Women Should Stand Up to Feminists, Not Turn Their Backs on ManKind

 

I’ve just read the Kathy Gyngell article “Men should stand up to feminists, not turn their backs on womankind”

Link Here

I also read all the comments, most of which were less than supportive of Ms. Gyngell’s….eeeemmm, request, instruction, plea…whatever it is.

I had two initial problems before I even started to read this article – the first two words for example “Men Should……..”

Seriously?

That’s how you think entitling an article directed at men by a woman ought to be phrased!

Men Should…….”

You may take it as read that my eyes are drifting heavenwards – for decades, nay, for centuries women have been telling men that they “should………[insert whiney female demand here]” do/not do, in increasingly strident, irrational and hysterical tones.

My second problem is with this “…..not turn their backs on womankind” what the ever loving fuck is “womankind”?

Is it some kind of secret organisation that all female children are inducted into at the moment of their birth?

Well, I’m female, and I feel absolutely no allegiance or weird cosmic psychic connection to random women I don’t know, don’t want to know and if I did know them – would probably not piss on them if they were on fire.

Guess I’m out of the “womankind” club now!

Anyhoo – Ms Gyngell is another of a growing number of this mysterious “womankind” who are beginning to realise there is a problem – a huge problem looming – epic – massive – what they are becoming aware of is the fallout – the disturbance in the sure and certain foundation of their superiority in the world, their unassailable smug cosmic importance.

In actuality, what they are experiencing are the symptoms – and failing to recognise the source – they are vaguely aware it has something to do with men, and are incorrectly assuming that men are the problem – ergo we have articles like Gyngell’s pleading with men to fix this problem. For women.

Oh dear, oh dear Kathy – men are not the problem – WOMEN are the problem.

All men are doing is………….walking away……washing their hands of women…..refusing to be your whipping boys, your failsafe, your soft landing, your shield, your invisible and unappreciated lackeys.

What you are feeling is the cold wind of being left to fend for yourselves – just like you all claimed you could do. Wanted. Demanded.

Reality bites – doesn’t it?

You know what you should have called your article?

Women should stand up to feminists, not turn their backs on mankind

And you should have directed it at WOMEN!

The first bloody thing you should have said to “womankind” was LISTEN to men, the second – shut the fuck up for once in your life and LISTEN to what men are saying.

Am sure Kathy Gyngell probably thinks she’s being oh so compassionate, and concerned and sincere – but – it’s too little, too late – and anyway – you’re using a tired worn out, frayed at the edges template not fit for anything but the rubbish heap.

The old, men protect, provide and sacrifice for women, and women do………………….absolutely sod all in return – gynocentric model. Talking about Peter Lloyd she says this:

“He is right to argue that there has never been a worse time to be a man. Many of the statistics of anti-male bias in modern British society are ones we have rehearsed here on TCW too.   He is also right to describe the routine rubbishing of men as feminist fascism and stiletto sexism and men as the new second class citizens.

I call this deeply hypocritical behaviour, feminist chauvinism or misandry. Woe betide any man who similarly denigrated womanhood.

Reading through his account of the contemporary vilification of men – the extent to which the dice are loaded against men in work and health, you cannot be surprised that men are going off women.”

She calls the demonization of men and maleness, the vilification and deliberate prejudice and bigotry against men “routine rubbishing of men”!

As if a systematic campaign to strip men of their Human Rights, a toxic malign propaganda campaign that has painted men as the source of all evil in the world is a just a minor spat, a few harsh words here and there.

This is the bit that made me smile – grimly – “Woe betide any man who similarly denigrated womanhood.”

She’s actually right – up to a point – except it would be lunatic feminists and gynocentrists shrieking like banshees – granted at this point in time the hysterics are just boring and tedious and oh so predictable – so – let me be the one who “denigrated womanhood

If you are a feminist or a “I’m not a feminist but…..” or a special little princess or goddess then listen up petal.

You are a pain in the arse, a selfish self-absorbed twat with the charisma of roadkill and the personality of a turnip – you’re not “bubbly” you’re mentally unstable, you’re not “curvy” you’re a fat-arsed trollop, you’re not “educated” you’re an indoctrinated clone with the intellectual capacity of a mushroom.

You’re not a victim of anything, you’re a whiney tantrum throwing narcissist, you’re not an independant empowered “sex in the city” wannabe – you’re a slut.

I think that about covers it 🙂

“…..….you cannot be surprised that men are going off women

No shit Sherlock!

Ok – I am perfectly aware that I have described the extremes of toxic female behaviour and that there are women who can and do behave like decent human beings – but – I also know that somewhere in the back of your minds you really do believe that you are “special” because you are female – you’re not – you do also believe that men are inherently created to be in service or of service to women – they’re not – human beings, ALL human beings are of equal value and worth – and no – NOT “equal” as in the same – but vested with the same rights as every other human being – and should be subject to the same sanctions if they violate the rights of another human being, ANY human being. No exceptions.

“But what all women need to face up to are the two types of ‘modern men’ that feminism has so cruelly manufactured for them: The Oh so correct honorary Nick Clegg-type feminists (Miliband and Cameron also fit this mould) who promote and toe the feminist party line – men who I suspect don’t really turn women on at all. Second are the refuseniks who have gradually turned into a worrying class of embittered, angry misogynists – leading the sexodus. These men will not even give women the chance to see if they find them attractive”

(emphasis added)

Jeez Kathy – you really need to get out more – seriously – the first thing to note of course is that men apparently exist only to be of use to women – “for them

The second thing of course is these “two types” of men and only two types that apparently Kathy Gyngell asserts exist!

I will concede the Nick Clegg/Milliband/Cameron type – though these are actually what could be more accurately called either “white knights” or manginas – poor emasculated saps who believe arse kissing and grovelling before hatchet faced feminists is a valid exercise!

As for the second “type” she describes – you know, I’ve never actually met an honest to God, dyed in the wool misogynist – never – have met and talked to lots of angry men, disillusioned men, hurt men, sad men, even some who were caustically funny. About women.

Methinks Mizz Gyngell is trying (really badly) to infer that any man who rejects “womankind” or the gynocentric worldview (most MHRA’s and all MGTOW) are………………..what did she call them? Oh yeah “……embittered, angry misogynists

Pretty pathetic attempt Kathy – all faux concern on the one hand, and dismissive contemptuous caricaturing on the other.

The last bit is the best bit “These men will not even give women the chance to see if they find them attractive.”

Can you see that? The bleedin nerve of these men – refusing to be assessed, to be evaluated, to be given the once over by all the sad lonely wimmenz pining away for a man!

I’m shocked!

Imagine that – men thumbing their noses at women – men declining to subject themselves to the scrutiny of women “to see if they find them attractive.”

I got to that bit, and I began to think – is she taking the piss? Is this a parody? Is this satire?

Can I suggest that women read the comments – from men – put your vag rage on hold – lose the entitled princess attitude and really pay attention to what these men are saying.

I’ll be honest – I generally can’t stand most women – especially in groups – and I am not a person with much by way of patience or…..tact……..or diplomacy……………..the thing is, most women can’t stand other women either – and you all bloody well know it – because if you were honest with yourselves you’d realise and acknowledge that you see yourself in the bitchy catty backstabbing antics of your “friends”

What you all should also realise is this – men ain’t stupid – they see it as well – what is happening now is they’re not interested in pandering to your bullshit anymore, tippytoing around your tantrums, your irrationality, your moods, not interested in giving in to your incessant demands and unreasonable behaviours.

It’s not cute, it’s not sexy, it’s not alluring – you have become toxic little timebombs waiting to go off – to be blunt.

You are so NOT worth it!

Let me give you a clue – you know when a man is eying you up with a speculative look in his eyes? He’s not “eye-raping” you, he’s not lost in admiration at your divinity and awesomeness ya dozy twat – he trying to assess how high up on the “crazy as a loon” scale you are – whether you’re mentally stable, or will you scream rape if he tries to talk to you.

Well that or he’s dumbstruck that you poured your 200lbs of lard into the equivalent of tube sock!

What Gyngell and her ilk consistently fail to understand is this – men and women are naturally drawn to one another, and not just physically, human beings over the course of millennia have evolved to value and desire a stable pair bond, in order to create the basic building block of functioning and healthy societies – FAMILIES.

There was an element of reciprocity in these relationships, men and women played to their strengths and natural inclinations, they supported one another. But above all they trusted one another, and valued each other.

Am I saying this was a perfect state of affairs? Of course not – there were imbalances, misunderstandings, discriminations – not on the scale that feminists would have you believe – and these issues were being and would’ve have been resolved – then feminism stuck its pointy nose into everybody’s business.

Then everything went to shoite.

Under the influence of feminism harnessing the innate seeds of gynocentrism within women a toxic and malign social cancer began to grow.

Gyngell and her fellow cronies – whatever their particular stance, do not get – women – the vast majority of them have corrupted their natures, have embraced a toxic and self-destructive paradigm – are, with very few exceptions, repulsive to a huge of men.

Shall I repeat that? REPULSIVE. Throw in offensive, unattractive (as human beings) distasteful, noxious, abhorrent and vile.

Most men are far too polite and diplomatic (and in some cases scared shitless) to say that to the numerous women they encounter who behave in the normal rancid, belligerent, obnoxious ways a huge number of women display.

But I’m not.

Ladies (and I use that term very loosely) YOU poisoned the well, YOU and only you are responsible for the growing numbers of men who to be blunt – wouldn’t touch most of you with a ten foot bargepole.

Just in case any of you think that all you have to do is slap on a fake simper and play the adoring girlfriend till you hook your man – think again. Too late.

Support the MHRM and SPEAK OUT  till every corrupt and biased piece of legislation is repealed, till every feminist is rooted out of public policy areas, out of schools, out of NGO’s – till no-one, and I mean NO-ONE will give any feminist the time of day.

Start with yourself – stand in front of a mirror and tell yourself, over and over again till you get it “I’m NOT all that” “I have no more or less worth than any other human being”

Finally men are starting to wake up and realise they have a choice – they don’t have to put up with your shoite – so they are CHOOSING not to.

 

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn cue a massive fit of the screamies…in…..1……2…….3….

 

Slainte 🙂

There Is No Spoon………….

 

Fans of the Matrix films starring Keanu Reeves (Neo), Laurence Fishburne (Morpheus) and Carrie Anne Moss (Trinity) will understand the title of this essay, as will many M(H)RA’s

The Matrix (1999) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/

On Neo’s first visit to The Oracle he observes some children performing amazing “tricks” one of these children, a young boy is bending a spoon with what appears to be his mind.

Neo is intrigued and wants to know – how?

The young boys answer is “to not to try to bend the spoon but to realise that – there is no spoon”. I’m paraphrasing slightly.

This essay is about perception and reality, about viewing something, anything, through the prism of your subjective experience of it, and the factual reality of it – whatever “it” happens to be.

It is about applying energy, resources and time, not only trying to forcing the spoon to bend, but wishing that spoon into objective reality, rather than realising that…………”there is no spoon”

In other words, this young boy is exerting force – an invisible powerful force to alter something, to bend something into a shape that is not its natural shape. The trick is, he is doing this to something that doesn’t actually exist – there is no spoon – just the illusion of a spoon.

Feminism is like that force, and the spoon represents the object, the thing that this force is wishing into existence, that thing or object being the sum of all evil, the fount of all badness – the big bad patriarchy.

Just like in the film, the only object that actually exists is the boy – the thing he has created is the illusion of a spoon – the trick is not that he can bend this imaginary spoon – the trick, if you will, it is that he can make you believe in that spoons existence.

So. Feminism is – the ability to make you see something that is not there – and to manipulate and bend that thing into any shape.

I can tell you that factually, objectively that in 2004, 6 female persons were unlawfully killed in the Republic of Ireland – those 6 female persons represent a miniscule percentage of the entire female population of The Republic of Ireland in 2004.

What feminists will tell you is the complete opposite of objective factual reality – they will expend much energy, time and effort trying to convince you that not only is objective reality wrong, but that their subjective irrational and erroneous perception of that unreality is correct.

In effect, attempt to convince you that there is a spoon where none exists, and that we need to bend that spoon – or else – calamity.

Feminism isn’t about reality, it is about perception, subjective interpretation, and altering a non existent spoon.

Naturally there are other ways to describe this – making mountains out of molehills, creating problems out of thin air, over-reacting excessively to every single “bad thing” that happens to women. All accurate descriptors of what feminism does.

The thing is – as a result of wishing that spoon into existence (creating a thing called the patriarchy) they have actually managed to create another spoon – a different spoon – that represents a chasm between men and women – a gulf, a poisonous barrier, a wall of distrust, suspicion and anger – lots and lots anger.

This anger feeds and renews and perpetuates the existence of this gulf.

The spoon that feminism claimed to exist never did, but because of the insistence on the existence of that spoon emerged what we now have – a massive almost unbreachable wall between the two halves of humanity. Two halves of humanity so out of tune with one another, so distrustful of one another and so immersed in the distorted reality created by feminism that vast numbers of men and women see one another and themselves in ways that are so unreal as to be unbelievable. Yet – many many believe in these distorted perceptions and refuse to see the reality.

The problem isn’t that anything bad happens to either men or women, because to be blunt bad shit happens, all the time, to everybody – the problem IS accepting the subjective, distorted and misperception of anything bad that happens TO women, BY feminism.

Feminists are telling you that there is this massive horrible thing, this awful spoon of malignancy and evil and badness, that only the force of feminism can bend into whatever shape makes the badness go away – the reality is – feminism IS the badness.

6 females persons were unlawfully killed in The Republic of Ireland in 2004, there have never been more than 22 (approx) female persons unlawfully killed in this State – NEVER – in any year.

These are bad things – no doubt about it – but – these are bad things in isolation from the actual lived reality of the 99.9% or thereabouts of the rest of the female population of The Republic of Ireland – or ever will be the reality.

Any hysteria surrounding these deaths is a manifestation of the flawed, distorted and corrupt perception of feminists and feminism and the toxic cloud of anger, hatred, bitterness and malice that lies at the very core of that perception of subjective experience that feeds that thing called feminism. That feeds it and fuels its existence.

Everything – and I mean everything that feminists say, think, believe and claim – is a spoon – and the reality is.

There is no spoon – there never was a spoon.

Feminism maintains that all bad things are male and all good thing things are female – I personally am becoming concerned that the MHRM is coalescing around yet another erroneous perception, that all bad things are female and all good things are male.

Both perceptions are equally wrong – and that is the only place where I will concede the concept of “equality”

Bad things – are neither male nor female – there is no inherent badness in being either male or female – but – both females and males do bad things – to one another.

There are human beings who are bad – evil – vicious – malicious – corrupt – violent – nasty – cruel. Some of those human beings are female, some of them are male.

The numbers of males and the numbers of females that bad things happen to – is irrelevant. It proves nothing about men, and it proves nothing about women – either in general or in particular.

Yes – you can make certain rough generalisations about men and about women – a fairly broad spectrum of leanings, tendencies, general interests etc – but just because lots of women want to do one thing and lots of men like doing something else – again, it proves nothing about either men or women – nor should it. Nor does it imply or even state that one sex is somehow being disadvantaged by the other.

Feminism takes these broad general commonalities that either women share or men share to a greater or lesser degree and make assumptions – negatively about men and oddly enough negatively about women – and BOTH sexes somewhere along the way decided to accept these distorted assumptions – to give credence to these rather warped and completely subjective perceptions.

It is worth noting at this point – that the vast majority of feminists who peddled these distorted perceptions, these warped subjective “realities” were using their own dysfunctional experiences as the basis for what became feminism – an entire “reality” created out of the personally dysfunctional lives and experiences of a relatively small number of – nutcases.

Not only did these “pioneers” have the mothers of all twisted spoons – they managed to convince not just other women but a huge number of men as well that their personal distorted “reality” was in fact – reality.

Millions of women’s patterned and re-patterned their own experiences, their own realities on the twisted perceptions of these lunatics. Re-interpreted their own realities to fit the illusion.

Now vast numbers of women convince themselves that they are being constantly disadvantaged – even when they have chosen to do whatever it is that allegedly puts them in that disadvantaged position!

I often wonder what the hell kind of fairground mirrors do these stupid women look into to see these distorted images of themselves?

So. In effect – the loons of feminism not only created the spoon, they poured all their malice, all their bitterness, all their rage and hatred for men into that creation.

Feminism is that malice, that bitterness, that rage and hatred, polished and moulded, layered and then re-layered with “credibility” with “academic cachet” with “plausibility”

Where we are now is like the aftermath of a massive bust up between two close friends – instigated by a conniving and sly third party. Feminism is the third party – the Iago dripping poison into the ear of Othello about Desdemona.

Where we are at now is the point where the third party has been revealed – but – things were said – nasty things – things were done – really nasty things – and both sides are understandably bitter.

To all intents and purposes vast numbers of men and women “took sides” and now – well now – we need to ask ourselves – do we keep the feud going, for another generation, and another, and another – knowing the truth – or are we going to stop and realise?

There. Is. No. Spoon.

There never was a spoon – there never was a massive global patriarchal conspiracy – never.

 

Did bad things happen? Yep – did people do bad things? Yep. Some of those people were female and some were male.

Were there some really ridiculous attitudes and beliefs about men and women? Yep. Mostly out of ignorance, stupidity and misinformation.

Did women suffer from discrimination in some areas? Yep – they did – but then – so did men – different kinds and in different ways.

Feminism would have you believe that ALL women experience their realities through a uniquely female prism – and that this distorted prism can only be interpreted, explained, defined and changed through the power of feminist ideology – oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease.

I’m female – I can count on the fingers of one hand minus my thumb and little finger the number of times I’ve ever actually thought about being female. I was in the middle of giving birth at the time – and it was accompanied by some choice language.

Feminism will also tell you that only feminists can and have the authority to interpret male reality – also through the prism of feminism.

Again – pluuuuuuuuuuzeeee!

What is feminism? It is the distorted and twisted dysfunctional and irrational perceptions of some seriously disturbed hags made manifest and actual, labelled and named, and brought into being from a toxic cloud of bitterness, hatred and a thirst for revenge on the perceived wrongs done to these individual nutcases and projected outwards onto the entire male population of this planet, both past present and future.

It is an irrational response to an imaginary “threat” an illusion, a chimera, brought into being by malice and bile and vitriol.

THERE. IS. NO. SPOON.

So, if there is and never was this global patriarchal threat to the wellbeing of ALL women, everywhere – what is left?

Malice, bile and vitriol, hated and bitterness.

Here’s the thing – there is nothing bad that exclusively happens ONLY to women – or ONLY to men – both men and women get ill, have accidents, are unfortunate enough to be assaulted, robbed and/or killed.

Both men and women suffer any and all of the possible bad things that can happen to a human being.

To put it bluntly – when shit rains down – men don’t have magic umbrellas that protect them automatically – it rains on everybody – doncha know. Feminism will tell you that rain wets women more than men.

But, for me, what truly encapsulates the sheer depth and breadth of the malice and spite that fuels feminism and feminists is patting yourself on the back for creating something called

The International Day of the Girl Child.

To a certain extent, while I loathe with a passion the whole concept of International Women’s Day, we are actually talking about adult women here – if they want to have a day and talk shoite about “the achievements of women” – whatever – zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

But to deliberately and consciously exclude CHILDREN – to viciously and smugly discard and marginalise CHILDREN as not worth – having a day or being included in a day – on the sole basis that these CHILDREN are boys – to me this is the quintessential essence of what feminism is all about.

Children who have no power, no influence, no voice – children who depend on adults for their safety and well-being – and feminists happily, smugly and with utter contempt exclude the most powerless of all – because they are boy children.

If nothing will ever convince you, persuade you, or cause you to stop and question what feminism is, what its purpose is, what fuels it, what drives it, what its toxic distorted roots are – THIS should.

The reality is – there is no spoon – there was never a spoon – there was never a global patriarchal conspiracy against women – but there sure as fuck is a global matriarchal conspiracy against men and boys – how else can you explain or justify ignoring CHILDREN – because they happen to be boy children?

Does Jackie Jones Have Tourettes? Part 1

 

“Tourette syndrome (TS) is a neurological disorder characterized by repetitive, stereotyped, involuntary movements and vocalizations called tics. The disorder is named for Dr. Georges Gilles de la Tourette, the pioneering French neurologist who in 1885 first described the condition in an 86-year-old French noblewoman.” [1]

 

It goes without saying, or it should, that whenever one of the Irish Times female “columnists” writes anything about so called “women’s issues” you are in for a screed of unadulterated rubbish, a toxic, biased, prejudiced and misrepresentative picture of……………..well…everything, but especially about men.

Not only that, but it’s usually interspersed with outright lies, deliberate fraud, and selectively dodgy “facts” and in Jones’ case an inability to articulate one thought at a time or write a sentence that makes any sense. It’s the “I’ll just throw out a bunch of random and disconnected whines then…..”

And no-one is more adept at this that Jacky Jones – in fact Jones is distinguished among her fellow female columnists because not only is she an idiot, she is obviously delusional and possibly suffering from some form of Tourettes. But it is the manner in which she literally vomits out random “issues” and perceived calumnies perpetrated against wimmin that makes me ask the question – Does Jackie Jones have Tourettes?

Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones – link here.

The title of her piece says it all.

She uses three undifferentiated “issues” “Inequality” “Abuse” and “The Cost of Childcare” to protest against something that doesn’t exist – in Ireland – in the present day. It did – up till 1973, 41 years ago, and was a product of the times, but, let me repeat – that was 41 years ago. The “Marriage Bar” as it was known was introduced in 1932, and applied to married women employed by the State.

It was abandoned in 1973, so was in force for 41 years – years which included the period 1939 – 1945 – WWII. Years which also included the depression, recession, massive unemployment and massive emigration of the 1950’s and early 1960’s.

That’s the short version – the long version requires a look at Irish history – and when I say Irish history I mean our actual history – as a culture, not the pseudo history cited by feminists and usually wrapped up in some vague reference to “traditional gender roles” alluding to some equally vague period of history in some undefined place where “women were traditionally oppressed” but we’ll get to that in a moment.

With regard to Jones’ article – pppfft – it garnered four comments, two each from two male posters, succinct and spot on, in rightly dismissing the entire article as a piece of rubbish. I’ll take her article apart separately, but first I want to put a bit of historical fact on the table, and put some things into context so to speak.

Yes I know, I know, feminists are allergic to facts, they break out in rashes and have an uncontrollable urge to scream like banshees when facts rear their ugly heads – but – bummer.

Like all “women’s rights” windbags (like Jackie Jones) and/or Irish feminists they use things like the “Marriage Bar” as some kind of all encompassing justification upon which to shriek about “inequality” and other really really important “wimmins stuff” – Jones naturally enough fails to put that (the marriage bar) or anything else into historical or cultural context – particularly in relation to Ireland – which is rather unique among the nations of Europe for so many reasons.

But from her rather limited perspective, it’s a handy little device upon which to manufacture some suitably artificial outrage and beat the feminist drum with, or the “wimmins’s rights” drum or just have a whine about……………

“I’m unhappy about something, I’m a woman, therefore ALL women are unhappy about… whatever it is…..and its men’s fault. I know fuck all about anything, but as long as I throw in the words, abuse, inequality, violence, blah blah blah, then I’m right, because I’m a woman, and all men are bastards”

I think that about sums up the basic premise upon which all feminists and “women’s rights” windbags ground their “arguments” on.

Anyhoo – I have no qualms about stating that – yep – the Marriage Bar existed, on its face it was discriminatory towards married women – but – it had sod all to do with patriarchy or some patriarchal conspiracy against women – and more to do with the actual economic. social and cultural realities of the times.

Let’s start with the history – and in relation to Ireland where it all started to go wrong.

“The 1922 Free State Constitution granted women over the age of twenty one the parliamentary franchise and so gave Irish women the same rights of political citizenship as men, the right to vote. All citizens were guaranteed equal religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities, regardless of their gender.[11] Under the terms of the new Constitution the future for women in the Irish state looked bright.

The parliamentary franchise had been extended to women on equal terms with men, six years before women in Britain could claim such a victory.[12] The Constitution also guaranteed the equal rights of men and women “without distinction of sex” which, it was hoped, would prevent further discrimination against women. It is not surprising, therefore, that feminist activists were optimistic about the future of Irishwomen. Esther Roper, in a letter to Hanna Sheehy Skeffington, expressed her hopes for women in the Irish Free State.

My noteup until that point Ireland was not an independant sovereign nation and had not been for several hundred years (a discussion for another time)

She wrote that “never had there been such a firm foundation of justice and freedom guaranteed by any country of its women citizens”.[13]Within a few short years, however, the promise of equal citizenship for women in the Irish Free State had been dashed. The first government of the Irish Free State, Cumann na nGaedheal, led by William Cosgrave, introduced a number of measures during the 1920s which were to have serious repercussions on the right of women to equal citizenship. These policy decisions reflected the growing influence of Catholic teaching on Irish social legislation. As early as 1925, the influence of the Church on Irish legislators was becoming clear.” [2]

What is worth pointing out here are two things – the largest numbers of advocates and supporters of distinctly Catholic inspired social policies were and still are women.

Secondly, at that time, and even right up until the present day Ireland has never been an industrialised country. This is important to bear in mind when discussing “employment” in Ireland and in particular female employment. The industrial revolution passed us by more or less in the sense that we had, and have no major heavy industry, this had and has had a major influence on the structure of Irish society.

“Ireland has changed from being a predominantly rural country to a more urbanised one during the course of the last 50 years. The 1946 population could be characterised as mainly rural with over 60% of persons living either in the countryside or in smaller towns and villages with a population of less than 1,500 persons.

In contrast, over 58% of the population lived in urban areas in 1996, as revealed by the most recent census. In the 50-year period 1946 to 1996, Leinster’s population has grown from 1.3 million to over 1.9 million. The increase in population in the Munster area was far less pronounced (from 900,000 to just over 1 million).” [3]

But, up till 1996, 42% of the population lived in rural areas – compared to the rest of the western urbanised world that’s rather unique.

It has been said that what we excel at producing and exporting is our own people.

Let’s put that into context – Jones attempts to imply that married women or women in general are or were kept out of the workforce, though, with how she has conflated all sorts of disparate “issues” and bounced around like a jack rabbit on speed from one “issue” to another it’s like trying to nail jelly to a wall – but from her title she has used the “marriage bar” as some kind of symbol to infer that………married women are especially discriminated today just as they always have been? Or something like that.

“Society should be structured in such a way that women can easily combine children and a career. The egg-freezing stunt shows that their right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously.” [4]

Right. Is there some part of Ireland has been a predominately rural country with little industrialisation for most of its history, that people like Jones don’t get? The vast majority of people lived on small family farms, and any jobs available that were not related to farming or to the small mining industries were in the Civil Service or in State paid occupations, like teaching or nursing?

The other thing worth noting is our falling population – it reached its lowest point in 1961 – we’ll get to that later.

While not the smallest country in the world or the least densely populated there are less people in the entire country than they are in some cities – so where the ever loving fuck are all these high-powered “career women” supposed to work? Doing what? Teaching pilates to sheep?

People didn’t have “careers” they had jobs – they worked – if they could – to earn money to live on – to feed their families.

Until the 1990’s we had neither the funds or the inclination to “make up jobs”, or “create jobs” so that women could have “careers” – people were employed when there was actually something for them to do, when there was an actual need to employ someone to do…………………….whatever.

What is worth noting here is that the biggest employer of women in this State – is the State.

Ok – let’s have a look at more recent data in relation to male/female employment in Ireland, shall we?

“Occupations: There were 851,300 women and 970,000 men employed in Ireland in 2011. Nearly a quarter of women (23.7%) in employment were in professional occupations and just over a fifth (20.9%) in administrative and secretarial occupations. Nearly a quarter of men (24.7%) in employment in 2011 were in skilled trades occupations while 15% were employed in professional occupations (Table 2.7).

Economic sectors: The Education and Health sectors employed the highest proportions of women in 2010 with women accounting for more than 4 out of 5 people at work in the Health sector and nearly three quarters of those in Education.

The sectors with the highest proportions of men in 2010 were Construction, Agriculture and Transport. In primary education, 85% of teachers are women. And in second-level education, 63% of teachers are women. Despite this, women are not well represented at senior level positions: only 36% of medical and dental consultants are women, 53% of primary school managers, and 41% of second-level school managers (Tables 2.8, 4.6, 4.8 and 5.14).” – [5]

Apart from the reference to women not being well represented at senior level positions can you see what I see? The vast majority of women are employed in cushy pensionable State jobs – and the vast majority of men are employed in exactly the kinds of occupations that are vulnerable in times of economic recession.

As for the “only 36% of medical and dental consultants are women” nobody says it better than angryharry [6] – except to add that becoming a consultant requires 100% dedication and commitment and this extract– from an article in the Irish Medical Journal press release, whining about discrimination against female doctors says it all.

“They propose a possible solution “The majority of interviewees saw that more job sharing and part time work as the mechanism to retain women and some noted that flexible work practices would benefit both genders in medicine.” All of the childless and single women interviewed were satisfied with their work life balance.

The majority of mothers (17/21) were dissatisfied and felt expectations of them were unrealistic and colleagues assumed they should just make the necessary commitments. Sacrifices were made by all mothers to deliver at work and their children were considered to have suffered. Older mothers expressed bitter regrets and three had dissuaded their daughters from pursuing a career in hospital medicine.” [7]

Ah well – part-time consultants? That’s what we need to inspire patient confidence – someone in whose hands we are being asked to put our health and in some cases lives into, showing up – part-time. Being totally focused and committed on the job apparently is characterised as “expectations of them were unrealistic and colleagues assumed they should just make the necessary commitments”

As for the other percentages – need I point out that higher level managerial positions require increased responsibilities and accountability – and women especially are not noted for either being willing to assume extra responsibilities or more particularly, being accountable – for anything they do. The percentages are just fine – in fact in one instance they are 53% female primary school managers – ergo more women than men – but no-one is screaming about men being discriminated against – are they?

I wasn’t even going to bother with the “gender pay gap” rubbish except for this:

Employment: The employment rate for men in Ireland stood at about 75% over recent years, but in 2009 it plummeted to 67.3%, decreased sharply in 2010 to 64.5% and dropped again to 63.3% in 2011.

The EU target rate for women in employment is 60% by 2010, a target that was met by Ireland in 2007 and 2008, but not in 2009, 2010 or 2011, when the rate had fallen to 56%. In 2011 46.7% of those in employment were women.

Men worked an average of 39.4 hours a week in 2011 compared with 30.6 for women and married men worked longer hours than married women, with nearly half (44.5%) of married men working for 40 hours or more a week compared with only 14.7% of married women (Tables 2.1, 2.7, 2.9 and 2.10).” [8]

Sooooooooooo, men work on average 8.8 hours more per week than women.

44.4% of married men work 40 or more hours per week compared to

14.7% of married women.

And yet according to Jones’ one of the burning issues apparently is this.

“Women still do five hours of unpaid work every day compared with men’s two hours.” [9]

Maybe because they’re at bloody work, if they’re lucky enough to have a job – and if they’re really lucky, a job paid for by the State?

“The long-term unemployment rate (unemployed for one year or more) for Irish men was stable between 2001 and 2008, at about 2% or just below, but increased in 2009 to 3.6%, rose sharply in 2010 to 8.1% and increased again to 10.4% in 2011.

The long-term unemployment rate for Irish women was less than 1% between 2001 and 2008 before rising over the last three years to stand at 4.5% in 2011.” [10]

I don’t know, is it just me or do those figures look pretty shit for Irish men? What with more than twice as many men consistently unemployed as women.

Having said that, let’s just take a moment to reflect on what the core message of feminism is – that historically for millennia; “all women have been oppressed by all men”. There’s a lot of hoo hah about “traditional gender roles” spouted by present day Irish feminists without actually pointing out the historical basis for these presumably oppressive “traditions” or where they came from.

I read it all the time on feminist articles/blogs etc and it’s all grounded in a particular cultural paradigm – chivalry – dashing white knights and fair maidens – where men were lords and masters of all they surveyed and women were……………….supposed to be grateful. Lots of other tosh about women being chattels and to all intents and purposes enslaved by nasty patriarchal men.

I cannot recommend highly enough Gynocentrism and its Cultural Origins http://gynocentrism.com/ for a thorough and comprehensive analysis of not just the historical reality of women’s lives but for how feminism is merely an offshoot of cultural gynocentrism.

All very well and good you might say – but what has that got to do Ireland and in particular the legitimacy of Irish feminism – bearing in mind that Irish feminists are singing  the same “all women are and were oppressed by all men for millennia” tune?.

Everything.

Irish feminists are grounding their claims in an alleged history of oppression that didn’t exist – in Ireland – in fact has never existed anywhere – but in particular not in Ireland.

But they’re like those wind up toys – ever since the first hairy arm pitted lesbian man-hating nutjob with a face like a bulldog chewing a wasp, started screaming about oppression, one hint that women might be inconvenienced and they’re off – “oppression, oppression, discrimination, abuse, violence, wah wah wah wah” they made up this “history” – literally invented history and started screeching – only one tiny flaw in all of it though – it’s all bullshit.

You see our history, our culture, is starkly different from the European history that informed and was transplanted via colonialism to the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and any other place that can trace its history back to the one common source – England.

All that lords and ladies, chivalry, knights in shining armour stuff? All that trapped in the kitchen in the 1950’s crap. Nope – didn’t happen in Ireland – our culture was unique, distinct, and has no comparison to any other civilisation or culture in the western world. We lived under a system of laws called the Brehon law – which was egalitarian and based on the concept of equality of men and women – traced back to around the Iron Age and managed to stay as the law of the land till around the 17th century.

“The laws are significant because they shed light on the complex sophisticated society of early Ireland that the laws reflect,” she says.

“The laws reveal a culture in which modern concepts such as equity, social mobility, negligence, unbiased witnesses and fair and open process of law and women’s rights were developed.”

 Brehon Law was generally operational in Gaelic areas until the completion of the English conquest of Ireland in the early 17th century. They were first set down on parchment in the seventh century and were named after wanderings lawyers the Brehons.
By the time of Elizabeth I, the Brehon Laws were considered to be old, lewd, and unreasonable. They were banned and English common law was introduced. [11]

So, there you have it – whatever historical oppression that feminists are talking about in some vague ill-defined time and place – that time and place wasn’t Ireland.

Our history from the 17th century to the early 20th century is well known – no need to go into it here. We emerged from that in 1922 as The Irish Free State – and enacted our first Constitution 1922 [12] – the one referred to in the first extract.

It was replaced 15 years later by our current Constitution 1937 [13] Bunreacht na hEireann 1937 – and we became The Republic of Ireland in 1948.

So that’s grand – except – our society had changed – apart the ongoing misery and deprivation, we were now Holy Catholic Ireland – and again – that history is well known. Between the 17th Century and the early 20th century the Catholic Church had tightened its hold on Irish Society.

The reality of people’s lives was harsh.

“During World War II (or The Emergency as the war was called in Ireland), ordinary life was severely affected. There was widespread rationing, covering butter, margarine, bread, tea, flour, clothes, coal, firewood, gas and matches.
There was a shortage of fuel for cooking and heating. As the war wore on, private motoring ceased to exist and horse-drawn vehicles were brought back into service. The hardship continued for some years after the war. In 1949, life began to return to normal and most rationing ceased. But normal life in 1949 was very different from what it is today.

 
The risk of death from tuberculosis and other infectious diseases was high. Very few people had telephones or cars. The radio was widespread, though the television had yet to be seen. Society was, by current standards, very conservative.

Censorship was severe—George Orwell’s 1984 was banned in 1949. There was little cohabitation, and births outside marriage were rare. Women, when they married, usually ceased working outside the home. We were a still a mainly rural society: only two-fifths of the population lived in towns of over 1,500.” [14]

From the extracts above you can see that between 1926 and 1946 we are talking about a society that was mostly rural, one where marriage was not always on the cards, and where women who worked in the tiny State bureaucracy were expected to stand aside in favour of either single women, or married men.

Irish society was centred around family, and part of the reason for this marriage bar was economic – to protect male employment and ensure a family income. The notion that a married woman would continue to work if she was married to a man who was working, and be in receipt of two wages was considered selfish, in a society were jobs were hard to come by, life was harsh, and generally shit. State jobs were good jobs, pensionable jobs, highly sought after.

“Under the Fianna Fail administration, the right of women to work outside the home was once again under threat. A public service marriage bar was introduced in 1932 which prevented women teachers, and later female civil servants, working after marriage. Mary Kettle, chairman of the Joint Committee of Women’s Societies and Social Workers, was outspoken in her opposition to the marriage bar. She claimed that women in the civil service “from their entry until they reach the ages of 45 or 50 are looked on as if they are loitering with intent to commit a felony – the felony in this case being marriage”.[57]

Despite the objections raised by organisations such as the Joint Committee of Women’s Societies and Social Workers, it was not until 1972 that the public service marriage bar was finally removed. The 1936 Conditions of Employment Act was the most serious attack on the right of women citizens to work outside the home. Section 16 of the Act gave the Minister for Industry and Commerce the power to control and restrict the number of women working in any given industry. In an effort to alleviate male unemployment, the government was willing to restrict the employment opportunities of women. The Irish Women’s Workers Union[58] campaigned against the new legislation but failed to have the offending clause removed.[59]

 
Opinions regarding the employment of women were mixed within the Trade Union Movement. Women working in industry faced long hours and low rates of pay. As a result, the employment of women was thought to jeopardize not only men’s jobs but the family wage traditionally earned by men. Even Louie Bennett, President of the Irish Women Workers’ Union, had her doubts about the recruitment of women into the workforce. She suggested in 1932 that the employment of women in industry had “not raised their status as workers nor their wage standards … it is a menace to family life in so far as it has blocked the employment of men”.[60]” – [15]

What this does not make clear is that the marriage bar applied to State jobs, Civil Service jobs – not private sector jobs.

Let’s take a pause here and consider that concept – family wage – Ireland is a distinctly family orientated culture – both for men and women – people, when they did get married – got married with a view to starting families – for most of our history since independence the economy has been shaky to say the least – but – people still wanted to get married and start families.

Rightly or wrongly the marriage bar was an attempt to ensure that there was at least a fair distribution of what were relatively scarce resources – such as jobs – jobs that could provide a decent income for as many people as possible. The kinds of jobs available were limited – farming, teaching, nursing, a bit of tourism, a bit of mining, some light industry. Up until the late 1980’s early 1990’s “careers” were some ridiculous concept that had no basis in reality for the vast majority of people. You got a job, you worked to put bread on the table. End of.

 

“Fifty years ago, statisticians did not have computers at their disposal. Graphs* such as these, which appeared in The Trend of Employment and Unemployment in 1951, were drawn by hand. They portrayed the likely future experience of 1,000 males and females aged 14 in 1946, up to the age of 50, using the latest data then available on emigration, marriage, mortality and the labour force. In a sense, this was a precursor to the CSO’s subsequent population and labour force projections.

There were earlier forecasts. In 1935, R C Geary (who was to become the first Director of the CSO in 1949) predicted, in a paper entitled The Future Population of Saorstát Éireann and Some Observations on Population Statistics (in the Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland, Vol. XV, 1934-1935) that the population of Ireland was “unlikely to exceed 3,700,000 during the next 80 years”.

His prediction for the total figure held true for the following 63 years, and only in 1998 did the population increase to over 3.7 million. The graphs in the 1951 Trend illustrated how things would turn out over the next 36 years if current patterns continued. So, what story did these graphs tell? How well did the forecasts turn out?

The graphs reflected some harsh realities of the times. Mortality was higher (and life expectancy shorter) in the 1950s.

Only 90% of the imaginary cohort were expected to live beyond the age of 50, whereas today about 95% of boys and 97% of girls aged 14 can expect to reach at least their 50th birthday. Life expectancy for children born in 1996, at around 73 years for boys and almost 79 years for girls, was a considerable improvement on the 1950s. Indeed, with the continuing advances in medical science, today’s young people can look forward on average to even greater longevity.

 

As many as 30% of males and 40% of females were expected to emigrate, most before the age of 30. The men and women who remained would have very different lifetime experience of the labour force. The majority of men were expected to be gainfully occupied. However, a much lower percentage of women would remain in the labour force after their early 30s. The career options available to women were fewer and, in general, women left their jobs when they married. The label “not gainfully occupied”, which applied to those women who married and became homemakers, looks quaint today!” [16]

 

What we are talking about here is a period of some 92 years, from 1922 to the present day – the first 50 years of our Independence were dire – poverty, recession, high unemployment, massive immigration, stagnant economy, high mortality rates, a totally repressed, insular and depressing place – it was shit – and it was shit for everybody – men women and children.

 

“To gain a fuller appreciation of recent population trends, it is necessary to view them over a longer period. As the graph shows, the population of the area comprising the Republic of Ireland was over 6.5 million in 1841. The deaths caused by the famine of 1846/47 as well as the large-scale emigration that followed in its wake and which continued through the second half of the 19th century resulted in a halving of the population by 1901.

 

Further declines, albeit more modest compared with earlier periods, followed between 1901 and 1926. The population then stabilised at around 2.9 million for the next quarter of a century, before falling to a historical low point of 2.8 million in 1961. Apart from the slight decline experienced between 1986 and 1991, the direction of population change has since been firmly upward. The change in population between two periods is due to changes in the number of births and deaths as well as the difference between inward and outward migration.

The table shows each of these components of population change on an annual average basis for each of the intercensal periods since 1946. In the earlier part of the period, net outward migration exceeded the natural increase in the population (births less deaths), resulting in the population declining to its 1961 low point. The main factor causing this fall was the high emigration that occurred during the 1950s. [16]

 

Again – let me put that into context – in the year 1841 the population of Ireland was 6.5 million – 120 years later it reached its lowest point in 1961 of 2.8 million – and it’s not like we weren’t having babies – we were – for export – millions of people emigrated. Left. Vamoosed. Skedaddled.

“Births began to increase in the 1970s to reach a peak of 74,000 in 1980. During the same period migration turned from outward to inward with the result that the population grew by 465,000 in the ten-year period from 1971 to 1981. Net outward migration strengthened during the eighties and this resulted in a slight decline in overall population levels between 1986 and 1991. However, since then the fall in outward migration has given rise once more to population growth.” [17]

What’s the point of all this? Well, the population of Ireland has only risen very slowly since the high point of 1841 – when it was 6.5 million – 170 years have passed since then – and the population has still not reached that high point of 6.5 million. In 1950 the number of births were 63,565, 56 years later in 2006 it was 65,425. [18] The increase of the last 10 years can be attributed to a combination of inward migration and low immigration – but those trends are being reversed – emigration is once more a feature of Irish life and many of those who immigrated into Ireland are leaving or have left.

We are once more economically up shit creek without a paddle, we have a housing crisis, we have a health service in shambles, we have people living in poverty on the streets, we have an epidemic of male suicide, we have children on years long waiting lists for surgery and treatment, we have every bloody social ill you can name – and we have people like Jackie Jones whining like this.

“Society should be structured in such a way that women can easily combine children and a career. The egg-freezing stunt shows that their right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously.” [19]

Women’s “……right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously” yep – you read that right – not just a job – a full-time job – and not even a full-time job – a career – because you see, even though there was grumbling about the marriage bar at the time – people were much less selfish and self-absorbed then – people didn’t demand “careers” useless made up pointless occupations to make them feel important or massage their over-developed egos, most people were grateful to have a bloody job – to be able to earn enough money to feed their families – or to be able to stay in their country and not have leave.
She also has a whine about;

“Full-time childcare for two children costs about the same as a medium-sized mortgage, or about €1,200 every month. Women in Ireland will never be equal until we have affordable childcare funded by the taxpayer.” [20]

 

By taxpayers I presume she doesn’t mean the thousands of people who leave and have left this country since the foundation of this State? Just the poor sods who are left.

€1,200 every month – paid for by Irish taxpayers – that’s €14,400 per year – do you know what the rate of payment is for a single man on Jobseekers Allowance? [21]

Its €188.00 per week, that’s €9,776.00 per year, or to make the comparison €814.66 per month – that’s to live on – to buy food, clothes, pay for heat – everything – out of that, even if you are granted Rent Supplement you still have to pay €30.00 per week for rent – that takes approx €130.00 out of your monthly payment of €814.66, leaving you with a massive €684.66 per month to live on.

From approx Oct to the end of March you get an extra €20.00 per week payment called Fuel allowance – works out at about an extra €500.00 per year – bringing your yearly total up to €10,276.00 or €856.33 per month.

So, according to Jackie Jones – women are entitled – ENTITLED – to have up to €1,200.00 in childcare costs paid by the taxpayers of this State so they can have the “careers” that they are ENTITLED to.

There would of course be those with hearts of gold who might suggest condescendingly that men should just get off their arses and get a job. Ever heard a phrase called “the working poor”?

“Poverty: The proportion of men at risk of poverty in 2010, after pensions and social transfers, was 15%, just above the rate of 14% for women. At risk of poverty rates were considerably lower for those in employment, at 10% for men and 5% for women (Table 3.6).” [22]

You might find yourself wondering why is the risk of poverty twice as high for men in employment than for women? It’s odd isn’t it?

Ah, but you see, here’s something that Jackie and her fellow harpies won’t mention;

 
298,000 men in employment are separated/divorce in comparison to 473,000 women separated/divorced and you can bet your bottom dollar that a large number of those separated/divorced women are not only claiming OPFP (One Parent Family Payment – which they can do even if they have jobs, and are also demanding and receiving maintenance/child support from a large number of those 298,000 separated/divorced men.

 

Makes sense now, doesn’t it? Why a man with a job would be at twice much risk of poverty as a woman with a job – I would posit that the woman with a job at risk of poverty has no poor bastard of a man to leech off – but – having said that – I can also guarantee that the 5% of women at risk of poverty will evince all sorts of hand wringing and outrage – while the 10% of men will be…………………….ignored.

 
Over the lifetime of this State – poverty, economic instability, unemployment, and vulnerability to unemployment have almost all been borne by Irish men – the burden of providing for and being responsible for women and children has also rested on Irish men – this was a responsibility that men themselves accepted for themselves and women expected them to shoulder – not hoped that they would but EXPECTED them to.

While this little trip down memory lane has been relatively brief, what it has shown is that albeit there was some grumbling about the marriage bar – there was a reluctance to “push it” because of the dire economic circumstances that prevailed, the cultural and societal norms that existed at that time – a society of families – a predominately rural culture – with the only guaranteed jobs being State jobs – everyone else was on their own.

 
Fast forward 80 some years – and the gloves are off – once again we are up shit creek without a paddle – and Jackie Jones believes that women are ENTITLED to a payment of €1,200 per month – a sum that is €344.00 MORE than a single unemployed person – the vast majority of whom are men – is granted to live on – paid by Irish taxpayers – so that women can pursue the “careers” they “have a right to”

You know – I can actually see the point of that marriage bar – and am quite impressed that some of the women’s groups at the time could see and acknowledge the big picture – the economic and cultural realities – and yeah – the attitude to women was patronising and condescending and would probably get on my nerves as well – but – as the Report says in its title.

 

That was then, this is now.

 

References

[1] Tourette Syndrome Fact Sheet
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/tourette/detail_tourette.htm
[2] Women, Citizenship and Catholicism in the Irish Free State, 1922-1948; CAITRIONA BEAUMONT; University of Glasgow, United Kingdom pp – 535
http://www.academia.edu/964139/Women_Citizenship_and_Catholicism_in_the_Irish_Free_State_1922-1948
[3] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999 – Changing Population Structure; Aidan Punch, Catherine Finneran pp 14 – 15
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/thatwasthenthisisnow.pdf
[4] Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones – http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/second-opinion-inequality-abuse-and-the-cost-of-childcare-preserve-the-marriage-bar-1.1989270?page=1
[5] From: Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 11
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/2011/Women%20and%20Men%20in%20Ireland%202011.pdf
[6] angryharry http://www.angryharry.com/Women-Doctors-Causing-Problems.htm?note
[7] Irish Medical Journal Press Release
http://www.imo.ie/news-media/news-press-releases/2013/women-underrepresented-at/
[8] From: Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 10
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/2011/Women%20and%20Men%20in%20Ireland%202011.pdf
[9] Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones – http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/second-opinion-inequality-abuse-and-the-cost-of-childcare-preserve-the-marriage-bar-1.1989270?page=1
[10] Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 24
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/2011/Women%20and%20Men%20in%20Ireland%202011.pdf
[11] http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/niallodowd/the-brehon-laws-the-lost-laws-of-ireland-show-complex-sophisticated-society-215429421-238244221.html
[12] Constitution of the Irish Free State 1922 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1922/en/act/pub/0001/print.html
[13] Constitution of the Republic of Ireland https://www.constitution.ie/Documents/Bhunreacht_na_hEireann_web.pdf
[14] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999; Introduction – pp – 5 http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/thatwasthenthisisnow.pdf
[15] Women, Citizenship and Catholicism in the Irish Free State, 1922-1948; CAITRIONA BEAUMONT; University of Glasgow, United Kingdom pp – 573
http://www.academia.edu/964139/Women_Citizenship_and_Catholicism_in_the_Irish_Free_State_1922-1948
[16] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999;
Changing Population Structure; Aidan Punch, Catherine Finneran pp – 13
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/

documents/otherreleases/thatwasthenthisisnow.pdf
[17] ibid
[18] http://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=cna13
[19] http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/second-opinion-inequality-abuse-and-the-cost-of-childcare-preserve-the-marriage-bar-1.1989270?page=1
[20] ibid
[21] JSA – Rates of Payment http://www.welfare.ie/en/pages/employment-supports.aspx
[22] Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 11
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/2011/Women%20and%20Men%20in%20Ireland%202011.pdf

Call to Arms: Honey Badgers and Non Feminist Females….Step UP!

 

Not literally “to arms” but to touch base, connect and collaborate with one another, in order to oppose our common “enemy” in fact the common enemy of all decent, right-minded human beings who are sick to death of the lies, the bullying, the vicious hate campaigns of feminists and their enablers, against anyone who dares to challenge them, criticise them or my favourite – take the piss out of them – and you all know that there is a veritable goldmine of material to work with there.

First – let me just explain what inspired this. Two things.

First there is a blog called femalefedupwithfeminism.wordpress.com   that I follow – and this blogger just posted an article entitled “Some thoughts on feminists shutting down those who dare to disagree”

Take your time and have a read – take in the full impact of the content of this blog post – in particular how feminists like that wretch Caroline Criado – Perez like to roll – or as I prefer to characterise what they do – slime their way across the internet and social media.

I understand and fully appreciate why this blogger is scared – and she’s right to be – these are nasty people – nasty, corrupt, vicious and completely without conscience people.

Direct message to Caroline Criado – Perez.

First – you don’t scare me – you are nothing but a bully.  A nasty, underhanded, and dishonourable bully of the first order. Bite me.

In my opinion.

See those highlighted words – in my opinion – I stand by every single one – I claim the Right – to hold and express MY opinions of YOU. I will not retract, remove or modify one single letter, one word.

Feminists like Perez, like those of her ilk – Stephanie Guthrie, Jessica Valenti and the rancid covens of them over at jezebel and feministing, all rely on bullying tactics, on hysterics, on lies and on manufactured “threats” to coerce others to do their bidding.

In effect, they throw tantrums, they hurl themselves to the floor like spoilt obnoxious brats and scream and scream till they are sick – they kick and they work themselves up into paroxysms of rage.

Infantile, hysterical, ridiculous rage – well, do you know what sensible, mature grownups do when confronted with a tantrum throwing brat?

They ignore them, they walk away, they give them and their hysterical petulant demands absolutely no attention – AT ALL.

Then there is this.

Bullies are never satisfied, are they? For an example that perfectly illustrates the sheer nastiness of feminists, just take a look at this wretch – calling herself Miss Anne Dree, who started contributing to a twitter “thing” entitled #killmostmen – yep a true humanitarian. Apparently in honour of International Wretches Day – nope – NOT a typo.

Mike Buchanan of J4MB has helpfully supplied information on who this nasty bitch is associated with:

“I recommend you click on #killmostmen to see who Miss Anne Dree is associating with and supporting. This is what feminists look like. I imagine they’ll be interested in our public challenges of prominent feminists (and their male collaborators). They include Julie Bindel, Kat Banyard, Caroline Criado-Perez, Vince Cable MP…”

(emphasis added)

As long as people are prepared to give in to them, to be intimidated by them, to just give them what they demand, they will keep demanding more and more.

The originator of this, goes by the name Bet Lunch – and in the insane world that feminists inhabit gives us her “reason” why this is a “good thing”

“Bet Lunch@ArchedEyebrowBRNov 7

I’ve just coined a hashtag that I think will please everyone: #killmostmen “

“Please everyone”??? – Like sociopaths, psychopaths, nutjobs and feminists you mean, NOT decent human beings.

You know who this vile creature is talking about?  Your sons, your fathers, your brothers, your nephews, your uncles – in fact every single male person you know  or are related to and LOVE, care about – and would be devastated if this piece of barely human effluent had her way.

As long as WOMEN – think this is “funny” or “acceptable” or “not worth bothering about” – it will continue – they will preen, they will smugly and viciously claim to speak on behalf of ALL women – on behalf of YOU!

They are nasty, vicious, obnoxious and venal creatures, with no conscience’s, no integrity, no moral or ethical code – look at them – read the garbage they write – look at the underhanded and vile campaigns they launch against people who criticise them, who disagree with them. The lies, the falsehoods, the smears and innuendoes – the manufactured drama’s they create.

Are these not the most ridiculous creatures you have ever seen?

Do you think or believe for one minute that these vile creatures give one single solitary shit or rats arse about YOU – you as an individual, you as an individual woman?  As a human being? Don’t make me laugh – all this bullshit, all this vicious and hysterical tantrum throwing is for one purpose, and one purpose only – to line their own pockets – to keep them in the “positions of power” they believe they have.

The power to throw the wool over your eyes – to make you believe lies – to feed you a diet of bullshit, cant, drivel, and the spewing of their own dysfunctional and twisted perspectives.

But perhaps the greatest crime of all is to convince you that you are nothing but a perpetual victim, that you cannot do anything on your own, that, you are pathetic, weak-willed, spineless and useless!

Why else would they be constantly beating on the drum for more “special” allowances to be made for women, for “supports”, for standards in almost every area of endeavour to be lowered so that YOU can “do the same job as a man”

What these feminists are telling YOU is this.

You cannot do anything on your own – you’re weak, pathetic and useless. The only way to get anything you want is to whine for it, to throw a tantrum and coerce people into giving it to you – to shut you up – to lie and cheat and behave in the most underhanded way imaginable in order to obtain something under false pretences.

THAT is the message of feminism to WOMEN.

Now, I know that most women have a strong desire for men to “like them” to “appreciate them” most women want to “have a man in their lives” you know it and I know it – so let’s not kid ourselves.

Ladies, WAKE UP – open your eyes, open your ears and LISTEN – listen and read what men are saying about you – listen and hear the contempt, the derision and scorn that more and more men are beginning to hold YOU in.  Yes – YOU, and you, and you, and you.

Oh sure, and forgive the crudeness – they’ll fuck you – in a heartbeat – because basically you’ve been putting it out there for nigh on 50 years.

But, they DON’T like you, they DON’T think you are a goddess, they DON’T think that you are a vision of loveliness and perfection – you’re just a quick screw.

And YOU all heard these messages from feminists – and fell for this bullshit – hook, line and sinker – don’t believe me? Then go look at what MHRA’s write and say about you – what they think of you – what MEN think of you.

Feminists scream and rant about “misogyny” they have hysterics about men who hate women – has it never occurred to you – YOU don’t get to choose what other people think of you – YOU don’t get to demand that MEN love you, or adore you, or “respect” you, simply because you happen to born female.

You have to earn these things, YOU have to be worthy of these things, YOU have to be “Worth it” and to be blunt.

You’re NOT!

But, you could be.

So, I issue an invitation to all women who genuinely want to be Human Beings – first and foremost – who believe that ALL Human Beings have worth, that what you have between your legs is secondary to what you have in your heart, in your conscience, in your minds – that being a Human Being transcends ALL other considerations – to say hello, to get in touch – to connect.

I know you’re out there – I know that you are as fed up with feminism as both the blogger at femalefedupwithfeminism.wordpress.com and myself, and so many more women are.

Lass – I salute you – well done.

I want to hear your voices – I will do a follow up post with your messages (with your permission of course – so if you do get in touch – make that clear otherwise I’ll just assume I have your permission)

Just so it’s clear – any feminists who “get in touch” and spew out their usual bile and drivel – I WILL put your “messages” up there as well – after all – fair is fair 🙂

And yep – I know you pop in here from time to time – duh!

So, you already know I’m not as nice as the lassie over at femalefedupwithfeminism.wordpress.com, probably to do with my zero tolerance of bullshit, drivel, and feminist whining – I loathe feminism – and have never met a feminist I would piss on if she was on fire. Consider that your one and only warning, if you decide to crawl out from under your rocks.

 

 

Say hello at: anjaeriud@hotmail.com   🙂

 

© Anja Eriud 2014

 

NB – A Honeybadger is a non or anti feminist female. Google it, or pop over to J4MB  – Justice for Men and Boys (and the women who love them) where you will find a video that will literally make you pee your knickers laughing. Use this link:

  http://j4mb.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/honey-badgers-the-video-2/

Without knowing it – you might just BE a Honeybadger.

Schools Out – Forever!

 

Whenever I need a bit of a lift – I turn to music – and nope – not some wishy washy ballady type music written for women to assure themselves that the greatest love of all is to love yourself! No doubt while chanting “I loooooooooooove me, what’s your hobby?”

Please! Get a grip.

Nope, what gets my blood moving again, what gets me up and dancing around the kitchen in my wellies (yes wellies) is Thin Lizzy – The Boys are Back in Town, and Alice Coopers – Schools Out.

Today and yesterday was no different – except in one way – it hit me, this morning – ladies, Schools Out – not just for the summer – but forever because The Boys ARE back in town.

Don’t believe me – hmmmm – you should maybe take a trip to Detroit this summer on June 27th and 28th, when the first International Men’s Rights Conference, of this century, is due to take place hosted by A Voice for Men.

The theme of this conference is simple, it is clear, and it is unequivocal, and it is the message of the Men’s Human Rights Movement (MHRM)

MENS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS.

The line up of speakers will address issues that impact on the lives, the worth, the value of men and boys – and they will speak the truth.

I can’t recall which one of you said those asinine words “the personal is political” but, I will give you all fair warning – YOU made it personal – now the growing international Men’s Human Rights Movement, WILL make it political.

For any feminists intending to attend, to protest, to launch a counter offensive in an effort to silence these voices, these truths – a concept I know that feminists have not even a passing acquaintance with – it’s too late.

Seriously ladies – you are too late – for almost 10 years I believe, since the inestimable angryharry first sat in front of his computer and tapped out the truth on his keyboard your days were numbered.

From: Equality Between Men And Women Is Not Achievable. Click here for article.

“The search for ‘equality’ between ‘men’ and ‘women’ is like a dog chasing its own tail. It will always be out of reach. And the very act of chasing it is costing us a great deal and causing tremendous damage to us.

The solution that we need to seek is not ‘equality’ – because it will never be found.”

You have been informed, the MHRM has attempted to educate you, to school you – and yet in your arrogance, in your vanity and egotism you played hooky, you skipped class and went on your merry ways. Well ladies – time to pay the piper, time for you to stop, to sit, stand or slouch still – lesson time is over – no more extensions – no more due over’s.

SCHOOLS OUT – forever.

Perhaps there was a time when you could have been considered capable of learning, capable of becoming more than you were, of growing into adults endowed with reason, with honour, with integrity, with even a small semblance of humanity. Alas with each poisonous article, each putrid blog and site, each repetition of the same tedious, asinine and frankly boring whines and complaints, peevish and petulant gripes and moans – it is abundantly clear that you are not capable of any of those things.

So, while all you fabulous 30 something’s are penning your screeds, cackling and sniggering with your various covens – and it must be said – while your ovaries are shrivelling to walnuts, your eggs have just gone off, and your vaginas are drying up – which apparently speak to and for you – the world is moving, and has moved on.

Oh yes, we know it is not going to be easy, we know that you will try every nasty, underhanded, sly and vicious trick in the book, and at your disposal to stop this, to prevent this conversation from taking place.

We know this, we know that you will point your manicured fingers at men and young men, at boys, and make false accusations, tell vicious lies.  We know this.

Just as we know that you will continue to write your poisonous articles, keep on posting your vicious rants on your blogs and sites.

WE KNOW THIS.

We don’t care, do it, bring it on – say what you like – peddle your lies, spin your fairytales, rant and rage, shriek and howl at the moon for all I care.

We know this, because we already know what you are willing to do to protect your ideology, to cling gracelessly and rigidly to your unsupportable “theories” we know that you will lie, will libel and slander, will viciously and dishonestly attack anyone who dares to challenge you. Like cornered rats do.

Do it – bring it on.

Then go look at the numbers – go look at the numbers of women backing away from feminism, go look at the numbers of men and women who are looking back at YOU – in contempt, in scorn, in derision.

Can you see them? Can you hear them? Of course you can, of course you know this is happening – why else would you all be in a fever, in an ever accelerating panic to enact legislation, to put in place gynocentric policies, to attempt to shut down and shut up these voices?

Do it, bring it on – laws can be repealed, policies can be abandoned, all it takes is the will and the commitment of men and women willing to say – ENOUGH. All it takes is for people who know the truth to stand up and say – this is wrong.

“All the forces in the world are not so powerful as an idea whose time has come.”

Victor Hugo

You are facing a growing army of these men and women – you are facing a determined, committed and immovable body of men and women who not only have stood up to be counted, but ARE standing up, more and more with each day that passes.

Abandon ship ladies, the boat is sinking, and the rats are leaving – and by the way – there is a price to be paid if you want room on the lifeboat?

That price is and should be easy enough to pay – all it will be is that, you become a human being.

The lifeboat? The Men’s Human Rights Movement.

 

© Anja Eriud 2014

 

 

 

How Dare You Have an Opinion……On Me!

 

Two things – first this delightful little quote I have often heard women use with regard to the “men in their lives” (and this little phrase is one we will be coming back to)

when I want your opinion, I will give it to you

The second thing is about me, a piece of advice I was given by a careers teacher way back in the mists of time when I was “young”

you’re very opinionated for a 16 year old – you should think about curbing that, and doing a secretarial course

Now, before any feminist decides to pounce on this as an example of “oppression” and “patriarchy” the teacher was female and she had never had an original thought in her entire life – of this I am convinced, and she didn’t like me, at all, for various reasons, mostly centred around me being “opinionated”

As you can probably see, if you’ve read any of my scribblings, not a piece of advice I took seriously or followed, ever.

Moving On.

Women, with the bedrock of feminist cant and drivel backing them up, have now inculcated a very insidious and egotistical state of mind – no-one, especially men, is allowed to have an opinion, other than a positive one, of anything they do, say or are.

In fact, with regard to having opinions, men are now not allowed to have an opinion on anything, just in case it clashes with whatever ephemeral or passing “opinion” on said subject that a woman has, any woman, on anything. Though, that “opinion” could change on a daily basis.

If as a man for example, you like go kart racing, and a female has allowed you “into her life” and in her opinion, go kart racing is stupid/boring/ridiculous/not my cup of tea – it will then be expected that you, a mere man, will now abandon your pleasure, your hobby, the thing that is your cup of tea – forever.

Woe betide you, if you sneak off on a Saturday afternoon with a couple of mates for an hour or two of sheer unadulterated pleasure – while she is at the hairdressers (could be anything up to four hours), at her mother’s (at least three hours) at her best friend’s (anything between an hour and eternity, depends on how much you have pissed her off that week) shopping (on a Saturday, and there are sales on? – at least six hours)

Annnnnnnnd she finds out!

Mate – you are now in the absolute shit – the doghouse – the outer realms of the universe where all men are consigned who do something that a female has specifically told you – SHE doesn’t like.

I might add, this egregious calumny is compounded if she has assigned you tasks to be done “while I’m off doing something really really important”.

I know, I know, you’re going to try logic and reason – everything on the list was done in record time, so “what’s the big deal?”

Sigh – tut tut – it’s “all about trust” doncha know – “you prooooooooooomised”.  It’s all about “letting her down” about her “feeeeeeeelings

By the way, even if you “cheated” and hired an expert to do whatever your assigned task was – it will be a “shit job” – it was “done wrong” – now she has to “hire someone” to “get it done right!”. Probably the same bloke YOU hired to do it in the first place.

I can almost guarantee that as he walks in to “do a proper job” you will exchange looks – because he probably has his own live-in wretch, tormenting the life and soul out of HIM, every bloody minute of the morning noon and night.

So, what has this to do with me and being “opinionated”? Well, granted in my youth my opinions were half and half actual knowledge of something that I had formed an opinion about, and my “feelings” about something – they of course tended to be very black and white – right or wrong – good or bad, no gray areas.

But my parents would have none of that – my mother – “give me a reason” sigh. My father – “how do you know that, have you checked to see if it’s true/right?” double sigh.

The little scenario I outlined above is a bit of a conglomeration of various different incidents I’ve observed over the years – the go karting thing though – was actually the secret passion of a bloke I knew.

What underpins all this is that SHE “let YOU into her life” – did ye not know – men don’t have lives, passions, interests or a separate existence? Men are only “of use”, men either “compliment a woman’s life” or “make it harder

As for the original premise, and the title of this essay – “How dare you have an opinion, on me!” this is the female ace in the hole – it IS the get out of jail free card par excellence – because if you take back YOUR right to have an opinion on any damn thing you like, the “magic spell” is broken the one where being “allowed into my life” is not so much a gift, the beneficence of a higher being allowing you to bask in her glory – it reveals itself as what it really is.

A selfish, egotistical, vain, shallow wretch, bullying another human being, using emotional blackmail, and coercing another human being into doing things that undermine and make little of their value as an autonomous human being.

To all those men who might be thinking, especially with regard to Getting you to “do things” her way – “ah sure, she just likes things done right, she just wants the house to look good

Bullshit. Shall I repeat that? BULLSHIT.

Most of the petty, useless things that women assign you to do, and will never thank you for, appreciate or acknowledge are designed to “keep you busy” to “keep you on your toes” they are devices, artefacts created to control, to demean, to enslave you further and further into a state of existence where your only function is to meet and serve  – “her needs

Any person who would throw the equivalent of a tantrum because another person has an interest or hobby that they don’t like/share/find interesting is a wretch.  Any person who demands that you “do things” for them, on their terms, and will explode/sulk/whine/ if you either can’t, or don’t want to do them is a bullying wretch.

 

I believe I just described quite a lot women. In my opinion.

 

© Anja Eriud 2014

 

PS Go Karting is great craic (fun) 🙂

The “M” Word

 

Women are crap at marriage, the “M” word” even when they yearn, they cry into their pillows at night for marriage, even when they think they believe they know what marriage is – they are still mostly crap at it.

The reason is actually quite simple, the marriage they dream of, they expect to have, they pine for, and in some instances pour scorn on (hello feminists) is a creation, a fantasy, an illusion that they created themselves, to get out of responsibility for being adults, grownups.

Lastly, but not, by any stretch of the imagination least, the western worlds model of marriage was created and cultivated for women, as a device for women to play act their way through their lives, to play at “being married”

Problem is, the illusion they created had a very short shelf life, historically speaking, the conditions and circumstances under which the original model of marriage was created “to serve” no longer exist – let me repeat that.

The conditions and circumstances under which the original model of marriage was created to serve, no longer exist – except in the minds and imaginations, and to be blunt unrealistic fantasies of women.

If ever there was a “thing” that should be consigned to the – “seemed like a good idea at the time” – category, marriage is it.

Even then, way back when the kiss of death for marriage began to take over – (that would be romance by the way) – it was a pretty shit idea. For a while it served its purpose, and depending on the maturity and intelligence of the parties involved, a lot of marriages were successful, workable, managed to stay standing, or at least did, till the kids were old enough to leave home and forge their own lives.

And our two lovebirds could stop pretending that they could stand the sight of one another.

I mentioned that the kiss of death for “marriage” is romance? It is, and right now every woman who has ever dreamed of “walking down the aisle” in some ridiculous clown outfit called “the perfect wedding dress” has fallen to the floor in a swoon. Oh please! Grow up – get up – and shut up – don’t even think about commenting or emailing me with some tearful (and probably pages long) diatribe about love, and showing your love, and how I don’t understand what romance is.

Bite me.

I know exactly what romance is and I also know, that it to love, to friendship, to loyalty, to honour, what feminism is to truth, to human rights, to sanity. And feminism is the vilest, most corrupt and corrosive set of twisted beliefs that ever found their way onto a page or into the mouths and minds of any person. I repeat.

Bite me.

The ironic thing of all, to me at least, is that women allowed feminism and feminists to destroy, to corrupt, to make unbearable (for men) the very thing that generations of women, whether they admit it or not want, yearn for, spend their lives trying to enter into – the unholy state of matrimony.

As our cultures and societies developed and progressed, many women began to feel a bit discontented, a bit unhappy, not “fulfilled”(sigh) in their marriages – enter the nutcase lesbian harridans and self promoting hippy sluts of feminism, to give these discontented and bored “housewives” a “get out of jail free” card, an excuse, a nicely exaggerated, completely and utterly false set of reasons and explanations for their “boredom”

Something is wrong with “marriage”? It can’t be me, therefore it must be you! With the “you” being men – as we all know, it doesn’t take much for women to completely lose all sense of proportion, or reality for that matter – therefore marriage must change – the legal and social framework within which marriages must be conducted in western societies must change so that women can “be happy” again.

Because, women still wanted their fantasy, their romance, their illusion – alas – of all the tinkering, all the changes, all the remodelling of marriage that feminism, feminists and women insisted needed to be done so that marriage was something that suited women – the ONLY change that could have made marriage at the bare minimum workable was not done, was never even considered, and to this day would induce rage, hysterics and poisonous articles from women and feminists with the intellectual capacity of a tree frog.

There is, and was ONLY one “thing” that needs and needed to be changed – WOMEN!

This is where I’m going to say, what for a lot of women will sound if not odd at the very least, then once again consign me, to that sphere of outer darkness that women reserve for those who “betray the sisterhood” boo bloody hoo. I LIKE it out here guuuuuurls  🙂

I like men.

I like the way they think, I like the way they talk and express themselves, and I like, with a few exceptions their sense of humour. Men are great fun, they are kind and generous (and no, I don’t mean that in a monetary way) they are loyal and trustworthy. You can depend on a man to keep his word, you can be sure that if a man says he will or won’t do something that it will or won’t be done. And yes, of course I am aware that some men can be just as big arseholes as women – but there is a vindictiveness, a spitefulness and nastiness within women that you don’t find in many men.

Most women don’t LIKE men – just the way they are – men are projects – blank slates upon which women get to write instructions upon. Women don’t SEE men as autonomous separate entities to themselves – men are an extension, a reflection, an appendage to a woman – a man is only as good as the woman in his life can either force him to be, or make him be, and that fits in with whatever bloody Disney fantasy they’ve had running in their heads since they wore their first “boys are stupid, throw rocks at them” tee-shirt.

For women, men are bit players, not even co-stars, but bit players in the drama, the fantasy, the illusion that is, the life and times of ME!

Of course the other ridiculous and asinine thing that women bleat and wail about and demand that men do is to “work on our marriage”?

Excuse me?  Do what?

Like the various bits of random engines and whatever they were, my brothers used to “work on”? Like an inanimate object that you were creating, be it a piece of sculpture, a painting or a piece of furniture? Like that?

There is only one “thing” that one could possibly “work on” that would make any difference to whether or not you are in a positive, enriching, worthwhile and workable union (I’m getting fed up writing the word marriage – and I think I might be breaking out in a rash!)

YOU!

You read that right, and by the way, I AM specifically addressing women – if you have a problem in your union – then that is YOUR problem.

But, but, but, but………….he does this, he doesn’t do that, he won’t do this, he won’t do that…..boo hoo!

Answer: So?

Are you suggesting, demanding and expecting that an autonomous human being accedes to your command, your order because YOU demand it?

Personal example: I cannot explain this, I have no idea why, but whistling drives me mad, seriously, it sets my teeth on edge, my late partner didn’t whistle – much – and only did it unconsciously – so, the first time – I explained, more or less as I just did above – then I ASKED – politely, civilly. His response, sorry darling, I’ll stop,  just let me know if I do it without thinking. End of conversation.

I hear women moan and whine about “what an arsehole” their husbands or partners are – and two things – arseholery is in the eye of the beholder – and like it or lump it people have the right to BE arseholes if they want to be.  If you don’t want to be around an arsehole – LEAVE, and leave the kids behind, you’re the one with the problem, not them.

I’ll admit, I am constantly shocked at how women speak to and treat their partners, I know I shouldn’t be, but I am, and when I say things like;

“If you spoke to, or treated me in that manner, I would probably find the biggest bucket of pig swill I could find, and dump it over your head”

I am equally shocked at how shocked THEY are, at being criticised!

If she was in my house, I would throw her out, and invite him to remain, and no, I’m not kidding – women seem to believe that the normal rules for civil behaviour, for how one treats other human beings are suspended, no longer apply, magically disappear in the context of a union or partnership.

THEY DO NOT!

The problem with modern marriage, and modern relationships, partnerships, unions, whatever floats your particular boat is WOMEN – and the problem with women is that women believe and expect that getting married means at the ceremony, or whatever, a marriage fairy flies in and sprinkles magic marriage dust on you.

That the recitation of some words, the physical act of standing there in THAT absurd dress alchemically changes you – and him – and even worse should.

What you bring to a union is YOU – warts and all – and wedding ceremonies are not some kind of supernatural Compound W* that makes all YOUR warts disappear, for women actually, it does seem to cause a major outbreak of warts – big massive hairy ones.

So – women are crap at marriage, because women designed and created marriage in their own image, and need I say it – in general, with a few rare exceptions, most women are a pain in the arse.

Ladies, the wheels fell off your trolley a long long time ago – you all better start learning to walk.

 

© Anja Eriud 2014

 

*Compound W is a liquid you paint onto a wart to make it disappear, sometimes it works, sometimes not, try rubbing half a potato on your wart – seriously – try it. 🙂

 

 

 

Previous Older Entries