Instapundit weighs in on that lying-about-birth-control question we were talking about — a lot — yesterday.
He's mostly focused on sympathy for males who must pay child support, but I think society has chosen to put the burden on men to control where they put their sperm. Imagine endless factual disputes over whether the woman claimed to be infertile or on pills. The child is real and needs support, and anyone who expressed horror — as Instapundit did — at "The Life of Julia" should understand why we hold men responsible for the consequences they risk.
To save commenters the trouble of telling me again: I know, there was an underage boy one time who was the victim of statutory rape and made to pay child support. So craft a narrow exception for people like him. The general principle is a good one.
If you're thinking of bringing up the woman's right to choose to avoid a pregnancy, let me repeat that this is a decision that properly belongs to the woman. Pregnancy occurs inside the woman's body, where the man lost control of his sperm. He should have been more risk averse.
Now, here's a proposal, based on all the attention Obamacare has given to women's health. Let's require health insurance to cover vasectomies. Then there will be some surgery that men have a right to choose. How's that for a pro-equality policy? Men can freeze their sperm beforehand and thereafter have perfect control over when women get hold of their reproductive powers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
577 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 577 of 577Some men LIKE wombats. Some men like a challenge, some men just want a blow up doll.
Well, Nich - I think it's actually more complicated than that.
I think she's playing with you guys a bit, and is trying to see how sarcastic she can get with that one haiku back there.
But as with many of her other posts, I'm not sure how seriously she actually takes this one.
I'm with you that it's fraud, but not abortion. Regardless, Mr Reynolds is right to at least point that out. I'm not even sure of how much she disagrees with that as a point, just with the attitudes of how far some are taking it.
And then, her squabbles going back to NYC are another story altogether. I'm standing by my buddy on that one... as anyone can expect. But hopefully they'll both be able to just appreciate some good humor over it - and yes, I think the hostess is the one in that fracas who could use more of it.
No ill will to anyone in this thread; I'm seeing a bunch of different angles, know who my buddies are, know where I stand, whom I agree with, and when to just laugh.
It's an approach I highly recommend.
CHeers.
Take it, Crack? I'm putting it to her. And now that I've had enough I'm rolling over and going to sleep.
Oh and she can sleep on the wet spot.
Pie face? Big titty pale skinned redhead, man! You can always put her face down.
"Okay, try this one: It's Friday night. Why the hell are you here bellyaching about your wiener?"
Althouse: So this is the way it works? This is what passes for intelligent discourse from a top law professor?
I'm not "bellyaching about my wiener," as you so charmingly put it. I'm wondering WTF.
Sternhammer said:
Who are these beta men who you claim wish to have sex and take no responsibility? I haven't read anyone make that argument here. Quote me some language.
I can't do better than that.
It's hard for me to understand your comments as anything other than intellectual dishonesty and strident, nasty emotional appeals. Is this what law professors teach?
There are women here too disagreeing with you. Are they pathetic betas bellyaching about their weiners?
So many things can be tied into this. St Croix has succinctly stated the reason for supporting traditional marriage
*********************
Saint Croix said...
But there really can never be equality about pregnancy and childbirth. It is the woman's special burden, and the policies have to be arranged to make sense around that basic inequity.
That's true, and I made this point the other day. Men and women are biologically unequal when it comes to sex itself. Marriage equalizes us. The father is biologically insecure (is this my child?). The mother is biologically insecure (am I raising this child alone?).
Marriage brings these two unequal people together. It is (obviously) the best institution for mothers, for fathers, and especially for children.
*****************************
The world has changed a lot- technology wise - since traditional marriage came about. DNA testing for one. And since most of the Liberals here, including our hostess, don't like the idea of traditional marriage, then I propose the following to start.
1. Common sense law- all children should be DNA tested at birth, and the biological father determined. If it turns out that a married woman has a child that isn't her husbands, and there was no previous arrangement (i.e, he's sterile and Cousin Bobby stayed over for a night- which is how these things used to occur) then hubby should be forever free of all INVOLUNTARY financial support for the child.
2. Since abortion on demand is a feminist sacrament, all men should be able to hand their one night stand a legal paper to sign- We're taking precautions to prevent pregnancy. If these precautions fail, then you shall get an abortion. If you choose, for religious reasons or other not to, then you shall be solely responsible for financial support of the child. .. And this should be legally binding.
3. Innocent third parties, that is me and other taxpayers, should not be required to support a woman's child if she chooses not to abort. If I didn't have sex with her at all, it's not my job to feed, clothe, and house the resulting child. This is common sense. If we cold turkey end WIC, AFDC, and all the other programs which required me to support kids of women I haven't had sex with, and seeing them in front of me at Wal-Mart, wouldn't want to have sex with, would lower everyone's taxes. And reduce the numbers of single mom's drastically as they realize suddenly that having kids does not put them on the gravy train.
This is just another indication that most women don't care about men for anything more than their own benefit.
Women always marry to move up in some way, to get someone to help make their life easier...never to make someone else's life better or make someone else's life easier.
You will never find a woman in the world who prioritizes a man's agenda in a relationship. You will never find a woman who admits that she doesn't do 50% of the work in a home/family. In fact, it is nearly impossible to find a women who is ever satisfied with what her husband does around the house...she will always think of more things he can do to make life more comfortable for her.
Men exist to provide for women. If a woman is capable of providing for herself, then men exist for her to marry someone more successful and make her life better. If she wants children, then men exist to help her not be so tired in taking care of the children, or in allowing her to retain her job perks/salary/benefits.
He will rarely be valued for his actual fatherhood.
He is just a paycheck and servant.
That's just the way it is. The success of women, and their continued wailing that it isn't enough (and will NEVER be enough) and actions to make things even worse for men to benefit women is why men are going on strike.
The only way to convince a woman she is wrong on this issue is if her son gets screwed over in paternity.
Which probably provides some insight into the vitriol coming from some of the participants, when you think about it.
Well I'm standing with Althouse, she just told y'all to get fucked, LOL, I love it!
You see as a man of the world...Ritmo knows we have already established the facts....we are just haggling over the price.
Thank you sir.
The real solution is to make the father the primary custodial parent in all cases. That would stop this mess in its tracks. If a woman wants out of the marriage, fine. But she cannot take the kids with her.
Hmmmmm....it appears that Althouse has lost support of her buddy Instapundit.
Interestingly, though, doctors often ask married men for their wife’s permission before they’ll perform a vasectomy. When people talk about “reproductive freedom,” they generally mean women’s reproductive freedom.
Of course....never admit when you are wrong or have made an ass out of yourself.
Double down on stupid. I'm quite sure that Inga can instruct you in that technique.
I am impressed by the level of hostility there is towards women on a blog run by a woman. As with the Inga/pretty much every male poster thing, there is something I am not getting here.
Dust Bunny, who freely admits she hates her own sex, what woman, WooHoo!
No Inga, she wants to get fucked, there's a difference. In theory I'm sure she appreciates your support, but in practice if you were the only one left on the blog with her, I think she'd relitigate her views on self-murder.
And I appreciate you want a fucking too, but busy day tomorrow, and after all, pearl necklaces before swine...
Guys: Here's what you're missing.
For most women, the ability to have a baby come out of her body brings about the same sense of self-respect and self-worth that a man gets from being able to contribute something of value in the world in return for a remuneration.
Now, a lot of guys (and gals) know that you work to live. You might be lucky enough to do something you feel really passionate about, but that comes and goes and is not a given or an expectation. People who, instead, live to work should put a time clock for punching in and out on their bedroom wall.
But for a woman, she really thinks that the most amazing thing in the world is that people can come out of her vagina. It's like, "WOW. I CAN MAKE PEOPLE COME OUT OF MY VAGINA!"
She'd never say it like that, because then it loses its BS "mystique" and "power".
Now, while it can be pretty cool to have little people coming out of your vagina, let's not get carried away. Let's not pretend that this makes you a better person. Let's not pretend it makes you more virtuous. And let's sure as shit not pretend that it makes you more right in how you'd abuse that power.
But some people, you see, are all about the power. So whatever it takes to make the people-coming-out-of-the-vagina claim more personal, political and AWESOME, they will do it.
What Ann is saying to you all in these comments, is:
WHOSE VAGINA IS IT, BITCH! TELL ME AGAIN! IT'S MY VAGINA THAT ALL THOSE PEOPLE ARE COMING OUT OF!! MY VAGINA! LOVE IT, BITCH! RESPECT IT! WORSHIP IT! (But don't fucking touch it. And don't even think about it in an objective way. You're disgusting and not worthy and beneath me. And besides, that distracts us from the GAIAN quality and Hollywood Welcome Mat that it serves
So it's basically, as with the onion rings, Althouse saying that vaginas are awesome too. Because, you know, she's awesome and she has one.
It really is just that simple.
Nichevo, you are confused, you are the swine, I'm the pearls.
It's a guy thing AreasonaleMan.
Stick with the nancy boy liberal shtick.
You wear it well.
Dust Bunny, who freely admits she hates her own sex, what woman, WooHoo!
Not at all. I have women friends who are intelligent, logical, capable, caring people who are not fraught with emotional brainless knee jerk opinions. We can have conversations and discussions and even differences of opinion without resorting to Junior High School girl dramas. I don't hate women. There are several women posters on this very site that I respect and for whom I have the highest regard. I hate stupid people. The fact that many like YOU are women and happen to be stupid is likely a statistical coincidence........we hope.
I think that as with men, what you do with your work is more important than having a job. As hard as that job might be.
And more women should realize that, as hard as having a kid might be, it's how you raise them that makes you either a good person or a worthless asshole.
But women have vaginas and that makes them golden calves so we must worship the portal-serving function that it holds. And, by extension, them as well.
Fuck work and fuck childbirth. Or, if you engage in either of those two things, just accept that it doesn't make you a goddam saint. Having a kid is hard but it's still something that, as Bill Maher wisely reminded, even a dog can do.
A dog can in fact have a number of puppies. I guess that makes her a more virtuous woman.
This is where the logic of vagina-worship gets you.
Don't do it.
Friends don't let friends worship vagina.
Enjoying it and respecting its childbirth capabilities, however, well, that's a little bit of a different story.
But don't worship it. That'll only cause trouble. Just ask the people of India.
See a ultra-liberal dude like Ritmo gets it.
Sharpen up dude.
Ritmo @ 10:59.
That was pretty awesome. Whether you meant it or not...it was. :-)
"some men just want a blow up doll."
Now come on Inga, jealousy is not attractive. It's not her fault that she knows what her mouth does best.
Odd. This thread is odd.
Are some people furious because (1) Althouse suggests men don't go depositing sperm around women they don't love and would despise having children with or because (2) Althouse/the law being in favor of/upholding abortion rights?
You have to ask yourself: if your man had to hyperventilate for 20 minutes to get you ready for sex, would he bother?
Bullshit DBQ, I seriously doubt you ever had a female friend. Probably precious few friends of any sex for that matter.
Totally meant it, DBQ.
It took me a while to realize all that, but it's mine.
Just make sure to cite. ;-)
Freeman, I agree, this thread is bizarre.
Ritmo, no more kisses for you tonight.
Just make sure to cite. ;-)
I will. The PEOPLE COMING OUT OF MY VAGINA remark is classic.
I consider DBQ a friend. I know many other people who feel the same. Several of them other cool women.
But she knows this.
So she can just laugh.
The Gods of the Copybook Headings laugh at this thread.
Inga 11:01
I keep forgetting you are a foreigner, I must make allowances. But having seen some German porn, it might be worthwhile. Go to Ann's bible, the Urban Dictionary, and look up "pearl necklace."
But as with many of her other posts, I'm not sure how seriously she actually takes this one.
Me neither. She started it seriously, like she wanted to have a a real discussion about a real issue.
But then people disagreed with her and apparently she had no choice but to start ranting about betas and worthiness and the like. It sounded like she was drunk.
Never mind disagreements and weiners, I am wondering how a prominent law professor does this. Of course, she's a woman, there's that. As Gahrie said:
I dare say a male professor at U. of W. who spent a week attacking his female commentors on his blog the way Althouse has been attacking her male commentors would soon be looking for a new job.
It is a shame that Charlton Heston is dead.
He could remake one of best movies as "Soylent Vagina."
"The people coming out of your vagina are people!"
Freeman, people are upset because Althouse was rude and insulting. I don't think the content of the arguments enters into it much.
The PEOPLE COMING OUT OF MY VAGINA remark is classic.
Thanks. It totally sums it up, doesn't it?
It's like, women put men down for going to war. But I guarantee you, if some artist could paint 9-month pregnant women laying down on battlefields, legs open to the air, spitting babies out of their vaginas as rapidly and numerously as artillery fire at the aircraft flying above, well...
Let's just say it would really make the gals at Jezebel and Feministing (and other places) feel really powerful.
There you go, Inga. Making the political personal.
Tsk tsk.
I thought it was humor.
Oh go tsk yourself Ritmo. I'm actually half teasing.
Look out. An Egyptian spam guy just showed up to molest you!
Egypt!
Freeman, look out ;)
But I guarantee you, if some artist could paint 9-month pregnant women laying down on battlefields, legs open to the air, spitting babies out of their vaginas as rapidly and numerously as artillery fire at the aircraft flying above, well...
I envisioned an army of babies marching away from the "source". As in the old WWII animated cartoon style. People. We have PEOPLE.
DBQ has been awesome since the first time I read her here. I would kill a bear to be her friend, and I can do it, because people didn't come out of my vagina putting me above responsibility. I can still make them though. I can still make people. Even now. Today, next week, next year, damned near forever. That is so cool of me.
Most of the frisson existing in male-female relations relates to the difficulty involved in establishing a good marriage. People in good marriages generally don't express high levels of hostility towards the opposite sex. And, before the trolls get started, I have been divorced once with children and know full well how vindictive women can be. Similarly I look at my two sons and pray they make sensible mate decisions because if they don't they are in for a world of hurt.
All this crap that Althouse is posting is for people in crappy relationships. It is whiny to blame half the population for the behavior of a small number of women/men that you self selected. It would probably make more sense for these people to ask why they make such bad decisions.
Humor can be rude and insulting. Often is.
Especially when the joke is on the level of: You're a [very nasty word]. Just kidding!
Freeman, I see 2 problems, although you were not speaking to me because Ivan not furious:
1 her tone, rudeness, disrespect, hostility are immeasurable and unchecked will poison the blog
2 she envisions, advocates or at any rate supports a society where 99.999% of the male sex is subordinated to a pusillanimous matriarchy, shortly before the whole thing collapses and the survivors can all be gang-fucked by the new barbarians and roll the genetic dice once more.
A dark night of a thousand years but as long as they have a pussy they're worth more alive than dead and SOMEBODY will breed them. Who cares about Western Civilization? I can make little people come out of my vagina! (TM)
And most of all, as Chaucer taught us, THEY WILL HAVE THEIR WAY (though the heavens fall)!
She IS the bear, lol.
"I don't wanna have babies with the skanks I like to hose down with my sperm. Those disposable tramps I bed should be drawn and quartered if they try to pull a fast one on a fine, upstanding guy like me. Just where do these no-good, dishonest women I make love to get off?"
I thought it was humor.
Freeman: Really? I admire your writing here and you seem like a smart person. I can believe that Althouse wasn't entirely serious, but as with most mean humor I think the speaker is telling us something real about herself.
I can even make people a hundred years from now. I'm that awesome. We men all are. Men are cool!
No, no, no. They have to be spat out. It reinforces the ownership over the source.
At least, that would seem to make sense.
Not to make this more sexual than it has to be, but honestly more women should probably just try squirting. They can get pleasure and wonder out of a pretty intense function where something is forcibly, if automatically expelled, and don't have to tie it into the idea of making people... which is where it gets corrupt.
Thinking of and exploring sexual pleasure as separately from reproduction as one can would do wonders for both.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Totally meant it, DBQ.
It took me a while to realize all that, but it's mine.
R&B comes out as anti-yoni. Who knew?
I bought a tail light tonight during this thread. Through the Althouse Amazon portal.
I did so because I come here for the fights.
All vanity all the time.
Glorious insults and wonderful new alliances form (although we all starve kids who depend on corn therefore we all, each and every one of us, deserve horrible anguish that doesn't end slow) as this blog dynamic and organic commenting entity keeps changing and entertaining.
OH AND THE TAIL LIGHT IS NOT A METAPHOR FOR HOW I FEEL ABOUT THIS THREAD AS I WON'T EVEN GET THE DELIVERY FOR A COUPLE DAYS HENCE THE TAIL LIGHT WILL BE DARK AND NOT STOPPING OR SLOWING ANYTHING DOWN UNTIL SUCH TIME I INSTALL IT.
CAPITAL LETTERS RULE!!!!
Similarly I look at my two sons and pray they make sensible mate decisions because if they don't they are in for a world of hurt.
I pray that you arrange for them to visit countries and cultures outside of America so that they can know how that actually works.
All this crap that Althouse is posting is for people in crappy relationships.
Too true. The GENDER WARS are not for the happy.
R&B comes out as anti-yoni. Who knew?
I'm actually anti-religion. Or at least, I believe in putting into perspective a religion so pagan as to advocate the worship of body parts.
But if you aren't, then only Gaia can help you. Hopefully before she returns you to her dirt - as that is her ultimate aim.
"I bought a tail light tonight during this thread.:
Wrong thread. This one isn't about gay sex for a change.
10% left to 500.
It was pointed humor, sure. There was a point in it.
But none of her comments are on the level of meanness and anger or just general dysfunction exemplified in some of the comments by those her comments were about.
It's almost in the bag, Bag.
So to speak.
Bag it, man!
Why not go gay, Ritmo? Or better yet, Muslim. A woman for children. A boy for pleasure. A goat for ecstasy! :-D
Part of the magic is in the mixture, Ritmo. What makes sex-->lovemaking different from masturbation is that, in some sense, possible creation of new life-you play a part just as much as the woman, don't let em fool you-is near at hand. The uncertainty, the gamble, the risk, is part of what makes it worth all the challenges.
Having had love, and having had sex, I would always pick the first if I had the choice.
Gee I guess that's beta. Okay ladies, I tried.
But none of her comments are on the level of meanness and anger or just general dysfunction exemplified in some of the comments by those her comments were about.
Who's being mean, Freeman?
I hope you didn't think my satirical "WORSHIP MY VAGINA" comments, weren't mean.
But then, I think of you as a person, and not just a body part. I sure hope that's ok with you.
Objectification is never fun. But then, those angry guys are just responding to a blog host who says that her adoration of her own innards makes her better than them.
Freeman 1133: disagree. Or if she is bested, it's not for lack of effort on her part; she just went fucking with bigger dicks than hers. We gave her respect, we didn't back down and kiss her ass because she's a girl. She played and she lost. She's been doing that a lot lately.
No, I don't mean on response to this. I mean the past stuff she's pushing back against now.
Oh and I get that the tail light doesn't stop or slow down my vehicle, that what the braking system does.
The tail light slows down and stops other vehicles behind me.
And if you haven't been getting some Ted Kennedy Victories in the War on Women, well, then, you haven't been paying attention.
Oh and ARM, you are anti-lingam. Please turn in your man card for shredding and disposal.
Why not go gay, Ritmo?
I like ladies that way. The activists are right - it's inborn, and for the majority of us has something to do with the differences. As long as you don't worship those different body parts, you're fine. But that's hard because most American women don't think of themselves as whole, intact people worthy of respect as a whole. They feel very entitled and having a worshipped body part means that there's a lot of entitlement that they (correctly, but not rightly) think they can get.
Other women around the world are either more:
1. Enlightened and rational
2. Practical
3. Focused on family structures and not how they can use sex to get what they want for themselves.
You will see, Grasshopper. Travel the world and discover the wonder!
"But none of her comments are on the level of meanness and anger or just general dysfunction exemplified in some of the comments by those her comments were about."
True, and that's kind of the point. No matter how we may wish it, we are not equal. You can slap a man in the face, but it is entirely up to him if you pay a price for it and how much. This thing we live under is a construct, and it's dangerous to fuck with it, unappreciative of what holds it together. Respect and reciprocation.
Everyone should just stop fighting, the air has been cleared.
Either don't read Althouse anymore or just face the fact that you may have been misreading her for years, and now you know where she stands.
Isn't that a good thing?
FH 1139: cite please. Pushing back against what? Who?
One might have a disagreement over who did the besting.
But so it goes. So many people, so many perspectives.
But none of her comments are on the level of meanness and anger or just general dysfunction exemplified in some of the comments by those her comments were about.
I sure couldn't tell the difference.
If that's the case, though, she misses the point of those commenters. They are not whining, they are attacking and they don't really mean it either. They are convinced that's the strategy that works in the game set up by women like Althouse.
Freeman, there are some pretty nasty comments in this thread, but most of them come after Althouse looked at the victims of truly despicable acts, and, because those victims are men, called them pathetic and said she would laugh in their faces.
And it is the whole point of this thread, nastiness and all, that women, like men always have, should anticipate the consequences of their choices, and accept responsibility for them. Choices like laughing in the faces of people who have been wronged.
Don't you pussies quit now. I'm almost there.
Who you callin' a pussy?!
Inga, for you to be in a position to tell me what to do, you should be carrying at LEAST two of my loads inside your pussy, mouth and/or ass. Deep inside, no cum dodging allowed. For me to actually heed your words, at least three would be better.
Speaking of which, Inga, a serious like question. I once had a nurse come in to me and part if the pitch was her saying words to the effect of Gee, why do guys have all these fantasies about nurses? That was my cue but I muffed it: had no idea of any such thing.
Why are nurses a thing, Inga? Is that a real stereotype? Are they sluts, or great lays for some medical reason, or what?
Nichevo said...
Oh and ARM, you are anti-lingam. Please turn in your man card for shredding and disposal.
Hey, wait a second, you just wrote.
Having had love, and having had sex, I would always pick the first if I had the choice.
Next you will be singing Barry White songs and buying flowers.
Heh. Oddly enough, I think that was intended to be encouraging. It's encouraging this idea that a person can be more than an animal who runts around with whoever, even those he doesn't like or know, more than a careless, appetite feeding beast.
I think it was an invitation to the recognition of the divine spark in man.
Nichevo did any nurse ever tell you that you're a pig?
Hard to keep up with this thread now. 500 is coming.
And I know I shouldn't waste pixels on Inga, but do you really think you're one to complain about nastiness and fighting after your low and obviously false attack on DBQ?
(Note: I'm not chivalrously defending DBQ because she's a woman, but just because the attack was stupid and offensive.)
Just more stick than carrot.
Ritmo, let me put it another way. You're against having kids and settling down with Mrs Right? Don't want to breed?
Five wheels I know her better than you do, that's all. She's big girl, she fights her own battles.
I think it was an invitation to the recognition of the divine spark in man.
Sure. Althouse rationalizes exactly like that. I call it "cruel neutrality" bullshit.
Inga, you're German, you love pigs.
No, but I have fucked at least one that I recall (not the one under discussion). She was more or less unexceptional as a fuck but she did enjoy it.
Listen nobody should criticize the Nutty Perfessor for getting down and dirty and giving as good as she got.
You gave you the honor of showing you who she really is and what she is really about.
This is the big time so you best bring your A game if you want to mix it up.
Believe it or not Inga is right. The Nutty Perfessor is lifting up her wrinkled Venetian blind skirt and showing you the goods.
The kind of stuff that makes your significant other go out and rent a dog so he can have a friend.
Nichevo, you wanna get laid, get a real romp, you won't get it talking to a woman like she's a whore, just some friendly advice, honey.
Heh. Oddly enough, I think that was intended to be encouraging. It's encouraging this idea that a person can be more than an animal who runts around with whoever, even those he doesn't like or know, more than a careless, appetite feeding beast.
I think it was an invitation to the recognition of the divine spark in man.
Okay. But what does any of that have to do with sex?
I think it's ok for people who've had sex with someone they were deeply in love with and deeply attracted to to think this way. But that is an ideal, and not the norm. Even though we delude ourselves into believing it should be the norm.
Most of the rest of us understand that there will have to be some negotiation between those things: Physical intimacy, emotional closeness and extreme attraction or lust.
People who require no negotiation between those things either are lacking (relatively speaking, not judging) in their interest in one of them, or are incredibly lucky.
I don't accept that easily, but after so many decades of trying to understand as much of those three things as I can, it's the only conclusion I can come to.
In all likelihood, you are probably luckier because you have things that make the attainment of at least a couple those things more strongly sought out.
You may be reluctant to admit that because your ego is healthy enough to know that it risks seeming narcissistic to do so. But the rest of us can vouch for it.
It's the luck of the draw.
I believe I'm also answering your 11:51 with my 11:57, Nichevo.
I recently began reading a very insightful book that touched on many of the themes we discussed tonight.
It was by Darwin Porter and called "Inside Linda Lovelace's Deep Throat: Degradation, Porno Chic, and the Rise of Feminism."
Required reading to prepare for the epic film soon to be released starring Lindsey Lohan.
Highly recommended.
Just more stick than carrot.
And as always, Althouse sits up in her high house, judging and lecturing and shaming because she knows best for us mere males, so estranged from our divine spark.
Freeman, would you put up with a man conning you like that?
You would call it abuse and you would be right.
Also some great sex scenes starring Sammy Davis Jr, Senator George Smathers, Bebe Rebozzo, Marlene Dietrich and Joe DiMaggio.
I kid you not.
I can believe that Althouse wasn't entirely serious, but as with most mean humor I think the speaker is telling us something real about herself.
Yeah, exactly. I think Althouse (like Crack, or Inga) is just playing a game here. It's a mean game, and I guess there's some fun to be had. But what's pretty obvious, at least to me, is that there is some genuine emotional upset underneath.
I think Althouse's position on abortion puts her under a lot of stress. It's at war with other positions she holds.
For instance, she thinks abortion is infanticide. It's a lot easier to support abortion when you reject the infanticide argument. Yet Althouse does not! She accepts the validity of the argument.
So now Althouse has to cheer and support infanticide. Her very honesty and intelligence is causing her a great deal of stress and emotional upset. And pro-lifers aren't helping, since we remind her of infanticide every time she brings up the subject.
Or think about free speech. Althouse loves free speech, it's very important to her. Yet abortion requires censorship of abortion photographs. Why? Because a photograph of an abortion looks like a baby that's been ripped to pieces. And Althouse knows that if people see these photographs, they will oppose abortion.
So now Althouse has to participate in censorship. She can't actually show an abortion. And since Althouse is an honest woman, this conflict upsets her.
Althouse supports equality for men and women. Yet abortion only involves rights for women. So now Althouse has to deny the importance of fatherhood, and deny sexual equality, which of course was the heart of feminism.
Inga sweetie, if we weren't a thousand miles apart, if I wanted you, I'd have you. You know that, liebchen, don't you?
Ritmo, then I've had incredible luck, or at least incredible opportunity. I feel for you that you could write that. Life has been good to me, I guess.
Glad to see Meade come back to his good natured self, after simmering down from whatever nerves were struck so deeply.
I suspect that Althouse will continue to be on the rag about this issue for a couple more posts, at the very least.
The genie of bitchiness can't go back in the bottle, and I think a lot of the more moderate commenters (and probably an exponentially higher level of lurkers) didn't like what they saw when the mask slipped all the way off.
My spark is invisible to harpies. Something about the wavelength.
Required reading to prepare for the epic film soon to be released starring Lindsey Lohan.
I think there's a reason porn is becoming more mainstream. In SoCal, it already is.
Jim Morrison said it best,
"Like our ancestors
The Indians
We share a fear of sex
excessive lamentation for the dead
& an abiding interest in dreams & visions"
He was right on the mark. In a society where every pixel and bit is available through your ISP, Puritanism is simply no longer an option.
Divinity comes in the form of the anonymous authors, during the important time period at least, of the Federalist Papers, which is what the vain here from all sides will some day wrought in their own way.
Thank God.
Without this vanity, humans would be extinct as civilization depends on vanity and the need to feel important. This can take the perverse form of being a great Nazi or worthy ChiCom because their version of vanity isn't Titus' for damn sure. The theory holds for tonight at any rate.
And that's probably a good thing.
It's just the same as the Friday the 13th movies.
It wasn't fun anymore when Jason took off his mask.
Only seven more to go.
Let's make them count.
I think Althouse finally just had enough woman bashing and male victimhood. Full stop. Got pissed off at let you guys have it, which many of you so richly deserved.
No game playing St. Croix, that is how I see it.
Inga sweetie, if we weren't a thousand miles apart, if I wanted you, I'd have you. You know that, liebchen, don't you?
Ritmo, then I've had incredible luck, or at least incredible opportunity. I feel for you that you could write that. Life has been good to me, I guess.
7/6/13, 12:06 AM
Doubtful.
No, like every other tyrant, she gets enraged when the people she pushes around push back. I'm beginning to take the drunk thing more seriously, she sounds irrational sometimes.
And drunk or sober, ego the size of a fucking house!
I found it all rousing, and jolly good fun.
I don't think life's been bad to me. Just normal.
Plus, I don't have a vagina. Thus, I lack the magical amulet.
500!
One way to find out, Inge
"Now in darkness world stops turning
Ashes where the bodies burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has struck the hour
Day of judgement, God is calling
On their knees the war pig's crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan laughing spreads his wings
Oh lord yeah!"
Thank Youuu! You're great! Good Night!
Ritmo, you can wear mine. ;)
What comes after the phillybluster?
Oh, I have the magic amulet. LOL
Freeman Hunt: "I think it was an invitation to the recognition of the divine spark in man."
Did you mean that the discussion of the legal fabric was about the 'divine spark'? Or that 'Spooge Stooges' is poetic prose for man being made in His image?
Hopefully you can clarify your point as I'm quite certainly lost. As all I can see is that a discussion about basic legal issues quickly devolved into a Capitol One commercial.
"What's in your wallet, Spooge Stooge?"
Saint Croix: Interesting. I focus on the broader disconnect between her commitment to rational thought and the dishonest arguments she makes, including this emotional ranting.
Deep down though, I think Althouse is basically a mindfucker, a garden variety sociopath, and maybe an alcoholic.
That's been my impression for a while.
Nah, more narcissist than sociopath. Narcissists require crowds to provide their adulation. Sociopaths could kill them all off and wouldn't care, as long as they could find another game to manipulate or provide fodder for their easily bored minds.
Rhythm and Balls said...
I don't think life's been bad to me. Just normal.
I suspect this is right. I could have married twenty more women like my first wife and had an equally unhappy marriage. My current wife and I both brought very low expectations to the marriage and remain pleasantly surprised.
There is a ridiculously high level of expectations placed on partners and marriage, even when married/partnered etc. we all have to row our own boat.
Inga - you might want to use quotation marks next time. That comment confused the hell out of me for the longest time.
The 12:11 comment, I take it, lol.
There is a ridiculously high level of expectations placed on partners and marriage, even when married/partnered etc. we all have to row our own boat.
Right. Which is why in other countries, there is a village, or a town, or something providing a sense of cultural continuity. Whatever it is, it binds, and that creates a sense of stability and structure that Americans lack. Out of the woodwork of something so abiding as that, a marriage (or any other emotional partnership) just naturally attaches. Americans have to invent their own frameworks.
It's a double-edged sword. We're huge social innovators, but we have a completely unstructured society and culture. It's a good thing, generally, promotes most of the progress in the world. The downside is that we still have all those same expectations out of a coupling, if not greater expectations, and no more-or-less permanently extended social framework through which to watch it grow and attach.
Nah, more narcissist than sociopath. Narcissists require crowds to provide their adulation. Sociopaths could kill them all off and wouldn't care, as long as they could find another game to manipulate or provide fodder for their easily bored minds.
There's a range to sociopathy. It can definitely include adoring crowds.
And if you don't think Althouse couldn't kill off this blog in an eyeblink, I've given you too much credit.
There's a range to sociopathy.
True.
It can definitely include adoring crowds.
Not true. A strict sociopath would accrue absolutely zero emotional satisfaction from an adoring crowd. It's what she or he could figure out what to do with the adoring crowd that would provide any satisfaction. A narcissist will get off on the adoration itself.
And if you don't think Althouse couldn't kill off this blog in an eyeblink, I've given you too much credit.
She can do whatever she wants. And a blog is not a person.
@Inga: the most creative solution I've heard of so far for the used condom issue was to simply keep a small bottle of Tabasco with you. Add some to the condom before placing in the trash.
Makes sperm theft a little less enjoyable. I'm not sure if it will prevent pregnancy, but at least she'll have some consequences for her deceit.
Of course the guy can just wrap it and take it with him too.
Rick, brilliant!
You agree there is a range to sociopathy then you start talking about a "strict sociopath."
Most sociopaths don't kill anyone, physically that is.
Plus, if you haven't noticed, Althouse doesn't really have an adoring crowd here.
Tabasco in a condom?
First, I'd try refraining from fucking people so untrustworthy that such mind-boggling asshattery sounds like a sensible insurance policy.
Pants, after sex, not before, lol!
Inga, if you think that a man pulling off his condom and dashing hot sauce into it before self-satisfiedly thinking, "Let that bitch try anything with that" could possibly be part of a fun, friendly and healthy sexual relationship, I pity you.
I mean, dear Lord. Don't have sex wit people you loathe. It's not complicated.
"You agree there is a range to sociopathy then you start talking about a "strict sociopath.""
There are a range of reds. However, the strict crimson shade...
I have never used a condom for oral sex.
I can see me now, using a toothbrush, trying to get my semen back, because Althouse said It's The Responsible Thing To Do.
"Hold still! I am not a drunk dentist!"
Pants, no I don't think any such thing. But I do know that young men don't always think before leaping and young women do silly things.
Ohhhh, St. Croix, you should! And don't forget the Tabasco!
;)
The [women] who are saying: I want [the right to vote] because [men] have something.
You [gals]...
If you don't have the wherewithal to realize what you are... you are no longer [women], and [men] should be rejecting you.
---
You are unworthy. The reason something ought to save you from [having sex forced upon you] is that you are unworthy, but unfortunately, it seems that some [men] do still choose to have sex with you and even to [impregnate you].
And that -- THAT! -- is what you complain is your misfortune.
Amazing blindness. Your misfortune is so much worse than that.
---
This [women's] rights stuff was old-hat in the [1880s]. Recycling it now is the lamest thing I've seen in a long, long time.
---
Lame little [women], whining about their meager [child support] money?
No one cares about you, because no one should!
---
[Women] need to value and guard their [vaginas from rape].
The lameness of [women] who throw this stuff around is mindboggling. Don't be a [cum dumpster].
--------------------------------------------
The backbone of society is the married, committed couple who channel their sexuality into making and growing the next generation.
Hint: the backbone currently has sclerosis and the future prognosis is not good.
http://ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=358#ixzz2YEy4K03Y
About 40.6 percent of children were born to an unmarried mother in 2008, an increase from 39.7 percent the previous year.
And if you don't think Althouse couldn't kill off this blog in an eyeblink, I've given you too much credit.
That's like saying Lou Gehrig can skip a day.
Now, if you're asking if Althouse can nuke some commentators, oh yeah! Seen it happen!
There are a range of reds. However, the strict crimson shade...
Ah. I've given you too much credit.
Let's Just Get Naked
I know what you're hidin' from me
You know what I'm hidin' from you
I know that you hurt me real bad
You know that I hurt you bad too
Let's just get naked
Just for a laugh
Let's just get naked
It's a trip and a half
We've been together so long
I hope it wasn't just the drugs
Let's just get naked
It's a trip and a half
-- Joan Osborne
Kudos to Bagoh and Betamax for keeping it funny.
I was very late to this thread, and waded through all of the comments. I'd like to thank all for a rousing evening of thinking about my weiner and its awesome ability to enable PEOPLE TO COME OUT OF VAGINAS.
Special thanks to St Croix, DBQ, Synova, Angelyne, for caring about men.
Inga, thanks for only going about 70% as far down the shamehole as Ann did. You tried to follow her but she out ran you.
tarheel, you should really stop letting women off the hook for everything. As near as I can tell, you seem to think that the sole value of a man is his utility to women.
Goodnight all, now go to bed!
I'll put it bluntly.
True manhood is banging hot chicks. True womanhood is making babies. Everything else is negotiation.
These are the primal truths that drive the Professor bonkers. The scars of feminist mommy battles are obvious. This latest episode started with the Professor's denial of another woman's claim to Sisterhood with her friend--with her friend!--based on a shared urge to procreate, an urge which both women concealed from their partners. The Professor wanted to focus on difference in the manner of concealment, and essentially denied that the second woman had been deceitful because she wasn't currently deceiving a partner. What was blindingly obvious was that Mrs. Not an Oops based her sense of solidarity first on the recognition of her primal urge, and second on the shared realization that society repressed its expression. We used to be able to say society channeled that urge, allowing, nay encouraging, its expression within marriage. That's not an entirely sensible argument these days. Young women may be as apt to conceal their engagements as their infidelities. The repression of baby fever in polite company is a cultural fact.
Now, as for the other primal urge, the Professor has embarked upon a path of chastisement and mockery. That might be an effective negotiating tactic if there were something to offer. Unfortunately, for the Professor, her political commitments have weakened her negotiating position. Maybe if you behave yourself you'll get a decent woman who will raise your children in a loving home, or maybe she'll give you an abortion, or maybe she'll take you to court. As always, it seems, "it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind."
The Professor has a fierce intellect, but when confronted with the procreative function of coitus, all reason is pushed aside.
I don't understand how a court can rule that every time a man has sex that's intent to procreate, but not for a woman. A woman can have sex without intent to procreate? How is that equal protection? Aside from it being patently ridiculous. I mean a man could have a vasectomy, wear a condom, take other contraceptive measures, and write in big bold letters in all matter of places, "I do not intend to procreate," and yet still he is not afforded the very same protection given to women by default.
Sorry, Althouse, I mean there's men not being able to have their fun and there's men not having any fun.
"Imagine endless factual disputes over whether the woman claimed to be infertile or on pills"
I can't actually. Either she's got a signed piece of paper from the impregnator saying "I accept financial responsibility for this child" or she hasn't. How hard is that ? No signature, no child support. Easy peasy. After all she's got several months to sign him up, during which time she can herself bail out of the pregnancy whenever she wants.
The contracts and stuff is all good fun and suitable for a law blog. But BS IRL. What would actually help society is no more abortions outside of the Tay-Sachs/breach birth/ectopic pregnancy type scenarios, IOW medically necessary. Althouse wants men in fear. Very well let women have equal fear. That's equal protection for you.
That was a very good post Eeyore.
As usual Ann, when you start thinking about an issue, from in between you loins than your ears you LOSE CONTROL of sentence construction. It just gets stupid.
Rhythm and Balls/Ritmo easily wins the thread with clear-eyed argumentation, truth-telling, and wit. He again showed his true colors and depth. He may hate conservatives (lord knows there are things to hate about some of them), but note how his obvious intelligence sets himself miles apart from some of the more familiar leftist idiot commenters hereabouts.
One of his best quips: Women already have enough difficulty separating their own sense of personal glory from what's actually good for a child; there's no need to make that problem worse.
And he used a semi-colon too. Was this to tweak our semi-colon-hating hostess, perhaps?
Haha, NoNo, you should only know.
Althouse's proposal has merit and is probably a good option for some guys. A lot of guys won't choose to do it but that's ok. Certainly there are a huge number of out of wedlock pregnancies. Guys who rely on their woman for birth control are relying on luck and the integrity/competence of their woman, which is not a dependable plan.
Taking it a step farther, guys could have their child custody rights guaranteed in a legal document before they agree to impregnate the proposed mother. Guys that want to have children could pick and pay a surrogate mother to impregnate. The child would be the guy's child with no mother to deal with.
Some vasectomies are reversible so that would be the safest route.
"The general principle is a good one."
Only under a feminist philosophy were women, the poor, dependent, helpless little dears, get the choices and men are held responsible for their choices.
Sternhammer said...You're a sexist hypocrite."
Hypocrisy, sexism and statism are defining properties of feminism.
Hypocrisy, sexism and statism are defining properties of feminism.
If feminism has a single defining property, you could say it's "ladies first."
I heard part of the grand scheme of o-care's "free" birth control was designed by men's/father's rights lobbyists-- if a women represents that she is on systemic or implanted birth control, and becomes pg, the old I couldn't afford it or did not have access to it no longer applies, opening the door to a new legal challenge by men to avoid child support.
Not Safe For Women of privilege:
http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sea/274495936.html
This excellent discussion outlines
the problem by avoiding the central
inequality: Marriage is a contract
for men, and not for women.
No woman who considers herself a man's equal would object to a marriage contract which specified -all- the rights,duties, and
penalties involved. Right, ladies ?
I’m of the old school and believe that men and women should take sexual relations very seriously rather than sport. At one time it was assumed that men conspired to have sex with women. Since visiting web sites that cater to women, I have been disabused of that notion and am told in no uncertain terms that women want to have sex at least as much as men. Indeed, the single woman who does not have a number of notches on her bedpost is an outcast.
But that makes me a fossil, especially when viewed from the perspective of Modern Liberal Women (MLW). Heck, I’m so old that when I was a lad the Constitution not only had nothing to say about abortion; it even lacked penumbras and emanations.
There are two views that MLW share: (1) abortion is an absolute right and (2) what women do with their bodies is their business. From this two things should logically follow:
· Women who have a child are the only ones responsible for that child being born. They have total autonomy of the issue of abortion and can terminate the pregnancy at any time. We have to give credit to the Romans who allowed the father to kill his children up to a certain age. The only thing that’s changed is the gender of the person with the right to kill.
· Since the man (sperm donor) has no rights regarding the birth of a child, he should logically have no responsibility.
If he accepts responsibility, that may be an indication of an emotional attachment either to the woman or to the offspring, or both. Acceding to an emotional attachment is not illogical since it brings pleasure to the individuals involved.
However, if there is no emotional attachment on the part of the sperm donor to either the woman or the child, it is the law, not logic that forces the man to pay for the upkeep of the child. Althouse makes emotional arguments to shame the man into child support, fallback to pre-Roe times when aborting a child was more difficult than having your teeth cleaned. She states that “The child is real and needs support.” Well, that’s true if the child lives which is a decision that’s entirely a decision on the part of the woman. If the woman decides that she wants the child to live, why is it the responsibility of the sperm donor to provide the “support?”
Ann Althouse demands not just autonomy for the woman; she demands that the sperm donor pay for her decisions. That may be illogical, but she is not known for logic. There are several indications of this: first, she teaches law and the law and logic do not necessarily intersect. Second, she voted for Obama the first time and actually considered doing it a second time. Third she is a woman and her kind has skin in this game.
I totally agree Ms. Althouse. However, I've got another proposal, as well.
Perhaps women, who want complete unfettered control of their own bodies should also shoulder an equal amount of responsibility for what they do with their bodies.
Perhaps,Ann, women, who demand unfettered freedom to control their own bodies should also accept at least equal responsibility for what they do with their own bodies.
In just to say Althouse is a dumb, sexist, hypocritical bitch. Now she thinks men have to burn their condoms, because throwing it in the trash isn't apparently enough.
Your feminine imperative is showing, honey. You stupid cunt, you think people can't read your vitriolic rhetoric and see that you are a sexist feminist? You think you're so special. You're scum. Wrinkly, old, pissy, and pathetic.
I am a young man who women would kill to get ahold of, because I'm smart, sexy, responsible. I won't be caught dead with a woman. You bitches are nuts.
You've given men a raw deal in procreation, and guess what? Deal with it yourself. We don't give a damn about you or your progeny.
Good luck shaming us into serving you, honey! The smart men don't fall for that.
Here is what Althouse is trying to say:
Procreation is the most divine, holy, wonderful thing humanity can experience, and women control ALL OF IT! So if you want to be considered worthy, do whatever we women say, or you don't get to participate in this most divine act, and we women get to consider you a reproductive failure for eternity.
But if we decide to have an abortion, you are to instantly see the child as a parasitical lump of cells, not a holy child of God, and are to heartlessly allow the woman to destroy it.
Althouse is officially intellectually bankrupt. She can't even decide what the child is. Is it holy, or not, you stupid woman? Is that for women to decide?
AND IF IT IS FOR WOMEN TO DECIDE WHETHER A BABY IS DIVINE OR DEAD, WHY SHOULD WE MEN CARE ABOUT YOUR PLIGHT OR TAKE PART IN IT?
Stupid, stupid woman.
Either freedom of choice is holy, or the child is holy. Can't be both, girls.
Althouse thinks both are somehow holy at the same time, because female imperative.
Yes, she is that stupid.
Question. If sperm is the man's property and responsibility, if the woman steals it, can he legally seize it back? What if violence ensues, as if one were struggling to reclaim one's purse or wallet from a mugger? May he force her to douche, or rinse and spit?
...
Those who say feminism is about women overshoot the mark. Feminism is about "ME!" Only and always.
Not a fan of Noonan, but she nailed this WSJ Op-Ed, not only spot on in her last words re Gosnell, but also in her assertation that the fall out of the numerous govt scandals and corruption of power leaning towards dictator-ish actions diminshes our love of, and allegiance to our country. I would add that the feminazi's, and their dick-tatorish (ha ha) ways has & is leading to the diminishing love of women and children by those tjat would have otherwise, in a different time, given their life to defend said country, women, and children. From Noonan's article: "The NSA is only one of many recent revelations and events tha ability to damage the ties Americans feel toward their country only big stories like the IRS, but stories that have flown mostly media’s interest. Here is one: Three was a doctor in Philadelph routinely killed full-term babies for years, and no one wanted him for years. It got out of hand—he was collecting body parts and he was finally arrested, tried, sent to prison. People who a extreme—people, forgive me, who are normal—who followed watched in a horrified, traumatized wonder. “They have place they kill kids in America now, and it’s kind of accepted.” Those watch closely say there are more such clinics, still up and ope There’s a bill in Congress now to limit abortions after the fifth the age at which hospitals can keep babies alive. It’s not an ex proposal, not in the least, but it’s probably going nowhere. It’s called anti-woman.
I feel that almost everyone who talks about America for a living politicians and journalists and even historians—is missing a h essential story: that too many things are happening that are m lot of Americans feel a new distance from, a frayed affiliation country they have loved for half a century and more, the country they loved without every having to think about it, so natural was it.
...Americans feel they barely know this country anymore.
...And if you think this does not carry implications for the road, for our healthy continuance as a nation, you are mistaken..."
I went back and read some of the thread, wow, a lot of crazy and awesome in this thread. I really enjoy the feral Althouse, much more entertaining approach than shunting the crazy stuff into sock puppets.
Some nice posting by Ritmo and ARM. When posters have personal experience re: the post topic and post based on their personal experience, the resulting posts are waaay better than when they just recite their political party catechism.
General Jack Ripper talking about being a splooge stooge:
It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? Our precious bodily fluids are used without our knowledge or permission. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
I first became aware of this during the physical act of love.
Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue... a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
I can assure you it has not recurred. Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women. But I... I do deny them my essence.
Meade said...
"This was a pretty low shot by the way."
Hah. I've taken lower blows and cheaper shots. MomJeans is the former Fred4Prez. He comes from a long line of haters, losers, and beta males. Clearly, he hides behind a screen name so his former wives, employers and children can't recognize him.
7/5/13, 5:30 PM
What have I ever done to you Meade? If I offended you show me where I did so?
I have not been posting here because I have been busy with more important things. That does not me a "hater, loser, or beta male." But obviously I have not missed much since I have been gone.
And no I am not "MomJeans"
What you wear is your choice Meade.
Double negative there. My bad.
Meade, I am not MomJeans.
" but I suspect men are held to the consequences of their action and aren't supposed to believe that sort of thing. Take care!"
So what you're saying here is that men are, at core, supposed to assume that women won't tell the truth with regard to sex/reproduction.
What happened to "no means no"?
I have no idea who MomJeans is, but it is not me. And that was me who posted as Fred4Pres on this thread. I updated the profile and for some reason it generated a new one.
I have done nothing to Meade. I have no idea why he is attacking me. But he should stop it. I took a break from Althouse and, given this, I can tell I have not missed much since I did so.
Steve Koch said: "Some vasectomies are reversible so that would be the safest route.",
The success rate is not high. I know. Doctors will tell you this both when discussing the snip in the first place, and later if you choose to reverse it.
For those men that know they don't want to be fathers, a vasectomy is the best solution, as soon as possible. Don't let the lack of viable sperm keep you from wearing your condom either, it's still a marginally effective STD shield.
And you don't need to mention your snip unless the subject of children comes up, and even then all you need to say is that you have no intention of becoming a father. Having made your intentions clear, her willingness to continue to have sex with you should be agreement with, or at least acknowledgment of your desire to remain child free..
If one recieves a gift upon which the recipient proceeds to some disadvantage because of the gift, do not blame the giver unless you can prove ignorance of the risks, yourself.
Meade, I am not mom of jeans or whore of the internet. Leave me out of this okay. You owe me an apology for accusing Fred4Pres.
Evil BloggerLady, Fred4Prez, fred4prez, whoever you are: email me and I'll consider apologizing to you. Whoever you are. Do you even know who you are?
General Jack Ripper talking about being a splooge stooge:
I was doing Dr. Strangelove on the other thread and I was going to get mad at you for ripping off my material but then I noticed you posted before I did. Oops. You psychic bastard.
It is frickin' uncanny how on point Ripper's monomania is with this discussion.
Meade,
I know damn well who I am. The only reason I am on this thread is because you were compelled to bring me up.
You accused me of being some commentator I know nothing about. I am not President Mom Jeans (or Whore of the Internets which I am told Mom Jeans also goes under). If you can show any post by Fred4Pres that is over the line, I would apologize to you. Otherwise, Leave me out of it. If you are not going to apologize for falsely accusing me of being Mom Jeans, that is because you are not man enough to do it.
Oh shit - The Cow's here!
And Fred4Prez!
No wonder Ann's getting testy - she's getting locked!
I am not shy about saying what I think. But I do not need to sock puppet to make fun of Meade and Ann. I can do that directly.
So the idea that would pose as "Mom Jeans" or some other racist or offensive entity is offensive to me. I am funnier and better than that. Sorry to disappoint you Meade.
And no, I do not feel like getting into a private email conversation with Meade. I do not hate Meade, but I sure as hell do not trust him or Ann.
Post a Comment