Look, I was trying – really trying – to keep my mouth shut. But the assault on manhood continues unabated. It goes on and on, like the girl who won’t stop talking frantically about her cat, or her Pilates. To the point at which you make the remarkable decision that it’s actually not worth trying to bed her. Just not worth the price of submission.

The worst kind of attack on masculinity, of course comes from within. That fifth column that insists on chipping away at the things that make men… men. Like the fact that we don’t wear makeup. Men do not wear makeup. That’s for ladies. It’s supposed to be a self-evident fact.

I was at a normal business-social cocktail function, in a normal city. A man in his early 30s, with whom I’d been in a normal meeting hours earlier, greeted me heartily, lager in hand. He had questions about the proposed deal and the companies involved, but I couldn’t stop staring at his eyes. They were outlined in black. He was wearing eyeliner.

What’s wrong with your eyes? Have you been injured? “It’s guyliner, mate. Makes me look fresh after a long day.” I was appalled. Does your wife know you do this? “Yah, she wasn’t too chuffed I was using hers, so I got my own.”

It turns out that major cosmetics manufacturers are enthusiastically enabling this nefarious new front in the battle to emasculate us, and to undermine another bastion of maleness. They sell not just eyeliner, but blush, concealer and foundation. For men. MAC seems to be a leading offender. Jean Paul Gaultier has an entire line of testicle-shrinking products it calls Monsieur, as it slowly transforms us into madame.

Men don’t have many natural rights left, granted to us by God or Nature or both, and that’s fine. Too many of the old natural rights just turned us into walking hindquarters anyway. But one privilege that had survived the ages was the right to look like Hell, and still be seen as tremendous, titanic and worthy of deference. We could let our hair go gray, or fall away. Our skin could become pasty and dry. These were badges of courage, battle scars, announcing our stamina and prowess in work, our command of resources and our power in the realm.

Gentlemen, I am extending a hand to you. Join me not simply in resisting, but also in condemning “man-makeup”. This is a bad thing for men. It needs to be crushed. And we’re good at crushing things, such as beer cans and other people’s dreams.

For the record, there are some personal grooming steps in which it is acceptable to indulge. You may use conditioner on your hair. A masculine cologne is not only attractive to (the right kind of) women, but also proclaims a traveling space around you as your personal territory, thereby increasing your power. If you absolutely must, you may use some kind of moisturizing goop on your face at night, but only if you never tell anyone.

But if and when you encounter an erstwhile member of the Man Club sporting makeup worthy of a representative of the gender with which we spend so much time trying to celebrate la difference, it is imperative that you follow this process:

1. Express shock and concern.

2. Inquire about the individual’s gender identity. (If that’s at issue, abandon discussion. There may be legitimate things at work here, and we’re defending masculinity, not promoting homophobia or trans-whatever-it’s-called.)

3. Apply derision, thickly.

If we fight this abhorrence now, with force, there is hope that it will die away in time, like those ill-fated “man-skirts” from the 1980s, and talking after sex.

Who'd you steal that from Mast?


That's not your writing. We know this because it wasn't full of "Stupid Cunt".

Stupid cunt, happy now you stalking feminist pig? fuck you HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA

www.me narebetterthanwomen.com

Nancy Levant
April 6, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

Like him or not, Carey Roberts doesn’t mince words, opinions, or facts. He’s one of those pesky and abrasive truth tellers that makes one breathe between the teeth or, in other words, makes one think even when cultural pressures demand that you don’t.

Political feminism is a beast. It is a dictatorial movement that demands gender behavior, gender roles, and gender servitude. It is not a movement based upon concern for women, but is wholly dedicated to 1) depopulation indoctrination and demand, and 2) the control of masculinity.

Let us begin by saying that 1) women are beaten and murdered by men in every cultural and in every country in the world. This we know. We also know that women kill women, men, and children in every cultural and country in the world, and that men perpetrate these same crimes upon other males in every culture and country in the world. People are not passive creatures.

We also know that women in other cultures and countries are not treated in the same fashion as they are treated in the United States, but that has far more to do with the fact that American males did, in fact, value their female counterparts, coupled with their cultural norms, Christian traditions, and constitutional laws, in a far more sincere and reasonable manner. In the great scope of world history, American men have fared beautifully in the treatment and respect of women due to the aforementioned reasons. In a global context, American women have had better treatment, rights, and cultural equality than most of the world’s women. Somehow, this fact is persistently ignored by America’s radical feminist fringe.

The fact that American women do have cultural respect, opportunities, and gender equality, is a uniquely and contemporary American tradition, and due largely to the genuine acceptance by American men of their female counterparts. Both genders have a very unique and a very good thing going in the United States – at least we use to. But I am very certain that the emasculation of males in this nation, by the very powerful and very globally funded and backed feminist lobby, has very ulterior motives.

It simply cannot be argued that depopulation is a key aspect of the global government’s mission. In fact, massive global depopulation is mandated by many, many decrees, commissions, think tanks, and movements. Genocide continues, unabated and globally, and century after century. “Disease” has become high science, massively funded, and continues, generation after generation, to be used as a lethal weapon. Many pharmaceutical drugs are dangerous to pregnant females. And new drugs have been engineered to all but eliminate menstrual cycles and to render men infertile. Genetically modified food has also been used to render men infertile. Religious suggestions to be fruitful have also been slated for political extinction, for as we know, too many commoners are problematic for the greed and sustainability of the elite.

Political depopulation strategies have been used to lower populations in resource-rich Third World Countries as defense and take-over policies, and we cannot forget Goals 2000, the 1974 report during the Carter administration, which promised that the U.S. would lower its population by multi-millions by 2050. So please, people, let us not continue to believe that “history” is accidental or by coincidence. History is orchestrated, planned, and funded at the expense of all tax payers who, pathetically and historically, pay for their manipulated demise time and time and time again.

The closing of American military bases, coupled with the homeland exiting of all American military men and women, is by no accident. Our military personnel are United Nations forces. First and foremost, get that through your heads. Secondly, consider that laws and pending legislation have now rendered non-military men, who remain on the homeland, virtually powerless. Their jobs left the homeland, the right to private arms is constantly being challenged and degraded, and any outward signs of aggression are fast becoming criminalized on all levels. Traditional and biological masculinity is rapidly becoming a crime – and not just in the United States of America. Remember that global governance is global law.

But why attempt to change the nature of human males? Let’s think about this. We know that men are more aggressive than females. We know that men are physically more powerful than females. We know that men have traditionally acted in defense of women and children, burg and community, state and nation – and particularly so via the mandates of the Constitution, the Second Amendment, and Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16, which were written SPECIFICALLY to address homeland security due to violations of law, insurrections, and/or invasions, and specific instructions for MEN on how to defend and protect all of the states in the nation.

Now, if men are culturally emasculated, redefined, and rendered incapable of bearing arms, what happens to the legal defense of this nation – especially given the fact that the American military is no longer the American military or present on the homeland?

If it is illegal for men to act defensively, to bear arms, to get mad, or to have opinions other than those crafted by social engineers, men are then rendered incapable of defensive (and Constitutional) duties and tendencies. See how cleverly this works?

Now, back to the feminist movement – as Carey Roberts has so courageously taught time and time again, the radical feminist movement is a political movement to emasculate men and to brainwash women. Mr. Roberts, you have always been right on the money. Political intent is never by accident – never. And the feminist movement, globally funded and created by the pathologically arrogant greed of dynastic social engineers, is but one effort to render impotent the sovereign United States and its Constitutional traditions. And sadly, terrifyingly, the men in this country have been severely damaged – financially, emotionally, intellectually, and defensively.

Now answer the question of who's words you're stealing.

None of your business..nosey sick stalking crippled cunt fuck you HAHAHAHA

get a job

www.menarebettertha nwomen.com

OMG!!! Men wearing make-up is just WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! I wonder what would happen if he got chucked in the 'chookie' for drunken driving or something....how would the liner thang go down in a prison cell I wonder? Men should NOT wear ANY form of make-up unless they like dresses too and pair them both together......LOL! Woman like REAL men!!!!!!

Of course it's my busines, you're passing off someone else's thoughts as your own.

That's illegal Mast.

SO have my arrested you stupid fucking cunt HAHAHAH

CLAIRE!! you pinhead ! WB !! LOL

I don't need to have you arrested. You'll end up being some man's bitch all on your own.

I did you paw paw! :) LOL!!!
In future carry some wet wipes with you so you can sort those trannies out - even if it is by force...Wahahahahahahahaha! LOL!

Don't think he wants to sort them out claire. He likes men who dress like women.


It makes him feel less gay.

For ONCE shadows pulls his head out of feminist asses and FINALLY get's it !!!!!

MAYBE there's hope for you yet, but i'm still skeptical.

he he he he he Damn you Clarie !! great recipie !!!! Back in Norway safe and sound Skaal !!!!

So tell me Mast, what makes you think EVERY woman is a feminist?

I..i'm sorry, are you talking to me? all I can hear is the squeek of wheelchair wheels and sloshing.

Exactly. You can't answer me.

Subtle reminder for you jackasses that need it:

Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)
Discussion: The target is accused of having anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable. Examples:
 “You’re bitter!”
 “You need to get over your anger at women.”
 “You are so negative!”
Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice. It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.
Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)
Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women. Examples:
 “You need to get over your fear.”
 “Step up and take a chance like a man!”
 “You’re afraid of a strong woman!”
Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.
Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) - The Crybaby Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing “Chicken Little”). Examples:
 “Stop whining!”
 “Get over it!”
 “Suck it up like a man!”
 “You guys don’t have it as nearly as bad as us women!”
 “You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges.”
 “Your fragile male ego …”
 “Wow! You guys need to get a grip!”
Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men. It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not (”yes” or “no”), however small it may be seem to be. If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser’s welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned. If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.
Charge of Puerility (Code Green) - The Peter Pan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male. Examples:
 “Grow up!”
 “You are so immature!”
 “Do you live with your mother?”
 “I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”
 “Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children.”
Response: It should be remembered that one’s sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability. If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.
Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) - The Elevated Threat Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner. This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target. Examples:
 “You guys are scary.”
 “You make me feel afraid.”
Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them. One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man’s legitimate freedom of expression.
Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) - The Sour Grapes Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems. Example:
 “You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”
Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?” At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”
Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) - The Brown Shirts Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. Examples:
 “You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”
 “You’re an extremist”
 “You sound like the KKK.”
 “… more anti-feminist zaniness”
Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).
Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question. Examples:
 “Are you gay?”
 “I need a real man, not a sissy.”
 “You’re such a wimp.”
Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.
Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)
Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women. Examples:
 “I’m not like that!”
 “Stop generalizing!”
 “That’s a sexist stereotype!”
Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.
Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)
Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:
 “You misogynist creep!”
 “Why do you hate women?”
 “Do you love your mother?”
 “You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
 “You are mean-spirited.”
 “You view women as doormats.”
 “You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
 “You are going to make me cry.”
Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or “argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).
Charge of Instability (Code White) - The White Padded Room Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable. Examples:
 “You’re unstable.”
 “You have issues.”
 “You need therapy.”
 “Weirdo!”
Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.
Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)
Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits. Examples:
 “You are so materialistic.”
 “You are so greedy.”
Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”
Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) - The All-That-Glitters Charge
Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences. Examples:
 “If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”
 “How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”
Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintanence” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).
Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan) - The Ugly Tan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned. Examples:
 “I bet you are fat and ugly.”
 “You can’t get laid!”
 “Creep!”
 “Loser!”
 “Have you thought about the problem being you?”
Response: This is another example of “circumstantial ad hominem.” The target’s romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.
Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)
Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target’s negative or guarded attitude about a situation. However, the focus is not so much on the target’s anger or fear, but on the target’s supposed attitude of resignation. Examples:
 “Stop being so negative.”
 “You are so cynical.”
 “If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat.”
 “C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.”
Response: The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation. Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist. Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.
Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) - The Pink Whip
Discussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate. Examples:
 “No woman will marry you with that attitude.”
 “Creeps like you will never get laid!”
Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy “argumentum ad baculum” (the “appeal to force”). The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position. Really, the only way to deal with the “Pink Whip” is to realize that a man’s happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage).

I always got it, and I never needed to plagerize anybody.




Being into equality does not mean abusing people, it means treating them like you want to be treated.


I told you early on, I wanted to discuss this subject in a way that is not full of personal attacks, and name calling.

I said that those things do not lend themselves to a reasonable discussion.

Those things I disagree with, if you avoid them I would like to participate in a polite discussion of the topic.

Of course I can answer you, but I chose not to. If you cannot condlude yourself by ALL of my posts why I KNOW all of you cunts are feminits, then you're a bigger idiot than I initially thought. Get a fucking clue you stupid cunt. Your very NATURE makes you a feminist pig. SO on that note, fuck off and DIE HAHAHAHAH

www.menarebet terthanwomen.com

Those aren't your posts. Those are other people's posts. You're just stealing them.



I want a rela answer for you. You think you have a brain, now you are to use it.

You actually expect females to discuss topics "reasonable" and "with logic"? my god dude, are you THAT deluded? Have you ever seen the movie "fight club"? I suggest you do so, just to try to recapture some of your "manhood" that is obviously lost.

You DO realize you'll become a target now that you've presented something LOGICAL that females will NEVER agree with and they think it's fucking OK to bash men on TV, in movies, and media. They RELISH the suffering of men, even if it's just for sick laughs and entertainment. ie: your man being punched by a female with laugh tracks. Of course the cunts will think it's ok and that we're just being "pussies" and not taking the "Joke" but by GOD if a man did to a woman in the media, Oprah and ever other cunt on the fucking planet would be picketing out side of the television studio. Tell me i'm wrong about that, and watch the bitchs take everything YOU say out of context to suit THEIR agenda. IT's all about them, nothing about you. They care not whether men live, OR die. All they want out of men is our subservence, money, sperm and attention. Period!!

Of course I have a brain dumbass, and "now you are to use it"? are you giving me an order? do you realize i'd sooner shove your sorry useless ass down a steep hill than ever do what you "tell" me to do? jeeezus "female" you're fucking deluded.

as always,

www.menarebette rthanwomen.com

What's a "rela"? dumbass