Category: Uncategorized

Sally writes back:

Mr. Vox Day: I was surprised by your response and found it even amusing. I appreciate that you responded to most of what I had to say. I am not contending the great things that men have done in the past, even though most was by accident, trial and error, and always with bloodshed. But lead you to understanding that Mae, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot are men. I think I prove my point with just that statement alone.

I always had my suspicions about Mae West. I am surprised, however, that Sally appears to believe Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot did great things. She may think that she proved her point by that statement alone, but she is nevertheless still wrong as her original point was that significant human events happened by accident and there is no question that these evil men knew precisely what they were doing in overseeing the murder of millions of individuals.

With technology increasing period is what lead to men and women living longer. Do you believe that women should be denied health care? Women are not less of a human because you might be stronger physically. If this is so then a man who is stronger over another man can enslave the weaker man and treat him less then what the stronger man is. Do you agree with this? You would have to if you really are consistent with your our beliefs. Evolution has helped us get pass the ignorance of the ancient times so I don’t know what time warp you are from.

I realize that the typical female innocence with regards to technology leads many women to believe that it simply grows on trees. It does not. As I wrote previously, men and women are living longer due to advances in technology created solely by men. If technological advancement depended on women, we would still be living in caves, albeit clean caves with fresh wildflowers decorating the interior. Anyone who can pay for health care should receive it; I will do her the kindness of passing over her inability to grasp the delta between the amount of time required for evolution to make an appreciable difference and the 6,000 years of recorded human history.

I think you are just an angry, lonely, misplaced, distorted individual. I actually feel sorry for you then disliking you. If you are in tuned with the world around you, then you will see that the gap in size between women and men is slowly starting to close. That is because women are educated and are more concerned with their health then with fulfilling men’s fantasies of a submissive woman (which is unhealthy and stunts growth). Men have not wanted women to be educated because we will find out that we can do everything that men can do. The way men have forced this in the past is through violence, threats and abusive behavior and it is just not a nature to behave in a violent behavior. Although, it has been reported that women are starting to have higher levels of testosterone and men having higher levels of estrogen (overall). Probably why we have the gay community visible, I don’t claim to know it all but continue my education to the best of my abilities for my family and children.

Like every woman on the receiving end of an intellectual beat-down, Sally quickly resorts to the usual passive-aggressive defense and attempts to claim a position of emotional superiority. Again, what she thinks has absolutely nothing to do with reality or the matter at hand. The evidence quite strongly suggests that she is wrong, as American women have used their educations – which they now have collectively more of than men – to demonstrate an embarrassing level of intellectual vacuity while seriously degrading the value of a college degree. An obvious example of that is Sally’s interesting theories with regards to women’s health. As for the decreasing gap in size, I don’t see the many supersized female porkers one sees lumbering about posing much of a threat to male physical dominance.

Education is not a destination but a continual road. If women hadn’t been suppressed for the entire length of evolution by men then I am sure today there would hardly be any evidence of greater physical strength. As far as intelligence there is no difference. Every individual has their strong points and weak points, even you. And if you want a bit of extremity then I would say men are really set up to serve women with their physical strength ability (laborers/warriors). I would also say women with their superior communication, reasoning, compassion, and interpersonal skills are more equipped to deal well in a position of power and authority. Women are hardly helpless to stop the wars that men create. Women are not fools at the same time. When we see a man who has lost his way we simply step back and let him destroy himself. It seems like men are on self-destruct a lot of the time. Women are not going to come up and shove a dagger in your chest to overcome the abuse of men because we know that is not the solution. The solution is a gradual change so that the shock will not cause needless deaths. Women are not for war. Those men and women out there are our babies, brothers, loved ones or someone else’s.

If education is a road, then Sally clearly took a wrong turn somewhere. There are numerous well-proven differences between the sexes with regards to intelligence, involving brain size, modes of thought and measured IQ. The great irony of women and war is that while women have been the mouthpiece of the anti-war movement since Euripedes, they also tend to be the staunchest supporters of the tyrants who require war to keep the populace quiescent.

I would love to continue this conversation but I am going to mark my place because I have dinner to prepare and the children to tend to and my husband will be home in a bit. You see I am in the position right now (at home mom) that a lot of men would like but only because I knew that when this desire I have to bear a family is done then I can pursue my own interests, desires, exercise my talents and abilities without suppression. And if I will counter some kind of suppression I have the right to fight it and make the world a better place for everyone. Try living in today’s world and stop trying to bring us back to a place of the past filled with despair.

All of this notwithstanding, I credit Sally for putting her family first, although this may be one of the few examples where homeschooling would actually be worse for a child’s mind than the public schools. As for a place filled with despair for women, the evidence suggests that lies in the future, not the recent past. The last eighty years in the West have been a brief and happy interlude in the normal flow of human history; a woman without a male protector is a woman who will soon find herself in chains or a burqah.

So you see, men just need to find the women who share the same interest and goals in mind instead of forcing women (overall) to do whatever you want them to do. You should seek people you believe as you do and you won’t have any problems. To force your views on someone else is wrong. If you have trouble seeking a woman with your views then maybe you need to revise them to a more intellectual standard. I look forward to commenting on the rest later if you feel like you can handle it sweet heart.

Unlike the fascist feminist movement, I force my views on no one. Only an ideology that is logically and intellectually bankrupt needs to call for the forcible re-education of its critics.

The Sports Guy on the Great Steve Smith:

The Bad Idea Jeans Award for Worst Move Before a Playoff Game
To the Bears D-backs who trash-talked Steve Smith in the pregame warmups before the Carolina game. Why wasn’t this in the scouting report? If you were Lovie Smith, wouldn’t this have been your only ironclad instructions all week? Don’t talk to him, don’t look at him, don’t even make eye contact with him. If he approaches you in the warm ups, act the same way you would if you were hiking in the wilderness and a grizzly bear approached you — don’t move, don’t react, don’t do anything until it walks away.

I’ll admit it, I harbor a deep and abiding affection for Steve Smith. He not only led my fantasy team to a second-place regular season finish but was the key figure in my two Super Bowl wins, and although the Vikings managed to make it back to the Super Bowl in 2012 after his retirement, they just couldn’t get it done and lost to the Dolphins on a last-minute touchdown plunge by Clinton Portis last night.

Sure, he’s a little bit psycho – this is the guy who once beat the tar out of his own teammate for no particular reason – but that’s why you A) don’t ever trash talk him, and, B) keep two men on him at all times. I will never, ever understand why NFL defensive coordinators insist on sticking to their “schemes” even when it means leaving a third-string CB on Smith, or, (like I once saw Green Bay do), leaving a linebacker to cover Randy Moss one-on-one in the slot.

And speaking of travesties, how did Steve Smith not get a single MVP vote? Brady, I would have been okay with, or Manning since the vote is about the regular season, but Sean Alexander? Fantasy MVP, definitely. The real NFL? No way.

From NRO’s Corner:

My private opinion, Jonah, is that the “many worlds interpretations” (MWIs) of quantum physics–there are at least three–are total crocks.

Martin Gardner is of the same mind. He skewered the MWIs in an essay in Skeptical Inquirer magazine four or five years ago. The article (and a response to critics of it) is printed in Martin’s 2003 book Are Universes Thicker than Blackberries? (NB: The book title refers to the fruit, not the gadget.) Martin’s conclusion:
The stark truth is that there is not the slightest shred of reliable evidence that there is any universe other than the one we are in. No multiverse theory has so far provided a prediction that can be tested. … Surely the conjecture that there is just one universe and its Creator is infinitely simpler and easier to believe than that there are countless billions upon billions of worlds, constantly increasing in number and created by nobody. I can only marvel at the low state to which today’s philosophy of science has fallen.

I find it tremendously amusing that some of the fervent evolutionists who are aghast at the notion of intelligent design fall for the many universes concept. This sort is particularly common in the science fiction community, which typically disdains traditional religion while embracing pagan spirituality, the more bizarre the better.

All of the criticisms directed at intelligent design – many of which are quite valid – apply in spades to the universes next door.

KR has a query:

As a Christian and a Libertarian I am constantly confronted with these two passages by my Christian peers. What is your perspective on the content of these passages as they relate to the command of God?

Whose name is on your dollar? Do you see the Internal Revenue Service on there? The proper Biblical conclusion is to pay your tax in Federal Reserve Notes to the Federal Reserve if it asks for it. Jesus Christ said to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, not to give him what is not his.

As for Romans 13, simply ask the questioner if they would favor regime change in the case of Hussein or even Hitler. If they do, then tell them that they would do well to deal with the log in their own eye before attempting to bring in the Bible to refute your political positions.

“What the great Bill Russell said meant a lot,” said O’Neal…. “He said he never had any rivals. He said he talked to Mr. Chamberlain at least once a week before he passed away, and I actually thought they hated each other, but he told me that wasn’t the case at all. It was something I had to hear from a guy like that. My mother and father also called me and told me to shake Kobe’s hand and that we were making a big deal about nothing. And even though I do act crazy sometimes, I do listen.”

I’ve always liked the Big Aristotle as a person, though not as a basketball player. (The non-calls on his multitude of offensive fouls are as bad as those on MJ’s travelling.) And insasmuch as NBA stars are role models for many boys, seeing a man who was so badly and publicly disrespected put that behind him with a handshake and a smile is probably more meaningful than it would be in a more rational world.

Kobe Bryant may be a great basketball player and a smart guy, but he’s a terrible teammate and a shady individual. Here’s hoping he can learn something about character from his ex-teammate. Shaq is a physical giant who has his money and his rings, but he’s never been bigger than he was on the pre-game court that day.

The crime of the young century:

Yesterday it was a matter of a ponytail, a pair of kitchen scissors and a bedroom in Dudley that prompted the learned minds of the High Court to consider the legal, moral and philosophical implications of the unwanted haircut.

Two senior judges spent almost an hour debating issues such as whether hair is dead or alive, what hair means to a woman and whether it is “intrinsic to the individual”, before reaching a decision on whether it was a crime for a man to cut off his ex-girlfriend’s ponytail against her will.

When, in 1712, Pope wrote his mock-heroic masterpiece The Rape of the Lock, following the hullabaloo that ensued after Lord Petre cut off a lock of hair of his beloved fellow aristocrat, Arabella Fermor, without her permission, the writer was assumed to be poking fun at the over-reaction of contemporary society. “What dire offence from am’rous causes springs, What mighty contests rise from trivial things”, he wrote.

But Sir Igor Judge, the president of the Queen’s Bench Division, and Mr Justice Cresswell took a different view.

In the first case of its kind, they ruled that hair could be regarded as a person’s “crowning glory” and that magistrates at Dudley, West Midlands, had been wrong when they decided last June that Michael Ross Smith had no case to answer on a charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

And just imagine if he had clipped her fingernails! Again, we have a crime which is dependent upon how a woman feels about something. No doubt it will soon be a felony to fail to pay sufficient attention to a woman when she is speaking or to make her feel sad.

On the other hand, what sort of lunatic prefers a woman with short hair? I find myself insensibly favoring this new interpretation of the law criminalizing hair-cutting, as women would no longer be chopping off their locks on a whim and all those gay hairdressers would probably be happier in jail together anyhow.

Pretty Lady sees a mismatch:

Sweetie, I am terribly disappointed. It is unworthy of you to be shooting fish in a barrel–hardly what I would expect of a chivalrous gentleman like you. Little Miss Sally is undoubtedly about eighteen years old and from a broken home. I imagine she will be a much nicer girl once she has settled down a bit.

One can only respond to those who first present themselves. I have said before that I’m pleased to take on any critic, regardless of their supposed status. And one can’t take on a feminist on feminism – even a feminist who can spell and write grammatically correct sentences – without it looking like shooting fish in a barrel. The recent MacKinnon-related post should suffice to demonstrate that.

As for Sally, she was quite literally asking for it. And when a girl asks to be pounded, why, what chivalrous gentleman would force her to make do with soft and timid caresses?

In which Crystal Lake quotes Catherine MacKinnon

“When women choose women sexually, this is a very powerful challenge to male dominance. This is a choice that symbolizes the fact that men are not essential to life and to sex. But one of the strategies of male dominance to subvert this power is to make lesbians sexy and thus take possession of them for themselves, as an instrument for their pleasure.”

This quote could stand as a symbol for feminism’s inherent strategic flaw

A Man enters the room. Two attractive young Lesbian Feminists are engaged in bonding Sisterhood activities.

Lesbian Feminist #1: “We are striking a powerful blow”, (wipes chin), “against the male dominance of the Patriarchy!”
Lesbian Feminist #2: “Don’t stop!”
Man: “Don’t stop, strike that blow!”

As the girls return to their statement-making, the temperature rises, along with other things. Overcome with a sudden appreciation for his stark inessentiality to life and sex, the Man suddenly removes his pants and nails both screaming feminists, one after the other, as they shriek in helpless outrage.

Man: (puts on pants and walks to door) “Well, I feel very put in my place. That was a very powerful blow. Thank you for educating me.”
Lesbian Feminist #1: “I’m telling my Daddy… I mean, I’m calling the police!”
Lesbian Feminist #2: “Call me!”

From abortion to the Sexual Revolution, from education to the vote, feminists have only managed to make the average woman more bitter and less personally satisfied than the miserable sows at Seneca Falls ever dreamed. And then there’s the demographic thing… it’s the least self-sustaining ideology since Catharism.

Since the dawn of time, men have been the generals and the game designers. So, it shouldn’t be a surprise when they so easily come up with a strategy to maintain their dominance. Let’s face it, is there anything funnier than a movement that would consider Jenna Jameson to be at its symbolic forefront?

From NRO’s Corner:

“Fear drives out reason. Fear suppresses the politics of discourse and opens the door to the politics of destruction.” – Al Gore

Al must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. Al will face his fear. Al will permit it to pass over him and through him…. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only Al will remain.

Sally shares her two bits:

This is the first I had ever seen your website. I would like to comment on your views of the article Why Women’s Rights Are Wrong. History has shown that men don’t really know what they are doing. Instead of blaming Women and Women’s Rights, trying blaming yourself and gender peers.

How has history shown this? Did Julius Caesar not know what he was doing when he crossed the Rubicon and put an end to the Republic? Did those who set up the Federal Reserve not realize that they were creating an inflation-engine machine? Did FDR attempt to pack the Supreme Court simply because he disliked the number nine? This statement strikes me as a tremendously naive one.

It was the men’s decisions that create the population boom that causes more men to decide to limit people in Asia to one or two children. It was men who brain washed everyone to believe that men are greater, stronger, and smarter than women, which is a lie (sin). That causes the decline in birthing to females. It was men that decided only men can pass on the families’ name, not that it is appropriate. It was men who abused their spouses and influence, it was men who suppressed their loved ones, it was men who craved war, it was men who did not appreciate what women do and how we play such a vital role in society and families, it was men who degraded us and treated us like we were second class citizens. Women’s rights came about because we have been treated badly and we want it to stop!

Yes, the population boom because of men, who had the bad taste to develop technology that allowed women to live to an average of 77 years instead of 30. Men are bigger, stronger and smarter than women on the average, by every measure, so there was no brainwashing necessary. There are men who crave war, to be sure, and since women are completely helpless to stop them, it is other men who must do so.

And how, I ask you, have women’s rights improved things for women? Consider some of the foremost aims of the early feminists: Divorce condemns most women to poverty because so many are incapable of providing for themselves without being handed a makework job in government, abortion allows a woman to murder her children and slaughters a disproportionate number of girls, one of women’s first political priorities was to ban alchohol and they have used their access to education to destroy the value of a college degree. The worst thing men could do to women is to leave them to fend for themselves; even giving them influence in government is turning out to be disastrous.

Women should wait till they are ready to have children. Women want to make sure that our children receive the protection and love that they deserve out of their childhood and life. Women want to make sure that their bodies and health and life will not be a sacrifice. Women take motherhood seriously! We want to be with our children because it is so important for a mother to mother but we don’t want the abuse, control, suppression, and manipulative degrading of our gender either. That is why we choose! Women have a right to decide if they want to have children at all. Many of us don’t want children, we won’t be force either!

Women who subscribe to this meme will die out, and deservedly so. They are already in the process of doing just that throughout the West, as they are considered less desirable by men, marry less often and later and have fewer children. The remainder will lose the ability to decide who they will marry, when they will have children and will again become the chattel of men that they were prior to the rise of the protective pre-feminist West.

Who cares if men don’t want to marry because of “liabilities”. Women do it all now anyways, with buying the houses, proving for the family, giving life to our own family, what do we need to marry for? Marriage for some women only becomes a burden. Most of us care only to mother our own small children, not someone else’s grown children. If a man can’t appreciate his wife and family enough to marry then, YES, do not marry!! We don’t want you. We are tired of the unappreciative manner.

This is complete nonsense. Women not only don’t do it all, they collectively contribute virtually nothing towards creating wealth and the technological advancement of society that has made our lotus-eating lives possible, furthermore,they do much to hinder it in destroying the natural workings of the free market. Sally is obviously quite young, otherwise she would know that it is not men who are complaining about no one wanting to marry them. The truth is obvious when even the most mysogynistic creep usually has several women hanging around hoping to marry him while many women will react with open fury to a successful, desirable man who announces that he has no desire to eventually marry.

I think now that women are in control of their destinies will be able to correct men’s self-serving, power hungry, bloody war craving, greedy wrong doings.

The short history of women in power shows no evidence of this whatsoever. More to the point, it will be interesting to see how they will keep power when men decide they will no longer submit to the Mommy State.

Women do have a deep appreciation of life. That is because we know what it takes for this to happen. Our bodies provide the housing and our bodies develop the new life. Men throughout history have destroyed this with war and hate and greed! Men will never have an appreciation for life like women do. Men can’t give life (birth)! That is what really bothers you! Such a powerful thing women have; the ability to create life. Is it you are only looking for control again? Men have such a small role in the process of it all which could probably be supplemented in evolution. After all… women do carry all the equipment. Evolution just might leave men to die out from old age and wars against each other. You are not God so how can you say you know where evolution will take us? That is typical behavior for men to play God.

It seems strange that women have such a respect for life that they regard ending it as one of their rights. Evolution requires millions of years and so has not entered into the discussion, the issue is demographics and it is not difficult to know where that is going as long as one possesses a basic grasp of mathematics. Of course, as we know, math is hard!

Did God make man or did man make God? The people who are good do not have to advertise it. The people who are evil are the ones that have the job of convincing others they are good, meaning your church. Have you molested many children today?

Apparently Sally is down with Mao, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, none of whom wasted their time convicing others that they were good. The mind boggles at imagining this lightweight attempting to define good and evil, much less delving into theology. As for children, not today, no.

Oh, that’s right, you are not a priest, but you do follow in their foot steps. Is that one of your reasons for women to be baby making machines?

No, I simply have an interest in the continuation of Western civilization, which is more than a little dependent on women embracing their unique biological role and the only one that a functioning society actually requires of them. But if Sally doesn’t, well, perhaps a burqah will suit her.

Men are responsible for all outcomes; many can argue men are the true root of evil. That is only a fraction of what I really have to say to explain about Women’s Rights. I always welcome a response. Bring it on.

It comes as no surprise that Sally doesn’t believe in personal responsibilit
y for herself or for women in general. In fact, it is this very belief that requires women to be second-class citizens; if, like children, they cannot be held responsible for their actions or decisions, then, like children, they cannot be permitted any degree of responsibility.