Female + Female = Baby ???

I saw this on The Hairy Reasoner Website and was flabbergasted by the possibilities.

The prospect of all-female conception – Independent Online Edition > Science & Technology

Women might soon be able to produce sperm in a development that could allow lesbian couples to have their own biological daughters, according to a pioneering study published today.
Scientists are seeking ethical permission to produce synthetic sperm cells from a woman’s bone marrow tissue after showing that it possible to produce rudimentary sperm cells from male bone-marrow tissue.

My Comment to Hairy’s Post was this:
The man-hating feminists, (to avoid using the inflammatory term femi-nazis), must be celebrating like the Red Sox fans beating the Yankees. If this is true, then they can honestly say, We don’t need no stinking men’.

If I was a man, I would be scared Sh*tless! They won’t be satisfied until the last man (is not) standing.

Advertisements

93 Responses to Female + Female = Baby ???

  1. ladyconklin says:

    You have got to be kidding? Oh My Gosh. What next. Have us mate with animals, which there is a rumor out that they have already done that. No thanks, man or no man, I like my life just the way it is. It’s moraly wrong and who are we to play God. I sure hope someone wakes up quickly before this happens or we’re going to be in a world of hurt.

  2. the Grit says:

    Hi Mad,

    We’re safe for a while yet, what with jar opening, getting things off high shelves, and the spider thing 😉

    the Grit

  3. honestpoet says:

    They’ve got technology for all that, too.

    I think men should just be thankful that SOME of us still like you at all.

  4. madmouser says:

    Yeah, Lady, what next ‘Choose Your Animal’?

    I can always rely on the Grit to get to the Nitty Gritty.

    HP you are correct, some of us still prefer men.

    Go Girls!

  5. lewisintex. says:

    Excuse me…Men have feelings too. This idea of women reproducing for theirselves is way out in left field. The women who think this is a wonderful idea have never experienced real passion and they have their biological clock confused with something else they must purchase at one of those sex shops. It’s a horriable idea and a thought process they should keep to theirself along with their sexuality.

  6. Joe O says:

    I was lucky enough to have a father. He taught me so many things my mother couldn’t That varied perspective and experience can’t come from all female parenting, no matter how empowered the women feel. Moms can’t teach their sons how to shave their face, not pee on your pants or keep their hands from sweating on a date. I do feel there’s as many cons as pros to this.

    That being said, I’m going to go have a beer, scratch my crotch, pick my nose and flick it while watching a ball game. >Burp

  7. honestpoet says:

    These children would of necessity be female. It would take a man to make a male sperm.

    Personally, I don’t give a darn what two consenting adults do with each other. Why does homosexuality bother some people so much? What do you care? How is it a threat to you? Lewis, why do you assume that the passion two women can feel for each other is somehow less real than what a man and a woman feel? How would you know? It seems that the hatred that some feel for homosexuals is what’s out in left field.

  8. Yes Sir, the best way for the scientific community to spend limited resources, is to find a way so some of the most troubled people in the world, Rosie O’Donnell-ites, can pass their gene poll on without “pole dancing.”

  9. the Grit says:

    Hi honestpoet,

    The fear of homosexuality is based in the desire for a stable society. Most people do not have the time or the desire to adapt to rapid and/or large scale societal change. It is much easier to go on autopilot and do a blanket “no” in response to fundamental divergence to the expected norm. Keep in mind that most people have more than enough to worry about with getting the next promotion, who their children are dating, is my spouse cheating on me, what am I going to do when I retire, and such, to spare much consideration to changing their minds on what they have been taught from birth is a big no-no. People who want a favor are generally best served to make nice and be patient in their quest. Those who want a favor and demand it, are generally only going to make enemies. It’s human nature.

    The same thing happened with American black, slavery, and general acceptance into society. Before the Civil War, slavery was already on the way out, due to technological changes in farming. Many slaves who had earned their freedom were accepted into society, some of whom also owned slaves. Another generation or so at that pace and we wouldn’t have African-Americans, but just Americans. Unfortunately the Civil War stuck its nose in, mostly for unrelated reasons, and, all these years later, we still have racial problems.

    If that example is not sufficient to make my point, then read up on how we treated the Irish, the Polish, the Chinese, and, well, any other large group that was thrust on society without proper preparation. The instinctive reaction is to isolate them with appropriate insulting rhetoric until they can be slowly assimilated with as little disruption to the general pattern of life as possible,

    While I can see that minority groups, such as people with alternative life styles, may be frustrated by the waiting period for general acceptance, a few years of hovering on the edges of society would seem a small price to pay in comparison to what really extremest groups, such as the Branch Davidians, have experienced.

    Slow and steady wins the race. Speed kills. Sorry.

    the Grit

  10. Christianconservative says:

    I’ll just say one thing, I’m not a betting man, and I’m not bringing my own beliefs into this when I make this statement: But I don’t think this is scientifically possible. Biologically I just don’t think you can recreate the same type of sperm and same type of human that you find in natural reproduction. And the people (???) that might be created from these experiments will have some sort of natural defects because of the way they were created.

    But then again… that’s why I’m not a betting man.

    And this whole thing is absurd. Why would someone want to do this? Calling honest poet.

  11. honestpoet says:

    People would want to do this for the same reasons anyone wants to have their own biological child. I was lucky enough to be able to do it without extreme measures, but plenty of heterosexual couples use up medical resources trying to get pregnant, or trying to have a child of a particular sex, when there are so many children who need adopting, and I don’t see any conservatives crying foul about that. As far as defects go, the sperm is just the delivery method for the genetic bundle from the father. It’s an uncomplicated cell (as far as cells go), so I don’t see why this shouldn’t work. As long as the child receives a complete genetic bundle from both parents, the likelihood of defects is no greater than for a naturally conceived child.

    Grit, I hear what you’re saying, but how long do you expect homosexuals to allow themselves to be treated as less than human? They’ve been ostracized, discriminated against, and occasionally murdered for long enough.

    The way forward for us as a species (and we do desperately need a way forward) is to acknowledge the humanity of all individuals, hopefully to value all individuals despite our differences, and at the very least allow all individuals to live in peace, as long as they do no harm. Christ encouraged, with word and deed, loving acceptance of even the most untouchable. Why has that example so largely gone ignored?

  12. the Grit says:

    Hi h,

    How long the wait lasts is not up to me, but to society, and to homosexuals. You must admit that much progress has been made in this area over the last generation. However, the in-your-face attitude of many in the gay & lesbian community has slowed general acceptance greatly. 40 years ago, which it seems strange to admit I can remember, divorced women were viewed much the same way, but, since they didn’t march through the streets in unusual costumes and demand anything, society, or the great mindless mob as I think of it, has embraced the concept with open arms.

    As to the teachings of Christ, a careful reading of the Bible will show that, according to the religious theory, mankind is incapable of perfect behavior, hence the need for salvation through faith. From my perspective, the behavior of stereotyping groups is mostly due to peoples’ lack of time to study the situation at hand. Really, there are so many “groups,” and, for most people, there is so little spare time to devote to deep thought and investigation, general and broad assumptions have to be made in order to function. For example, after 60 years of subtle media coverage of UFO’s a large majority of the US population believes that we are being frequently visited by space aliens. A report here, a report there, a few funny news stories, and some movies, have managed to produce a consensus in favor of a laughable proposition. Now, if the tinfoil hat crowd had staged public events where they reveled in their difference and demanded Government protection of their behavior, things would have been different. Sorry, but that is life.

    If you want further proof, just look at Mad’s latest post, where it is perfectly alright to use the term “redneck,” which is the last American group which is politically correct to mock. Of course, I guess I could let my hair grow a bit, sell my truck, give away my pitbulls, sell my guns, and make an effort to loose my Southern accent. That post is my next stop 🙂

    the Grit

  13. The Dude says:

    Of they’ll need men. Who are they going to blame everything on? Who are they going to yell at? I know my “old” lady would agree…

  14. lewisintex. says:

    honest…I didn’t assume anything. It was a mear statement. To assume is to make an ass out of you and me, and I had no intentions of doing that. I was mearly making a statement which apparently was taken out of text. I am a very open minded person, and I really couldn’t give to hoots what some of these people do, as long as they aren’t jamming it down my throat everyday. It’s a life style they chose, not me, so why should have to bow down to their needs. Sorry for their luck, but they bring most of this crap upon themselves with their (all for me Parades, etc.) The Grit said it very well and if you can’t understand that language then I feel for you. It’s only an opinion, just like yours, not to hurt anyone. Just an opinion.

  15. How about if we cut the “crap” and take this perverted homosexual abomination straight on by mental health professionals that are not homosexuals.

    We are all grown ups here; see if you can take the truth.

    “The Reverse Socialization of Homosexuality

    Becoming a homosexual involves a tremendous amount of reverse socialization. Almost every child is taught to avoid feces. Potty training explicitly teaches one to regard feces as ‘dirty,’ disgusting, and unhealthy. Yet most homosexuals eventually learn to immerse themselves in feces. Past surveys suggest the following typical sequential development of gay activity. The median age for gays when their genitals are first manipulated by another male is 13. In about two more years the anus is first used for sex rather than biological relief; and in another year or two the anus is licked for ‘sexual fun.”

    Now is it fear of Homo’s or disgust that makes sensible humans to not want to encourage this abominations by main streaming it.

    Homosexuals, no matter how hard they, and their enablers try, are not gay and they are not partaking in an alternate sexual preference.

  16. But they are ” trying to jam it down your throat everyday (pun intended to point out that homosexuals are rabid about their sexually perverted appetite).

    “They (homosexuals) are recruiting others, forming communities, beginning to mock and undermine the old pieties of loyalty to family, country, and God. They have redefined “good” and “evil” and view with contempt the idea that honest work and sex within marriage are communal acts necessary for human survival.”

    “Besides gays’ preoccupation with sex, traditionalist psychiatrists have catalogued a higher incidence of personality characteristics suggesting psychological disturbance and an inability to interact successfully with others. Dr. Edmond Bergler, (1) who treated over a thousand homosexuals, concluded that gays tended to: provoke attacks against themselves and then count these “attacks” as injustices they had suffered

    (1) display defensive malice toward others,
    (2) exhibit a flippant attitude in order to cover underlying depression and guilt,
    (3) display extreme narcissism and superciliousness,
    (4) refuse to acknowledge accepted standards in non-sexual matters, on the assumption that the right to cut moral corners is due homosexuals as compensation for their “suffering,”
    (5) and “be generally unreliable, also of a more or less psychopathic nature. “

  17. honestpoet says:

    Son, you sure do reveal your prejudices by citing this sort of “science.”

    Dr. Bergler’s sample can hardly be said to reveal anything about the larger homosexual community. All the men he dealt with he dealt with BECAUSE they suffered some form of mental illness. By your logic, my husband could draw some pretty dark conclusions about heterosexual males who abuse his female patients. (Most of his female patients are actually ill because of what they suffered at the hands of some man as a child — usually the father or stepfather, which make the arguments for the value of a present father suspect, imo — and have therefore learned to tolerate at the hands of their intimate partners later.) Or about the heterosexual males who are his patients.

    Face it. Your upbringing has taught you to hate gays because they’re different, and because some old books written by desert tribes in the middle east who worshiped a volacano god named Yaweh say homosexuality is a sin.

    It’s time to join the present. Step up or step off.

  18. “Are homosexuals troubled today because society unreasonably discriminates against them or are they more frequently pathological and distressed due to a psychology shaped by their choices and experience?

    Several lines of evidence suggest that the personality problems of gays are not a consequence of societal rejection, but ‘part and parcel’ of living the homosexual life. Furthermore, discrimination against those with homosexual inclinations, like discrimination against the able-bodied who refuse to work, is both necessary for the greater good of society and the individual himself. In fact, such discrimination is an attempt to prevent persons tempted by homosexuality from suffering the pathologies it induces.”

    Did you treat any homosexuals? And what and where are your bonfires idiotpoet.

    Poets are such a God awful nebulous bunch of starry eyed dreamers and slackers.

    Obviously you were raised by people ill equiped to teach you the world as it is. I take it you have had personel experience with the homosexual life style.

  19. idiotpoet, I am not one to beat about the bush.

    The following very well puts your destructive stupidity, and your ilks into perfect perspective. I do not waste my time for the likes of you, since it is difficult breaking through a parents failure — I take the time for those that hunger for the un-PC side of life.

    “As opposed to the traditional view, modern egalitarianism emphasizes the equivalent worth of everyone irrespective of their willingness to be productive (after all, we share a ‘common humanity’). This ideology sees no ‘linkage’ between economic and sexual productivity and psychological well-being: those who choose to live on welfare are “just as good” and have the same mix of personality characteristics as those who choose to work. The married are sexually and psychiatrically indistinguishable from those “living together.” And homosexuals are psychiatrically and socially indistinguishable from heterosexuals.

    Egalitarian social-psychiatric theory holds that if society would compel its members to accept everyone “for what they choose to do or be,” everybody (including homosexuals) would come to feel good about themselves. In this ‘brotherhood of humankind,’ the job of creating adequate material wealth and rearing a sufficiency of well-socialized children would flow ‘naturally’ out of the general spirit of cooperation, decency, and acceptance that would prevail.”

    Abject hogwash is the “equal” theory — “Nothing is more unequal then when man tries to make all things equal” — Aristotle

  20. honestpoet says:

    LOL. No, actually I’ve never had a homosexual experience in my life. I’ve been married for 15 years, have two kids, and enjoy my heterosexuality on an almost-nightly basis with my very manly (and skilled) husband.

    Funny that you’d quote Aristotle, when you seem much more like a Platonist, especially in your disregard for poets. True, many are dreamy-eyed slackers, but I”m actually part of a new rationalist, pragmatic wave. I’m somewhat of an anti-romantic in my desire to deal with reality.

    I never said I treated anyone, but I do talk to my husband about his work frequently. He told me about the study you cited, which was actually pretty sound (it was not a sample of psychiatric patients). However, he also said that you took the quotes quite out of context (rather like a Christian with the Bible). The tone of the study was actually much more compassionate than you’re able to perceive (you seem to be utterly lacking in that trait). You imply that it paints gays as psychopaths, which is not the case.

    Hubby tells me that the current psychiatric understanding is that the majority of gays got that way, it seems, via abuse as young children at the hands of adult males, with a controlling mother, and a weak, absent, or abusive father. In these cases it could be said to be a neurosis. In some cases, however (about 1 in 15), there’s no history of abuse and the child is simply born that way, from the start (there’s one of those on our block), with sugar in their tank, so to speak.

    Either way, however, the consensus is that there is no perceived choice in the matter, so to treat these individuals as if they were criminals or sinners or less than human is cruel. The way to solve the problem is to confront child molestation, not to punish its victims.

    BTW, my husband also says that with your patent homophobia he has no doubt that you are yourself latently homosexual. A number of his patients (one is a preacher) who by day bash gays do themselves seek treatment because they can’t stop looking at gay porn. Do you weep, like them, when you do?

  21. Yeah right, your husband is a looney-tuner and the two of you do the humpty-dance every night all night long — Did I mention I was a brain surgeon — What a putz!

    I’m glad you stated that the study I mentioned was sound because it most certainly is, and now is the time to link it and let the gentle reader decide for themselves.

    But before I do I must ask a question; Do you actually believe that people with an I.Q. higher than a stump falls for that lame ploy of, “if one doesn’t approve of a sick perversion then they must fear it and probably are a closet homo?”

    For the most part people do not fear queers, they find them repulsive when they think of what they do based on their perversion.

    http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet6.html

  22. Oh, and just in case, I’ll provide the last bit of the study that you and your husband Sigmund said was aces but I made it sound less compassionet.

    “It is far from surprising that half of gays expressed regret about their homosexuality (5) or that four times as many would advise adolescents who were just beginning homosexual activity to stop rather than continue. (4)

    The “gay life” is short, lonely, and filled with cheating, insecurity, disease, and danger. Although held captive by sexual addiction rather than brick and bars, homosexuals exhibit many of the same psychological traits as those imprisoned in death camps. The pathologies of homosexuals fit the traditional social-psychiatric view: Happiness and well-being are earned through social and sexual productivity, not “sexual freedom.”

  23. honestpoet says:

    Despite the etymology of the word homophobia, most do not use it to mean the fear of gays, but the hatred of them, rooted in the fear that oneself is, actually, gay.

    And you display it in spades.

    And if you’d even glanced at my blog, bozo, you’d see that I didn’t just come up with the bit about my husband the psychiatrist and our healthy marriage. It’s a fact. The fact that YOU can’t accept that an intelligent, heterosexual couple could feel compassion for gays is not my problem, but a symptom of your obvious pathology.

    I’m done with this conversation. Yes, the gentle reader is free to decide for him/herself.

  24. Why on Earth would I glance at your blog, your comments speaks volumes.

    What compassion do you have for society when you want to main stream perverts so you can say, “look all, I’m set a part because I feel so much more than you.” — What’s next, your compassion for those who cannot control their beastiality, their pedophilia.

    Let me tell you and that quack your hitched to — if you two are bonking each other every night, which you are not, it ain’t normal —you both need a shrink.

  25. Kita Kazoo says:

    I’m with you honestpoet. All of this bullying and name calling speaks volumes about the “son”. I think you have handled yourself well and I look forward to reading your blog.

  26. honestpoet says:

    Thanks, Kita! I look forward to your feedback there.

    And that silly son fella sure doesn’t know much about marriage, I’ll tell you what. If he thinks it’s unnatural for married people to have sex on a regular basis, he’s clearly never experienced a healthy relationship. Which is probably the root of his obvious problem.

  27. Terry says:

    Farming heterosexual babies is a reality in Massachusetts.

    Stephen Baskerville states that:
    “Financial incentives and quotas created by the Adoption and Safe Families Act in 1997, championed by the Clinton administration, have resulted in a “child protection racket” rife with “baby stealing and baby selling, … In family court recently the hallway was clogged with parents and children being adopted. “You could hardly walk. You had never seen such mass adoptions before.” Forty percent of Massachusetts children adopted have gone to gay and lesbian couples, according to Democratic state Senator Therese Murray, who supports gay marriage. It is not difficult to see who will supply the children of gay “parents.”

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Baskerville/stephen1.htm

  28. Oh, so now it’s on a “regular basis” eh.

    You said you were doing the huppity-bumpity all night every night, which would make you and Siggy sex addicted.

    You’re not spending a lot of time “on the cell phone” during the day and just letting it vibrate — hmmm — are you?

    You may have a serious problem — You’re not sitting on a running dryer for long periods of time, are you?

  29. It’s weird that scientists have nothing better to do with their time than to make artificial sperm. I mean, if we were trying to prevent the extinction of panda bears, I could at least see the point, but this is just nuts.

    My main issue is that, as an engineer, I see how there are always more variables than are originally thought – or, even if scientists are aware that there are unaccounted-for variables, cannot find them until it’s too late. The long way of that is to say that human experimentation is, IMHO, entirely and always inappropriate. It’s not as if the reproduction mechanism is lacking for utility; we aren’t curing cancer here.

    HonestPoet: ignore GMS – he’s attacked me, calling me ugly and saying the only way I can get a date is to hang out at a prison. In fact, he personally attacks anyone who dose not express mindless fealty to his positions. You’re doing well – please don’t take it personally nor feel the need to justify oneself. You cannot (and would not want to) invite him into your bedroom every night to witness marital lovemaking. You can’t prove yourself to those who refuse to accept proof.

  30. “You cannot (and would not want to) invite him into your bedroom every night to witness marital lovemaking. You can’t prove yourself to those who refuse to accept proof.”

    That is the most cruel thought any one has ever planted in my minds eye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — It would be like witnessing the Hindenberg burning and falling — “Oh the humanity.”

    It would be like trying to get the Towers falling out of your mind — “You’re mean spirited,” Theo.

    You could get a date by hanging out at the docks, where sailors get off the ships after a year at sea — I’m just trying to help.

  31. It is statements like the following made by feminists that make real men suspect their motives.

    “you’ve resorted the the (you made a mistake here 160) lowest and the cheapest of attacks against a woman smarter than yourself.”

    “May I point out that you may as well walk about with a sign saying, “I’m wrong and I’m too much of a snot to even consider another way of thinking!”?”

    “(Mostly, I get paid for bitch-slapping their opponents. This is just a warm up. 🙂 )”

    As far as calling you ugly…I did not. What I said was;

    “One malady associated with your bred I find fascinating is — usually unattractive women try to compensate for it with a pleasant personality, but not in the feminist’s case.”

    Theo,

    If “The Mouse That Roared,” starts a thread about astronauts, you’re not going to claim being one of them along with an engineer and a law clerk…are you?

  32. Well, you stated that I am a “dime a dozen FemiNazi,” and then made comments about the unattractive nature of feminists. Having taken elementary logic, I feel safe in presuming that you did, indeed, make a snide reference to my features. Considering that you also stated that I can get a date if I hang out by the docks (presumably, only the loneliest of men would want me, and, presumably, I cannot tell the difference between romance and prostitution), I feel safe in telling you that you’re wrong.

    Not an astronaut, but I did work on a space project. That tends to intimidate a lot of people, although it was a small part of a Phase I and really great fun.

    I got my engineering degree from a very well respected undergraduate school and took a second major in classics. I worked at an engineering firm for several years, doing materials science/structural composites/nanotechology. (Part of the high-strength composites was doing the space-related project.) I then went to law school and currently work as a law clerk in a litigation firm.

    I’m sorry that you don’t believe me, but such is your problem. Likewise, you feel that I need to be used to the point of degrading myself to getting desperate men – as if only desperate men would want me. Again, such is your problem; I see no reason why any rational, psychologically stable person would need to degrade another human in the manner in which you have degraded me, AVoiceofReason, and HonestPoet.

    You have issues. They aren’t my issues and, frankly, I have no need to prove that to you – only to any rational bystander who can understand that your attacks are indicative of your character.

  33. You started it; I finished it.

    If they ever choose me for space flight, I will insist knowing if you did any of the work on the rocket I am to blast off in.

    I think you’re a man hater.

  34. You started it; I finished it.

    That’s mature.

    If they ever choose me for space flight, I will insist knowing if you did any of the work on the rocket I am to blast off in.

    I think you’re a man hater.

    Again, so mature. You think all women are either psycho sex addicts or man-haters. Not to sound childish, but it’s pretty clear that you really dislike WOMEN. At best, you’re patronising; at worst, you exhibit remarkable cruelty – which is astonishing, because nothing said has warranted the hostility and degradation which you heap on us.

  35. You simply cannot handle it when some one gets back in your face like you get in their face.

    To many men kiss feminist butt, and do not realize that men owe you nothing. As far as I’m concerned you are competition in the world and need to be dealt with accordingly —- men will wise up to your game and soon.

  36. I stated;

    “You started it; I finished it.”

    You stated;

    “That’s mature.”

    It is mature when some one wises you up to the state of our public school system and the reason it is so bad.

    You only want to hear what you believe to be the case, not what the facts point out. Facts are cruel to you people.

  37. WHAT? You didn’t present any facts. You presented significant amounts of generalised, unsubstantiated opinion/rantings.

    I responded to your attacks on my intellect with what you posted above; you then proceeded to attempt to degrade me. AVoiceofReason did not attack you before you also heaped insults upon him; neither did HonestPoet deserve what you gave her.

    The list of people that you intentionally degrade goes on. This is not about me, but about the way you make this blogging community worse. There’s a common theme in ruined threads, and it’s you.

    As far as I’m concerned you are competition in the world and need to be dealt with accordingly —- men will wise up to your game and soon.

    Care to elaborate? “Dealt with accordingly?” Enough said.

  38. I stated an opinion about public schools; you proceeded to slam public school teachers and ALL public schools while offering no proof. I offered proof to the contrary; you then said that I lack reading comprehension abilities. My response was that I’m an intelligent young woman, which apparently bothers you. Your response:

    Your nothing but a dime a dozen femaNazi with a chip on her shoulder, over compensating and lying about her accomplishments based on her inferiority complex — inside, you know for a fact there are all kinds of things you cannot do that a man can — YOUR CONFLICTED ROSIE!

    Your behavior is a stock response associated with femininism, which is a most flummoxing mental malady in many ways.

    One malady associated with your bred I find fascinating is — usually unattractive women try to compensate for it with a pleasant personality but not in the feminist’s case.

    Fascinating how you brought a Johnson into the matter…are we a might envious of that particular bit of anatomy?…was Freud right, or are you in dire need of a date?

    You can get a date. Hang out down at the docks or at the discharge gate at a near by prison.

    Enough said.

  39. Afterwards, AVoiceofReason weighed in on public schools. He did not attack you but rather responded to your comments in a thoughful, thorough manner. You said, inter alia:

    You Sir are a fraud and a liar. The real world knows better, and a creative, talented and dedicated teacher means every thing to a student. You should be fired on the spot with that horses ass mind set.

    ….

    THE NERVE OF A UNION BOLSHEVIK SAYING THEY TOOK THEIR UNION JOB FOR THE BETTERMENT OF MANKIND.

    Your ‘tude has nothing to do with me.

  40. Once again, you started the aggression I ended it.

    AVOR and you completely ignored the links I provided and are incapable of fathoming the dire straits are public school system is in.

    Why?

    Because he is a union man and you had no problems in the school system you attended — Now that’s proof positive.

    Thanks for reminding me of what I wrote — No wonder you’re a steamed FN — The truth hurts and upsets people.

  41. Dealt with accordingly means no affirmative action, no special protected status or preferential treatment.

    STAND ON YOUR OWN MERIT BROAD, like all the rest of us poor slobs and stop all your “in the face,” whinning and crying.

  42. England has a major shortage of Doctors because of their feminist, affirmative action policies.

    It seems many of the female Doctors that got preferential treatment over males, have stopped practicing medicine to raise a family of their own.

    This is what the majority of women end up doing when they can.

  43. STAND ON YOUR OWN MERIT BROAD

    I spent my summer working on issues to FIGHT affirmative action. I do stand on my own merit, HATE affirmative action, and thoroughly enjoy winning on merit. 🙂

    Anyone who has spent more than a nanosecond reading my blog is well aware of the above. Obviously, your attacks on my person are completely unrelated to anything related to reality (hum, common theme here?) – it is YOU who hate the facts. Those facts are pretty brutal to your cause. I’m a smart, successful woman who has gotten through on her own merit.

  44. That’s good to hear Theo.

    So I can take it that you then understand why companies have been circumspect with the great cost of hiring and training women that very often leave to raise a family, or want to work part time? — Bigotry is not the overwhelming issue and has not been in the past.

    My cause is “no sacred cows” as my header clearly reads whether they be cows, bulls, teachers or feminists just to name a few.

  45. Here is another cause of mine.

    Osprey web cam real time. THe eggs are late hatching last I looked.

    http://www.palmetto.coop/community/env_osprey.asp

  46. Well, let’s see. I also have zero desire to have kids of my own, so I would hate to be screwed by the fact that other women leave.

    I don’t believe in collective rights, just individual rights. Ergo, I don’t want to be analysed (for better or for worse) as a “woman,” but as an individual. If a company concludes that, because I’m a woman, I’m not worth training, that’s b.s. that acts as affirmative action for men. I don’t approve of it from either side.

  47. See now you’re just showing your true nature, true animus and convoluted ability to reason

    Save your double talk for those who fall for it!

    A company deciding what’s best for them based on their experience is not AA.

    A bunch of in your face Marxist legislating and forcing people and companies to follow their failed social engineering plot is AA.

    Tell us Theo, who do you want enforcing the out come of the “analysis of an individual,” once the analysis is complete.

  48. That’s if the analysis does not go the woman’s way!

  49. ” FEMINISM is shown to be a significant CAUSAL factor when it comes to serious violence, assault, domestic violence, sexual assault, robbery, child abuse, drug abuse, teenage pregnancies, poverty, poor educational standards, prostitution, paedophilia, harassment, bad manners, traffic congestion, pollution, terrorism, vandalism, burglary, murder, teenage delinquency, road rage, alcoholism, other addictions, hooliganism, depression, gender conflict, hysteria, stress, serious health problems such as heart disease and cancer, greater disablement among children – both psychological and physical – with millions killed while in the womb, AIDS, the judicial punishment of innocent individuals, the poor educational achievements of boys, the growing prison population, family breakdown, the increasing alienation of men, the corruption of the justice system and the democratic process, the corrosion of academic integrity, the degradation of the social sciences and the law, poor public services, the impoverishment of pensioners and the looming pension crisis, excessive immigration, long hospital waiting lists, hostile rap music, high taxation rates, the terrible shock now being experienced by thousands of women who are discovering that they are too old to have children, and, almost unbelievably, global warming.

    Feminism and political correctness have been the two most influential ideologies in the west for almost four long decades. What else, therefore, would you suggest has had the most influence with regard to the serious societal problems mentioned in the list above? – the problems that almost everyone claims to be so concerned about.”

  50. Hypocrite.

    So I’m not supposed to want anything to help me out in admissions to schools (fine) but then I’m supposed to allow men to favour each other in hiring processes. Hate to break it to you, but when one party is disfavoured in a hiring process, the other parties receive a benefit.

    I never said ANYTHING about gov’t enforcement.

    Hypocrite. You want it both ways – ensuring that women get no special treatment in any situation, and then giving men a leg up in hiring decisions by stating that women are all unfit to work. Oh yeah, no sacred cows for you – save outright misogyny.

  51. Your “facts” about feminism come from a site called “Angry Harry,” which is woman-hating misogynistic rantings on a web page.

    It also blamed women for boy’s underachievement. You know, because when women achieve, poor men get all emasculated and start dropping out of school. (Some people would call it healthy competition and the elimination of gender bias.)

    It also tell us these gems:
    Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money? – yep – but for the career aspirations of a few thousand women, just about everybody in the UK has to pay a price; particularly the old and the sick.

    Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work? – no, they did not

    Women – Weak and Pathetic? – why women stayed at home

    Are Women Not Even Responsible For Their Work Choices?

    Men Earn Quarter of a Million Pounds more than Women – but it mostly gets spent on women

    Misogynistic woman-hater alert!

  52. How do you want “your needs” enforced over anothers needs? — By affirmative action? I believe you already answered the question with what you intimated, but I’m not positive.

    Screaming hypocrite and claiming I said things that I did not is not an argument befitting one with a 160 I.Q..

    Harry makes some excellent points, and they are points that need to be heard, because many are spot on and are deemed taboo by the thought Nazis.

    http://www.angryharry.com/nobenefitsoffeminism.htm

    YOU’RE NAME CALLING TOOTSE! — Very unbecoming of one with such a grand intellect.

  53. You go Harry!

    “Just look at the construction industry today. You will not find many women wanting to lay bricks or to climb scaffolding. But if ever there comes a time in the future where such work can be done merely by pushing buttons while chatting to one’s colleagues, then women will want to do it!”

    “And, no doubt, the feminists of the future will then perpetuate the lie that today’s women were discriminated against in the construction industry and that they were mostly desperate to lay bricks and climb scaffolding!”

    Look how Theo chats on the WWW while she’s at work — nice work if you can get it.

  54. So when you call people “idiots,” “broads,” or “FemiNazis,” that’s fine, but when I point out that your positions are internally inconsistent, I’m “name-calling?”

    ROFLMAO!

    I never said that I want my “needs” “enforced” “over other’s needs.” I actually have NO CLUE where you got that.,.. because the only place where I’m a FemiNazi, an idiot, or someone who wants entitled benefits is in your own screwed-up head. 🙂

    Look how Theo chats on the WWW while she’s at work — nice work if you can get it.

    Um… I wasn’t at work when I wrote those things. Your crystal ball is remarkably inaccurate!

  55. “because the only place where I’m a FemiNazi, an idiot, or someone who wants entitled benefits is in your own screwed-up head.”

    Well, alright then —- if you are telling the truth, then we have no argument. However, if you think a skirt deserves something more in the way of a competitive edge over my son, then we have a serious problem.

    I will now get back to reading what Harry has to say — he’s a pretty smart cookie — you should read more of his work and “broad”–en your horizons.

    Harry claims that our educational system is slanted towards teaching in a way that benefits women and hurts men — Hmmm, I wonder, but I’m not sure. You must admit those teachers and professors are mostly leftist scum and feminism is one of their rallying calls along with homosexuality.

    I will do some research and get back with you Theo.

  56. It is IMPOSSIBLE to prove a negative, and IMPOSSIBLE to prove my real thoughts to anyone who frankly does not want to hear them.

    I strongly suggest that you read my blog. I’m anti-affirmative action, mostly as a result of having been a woman engineer who was told that she only got into school because she’s a woman. (Statistically, women engineers have higher GPAs and SAT scores than their male counterparts, but there are fewer of them. Very self-selective group.) I see that there’s no way to prove yourself once the stigma of AA attaches to you – well, not until organic chem weeds out 1/2 the class and you aren’t part of that half.

    Frankly, the idea that I could be judged on my gender – either positively (i.e. affirmative action) or negatively (i.e. sexim) really pisses me off. If an employer thinks that I’m going to run off and have babies and doesn’t hire me, that’s complete crap. I’m not responsible for what other women do; nor do I expect modern men to be responsible for their ancestors.

    Again, try figuring out what I actually THINK before trashing me.

    Angry Harry has nothing of value to say. He’s clearly a man who wants to blame women for everything; people of both genders do that and should be summarily ignored.

  57. Theo said,

    “Angry Harry has nothing of value to say. He’s clearly a man who wants to blame women for everything; people of both genders do that and should be summarily ignored.”

    No way! Harry blames much on feminism and PC and has a place at the round table of thought — I’m sure you find Harry, hair raising, and it’s to be expected.

  58. Statistically, men are more likely than women to drop out of college. Should we factor this into consideration before admitting men into universities?

    FYI, men today get affirmative action when applying to college. As more women graduate high school and a higher percentage of those seek higher education, and as women have better grades and better extracurricular activities, less-accomplished men are given a leg up so that campuses do not go too “pink.” My alma mater admitted to giving men a leg up so as to achieve gender parity. Is this okay with you?

    Assuming, arguendo, that you are correct that the high school educational system is biased against men, do you approve of this remedy? If not, do you think that boys who are harmed by the system should just deal? Do you think that their true merit will shine through regardless of a system designed to work against them?

    If you do approve of AA for me, why this one and not affirmative action that helps out groups that have been historically (and currently) persecuted?

  59. You Missy are in a dream world if you think I believe, ever, a white male is given a hand up in any situation controlled by the left or for that matter any government agency Men of color yes, and I would stop it all.

    You’re just grasping at straws. Try not to make yourself look foolish. When you say things like “persectued groups” you sound like nothing but a Marxist dolt — who is being persecuted in America that needs the Marxists to ride in on their white stead and establish nirvona. And who alive today persecuted anyone?

    Are you a disgusting Democrat?

    If the education system is favoring the best way for women to learn and ignoring men, then something must be done to improve the system for the men students — wouldn’t that be an unGodly sinister thing if in fact what Harry said is correct about our education system?

  60. greetingsmyson said 14 minutes ago:

    You Missy are in a dream world if you think I believe, ever, a white male is given a hand up in any situation controlled by the left

    You, sir, are in a dream world if you do not know it to be true.

    College professorships are dominated (except at George Mason) by liberals, yes. However, the administration is a business – one designed to maximise profit, increase rankings, and attract the best students.

    I suggest, before you dismiss my (very true, very valid) argument as untrue, simply because it does not fit within your narrow (and incorrect) view of the world, that you do some research. Here’s some to start you off:
    http://www.dickinson.edu/dickinsonian/detail.cfm?95
    http://aad.english.ucsb.edu/docs/male-female.html
    http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/CrossoverinFemaleMaleCollegeEnrollmentRates.aspx
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?ex=1310097600&en=cd9efba2e9595dec&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
    http://www.thecrimson.com/printerfriendly.aspx?ref=513829
    http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/51_gendergap_universities.html
    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3D61530F932A2575BC0A961948260

    “Well, at least one college has noticed it. The dean of admissions and financial aid at Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, Jennifer Delahunty Britz, wrote an op-ed for The New York Times in March describing her school’s efforts to maintain a male-female balance. She wrote that 55 percent of applicants to Kenyon­ are women, “a proportion that is steadily increasing.”

    “The reality is that because young men are rarer, they’re more valued applicants,” Britz wrote. She went on to describe the “hint of desperation in the voices of admissions officers” when their campuses become 60 percent, or more, female.

    “Once you become decidedly female in enrollment, fewer males and, as it turns out, fewer females find your campus attractive,” she wrote. ”

    If all you have against me is that I say, “persecuted groups,” which is a fairly straightforward and common way to describe the reality of past discrimination (unless, of course, you think that NO ONE in the whole history of the world has ever faced discrimination except for white men), then you really need to reconsider your argument.

    Note that I also said HISTORICALLY persecuted groups. Oh, that might just KILL your argument against me right there.

    Are you a disgusting Democrat?

    I am neither. If you cannot figure that out, I strongly suggest reading my (decidedly conservative) blog. Then again, that involves actual EFFORT into educating yourself. It would also involve not condescending to the vast majority of the world, but, for some reason, you consider yourself to be a supreme being.

    So do you think that Kenyon and Oberlin and Tufts and Vassar should stop using affirmative action to increase their ranks of men? What about the fact that it’s a BUSINESS decision – that schools with a close gender balance are more attractive to BOTH genders?

    I have to love it: when women outnumber men, men are being persecuted by those evil Leftist school teachers. It has nothing to do with a level playing field. When men outnumber women, it’s because of “inherent differences.”

  61. honestpoet says:

    Theo, you are so wasting your time with this specimen. Don’t you know a closed, small, defective mind when you see one?

  62. I am against all affirmative action.

    I am all for meritocracy.

    I am all for entities making decisions that are best for their best interests, without screeching homosexuals and Marxist advocates shoving their wants down the throats of American entities.

    If the powers that be believe that a 60/ 40 spit of women to men will destroy their university then they have a right to not allow that to occur without government interference. The same goes if the statistics are reversed in another university.

    You state,

    ““persecuted groups,” which is a fairly straightforward and common way to describe the reality of past discrimination (unless, of course, you think that NO ONE in the whole history of the world has ever faced discrimination except for white men), then you really need to reconsider your argument.”

    Straightforward for those that lean left or are full blown left and are looking for victims to support their sick ideology.

    I believe I will peruse your blog, you’ve convinced me. Let’s see here……

  63. Ah go make up more lies about your sex life, lyingpoet.

  64. “He explained it to me: he was a white male in a department that needed more visible women and minorities. Never mind that the woman hired had less experience and fewer credentials. Never mind that the university had been grooming him for the position — (indeed, the department head could not even look him in the eye while breaking the news). Never mind that my friend is now so embittered that he tells his male students to forget pursuing a degree in the humanities, because credentials and quality do not matter anymore. If they are white and male, he insists, there will be no place for them in academia.”

    If my friend were a woman, he could sue the university for unfair employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This section of the Act states that it is unlawful for any employer:

    “(1) to fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, or privileges of employment because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.”

    But to bring such a suit, he would have to belong to a class protected by Title VII: that is, he would have to be a woman or a minority. As a male from German-Irish ancestry, he is not simply excluded from protection; he is, in fact, the person against whom protection is being offered. Why is this protection necessary? My friend has always been sex-blind when it comes to his students and colleagues. Why, then, do women have to shield- ed from him? …

    Wendy writes more of the truth,

    http://www.zetetics.com/mac/affirm.htm

  65. SAT’s for 2005 math scores; male 538 / women 504

    SAT’s for 2005 verbal scores; male 513 / women 505

    http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/46851.html

    Hmmm!

  66. “Greetings, my son!” is on the case — watch out!

    Hey Angry Harry I’m moving in on what you wrote — my research is starting to pay off.

    “Phyllis Schafly has done a number of articles about the penalty boys pay just for being boys in our public schools. How teaching NOW is geared toward girls, not boys. But, it seems NOT to have improved the girls’ scores?”

    You screeching, dominating, lying, men haters can get the rest of those panty waste men to cower, but not me. I know better; I am aware.

  67. Gender Bias

    22 School Practices That May Harm Boys

    http://www.illinoisloop.org/gender.html

    Evidence abounds that boys thrive in the more disciplined, structured learning environment. America’s loosey-goosey schools, however, shun discipline and moral instruction. Boys are also biologically predisposed to competition. But in the progressive school, cooperative experiences and groupthink are preferred to individual achievement.

    And girls are favored over boys.

    Shafting boys!

    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48527

  68. penandink says:

    In case ALL of YOU have forgotten the most important thing, I would like to take this opportunity to remind you. The Lord made everyone equal. He gave us all great minds, strong bodies, a heart and soul and the ability to think on our own. He gave us the opportunity to decide what we want for ourselves and how we would like to live our lives. No one has the RIGHT to pass judgement on anyone nor criticize another for his/her beliefs. So I think it’s more than past due for all of you to bury the hatchet and call it a day and put all the rotten, snide remarks behind you. Everyone needs to just move forward with their lives and thank a Teacher for giving you the education you needed to respond to this blog to begin with. Peace be with all of you.

    right to pass judgement on another nor criticise

  69. Yeah Theo, listen to what Oprah here has to say.

    You atheist–feminists are entirely to judgmental. And I would also add ungrateful, based on the fact that the two most liberating factors of Western Civilization, especially women’s liberation, were Christ and men.

    How are the Gals doing in Moslemville? — hmmm!

  70. Good point, HonestPoet. I just hate to think of someone reading that nonsense and actually thinking there might be even a grain of truth to it.

    Penandink: I would posit that GreetingsMySon would not thank a teacher for his abilities, if that teacher were a member of the public schools:
    http://icanplainlysee.wordpress.com/2007/03/14/public-school-bible-study-recommended-by-latimes/#comments

    GMS,

    So what? You’ve proven nothing. You’ve called me a bunch of names, criticised me when I pointed out your internal inconsistencies, and have generally stomped about with your hands on your hips, accomplishing nothing.

  71. Projection at it’s best, Theo.

    The links I provided proves much. Your feminism has clouded your ability to reason. The mere fact that you espouse the need to be a feminist speaks volumes about a person.

  72. It has nothing to do with bias 160, or you other feminists.

    “Are the conspicuous achievers, who for better or worse contribute most to our images of success, mostly male or female? Among students who take the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) and Advanced Placement (AP) Tests in mathematics and science, men do score substantially higher than women, especially in such areas as physics.

    Why?

    The fundamental reason has less to do with bias than with a peculiarity of males as a group. On many human characteristics, not just math and physics, males display greater variability than females. This fact is well-known to researchers, and it goes a long way toward explaining what many in the public find disturbing, the greater number of males who end up at the top in most fields.

    Bell-shaped curves with the identical averages can take different forms-high and peaked (low variability) or broad and I spreading (high variability).

    The greater variability of means that males more often appear in the far right-hand tail of the curve, among the top talent. This occurs even when male and female averages in the general population are the same. (Where males score higher on the average, as they do in science and mathematics, the male advantage in the far right-hand tail becomes even more extreme.) The practical result is that, in fields with small numbers of people, such as physics, few women will appear in the far right-hand tail, with the Albert Einsteins, Richard Feynmans, or Stephen Hawkings.

    This is unfortunate for women.”

    It’s unfortunate for men also, because there is a major down side that you feminist are not worth my time to explain.

  73. bloggernista says:

    For the record, I am a man and not scared sh*tless or otherwise. Admittedly I am gay, but still… If two women want to have children without male involvement, I am fine with it. Men are only useful for a few things anyway.

  74. madmouser says:

    Oh my, bloggernista, gay or not, why are you so sour towards men? Should I be afraid to ask what few things you think men are good for?

  75. madmouser says:

    To my blogging buddies, Greetingsmyson, Theo and poet, you have taken this topic farther than I ever imagined. I must tell you that I have been intently consumed by the verbiage and anxiously awaited each response. It has been so good, I did not want to interrupt the flow with my less than capable attempt to keep up with all of you. Thanks for your heartfelt thoughts. I hope I can think of another topic to tickle your fancies.

  76. LMAO!!! So I’m supposed to thank you for not oppressing me? That’s a good one. 🙂 While we’re at it, why don’t blacks get down on their knees to us for not enslaving them?

    Men as a factor in liberating women… LMAO!! Thanks for the laugh. 😉 (Hey, I have food poisoning. I need a giggle.)

    As for your “data” on the SAT:
    1. The SAT is also a measure of confidence; it is not a pure measure of intellectual capability. I suggest you examine data about the psychological development of intelligence. A few months ago, a study came out showing that women perform better on math tasks when they are told beforehand that the disparities between men and women are due to discrimination; the other group, who underperformed, were told that it was due to inherent differences.

    That shows us that, either way, if we want to maximise the talent and the American workforce, that we ought to treat people as having the potential for high achievement. I outperform the vast majority of men and women; the best use of individual talent requires assessing me as an INDIVIDUAL

    2. Women, generally, out-perform men on verbal tasks, yet you don’t see women at the top of journalism. Obviously, there’s something more going on there.

    3. You don’t need to be in the top 0.00001% to do good science or be a good engineer. Even assuming your distributions to be reflective of pure talent, it doesn’t matter: once you get down to the (gasp!) 95th percentile, things are close enough to even.

    4. I got an 800 on the math portion of the SAT, first (and only!) time I took the test. No test prep. So I’m either a freak of nature (being a woman and all), or something in my upbringing allowed me to get through the barrier to the very top.

    5. Who cares? You aren’t one of the super-intellectuals, so why ride on the coattails of those smarter than you, simply because you share one characteristic with them that neither HonestPoet nor I share?

  77. It cracks me up how you continuously complain when men are discriminated against as a group, but throw a hissy fit when a woman asks to be evaluated as an individual. Take your pick: analyse men and women as persons, irrespective of their gender, on a merit basis, or dole out benefits and burdens according to gender. You don’t get to burden ALL women because of group behaviour on one hand and then ask for all men to be evaluated as individuals.

    Try using the same standard for both.

    Also, while you’re at it, try some facts. You think that yelling “feminist” enough will get me to pretend that you’re not a raving lunatic; in reality, your claims about how atheists or feminists ALL think a certain way does nothing but highlight your sexism.

    “Are the conspicuous achievers, who for better or worse contribute most to our images of success, mostly male or female? Among students who take the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) and Advanced Placement (AP) Tests in mathematics and science, men do score substantially higher than women, especially in such areas as physics.

    Classic bait and switch. We start talking about achievers who contribute most to our society and then talk about SATs – as if high schoolers contribute to society by filling in little bubbles on a sheet of paper. Logically unsound.

  78. Your feminism has clouded your ability to reason.

    Oh, again, thank you for making me laugh. 🙂 (Your family must, at least, have an endless supply of entertainment around the dinner table every night!)

    feminism a doctrine advocating for the political, social, and economic equality of women.

    That doesn’t mean that we are the same. That doesn’t mean that men can bear children. It just means that, under the law, we should be treated as equals.

  79. I’m a raving lunitic?

    A person speaking in tongues makes more sense than your last comments.

    Women lacking confidence? That shows how bad you are jaded and unfamiliar with the facts.

    And with respect to your boast of having a 160 I.Q.. —- A person with that high of an I.Q. could grasp the meaning of the Bell Curve, in which you absolutely failed to do.

    Also, if I were a woman as unimaginative, hackneyed and as lame as you, I would be claiming gender bias as well to rationalize my deficiencies. By refering to myself as a feminist would help in this regard also.

  80. As usual, you attack the person, not the points, which is a good strategy when one is too intellectually lazy to engage in debate.

  81. No points were made!

  82. So, bloggernista, you big palooka, what made you switch teams?

    Where you dating or married to a feminist like Theo, and the experience made you go running to the other team screaming, “pick me, pick me!” “She won’t shut up” — “She won’t stop belly aching.”

  83. I would refer you to yesterday’s post at 6:50 pm.

    Um… how can you NOT be a feminist? Really, what do you have against equality?

    I really have to laugh at your statement about me bellyaching. I mean, you run around calling anyone who does not mindlessly agree with you all sorts of names – FemiNazi, ugly, idiot, communist, Marxist – and then say that I “bellyache.” If you even give your family a small ration of the cruelty and taunts that you dole out here (and really, do leopards really change their spots, or does online give you license to do things that you would not do in real life), their lives must be a sour Hell.

  84. You do read what you write, don’t you? You’re no saint.

    You’re delusional and equality has nothing to do with your feminism.

    You’re “equality” has destroyed the education system for boys and dumbed it down for girls, just to name one of the pernicious aspects of your mindless quest for equality that you have had all along.

    You’re full of it Theo, but why should you care about a boy’s future in America, after all you’re a feminist and do not plan on having a family that would include a son.

    As far as my family is concerned, they’re doing quit well, and I want to keep it that way and make sure none of them are relegated to being less equal than self centered, unsatisfiable, non-mainstream broads like you.

    Equality = feminist is like; Gay = homosexual; like pro choice = infanticide.

    I hate leftists and I hate feminists because they’re joined at the hip.

  85. bloggernista says:

    @ Madmouser, I am far from sour towards men. I have a great deal of love towards. I just don’t believe that having male genitalia makes one all that.

    @ Greetingsmyson, I never switched teams cause I was never on the other team. I gay because as the ’80s pop song by the Waitresses says “I know what boys want. I know what boys like.”

  86. Greetings,

    Absent SPECIFIC actions I have performed and SPECIFIC policies that I endorse, please do not blame me for anything… male immaturity included.

    I’m sane, smart, and rational. Not my fault that you can’t hold up your end of a debate.

  87. PS – not my fault that you hate equality. Lack thereof, m’dear, is sexism.

  88. How appropriate your writing so close to May day Theo,

    “PS – not my fault that you hate equality. Lack thereof, m’dear, is sexism.”

    A leftist con a feminists con; to peas in a pod.

    Bloggernista wrote,

    “I know what boys want. I know what boys like.”

    Good Lord, please keep it to yourself.

    Although, you could try and help Theo out, she’s having problems finding dates.

    You never know it could lead to a show on Bravo — “Queer eye for a straight feminist.”

    Hahahaha! — sometimes I tickle myself.

  89. m’dear???????????

    Now that scares me!

  90. Addictions says:

    Addictions

    Addictions

  91. home online typing jobs

    free typing jobs at home

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: