post Title 9 rights and where students should go if raped.

Quote:

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, and Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who both spent much of last year trying to legislatively police sexual assault in the armed forces, have now turned significant attention to such problems on the nation’s campuses.

“After a year of working hard to reform how the military handles sexual assault cases,” Ms. Gillibrand said in an email, “the stories I have heard from students are eerily similar. Once again the problem is systemic, survivors feel twice betrayed, and reform is required.” The report from the White House task force, she said, “is a step forward, but senators on both sides of the aisle will continue to study the problem and look at needed legislative solutions.”

Ms. McCaskill, a former prosecutor, plans to conduct her own survey of 350 colleges and universities nationwide to monitor their handling of sexual assault cases. The two are among nearly a dozen senators seeking new federal funding to battle campus sexual assaults. Ms. Gillibrand also has asked the White House to better centralize the functions of the Department of Education to deal with sexual assault.

In other words:

-- The White House is now insisting on a witchhunt of men on college campuses
-- The "victims" will be allowed to remain anonymous so that they can slander men with complete impunity, not even their reputations will be threatened
-- Cockblocking "bystanders" will now be mandatorily trained and enabled to spy on and hound guys everywhere
-- Ludicrous "climate surveys" will create an atmosphere of fear and encourage "victims" to come forward
-- The egregious "20%" lie is being repeated over and over again
-- Leading this charge are two hag lawyers/prosecutors who have previously done their best to destroy the US military and are now trying to do the same thing to college campuses

Grim stuff getting worse from day to day.

[Christian McQueen]

The elephant in the room lies in the senators' political affiliation.

Just sayin...

[Sombro]

Brown, Like Yale, Screws up on Due Process

Quote:

A few years ago, the Patrick Witt case at Yale exposed the unwillingness of an Ivy League institution to uphold even the minimal due process protections the schools accord to students accused of sexual assault. Witt, recall, was a star quarterback who withdrew his Rhodes application, the interview for which coincided with the Harvard-Yale game. An article by the Times' Richard Pérez-Peña implied (without producing any evidence) that Witt had withdrawn his candidacy because he was accused by another student of sexual assault. As the essayist Richard Bradley noted at the time, the Times "allowed itself to be used to publicize an anonymous accusation of 'sexual assault'--rape--and smear a young man's character, reputation and future through implications that it can not verify and insinuations that it can not prove..."

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/20..._on_d.html

Fighting Rape by Treating Due Process as an Alien Concept

Quote:

This approach is exactly what anti-due process activists have championed: discourage accusers from going to trained law enforcement officials, and instead go to campus tribunals, where it's much easier to obtain convictions. And in the Sclove case, this is exactly what occurred. The tribunal came back on Sclove's side, on a preponderance-of-evidence standard in which the accused student lacked the right to counsel. A victory for Baker's worldview, correct?

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/20..._due_.html

[The Lizard of Oz]

(04-28-2014 09:41 PM)Christian McQueen Wrote:  

The elephant in the room lies in the senators' political affiliation.

Just sayin...

Democrat feminist hags are definitely leading the charge, but Republican white-knights are following hard on their nasty heels. I don't see anyone rushing to defend young dudes whose lives will be ruined by this evil insanity. It's the usual unholy alliance of progg feminist agitators and tradcon prudes and white-knights, all shedding crocodile tears about the non-existent "sexual assault" epidemic.

[Fitzgerald]

Here's a solution to the "rape problem". Men are legally barred from pursuing higher education. Boom, problem solved.

[Dusty]

Relevant report from the excellent James Taranto from the Wall Street Journal today. A a potentially big shift in thinking on these matters.

So this director of the Association of Title IX Administrators is starting to speak out about the kangaroo courts fucking with young guy's lives for daring to chase pussy.

When you have someone in a position that is mangina self-selecting, and who doubtless has femcunt harpies screeching in his ear all day, start to take a stand like this, you have to feel some optimism that the tide is turning.

Quote:

The Other Side of Title IX
A warning to higher-education administrators.

By JAMES TARANTO CONNECT
April 28, 2014 1:58 p.m. ET
Brett Sokolow, director of the Association of Title IX Administrators, has a warning for American college and university administrators: In their efforts to enforce Title IX, he argues, they are running afoul of Title IX.

Title IX is a provision of the Education Amendments of 1972 that stipulates: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Under the Obama administration, the Education Department has interpreted this law as requiring colleges and universities to police sexual misconduct involving students, on or off campus, under the broad rubric of "sexual harassment . . . including sexual violence."

In a newsletter to members dated last Thursday, Sokolow reports that "in the last two weeks, I've worked on five cases all involving drunken hook-ups on college campuses. In each case, the male accused of sexual misconduct was found responsible. In each case, I thought the college got it completely wrong."

He does not reveal the names of the institutions involved or any other specific details of the cases, presumably because his consultative role entails a duty of confidentiality. But he sums up the problem as follows: "Some [disciplinary] boards and panels still can't tell the difference between drunken sex and a policy violation"--that is, a sexual assault.

Sometimes that is by design. "In a recent case," Sokolow recounts, "the campus policy stated that intoxication creates an inability to consent." That makes it easy to establish a violation--except that in many cases the accuser has violated the letter of the policy as much as the accused has. "If both are intoxicated, they both did the same thing to each other," Sokolow writes. "Why should only the male be charged if both students behave in ways defined as prohibited by the policy?"

That's a rhetorical question. "I'm not suggesting we charge both," Sokolow clarifies. "Surely, every drunken sexual hook-up is not a punishable offense. . . . There must be something that the respondent does, beyond having sex, that makes a lawful act (sex) into a policy violation."

In his view, a drunken sexual encounter should be considered an assault only if the facts show that the accuser was incapacitated by alcohol and that the accused had mens rea, or guilty intent: the "knowledge of that incapacitation, whether actual or constructive"--in other words, "that the respondent know or should have known" of the complainant's incapacitation.

"There is no need for an intent to rape, but there has to be something more than an intent to have sex to make this an offense," he writes. "Otherwise, men are simply being punished for having sex, which is sex discrimination under Title IX, because their partners are having sex too and are not being subjected to the code of conduct for doing so." Title IX, after all, protects students of both sexes from sex discrimination.

He warns institutions that they expose themselves to legal liability if they apply their rules in an "arbitrary and capricious" way at the expense of male students: "We are making Title IX plaintiffs out of them."

[BortimusPrime]

(04-28-2014 10:01 PM)Fitzgerald Wrote:  

Here's a solution to the "rape problem". Men are legally barred from pursuing higher education. Boom, problem solved.

Heh, this would have the unintended side effect of totally destroying academia. Employers would react by removing degree reqs in favor of internships and work xp, since they don't want to get stuck only hiring nonproductive women. The end result would be making it blatantly obvious that college serves only the purpose of draining the income of middle class parents who think they're helping their little precious by subsidizing his binge drinking for four years.

[runsonmagic]

Oh good, now only older dudes who aren't accountable to college gestapo boards will be able to waltz in and steal your daughters for our empowering homemade porn shoots.

[The Lizard of Oz]

@Dusty -- well, Brett Sokolow has a lot to atone for. He is one of the people most responsible for creating and promulgating these kangaroo courts in the first place.

I am not optimistic -- there is a full court press by the current admin to make things worse and worse. There might be some meek protests but I see no evidence that the tide is turning. Quite the contrary.

EDIT: here is a post with an article describing Sokolow's crucial role in creating the current kangaroo court system.

[darklightdispatch]

A question to guys who are currently in or recently out of college: do you get the impression that there actually are a significant amount of legitimate sexual assault incidents happening on campus? My impression is that, particularly considering how soft and timid so many college-aged guys are these days, actual college sexual assault is rare as hell.

When I was in college (less than a decade ago), girls had drunken hook-ups that they regretted, sure, but as far as actual violent, forced assault, it was all hysteria and no reality as far as I could tell.

[darklightdispatch]

(04-28-2014 10:16 PM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 10:01 PM)Fitzgerald Wrote:  

Here's a solution to the "rape problem". Men are legally barred from pursuing higher education. Boom, problem solved.

Heh, this would have the unintended side effect of totally destroying academia. Employers would react by removing degree reqs in favor of internships and work xp, since they don't want to get stuck only hiring nonproductive women. The end result would be making it blatantly obvious that college serves only the purpose of draining the income of middle class parents who think they're helping their little precious by subsidizing his binge drinking for four years.

Sounds like an unqualified win all around. Also, though, having male-only and female-only colleges seems like a reasonable idea. If preventing those evil rampaging young males from terrorizing poor sweet young women is what you want, physically separating them seems like the obvious solution. Give this whole failed co-ed experiment a break. However, since feminism is based in envy/jealous and all about maximizing victimhood for women, that's the last thing they'd go for. For feminists, the greater fear isn't being victimized, it's being robbed of the opportunity to play the victim.

[Glaucon]

One gender only campuses.

Imagine being a player and sneaking into a girls only campus...poon paradise!

[Suits]

(04-28-2014 10:16 PM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 10:01 PM)Fitzgerald Wrote:  

Here's a solution to the "rape problem". Men are legally barred from pursuing higher education. Boom, problem solved.

Heh, this would have the unintended side effect of totally destroying academia. Employers would react by removing degree reqs in favor of internships and work xp, since they don't want to get stuck only hiring nonproductive women. The end result would be making it blatantly obvious that college serves only the purpose of draining the income of middle class parents who think they're helping their little precious by subsidizing his binge drinking for four years.

It wouldn't just destroy academia. Imagine a world without trained, male engineers. A world where all physicists will take 10 years off to pop out babies. A world where only women are certified elementary and high school teachers.

[darklightdispatch]

Generally, a move towards restoring male and female specific spaces would improve life tremendously.

Our current practice in the West of mixing males and females together at every stage of life is quite bizarre and unnatural. Every society prior to the present, from caveman days on, has seen fit to separate males and females and define complementary gender roles based on inherent function. This was both common sense and required for survival and prosperity.

The current elites, or whoever is in charge, is engineering a population of androgynous worker bees. The book "Brave New Word" by Aldous Huxley predicted all this a long time ago. Orwell's 1984 gets all the attention, but Brave New World was more prescient and applies more closely to what's going on today.

[Suits]

(04-29-2014 12:20 AM)darklightdispatch Wrote:  

Generally, a move towards restoring male and female specific spaces would improve life tremendously.

Our current practice in the West of mixing males and females together at every stage of life is quite bizarre and unnatural. Every society prior to the present, from caveman days on, has seen fit to separate males and females and define complementary gender roles based on inherent function. This was both common sense and required for survival and prosperity.

Men and women have almost nothing in common. I recently had a conversation with the pastor of the church I grew up in. I explained that one of the reasons I preferred to live in China was because of the meaningful male-male friendships and bonds that are formed in the tight-knit expat communities in the country.

(Expat women are generally either (1) married to rich expats, who have their own stuffy social circle, (2) don't last long in China at all, (3) or pretty much keep to themselves, because due to the prevalent supply of eager and friendly Chinese women, Western women have no social capital in China -- i.e., no one wants to bang them; even the black guys from Africa who want to try to white poon eventually tire of their bitchiness and switch back to Chinese women exclusively

Single Western men don't hang out exclusively in sausage fests, but since most of them are dating Asian women, the effect is similar -- rather than the female participants in social activities calling the shots, they are merely there to accompany the men who bring them and rarely do they use these social gatherings to attention whore, as Western women are apt to do).

The pastor seemed offended that I would champion exclusive male socializing. Even when I explained that I had not problem with sometimes hanging out in mixed groups and sometimes hanging out with only other guys, he seemed to think that it was a terrible thing to place value in male company without the accompanying distraction of female participation.

I might have grown up the West, but I find it strange this obsession with never closing any metaphoric door to any woman.

[It_is_my_time]

Just amazing, completely amazing, how Obama says he wants to help out young minority men, as he claims there is a crisis in their community for them. And he is right, there is a crisis in their community and such little opportunity. Of course all of that was created by the Democratic party by creating single mother household lead ghettos.

And then he goes out and pushes for a witch hunt against young men a week later.

Obviously he is just a politician pandering for votes. But how can the average person not see through this complete hypocrisy and be outraged by it.

[TonySandos]

If you've ever been a fan of dark meat, you'll understand why feminist/racism activist black chicks should be avoided like the plague

[darklightdispatch]

(04-29-2014 12:34 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 12:20 AM)darklightdispatch Wrote:  

Generally, a move towards restoring male and female specific spaces would improve life tremendously.

Our current practice in the West of mixing males and females together at every stage of life is quite bizarre and unnatural. Every society prior to the present, from caveman days on, has seen fit to separate males and females and define complementary gender roles based on inherent function. This was both common sense and required for survival and prosperity.

Men and women have almost nothing in common. I recently had a conversation with the pastor of the church I grew up in. I explained that one of the reasons I preferred to live in China was because of the meaningful male-male friendships and bonds that are formed in the tight-knit expat communities in the country.

(Expat women are generally either (1) married to rich expats, who have their own stuffy social circle, (2) don't last long in China at all, (3) or pretty much keep to themselves, because due to the prevalent supply of eager and friendly Chinese women, Western women have no social capital in China -- i.e., no one wants to bang them; even the black guys from Africa who want to try to white poon eventually tire of their bitchiness and switch back to Chinese women exclusively

Single Western men don't hang out exclusively in sausage fests, but since most of them are dating Asian women, the effect is similar -- rather than the female participants in social activities calling the shots, they are merely there to accompany the men who bring them and rarely do they use these social gatherings to attention whore, as Western women are apt to do).

The pastor seemed offended that I would champion exclusive male socializing. Even when I explained that I had not problem with sometimes hanging out in mixed groups and sometimes hanging out with only other guys, he seemed to think that it was a terrible thing to place value in male company without the accompanying distraction of female participation.

I might have grown up the West, but I find it strange this obsession with never closing any metaphoric door to any woman.

This brings up an important observation: even (sometimes especially) religion in the U.S. seems to promote feminism and be against men just as much as academia, Hollywood, etc. It would seem that the church should be the one place for traditional views, but surprisingly, that often isn't the case. There's literally nothing in mainstream society that isn't tainted by feminism.

I've also noticed that when men do anything together without women interfering directly, they're labeled "bros" in a derogatory way or implied to be gay. Mainstream Western culture is really intent on destroying and eliminating even the possibility of (non gay) male-male relationships without feminine influence.

[Travesty]

(04-28-2014 11:34 PM)darklightdispatch Wrote:  

A question to guys who are currently in or recently out of college: do you get the impression that there actually are a significant amount of legitimate sexual assault incidents happening on campus? My impression is that, particularly considering how soft and timid so many college-aged guys are these days, actual college sexual assault is rare as hell.

When I was in college (less than a decade ago), girls had drunken hook-ups that they regretted, sure, but as far as actual violent, forced assault, it was all hysteria and no reality as far as I could tell.

If there is a real attack it is many times from an outsider either visiting or cruising through town, is looking for trouble, and has a prior record.

I don't remember one case or even a rumor of one girl getting attacked in my social circle or any touching it during college or grad school. If 1 out of 5 girls is getting attacked I don't see how they can all keep their mouths shut and no rumors go around ever.

I did however hear scare stories about being out late at night on campus etc... and of course some incidents of again out of town guys who had histories.

Also I am sure once these guys attack they leave back to where they came from they don't stick around campus repeat attacking in most cases I'd assume.

This reminds me of the anti-rape awareness classes. Lol telling a rapist not to rape won't stop him. Just like a murderer, child molester, or drug addict. Telling them no won't do shit.

Now stopping single motherhood and forming strong families that have plenty of money (less taxes) and incentive (less welfare) to support children? That could help.

[Suits]

^In the West, equality has become synonymous with sameness.

In a climate where men and women are seen as exactly the same (with variation between individuals but not the sexes as a whole), then placing any value in male-male bonds as something to be desired will be viewed as the same as holding a discriminator attitude towards women, excluding them from something for no justifiable reason.

It seems few are willing to accept or admit that male-male friendship is far superior to male-female friendship.

While relationships with women have their place, any relationship with a woman you haven't banged yet is guaranteed to be fraught with dishonesty.

(1) If you don't want to bang her, being honest about why will hurt her feelings, so you get to choose between not being completely honest or terminating the friendship by hurting her feelings.

(2) If you do want to bang her but haven't, being honest is obviously a poor play until you are ready to make your move (which us players know needs to happen right away, but that nullifies the idea of male-female friends anyway).

(3) If you spend any period of time not be straight up about viewing her as sexually desirable, no matter where the relationship goes, it'll be built on a foundation of dishonest/withholding the truth.

The only solution is the bang her right away, so that the two of you can be honest and open with each other from the beginning, but that is a different type of relationship than a non-sexual friendship.

Therefore, the only real friendship a straight man can have that isn't based around some level of sex, is a friendship with another straight man.

Since bringing women into the room means that the men in question (previous to any sort of bros before hos bonds being solidly solidified) will be in competition mode with each other instead of collaboration mode (which is the mode men need to be in to truly win -- always competing with each other means that women always win).

So, there is a great need for us men to have the opportunity to build strong friendships and trust away from the interference of women.

Of course, men having fun and creating friendships without women present is a distasteful idea to most people in the West.

But to fail to do so means that women are always in a prime position to divide and conquer, something they have been very successful at in the last 50 years if one looks at how they have destroyed any power men may have once had.

The only way for a male to have any sort of control over his life is to never move in with a woman and by never doing so, never reach a state of legal financial obligation to a woman.

But if male bonding outside of the watchful eyes of women ever becomes the norm again in Western culture, we might be able to restore some normalcy to Western living.

Do the right thing. Build friendships with other men. Save women for relationship based around sex, not friendship.

[It_is_my_time]

(04-29-2014 03:14 AM)Suits Wrote:  

^In the West, equality has become synonymous with sameness.

In a climate where men and women are seen as exactly the same (with variation between individuals but not the sexes as a whole), then placing any value in male-male bonds as something to be desired will be viewed as the same as holding a discriminator attitude towards women, excluding them from something for no justifiable reason.

It seems few are willing to accept or admit that male-male friendship is far superior to male-female friendship.

While relationships with women have their place, any relationship with a woman you haven't banged yet is guaranteed to be fraught with dishonesty.

(1) If you don't want to bang her, being honest about why will hurt her feelings, so you get to choose between not being completely honest or terminating the friendship by hurting her feelings.

(2) If you do want to bang her but haven't, being honest is obviously a poor play until you are ready to make your move (which us players know needs to happen right away, but that nullifies the idea of male-female friends anyway).

(3) If you spend any period of time not be straight up about viewing her as sexually desirable, no matter where the relationship goes, it'll be built on a foundation of dishonest/withholding the truth.

The only solution is the bang her right away, so that the two of you can be honest and open with each other from the beginning, but that is a different type of relationship than a non-sexual friendship.

Therefore, the only real friendship a straight man can have that isn't based around some level of sex, is a friendship with another straight man.

Since bringing women into the room means that the men in question (previous to any sort of bros before hos bonds being solidly solidified) will be in competition mode with each other instead of collaboration mode (which is the mode men need to be in to truly win -- always competing with each other means that women always win).

So, there is a great need for us men to have the opportunity to build strong friendships and trust away from the interference of women.

Of course, men having fun and creating friendships without women present is a distasteful idea to most people in the West.

But to fail to do so means that women are always in a prime position to divide and conquer, something they have been very successful at in the last 50 years if one looks at how they have destroyed any power men may have once had.

The only way for a male to have any sort of control over his life is to never move in with a woman and by never doing so, never reach a state of legal financial obligation to a woman.

But if male bonding outside of the watchful eyes of women ever becomes the norm again in Western culture, we might be able to restore some normalcy to Western living.

Do the right thing. Build friendships with other men. Save women for relationship based around sex, not friendship.

Excellent post. This is something I have learned as I have grown older. Women are there for a relationship or really not at all. I have little to nothing in common with most women. They are often entertained by childish type things that are annoying to me.

That is why this forum is so great. It allows men to escape from women and learn and vent and share and grow. It would be excellent to have more male only clubs in the USA. But even without them we have Roosh and that IMO is a very good way around this system.

[Glaucon]

(04-29-2014 03:14 AM)Suits Wrote:  

It would be excellent to have more male only clubs.

Yep. There are a few male only spaces left, like hunting clubs and other very male only spaces, but we have been pushed out to the edges of society.

Those old men only clubs were the meeting place of the intellectual elite, where real business and serious discussions took place.

Sometimes I think we should create underground men only clubs, only known by a few.

[Laurifer]

Didn't want to start an entire thread on this since it just usually pisses me and everyone else off. Just a friendly celebrity-endorsed reminder from the White House that every college-going young man is a rapist:

However, some of the comments are from an article about the video show hope.

Quote:

How many celebrities can we get for a PSA on the victims of false rape claims and false abuse allegations related to divorce and custody battles? Maybe Alec Baldwin.

1 in 5? If alcohol negates consent then more men than women are raped.

Does the WH want unis to boot male students out for a mere accusation like feminists are demanding around the country?

Quote:

I am a woman who laughs at rape jokes and I will not tolerate this sanctimony as part of my "gender's behaviour". No does not always mean no--sex is a complicated dance, life is ambiguous, and if you can't handle it, don't get involved in sexual situations. Either women are strong enough to make it on their own or they need to be chaperoned like children.

Quote:

"change your gender's behavior". what a sexist thing to say. So because rape is a problem, it must be attributed to mens' gender somehow?

How is this any less offensive than telling black people to change their race's behavior because a small minority in their race make up a disproportionate amount of violent crime?

Or telling all Catholics to change their Religion's behavior because of a minority of disgusting individuals exist in that faith.

It isn't. Rape is a crime perpetrated by a very small minority of men, and isn't a "gender issue." It's a criminal issue.

Edit: Video first shared by Dusty in http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-35589-...#pid715103

[Travesty]

This video has convinced me that I am a victim.

No one helped me at any time when more than a handful of questionable looking girls had sex with me when I was intoxicated.

I still write and sketch these nightmares into my diary everyday. Everyone's inaction did this to me and my tainted manhood.

I have turned to hard drugs and ED pills because I can no longer relate to the opposite sex on a normal level.

[Quintus Curtius]

Not much to add here, except that this is yet one more depressing reminder for men as to who runs the show in the US. And the fact that the government would spend time like this to address a non-existent problem shows that our government is now totally worthless. Utterly, totally worthless.

Our society has lost its right to survive. We deserve our plunge into the ash-bin of failed civilizations.

Don't think for one minute that this is some sincere public service initiative based on a real problem. It's just institutional white-knighting on a massive scale, the object of which is to crush any last vestige of male self-esteem and independence on college campuses.

They want us to submit 100% to their entire program of subservience.

The real message here is this:

1. We women and girls run the show. Whatever we accuse you of, you're going to be guilty of (until proven innocent).

2. Don't even think of approaching me unless I give you written permission.

3. Don't even think of escalating physically with me unless I give written permission.

Men are now going to be gradually hammered into females. No masculine energy, spirit, or initiative will be welcome. If you're a man, you're job is to be a sperm donor at best, and when you're not doing that, to be a bubbling, bouncing beta orbiter, amplifying and agreeing with every female whim. Anything less than that is a punishable offense.

I mean, how bad are things going to get before sustained, organized resistance from men breaks out? What is it going to take? The government force-feeding us estrogen? Neutering us at birth?

And these rich celebrities, sitting in their mansions, make me sick. Hypocrites, sellouts, liars, scum of the earth.

I am beginning to darken. I am beginning to lose hope.

I am beginning to feel real stirrings of hate, unadulterated rage, and lust for vengeance.