#metoo

[Jimmy Todd]

Interesting excerpt from Orwell l's brilliant book. How true is it and, if so, why?
A feminist activist once quipped that "if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." Once response to that was, "if men could get pregnant most women would be rapidly anti-abortion"
How true is either statement?

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Interesting excerpt from Orwell l's brilliant book. How true is it and, if so, why?
A feminist activist once quipped that "if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." Once response to that was, "if men could get pregnant most women would be rapidly anti-abortion"
How true is either statement?

The second one's true. The first one is feminist projection, as we can now see that it's the women who are turning abortion into a sacrament.

Regardless of socialization, women and men are wired differently. When men attain more money, he tends to think in terms of building a family with children; when women attain more money, she tends to think in terms of not having to have children.

Women tend to extract; men tend to provide. Or, in the parlance of the present, "Men are in love; women are in business." (Which is probably why lesbians have the highest level of domestic violence and divorce, gay men have the lowest, and straight couples are in between).

The religious texts warn about the dark side of women, but that is dismissed by feminists as being the bias of patriarchal documents (although those same texts discuss the dark side of men all the time, and also instruct men to be respectful of their wives -- which, presumably the feminists are fine with).

These are generalizations, of course. Not all men are loving, and not all women are lesbian witches... I think.

Anyway, the jurors are now doing TV interviews besmirching the character of the lone hold-out male juror who voted to convict Clancy. And the quasi-liberal corporate media, run by feminists, is hovering on every word, taking this character-assassination quite seriously. Seeming to ask no questions about these sniveling jurors' objectivity, or their continued bullying of the lone juror. (They're not really talking much about Clancy, nor the kids, but how "arrogant" and "disgusting" the lone juror supposedly was).

So the blue-haired pink shirts may be in the minority, but the rest of the witches, lesbian or not, are taking their lead and running with it.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Women tend to extract; men tend to provide. Or, in the parlance of the present, "Men are in love; women are in business."

Funny you mention this. The BBC's site has long had a disproportionately high number articles highlighting the importance of women's health and wellbeing compared with those of men. Increasingly, I'm also noticing regular features flagging the virtue of women asking their male partners to provide more.

I asked my husband to pay into my pension when we had a child - here's why

Molly and Taylor Haylett explain the changes to how they managed their finances when they started a family.

www.bbc.co.uk

Taylor, 33, admits it was not something he knew about but was on board with Molly's suggestion.

Why more women carry the 'mental load' - and how couples can share it

Planning, organising and remembering household tasks often fall disproportionately to mothers - here are some tips to help.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sophia says she tried multiple times to explain the concept of the mental load to her husband - but feels he didn't understand and dismissed her concerns

He would ask what he could do to help, but... that still puts the burden on the other person to do the thinking.

Sam Berry says while some men do not care, a big group - his audience online - "actually are really good husbands, are really good dads, they are trying their best and want to do the best they can, but almost haven't seen it or don't have the language".

The second article suggests by its tone that even when well-meaning men want or attempt to help, they're ultimately just too clumsy and male to understand or get it right. It's a no-win situation.

Something the article doesn't even consider - perhaps tellingly - is that the man's "mental load" isn't non-existent... it's just invisible.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Funny you mention this. The BBC's site has long had a disproportionately high number articles highlighting the importance of women's health and wellbeing compared with those of men. Increasingly, I'm also noticing regular features flagging the virtue of women asking their male partners to provide more.

I asked my husband to pay into my pension when we had a child - here's why

Molly and Taylor Haylett explain the changes to how they managed their finances when they started a family.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why more women carry the 'mental load' - and how couples can share it

Planning, organising and remembering household tasks often fall disproportionately to mothers - here are some tips to help.

www.bbc.co.uk

The second article suggests by its tone that even when well-meaning men want or attempt to help, they're ultimately just too clumsy and male to understand or get it right. It's a no-win situation.

Something the article doesn't even consider - perhaps tellingly - is that the man's "mental load" isn't non-existent... it's just invisible.

Oh, yeah. Always. The ability to skew a news story in her favor -- and to make him look "insensitive" or hapless -- is astounding. It's done reflexively. No matter the story, the media, the press will spin it to play up her suffering and saintliness, with his boorishness simply presumed.

It's just too easy. And it's applied approaching 100 percent of the time. Rarely is any variation permitted unless there's an agendum to do otherwise ... which is why somebody should have started an ugly rumor that Lindsay Clancy was, or was becoming, "MAGA" to sully the jury support for her, especially in blue-leaning Massachusetts. (It certainly changed on-the-street interviewers where the adamant pro-Lindsay female fans suddenly flipped against her when told Lindsay was -- allegedly -- pro-Trump, and therefore wanted her convicted).

But the old trope in TV commercials and sitcoms is Idiot Dad saved by Power Mom -- again, approaching 100 percent of the time. Not only because feminists run the media, but because 85 percent of the consumer dollars are spent by women (and she's not just buying groceries or diapers). So the advertisers feel they have to fawn over the women and smirk at (if not defile entirely) the guys, and do so eternally And that involves tons and tons of Projection, 24/7.

Her Appetite is enormous and insatiable. Especially with all that oppression.

 

[Frank Underwood]

These are generalizations, of course. Not all men are loving, and not all women are lesbian witches... I think.

It's fascinating because society pushes the opposite generalization (that men are demons and women are saints.) I always pushed back on that because I knew it was a gross overstatement, but even I was stunned by the number of women who rallied around Lindsay Clancy. She's practically a deity to these nutjobs. If they feel this much of a kinship to her, it makes you wonder what they're capable of. I even saw a woman try to make Lindsay seem like the victim. She said, "the reason we support her is because she's not just a man who annihilated her family because she wanted out of a marriage. She was a woman who was failed by systemic patriarchy." It's funny how feminists bashed good men for supposedly not doing enough to hold bad men accountable, yet we don't hold rallies for rapists and serial killers, nor do we blame women for the actions of bad men. The real victims here are the children, and it's ridiculous that Lindsay's husband and the lone male juror have been vilified. Lindsay and her merry band of nutjobs deserve to rot.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Feminism and old school Patriarchy have been hand-in-hand on the downlow from Day One. Feminism isn't a rebellion against The Patriarchy, it's a manifestation of The Patriarchy.

Look closely, and you'll see their goals are identical.

 

[Seaviewer]

People talk about "straight, white male privilege," but if the genders were swapped, nobody would be expected to "get off the fact" that children were brutally murdered.

Murder is a legal term. Nobody disputes the fact that she killed the children. As harsh as it may seem that is not the issue. I don't pretend to know the truth of her defense but as I said before, the issue is one of mental competence. Eleven out of twelve jurors were not convinced.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Eleven out of twelve jurors were not convinced.

And we're discussing why.

The psychiatric experts who interviewed her after the murders stated emphatically that she was not in psychosis. And even if she were, it would make no difference -- many men who have killed their families were diagnosed as psychotic, yet were convicted quickly and even fried.

What's the difference? She's a woman.

In the 19th century, there was a move to attempt to decriminalize infanticide because 90+ percent were committed by mothers, and all-male juries refused to convict a woman. So it was considered a waste of tax payer money... The Clancy case shows that female jurors are not any harder on a female defendant.

 

[Seaviewer]

And we're discussing why.

And I'm giving my opinion.

The psychiatric experts who interviewed her after the murders stated emphatically that she was not in psychosis. And even if she were, it would make no difference -- many men who have killed their families were diagnosed as psychotic, yet were convicted quickly and even fried.

Comparisons with other cases are interesting but not relevant.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

And I'm giving my opinion.

Comparisons with other cases are interesting but not relevant.

Please familiarize yourself with the case.

If you kill your kids, just see how long your mental competence keeps you out of the gas chamber.

That said, 10,000 IUs/day of Vitamin D-3 can help.