Me and one other reader of Glenn’s site were posting threads. The topics ranged very far afield of child custody/support. I centered most of my comments around the heaping mounds of stinking hypocrisy feminist theorists leave everywhere, from women in combat and many other things. Because nothing proves your full of sh*t when you say one thing and do something completely different.

In my last allowed post I mentioned the close ties that family courts (and media, and every other government/corporate entiry) have with feminists and how feminists usually get any law they cheer passed.

One of the responses (to my post) was (I picture her screeching): If feminists ran things, all the magazines would (forcibly I imagine) have feminist friendly articles, pharmacies would have to provide contraceptive pills, and yada yada yada.

I noticed that her description of a grand vision of a eutopian heaven was sounding a whole hell of a lot like a TOTALITARIAN STATE!

It became obvious to me why I was banned. Ampersand didn’t want me posting anything to the effect that these bitches are little dictators who (if given the power) will REMOVE FREE CHOICE of people to live their lives how they see fit. Can’t have the less hystrionic ‘converts’ start questioning what kind of storm-trooper empire they had joined with.

These bitches are scary people. And the government (and other entities) just keep shoveling these insane rabid quacks more and more power.

It’s no wonder they have such a hysterical lop-sided view of the duke rape case. They are used to women ending up as the “winner” of every rape/sexual harrassment/dv case (or for women to “get off” for murdering their husbands on spurious now-undisputed-due-to-death claims of abuse). The one time a cheating lying bitch doesn’t win her case they aim to raise such a sh*t-storm everyone will be afraid to let it happen again.

I think this is also why they hate Dubyah. Dubyah has stolen hugely from the liberal/feminist playbook:
Do whatever the hell you want in the face of overwhelming criticism/dissent: CHECK.
Invent names to discredit your critics with name-calling: CHECK. (liberal name-calling: Racist/mysigonist/bigot. Dubyah name-calling: unpatriotic, cut-and-runners).
Lastly, reward (and entrench) your supporters: CHECK.

Dubyah gave huge goverment subsidies to Evangelicals. Feminists acquire huge grant dollars for ’scholars’ who ‘prove’ high rates of DV, and high rates of rape et cetera. These feminists and liberals just don’t like what they see in the mirror.

By dehumaninizing men, it means that they can avoid introspection and project their own selfloathing onto men.

If they only look for the negative and look at the negative, that is all they will see!

Was it Hoff Sommers or Patai? Who wrote that the students of the gendered war studies learnt how to stoke their anger.

Typically emotive statements would be made, as well as fear mongering and exaggerations. The exact same techniques that has been used by warriors to build up the battle lust, just before a battle.

Thier power is above the law, as they have shown they can lynche any male at any time…

“The message is clear: You can terrorize some woman all you want, call her a nigger and threaten to shove a broomstick up her and knock her around and probably rape her, and…win…Any questions about why every single athletic team in this country now has carte blanche to rape and torture any woman they get their nasty goddamn hands on? Fuck off. Go away. Do not post here. If you do, your comment will be deleted.”

Methinks this “dignified” woman is an insult to the color violet. An insult to anyone else who bears the name Violet. An insult to even the most ardent feminist by her LIBERAL use of vulgar & foul-mouth language! It is my observation that she only appeals to the lowest of lows. After politely posting a rebuttal to the ten incidents she listed on her website claiming that men commonly murder their wives and get away with it, by detailing incidents of women who had also murdered their husbands on the exact same days she listed in her blog (Mary Winkler aside), the post was deleted! Another person civilly posted a rebuttal to her position on the Winkler case and that post was deleted as well. As a black man, I find it very amusing to be included with “white ‘rights’ activists, neo-Nazis, skinheads, Ku Klux Klan members, etc.”

I think these ladies (if that is the correct word) are very much like the KKK or white supremists they accuse MRA’s of.

In other words they, themselves much more resemble the KKK or white supremites groups than MRA’s.

That is they are like a bomb just looking for a place or an excuse to go off.