More Feminist Bullshit on Tumblr

I have a penisI’m really not a fan of Tumblr, it, like Twitter, represents the short-attention-span culture that I detest in the world, filled with mindless memes and quick quotes.  It all goes by without much context, people repeating what they read somewhere else and very rarely ever resulting in an intelligent conversation about the issues.

I really don’t follow many people there because I haven’t found many worth following, but one that I have picked up is Wil Wheaton because occasionally he tweets something cool and geeky. He also posts a metric shit-ton of liberal political nonsense.  I know I shouldn’t be surprised but so much of it seems to go by totally uncritically, very similar to the nonsense we see in the Atheism+ community.  Yes, Wil is an atheist and for that he gets some modicum of respect, but like so many other liberal atheists, his ability to logically and rationally evaluate typical liberal tropes ends there.

Today, he posted the following, as a reblog:

You must remember, it isn’t about “All men are menaces to women,” it’s about “All women have been menaced by men.”

Yeah.  Sure Wil.  You keep telling yourself that.  If you go ask a dozen random women on the street, I’m willing to  bet that they’ll tell you this is nonsense.  How do I know?  Because upon seeing that, I did ask a bunch of women I know and that’s exactly what they said.  Absolutely none of the people I randomly sampled said they have *EVER* been menaced by men.  Not one.

I’m sure that’s a solid baseline too.  If you took a wide spectrum of women across the country, accounting for all ages, all social and political and financial backgrounds, and asked them if they’ve been personally menaced by men, either specifically or as a general group, they’d largely say no.  Now sure, I’m certain some of them have been raped, some have been beaten, some have been abused and that’s both regrettable and reprehensible, but to say that all women have been menaced by men is absurd to the highest degree.  Arguing that not all men are a menace to women is absurd.  Virtually no men are a menace to women!  You’re looking at a very tiny percentage of men doing anything violent toward a tiny percentage of women.

I’m not trying to downplay actual violence toward women by any means but I’m pointing out that you have a group of women who, by their own admission, hate men and have been caught time and time again outright lying about the statistics and then you have men like Wil Wheaton, and he’s certainly not alone, who are only too happy to buy into this radical feminist bullshit because they feel they have to in order to be liberal.  They can’t say “this doesn’t make any sense” or “show me your data”, they’ll get shamed by their liberal cohorts.  It’s that kind of idiotic group-think that causes so many problems.  People who think they have to fall into lockstep with others who claim their label without seriously thinking about the actual position need to be whacked over the head with a stick, maybe it will knock some sense into them.

Now I don’t know that I’ll drop Wil from my ever shrinking watch list on Tumblr.  I really do like him, I love Tabletop, I love that he’s a geek, but like most people in Hollywood, he’s a dyed-in-the-wool liberal and like most liberals, he’s out there reacting emotionally, not intellectually.  Maybe I should keep him for a laugh now and then, or a reason to roll my eyes. Heck, he might even be good for another blog post someday, you never know.

305 thoughts on “More Feminist Bullshit on Tumblr”

  1. It truly is amazing that in some circles people are not allowed to question anything. Its as if they want to act as the thought police as well. If you disagree your thoughts are wrong and you must be cleansed or excommunicated for asking a question. In some ways they are far worse, or at least equal to the religious.
    My recent post Corrupted memories

  2. The age old love-hate relationship between women and their peni.
    (Isn't peni the plural of penis, just like Elvi and Elvis?)

    In any event, a penis is like a policeman.
    Everyone will cuss a cop heartily until they really need one………….

    1. No peni is not the plural of penis. The plural of penis is penises. Now if you were going for some kind of humor here, you failed, and, like TheNewsMadd, you should keep your day job and never consider comedy as a career. It would be financially disastrous for you.

      What, you think the only role for a woman is to love your penis? I get the feeling that this is the part of your anatomy with which you do your thinking. And those would be some mighty small thoughts.

      1. You really need to calm down and lighten up.
        Are you on blood pressure medication, or is your attitude a result of 'roid rage?

        Try to find humor in the humorous.
        Stop and smell the roses and watch out for the pricks.

        1. I do find humor in the humorous. What you said was not humorous. You have some inflated sense of yourself. You must think that because you say something that in your mind is funny then it must be funny to everyone else. You need to get over yourself.

          No, I am not on blood pressure medication. I have no "roid rage" whatever the hell that is. But I do not leave unchallenged bullshit that you or anyone else wants to attempt to pass off as humor. As I said, if this is your idea of humor than I submit you are not a very funny person.

          1. Wow, the posse thinks alike, that doesn't surprise me.

            But that doesn't mean my kind of people or those that destroy engages with would.

        1. It isn't any funnier when professional comedians say it. Nothing I write is obviously going to changer your mind about jokes concerning the sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, or age of a person. But just because you think such jokes are funny, does not require that everyone else think them funny. I just think that you have poor taste where it concerns humor.

          1. I think you have a very bland sense of humor and when comeduans say it,pretty sure everyone at the laughs

          2. He has one, and has explained it.
            Just because he doesn't like to see people used as the butt of a joke only means just that.

          3. I know that you are incorrect when you say you are "pretty sure" that everyone laughs at these jokes. I know lots of individuals, both male and female, whom I know for a fact would not laugh at such jokes. In fact, I was speaking to a group of these people just yesterday about this post and the ongoing conversation. Not one of them found what you said the least bit funny. I think I can speak for these same people when I say I don't think they would laugh at a comedian making the same kinds of jokes. So, yes there are people who do find this kind of stuff humorous. But you are most definitely wrong to assume or even be" pretty sure" that everyone laughs at such jokes when comedians say them.

            If what passes as humor is what you have been defending here then I will accept the description of having a bland sense of humor. Far better that than the taste in obnoxious, offensive humor you prefer.

          4. Most liberals would not find it funny because liberlas don't have a sense of humor. Every comedy club I have been in those jokes are laughed at.

            So go cry a river elsewhere.

          5. well i go to them all time and femist jokes are told and everyone in there laughs.

            They don't have a sense of humor you show that and so does dogman (yes I am calling you liberal)

          6. I do have a sense of humor.

            My email is usually jokes that make the rounds.
            Just this morning someone sent me this:

            "Honey, what would you do if I won the lottery?
            She replied "I'd take half and leave you."
            He hands her $6.
            "I won $12 yesterday. Keep in touch."

          7. That was funny………………….about 10 years ago when it was first told. Not as funny as a feminst joke though

          8. And I don't see the word divorce anyplace in it.

            Could it be that (according to your definitions) you are stalking my comments?

          9. Why don't you post that cartoon with the naked man having sex with a goat. I remember you loved that one, Roger.

            Cartoon porn isn't so funny to me, though.

          10. I didn't like it. I just said I didn't like it. I don't think cartoon porn is funny.

            You loved it, you posted it several times. Why don't you post it anymore?

          11. Would it be easier for me to google …naked man having sex with a goat?

            Is that how you found it?

          12. The one where the man is naked and he is having sex with a goat.

            You can't remember how funny you thought it was. You posted in a dozen times.

            I remember that you were always trying to post sexual YouTubes to Wee, no matter how many time he asked you to stop.

          13. I recall patriothere saying goat brides were universally accepted, do you mean that? I can dig that quote up if you want.

          14. I want to know why you don't post that cartoon porn of the man naked and performing bestiality.

            I remember you posted it to Wee, even though he asked you not to. It was kind scary that you would not stop.

          15. That doesn't ring a bell.

            Unless you come up with more evidence it was my cartoon, I'm going to just suggest you're making things up.

          16. You aren't inside my head.
            You don't know what I remember or not.

            Like your claim you don't have the contact info that you have.

          17. I don't. please provide it so we can move forward before the case is dismissed.

          18. There is enough evidence to show you have that contact information that I'm comfortable with it.

            Explain to the judge and see what happens.

          19. I'm not comfortable with you making claims that i have your lawyers address, when you don't have any evidence of it.

            And I don't feel comfortable with the fact that you make up these lies as an excuse for not providing the contact information I require to make a legal defense.

            That is cause for dismissal.

          20. And my complaint lays out why I'm not comfortable with your comments in the past.

            That is cause for legal action.

          21. I know it's public record and anyone can request info on it. The counselor of record is posted on the court web site that Alinksy has posted, you might want to think about it before you go on the attack.

          22. Am I suppose to be offended that you call me a liberal? Yes, I am a liberal and not the least bit ashamed of it.

            How do you know that everyone laughed? Did you have eyes on everyone after the joke was told? Do you have some video evidence? Are you assuming this because of the volume of the laughter? If so, that is not conclusive evidence that everyone in the audience laughed. But let's assume that everyone did laugh. That demonstrates what? In my opinion, it demonstrates that everyone in the audience has the same poor taste in humor that you do. I've been to comedy clubs as well. Have never laughed at a joke that takes shots at women because of their gender or sex. Have laughed at lots of other jokes.

          23. I did not say people don't laugh at them. It is also very likely that every comedy club you've been in where those kinds of jokes were laughed at contained some liberals in the audience, unless you frequent Conservative's only comedy clubs. So you are almost certainly wrong that liberals don't have a sense of humor. They all do. But we don't all have the same sense of humor. We don't all find the same jokes funny. I have no doubt that the liberals who laugh at those kinds of jokes have the same poor taste in humor that you do.

            No, I think I'll stay here and cry a river. Perhaps your bullshit will be swept away in the floodwaters.

          24. You don't need to.
            He explained the things he doesn't find funny, and each person is allowed their own comfort zone on humor.

          25. Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die.

          26. That was typical of your trollish behavior.

            Nothing at all to do about feminism.
            For example. "If a tree falls alone in the forrest and no woman is there to place blame, is it still a man's fault?"

          27. Yet another failed attempt at humor. Or is it your way of telling me that you wish me dead? In either case the remark says a great deal more about your demented sense of humor (not to mention lack of character) than it does about my sense of humor.

          28. It was a quote from my favorite comedian, Mel Brooks.

            It's a classic line that a lot of professional comedians use when describing how comedy works.

            I thought you would recognize it, since you know so much about what is funny…

            Why didn't you?

          29. Soap dish was many things but about Feminism it wasn't.
            Since you claimed to have been involved with that one, you're the expert on it.

          30. Why would I want to when you're made comments like this in the past?

            1 week ago @ – growl · 26 replies · -9 points
            "That;s right!! There ill be blood you f**kers!!!!

            When you try to make people slaves, you soon find your head in a basket.

            Then I will f**k you in your dead eyeball."

          31. Why do you think that's a priority for me, I like to discuss serious topics in an adult manner and no I don't mean the blue kind of manner.

          32. No intention. You inappropriate pretense at guessing my abilities doesn't mean anything other than you have an inappropriate obsession with guessing my abilities.

          33. Not your concern and not something I discuss with the kind of person that would post this comment:
            23 minutes ago @ Storyleak – Obama Unapologetic Abo… · 0 replies · 0 points
            I always had this kind of temper.

          34. Heh, you know, that reminds me of something totally unrelated, but a long, long time ago, my best friend worked at a school where, the rumor was, a guy was seen late at night screwing a sheep on the baseball field and when discovered, he rode off on a pink bicycle. That became a long-running joke, asking my friend where his pink bike was, it resulted in him getting an inflatable sex sheep for his birthday, etc. Even 25 years later, we still laugh at it and frankly, I wonder whatever became of Baaaaarbra.

            So it\’s officially a guy with a green jacket, jeans and a blue wool cap, riding a pink bike. 🙂

          35. I don\’t remember how that part went, whether he just left the sheep or took it with him. That\’s kind of a funny image though.

          36. So to have an opinion about what is and is not funny you must first be able to recognize lines and the comic who said them? I also find Mel Brooks funny, sometimes. This is not one of those occasions.

            As for matching comics with their lines, it is not one of those areas of knowledge that I have chosen to devote much time to memorizing. It isn't necessary to decide what is and is not funny.

          37. No, of course you don't have to know that line. But you talk with such authority about what is funny, it did make you look pretty f u ck ing stupid.

            Why don't you tell us a joke, or post something you consider funny.

            Or are you just an angry old naysayer?

          38. Your first comment answers a question i didn't ask, dumb ass.

            I am here because I saw you stalk Wee to this site and harass him, and I thought I would save the information.

          39. And not here as an adult for serious discussion.

            How telling, just wandering around trying to conduct yourself as my complaint alleges.

          40. Please don't sue me. If you put me on the stand, everybody will laugh at me.

            I'm scared of your legal team.

          41. Then you need to discuss terms for an out of court settlement.

            You know who to call.

            Frankly I don't think you know how to approach anything seriously. But that is not my problem, it's yours.

          42. How do you know what kind of site this is? You are only here trolling. You could care less. You have been banned from just about everyplace on the Internet, and where you aren't banned, they simply delete your comments.

            If you really were somebody to be reckoned with, you would be on the website with the most traffic and debate.

          43. No, you simply delete the comments, it's what small people do when they realize they can't actually debate or discuss, they scream and try to keep the adults from it.

          44. Rog, old buddy, have you ever given it a thought that maybe it's not everyone else, but maybe it's you? You are a classic example of how crazy people don't know they are NUTZ!

          45. Yes, then I read your comments at Ray's and realize you aren't exactly the kind of person I'd buy a used car from.

          46. When I read your comments I realize a lot of small animals pets must come up missing in your neighborhood.

          47. Why, you don't even know where I live so you can visit the neighborhood.

            Is it so bad under the troll bridge that you have to growl extra loud?

          48. Of course not. Roger is a lone crusader for justice in an upside down world. All the push back he receives means he's having an effect. The only discouraging thing is when he is completely ignored … like at LRC.

          49. Yes, it's amazing I'll defer to your expertise in this area, I'll stick to what reasonable people do, since that's what I focus on with my comments.

          50. Does that mean you're going to make another comment like this one?
            9 hours ago @ Pissed Off Pirate – It seems that the time… · 0 replies · +2 points
            He acts like the classic High School Bully. I would smack him in the nose if I could.

          51. Well when you are being bullied and harassedyou have the right to defend yourself. Quit being a bully and harassing me

          52. Or what? Are you going to give me another time limit to pull my profile?

            You don't get to make that call, and if vigorous debate is more than you can handle, ti's a voluntary forum.

          53. Oh no by all means keep bullying and harassing me and causing me emotional distress.

            IF vigorous debate is not for you why did you file a law suit claming emotional distress?

          54. Do you realize this forum is an open debate and discussion setting? That means people may not agree with you. If that is threatening for you in any way, this may not be the right setting fo you to participate in.

            Deal with it.

          55. You'll stick to what reasonable people do?

            What is that?
            Posting and re-posting hundreds of comments on LRC and then pulling then?

            You aren't reasonable.

            You are an asshole.

            Sue me.

          56. Wow Rogere'.
            I am impressed.
            You apparently no longer have a lawyer.

            You have a full blown legal team.

            You are becoming the Donald Sterling of Intense Debate.

            I am curious, are you going to add PoofShesGone to your lawsuit and sue her as well? Because it might be hard because Poof! She gone…………

          57. Of course there is a reason and it has nothing to do with cowardice. Smart people believe in self preservation. I'm not interested in you, or your merry band of followers to descend upon me and attack me like you did in the past when I had a formal ID account. Been there, done that, not interested in re-living it.

            You do not like it when you get a taste of your own medicine, do you?

            I am curious, when is the big "Trial of the Century?" Caution your "Dream Team", and make sure they are aware of "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."……….

            I'd be interested in taking some vacation time, dusting off my Press Credentials and coming out there to cover your "trial". I want to see if there are real Kangaroos in the Courtroom, and do an online story about it………….

          58. I won't debate you. I do not debate with lesser life forms. I won't discuss anything with you, you are ignorant.

            I am just a Paula Revere. Someone to spread the word about your nonsense.

          59. Roger appears to be struggling today. Silly little troll should have just stayed in bed.

          60. I don\’t know why he bothers, he\’s not going to get any traction here at all if he can\’t provide objective evidence for his imaginary friend. No evidence = no acceptance. All he\’s been doing is trying to shift the burden of proof and it just won\’t work. Either he proves his God is real or he\’s just wasting everyone\’s time.

          61. The reason Rogere' appears to be struggling, is because the full moon is waning. He hit a crescendo last week when the moon was full. He is going into hibernation mode for the next several days. Sure, he will make his appearances, but it will be mostly half-hearted, incoherent babbling.

            Poor Rogere'. Man-child of the Moon…………

          62. Here are some jokes I consider funny.

            Politics is like driving, it's R to go backwards and D to go forward.

            Q: Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, a Compassionate Conservative and
            a Mean Conservative are walking down the street. They see a $100
            bill lying on the ground. Who gets it?
            A: The Mean Conservative, naturally. The other three are fictional.

            A republican found a magic genie's lamp and rubbed it. The genie said : "I will grant you one wish." He said : "I wish I were smarter". So the genie made him smarter. The next day he became a Democrat.

            Of course conservatives love low income Americans, that`s why they made so many of them.

            Q: How many Republicans does it take to screw in a light bulb?
            A: None, they only screw the poor

            How to spot a republican.
            A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

            The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.

            "She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be an Obama Democrat."

            "I am," replied the man. "How did you know?"

            "Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct. But I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

            The man smiled and responded, "You must be a Republican."

            "I am," replied the balloonist. "How did you know?"

            "Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you are going. You've risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's my fault."

            What's the biggest problem with the idea of intelligent design?
            It doesn't explain why Conservatives are made.

            The next five are some of my favorites from George Carlin.

            Have you ever wondered why Conservatives are so interested in encouraging people to volunteer in their communities? It’s because volunteers work for no pay. Republicans have been trying to get people to work for no pay for a long time.

            Once you leave the womb, conservatives don’t care about you until you reach military age. Then you’re just what they’re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.

            The real reason that we can’t have the Ten Commandments in a courthouse: You cannot post “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “Thou shalt not lie” in a building full of lawyers, judges, and politicians. It creates a hostile work environment.-

            The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it.

            Why are hemorrhoids called “hemorrhoids” instead of “assteroids”?

            What does a dyslexic, agnostic, insomniac spend most of his time doing? Staying up all night wondering if there really is a dog.

            I'll end with some science jokes I like.

            A photon checks into a hotel and the porter asks him if he has any luggage. The photon replies: “No, I’m travelling light.”

            An electron is driving down a motorway, and a policeman pulls him over. The policeman says: “Sir, do you realise you were travelling at 130km per hour?” The electron goes: “Oh great, now I’m lost.”

            Never trust an atom. They make up everything.

            Did you hear about the man who got cooled to absolute zero? He’s 0K now.

            Q: Why are quantum physicists so poor at sex?
            A: Because when they find the position, they can't find the momentum,
            and when they have the momentum, they can't find the position.

            A neutron walked into a bar and asked, "How much for a drink?" The bartender replied, "For you, no charge."

            Two atoms were walking across a road when one of them said, "I think I lost an electron!" "Really!" the other replied, "Are you sure?" "Yes, I 'm absolutely positive."

          1. I think if men were real men, with all it entailed.. (responsibility and dependability) then women would be more happy with us.

          2. They are two sides of the same coin.

            And men that satisfy what women expect from men will eliminate the need for feminists.
            That shouldn't be a very big shock for you.

            Women angry with men usually know men that gave them that attitude.

          3. Why do you think I'm single? Do you have the divorce records from Nebraska?

            Oh, that's right. I told you it wasn't mine.

            Did you believe the Washoe site was me?
            Oh, that's right. I told Alinksy it wasn't me.

            What you think you know about me may not be accurate.

          4. Roger Randolph Russell lives in Kearney, Nebraska.

            I heard he is a virgin. A very angry and lonely virgin.

            He also loves the movie Soap Dish.

            Care to tell me if I am accurate?

          5. So my name is a common one (as I've been saying).
            You posted all last week you were going to be traveling today, was all that just an a lie designed to try for an emotional reaction from me?

          6. He evidently got a reaction from you the other night. You deleted about two dozen of your own posts from StoryLeak.

          7. Your first name is common. Only one virgin has the name Roger Randolph Russell, and he lives in Kearney, Nebraska.

            Am I accurate?

          8. Still pushing for personal information?

            Why not wait and find out in depositions.
            The more you think you know, the more I realize you don't.

          9. Then I admit that this isn't the forum to discuss it.

            And even if it was, it would be out of my comfort zone to give further information to someone who has made these kinds of comments:

            5 hours ago @ Frontpage Magazine – The Snake in the Blood… · 0 replies · +2 points
            I will pay someone to slipyou some LSD in you Dairy Queen shake and tape it.

          10. Admitting I don't know is all the information I need. You just blew your case on this forum, stupid.

          11. Admitting you keep asking is all the information I need.

            You just keep digging the hole deeper, stupid.
            And what sane person would give you or admit to anything on a forum to a person who has made comments like this?

            16 minutes ago @ – growl · 1 reply · -1 points
            So is your brother going to die because gods sees the way you treat others and he is teaching you a lesson?

          12. I don't need to ask, you already told me I wasn't accurate. Your case is finished, you dug a hole in your wallet because you got angry when I said you pee sitting down.

          13. Is this like I didn't provide the contact information so the case was finished thinking?

            You are stalking me, threatened to come to my home and speak to me and tore into me for the divorce records you now realize may not be the same person.

            You would never get information from me on this forum of a personal nature, all your continued interrogation.

            If you think the case is finished then meet me in court. And all that travel plan comments, was that just more of the same wasn't it.

            Just like the complaint alleges.

          14. Yes, your case is also finished because you won't give me the contact information.

            I never said I was going to your home, I don't know where you live. I don't know if you are divorced or still a virgin.

          15. I know your name is Roger, and I can look up the name Roger on google, you idiot.

            Sue google you self possessed OCD virgin.

            You have no case with me.

            And even if you did, you need my name, which you forgot to get before you filed.

            You are a loser in every way.

          16. Cut and paste now?

            So, did you travel to the middle of Nebraska or was that just more of your typical effort to cause me distress emotionally?

          17. Saying I had to have better answers in person than on line?

            After making comments like this one?
            20 minutes ago @ – growl · 3 replies · 0 points
            Having your head in a basket would make everyone here pleased.

            And we would keep your head in the basket until your girlfriend came to get you.

            It would dry up and be food for insects. The first time your head was ever used for something useful.

          18. You don't seem to have any first hand knowledge in this area.

            Who are you to say what a woman wants? All women are different.

            Feminism comes from women fighting for their rights and a social definition, NOT based on anything a man NEEDS to give them. In fact some women prefer to lick rug.

          19. Projection. It's all you have.

            And real men don't need to hold women down. Real men aren't threatened because of a woman doing her best.

          20. Any guy that does that gets a kick to his head everyday in the prison courtyard.

          21. Oh brother, the backtrack.

            So you realized that the comment you posted was flawed and you can't just say you were either wrong or unclear.

          22. I stand by my statement.

            Do you stand by your statement that your girlfriend doesn't like to be held down?

          23. You stand my the comment some women love to be held down in response to mine saying real mean aren't threatened by women that do their best?

          24. You are entitled to your opinion of course.

            But then why does your posse follow me around to try to lower every single place I post comments into a school yard brawl?

            All insults all the time.

          25. I don't have a posse and why do you stalk me from site to site and to try to lower every single place I post comments into a school yard brawl?

            Like this site

          26. Is that why the responses to SBJ was pulled yesterday?
            Because I posted a quote that you didn't want anyone to remember about needing to contact people off forum?

          1. Yes, you did. You told him your comment was funny.

            It may have been funny to you, but that doesn't mean it was funny to everyone else, humor is individual.

          2. You will be receiving a formal complaint from my attorney regarding Soap Dish.

            You can explain it to a jury.

          3. I have never posted his address, you liar.

            Again, please give me his address. I really need to send him the complaint about Soap Dish.

          4. An avatar is different from an address. So please give me the address.

            It's ridiculous that I have to beg you for your attorney's contact information/ Nothing can go forward. And this is grounds for a dismissal.

          5. You don't know what I have. I am asking you for it now. But you refuse. That is grounds for dismissal.

          6. I know that if you found his website to use his pic then you have his contact information.

            I also know you have an email address to get that information from. That I have made an open offer to get you any information on his contact info that you request from that email address.

          7. You DON'T know that. I can't even remember where I get most of my avatars. I just google stuff like balls, or lawyer, and take whatever comes up first.

            Now, if you are going to refuse to give me your lawyer's contact information, then your case must be dismissed.

          8. Backtracking again?

            You sure are doing that a lot lately.
            And once more, you have an email address where you can request that contact information.

          9. Yoiu keep saying what I have, but you have no proof.

            I will not give you my email address, I don't trust you, you are a stalker.

            I will give my email address to your attorney, if you will please provide it.

          10. There are many comment in your link. Which one?

            And how are you on getting me your lawyer's contact information?

            I'm really going to need that soon.

          11. So what is the permalink to your lawyer's contact information?

            I'm still trying to get that.

          12. Count up 8 comments and the permalink where wee gave out the email address is available like the day he posted it for you.

          13. There are hundreds of comments on that link. And I don't see any address.

            This is a legal matter, not an Easter Egg hunt.

          14. That link is to one comment, and its' still on his profile comment stream.

            Dont' blame me for your stupid. You really should get legal help if you're so lame you can't find a comment with the permalink.

          15. No, that link is for hundreds of comments. I I don't like you calling me stupid and making other personal attacks when I just want your lawyer;s contact information so we can move on with the case before it is dismissed. You are a bully.

          16. I'm not comfortable for you to continue making demands in spite of the evidence you already have that info.

            Call the court, they will have it.

    1. Is this meant to be taken seriously? If so, you have a lot in common with those fundamentalist christians whom you so despise.

      And if it is meant as a joke, well then keep your day job, whatever it is, because you are not a funny person.

      1. It is a joke and I see you have no sense of humor.

        Kind of a shame if you don't know how to laugh.

        If your part of the PC crowd you are part of the problem with this country

        1. Yea, I don't have a sense of humor because I don't find one particular joke funny. I do know how to laugh. I laugh at lots of jokes. I don't laugh at jokes that are not actually funny, as was the case with your comment. By the way, I was suppose to know this was a joke how?

          It is not PC to call out as unfunny something that is not funny. I don't laugh at jokes that are aimed at people because of their gender, race, sexual orientation, age, etc. I don't do this because I don't think such jokes are actually funny.

          I would say that you are part of the problem with this country if you think it is okay to attempt to make fun of people because of their sex, age, sexual orientation, race, etc.. Call it what you like. But the charge of PC is just a club that people such as yourself use as an excuse to justify their retrograde beliefs and/or to try to guilt others into keeping their mouth shut. Doesn't work with me.

          1. " I don't laugh at jokes that are aimed at people because of their gender, race, sexual orientation, age, etc."

            I do.

            I thought Archie Bunker was hilarious.

            Political correctness is intellectual terrorism.

          2. I wonder if you got the point of the Archie Bunker show? Sure, there were jokes of this kind in the series. But the real joke, the central target of that series was Archie Bunker himself, who was a stand-in for all the bigots of the world. If you think the core comedy of that show was the actual bigoted remarks made by Archie Bunker, then just maybe you were one of the persons for whom Archie was the archetype.

            So first I am falsely accused of the fictional offense of being PC and now you attempt to paint me as a terrorist. So typical of assholes like yourself. Political correctness, as I said is a charge leveled by neanderthals who haven't any really good arguments to advance. It is an attempt to guilt a person into shutting up. Political correctness is a load of crap. It is a fiction. It is a patently stupid charge leveled by idiots who simply want to dismiss another's comments because they don't like them but can't think of a mature, well-reasoned response to them.

            Finally, whatever political correctness might be, it is a form of free speech. Accusing me of political correctness gets you nowhere. The accusation itself is laughable. Do you honestly think for even one second that I will restrain myself in stating my views simply because you label them as politically incorrect or charge me of playing the mythical political correctness card? If so you are an even bigger fool than I thought.

          3. He threw a fit.

            Get a life?

            I have a great life unlike you who spends his entire life on ID stalking and harassing people

            So GFY

          4. He explained his position.
            You have nothing to say about his personal opinions, they are his.

            You want different ones, fine. But you don't get to tell him what he should find funny. So, you need to get a life.

          5. I never told him what HE should funny I said other do.

            Like I said I have a life and I am getting ready to go outside and enjopy it and not sit on her being a miserable POS trying to sue everyone all day because you have no life

          6. You didn't show any respect for his sense of humor, or the limits he explained.

            Why should I have to quote you, it's all from this morning you should be able to remember that far back.

          7. Roger, since you obviouslt understand destryoedbydoma so much and you are new BFF's, why don't you all consider getting a room>

            Who know, as popular as you two are, you could start your own blog. Call it

          8. I do. Based on the evidence towards intelligent design on things as common place as a virus, or the complicated endocrine system, or the vast variety of life that goes against millions of years of selective survival, I can wonder about a larger possibility. A creator.

          9. Yet you've done none of that. You have CLAIMED evidence for intelligent design, based on your own fallacy from ignorance, you haven't actually presented any evidence that there was actually an intelligent designer. That's where you have to prove that God actually exists in reality. When do you think you'll actually get around to doing that? Until then, all the claims and arm waving you've been doing are meaningless.

          10. The evidence I just laid out is real.

            And that is your fallacy. You refuse to even admit the things I pointed out are real.

            Our conclusions from that may be different, but my evidence is more substantial than your assertions on the big bang with nothing to look at and examine.

            The endocrine system is complicated beyond what our medical researchers can figure out and solve. That's why we have the diseases we have with no cures. I don't see that as a product of evolution, but evidence we are in a state of decate genetically.

            Of course if you have PROOF otherwise, feel free to present it. Fair is fair after all.

          11. Roger go away you are
            idiotic. I have talked with real Christians who are 80 years old that are not as ignorant as you. You have met your comment quota for the day now go away. Tell your handlers you have failed once again You are a Joke at this point.

          12. I notice you did a lot of bad calling.

            But you didn't actually address the comment you were almost replying to.

            That's why you should just wander away.

          13. What a crock of shit. By telling me that I have no sense of humor on the basis of a single joke that I did not find funny you are implying that I should have found the joke funny. Now if you come back again with the lame statement that you weren't telling me that I should have found the joke funny, then you are just flat-out lying.

          14. No asshole. I explained to you why the joke was not funny. You think anyone who disagrees with you must be throwing a fit because you have a inflated sense of the worth of what comes flowing out that brain of yours.

          15. You explained why you did not think it was funny. If you don't like it don't read it.
            Calling me an asshole was funny

          16. Isn't today the day that Alinsky will be in Kearny, NE?
            Are you two going to have a Meet and Greet?

            Will you post details of your date online?

          17. What date?
            Just because he plans on traveling (possibly) to a town in the middle of Nebraska doesn't mean we'll meet.

            It means he's just trying to stir up the pot and being his normal self, I wonder if he's going to try paying someone to slip LSD in my shakes like he mentioned once, with him and his bizarre fixations there is no telling.

  3. "If you go ask a dozen random women on the street, I'm willing to  bet that they'll tell you this is nonsense.  How do I know?  Because upon seeing that, I did ask a bunch of women I know and that's exactly what they said.  Absolutely none of the people I randomly sampled said they have *EVER* been menaced by men.  Not one."

    I agree that Wheaton is most definitely wrong to have said that all women have been menaced by men. But just what you think you're tiny little sample above demonstrates is unclear to me. It does refute the claim that "all women" have been menaced by men. But it is useless in making any claim other than this. It obviously was not a truly random sample, despite you characterizing it as such. You admit that these were all women whom you know. That is not random. The fact that you think it is only reveals you don't fully understand what random means, at least so far as it relates to polling. Additionally the sample size is much too small. Finally, your data is anecdotal, For each of these reasons so your data certainly can not credibly be used to draw any conclusions about how small or large is the percentage of women who have been menaced by men. If you think it can be used for this then you need some instruction in basic statistics and polling methodology.

    "I'm sure that's a solid baseline too.  If you took a wide spectrum of women across the country, accounting for all ages, all social and political and financial backgrounds, and asked them if they've been personally menaced by men, either specifically or as a general group, they'd largely say no."

    You know this how? If this is the case then provide at least a link to the data that confirms it. Just because you assume that this is what would result from such a poll doesn't make it so. Now, don't misunderstand me. I am not claiming that the opposite is true. Unlike you, I acknowledge that I don't know what such a poll would show. Thus the appropriately rational and reasonable thing to do is to admit now knowing. But you have already come to the conclusion without any data other than your non-random, small-sample size survey. This is not the right way to do it. You are doing it wrong.

    1. I never presented it as anything but a small sample, nor claimed it was anything else. However, that small sample was enough to disprove the claim that was made, and that's all it was intended to do. There's no such thing as a totally random survey, all surveys perform such with certain common elements in mind, be it people in the same city/state/country, people with access to telephones or computers, etc.

      You just like criticising for the sake of criticism without understanding reality.

      1. Then where is the data for your claim that "Virtually no men are a menace to women!" and your implied claim that the menacing of women is a minor or small problem in our society. Again, you made these claims, not I. You offered no evidence for them. As for your survey, sure you did not specifically say that you were offering it as evidence for your other claims. But until your reply above you also did not clearly specify it was being offered only to refute Wheaton's claim that all women have been menaced. So now you have cleared that up. Well and good. But you still have not offered data to substantiate the other assertions you made.

        No such thing as a totally random survey? This will be news, I suspect, to most statisticians and mathematicians. Incidentally, I suspect you are interpreting the meaning of random differently than am I and the scientific community in general.

        "The term "random" has a different meaning in statistics than in ordinary language. In everyday terms, a random event is one that is unpredictable, lacks purpose and/or has no discernable pattern. In statistical terms, a random event is one that occurs with a certain, measurable chance or probability of happening. For example, under the simplest circumstances, where each member of a population has one chance of being sampled, the probability of getting selected for a survey can be calculated just by knowing a population size and desired sample size. One would have a 10 percent chance of being selected for a 100-person sample out of a total population of 1000. But, researchers use several methods for randomly selecting samples. These include stratified, cluster and systematic sampling. Stratified and cluster sampling require prior knowledge about the survey population but can produce more representative samples than simpler “blind” sampling methods. Researchers often use stratified sampling to capture the diversity of large populations with distinctive, homogeneous subgroups—such as the U.S. population. In all cases, feasibility and cost influence the sampling technique chosen by researchers.

        "Nonrandom samples include those that select members of the population based on their proximity, availability or through referrals by friends. There are sometimes scientific reasons to conduct non-random surveys, but they are often unscientific and should not be used to generalize statistically to larger populations." (Source:

        I suggest you read the entire document there. I was using random in the sense that the National Science Foundation described. Your survey was not scientific. In fact, by the description offered of nonrandom in the second paragraph of this excerpt, your survey is non-scientific because your sample was from a group of people both proximate and available to you because of that proximity. Therefore it has nothing credible or of substance to say about the issue of the degree of menacing behavior by men directed toward women, other than to refute Wheaton's claim (which I agreed was absurd) that ALL women have been menaced.

        I fully understand reality. It is you who is denying or rejecting it here. I am criticising you because you have made assertions and claims without providing evidentiary support for those claims. This is legitimate criticism. When you start providing actual evidence for claims you make, I will stop criticizing you for this. However, I do reserve the right to critique the evidence your offer, should you ever start doing this.

  4. "Now sure, I'm certain some of them have been raped, some have been beaten, some have been abused and that's both regrettable and reprehensible, but to say that all women have been menaced by men is absurd to the highest degree."

    You are correct that it is absurd for Wheaton to claim that all women have been menaced by a man. But in the first part of this paragraph you speak of women being raped, beaten, and abused (I assume you mean physically) as if these are the only means by which a woman can be menaced. This is simply not true. Stalking, intimidation, repeated harassment, and threats are forms of menacing a person. None of these necessarily include physical assault.

    Based on a survey – which was properly conducted, unlike yours – jointly conduced by the National Institute of Justice (a division of the U.S. Justice Department) and the Center for Disease Control, an estimated 1.9 million women are physically assaulted each year. While some of this may have been women assaulting other women, I doubt that it represents more than 1% of this total. (Source: From these results and others in the report, I conclude that menacing of women, which includes acts of physical violence but is not limited to this, is not a tiny problem as you wish your readers to think. It certainly is large enough to be treated with more serious consideration than you are in this post.

    From the same source:

    "Using a definition of rape that includes forced vaginal, oral, and anal intercourse, the survey found that rape is a crime committed primarily against youth: 18 percent of women surveyed said they experienced a completed or attempted rape at some time in their life and 0.3 percent said they experienced a completed or attempted rape in the previous 12 months.

    "Violence against women is primarily partner violence: 76 percent of the women who were raped and/or physically assaulted since age 18 were assaulted by a current or former husband, cohabiting partner, or date, compared with 18 percent of the men."

    "Using a definition of stalking that re- quires the victim to feel a high level of fear, the survey found that stalking is more prevalent than previously thought: 8 per- cent of surveyed women and 2 percent of surveyed men said they were stalked at some time in their life; 1 percent of surveyed women and 0.4 percent of surveyed men said they were stalked in the previous 12 months.

    From these results and others in the report, I conclude that menacing of women, which includes acts of physical violence but is not limited to this, is not a tiny problem as you wish your readers to think. It certainly is large enough to be treated with more serious consideration than you are in this post.

  5. "Virtually no men are a menace to women!"

    This comment is equally absurd. It most certainly is not a conclusion justified by nor supported by the paltry anecdotal data you offered from your completely non-randomized and non-scientifically and methodologically incorrectly conducted survey.

    "You're looking at a very tiny percentage of men doing anything violent toward a tiny percentage of women."
    From the data (or I should say lack of data) provided in this post you are completely unjustified in concluding that it is a "tiny percentage of men doing anything violent toward a tiny percentage of women." And again, you have changed the scope of the issue. Wheaton was not talking solely about violence toward women. His comment was about menacing, which, again, includes violence but is not limited to violence. I can't identify the name of it, but you most definitely have employed a logical fallacy here.

    "I'm not trying to downplay actual violence toward women by any means…"

    You are aware that violence against women is not the only form of menacing, aren't you? I ask this because, while I think you're criticism of Wil Wheaton's use of the word "all" in his statement is justified, you are incorrectly changing the subject from the issue of menacing to the much narrower issue of violence against women. Without actually checking the data, I am fairly certain that the percentage of women who are victims of violence perpetrated by men is smaller than the percentage who have likely been menaced. But you seem to be implying that the two are the same since you switched from talking about menacing of women – the focus of Wheaton's posting – to violence against women.

    "… but I'm pointing out that you have a group of women who, by their own admission, hate men and have been caught time and time again outright lying about the statistics and then you have men like Wil Wheaton, and he's certainly not alone, who are only too happy to buy into this radical feminist bullshit because they feel they have to in order to be liberal."

    I thought this post was a criticism of Will Wheaton? Now you've brought in some women, whom you don't identify. But since you've brought them in, who are these women? Provide links to comments where they have said they hate men. I'm not going to simply take your word for it. What statistics have these women used that you claim are lies? Do you think all feminists are radical man-haters. Is there no part of feminism you think justified as a cause worthy of support?

    "They can't say "this doesn't make any sense" or "show me your data", they'll get shamed by their liberal cohorts."

    This is a rather hypocritical criticism coming from someone who has failed to provide data to support the assertions you make in this post.
    ". like most liberals, he's out there reacting emotionally, not intellectually."

    I have no quarrel with your criticism of Wheaton's overstating the number of women who are menaced by men. But Wheaton doesn't speak for all, or even most liberals. For you to charge that most liberals react emotionally is an opinion without any substance. What is your data for this? I know a great many liberals personally (in the hundreds), and nearly everyone of them offers more intellectually substantive arguments than I have ever encountered from you. This post is yet one more example of your inability to offer arguments based on credible data and evidence. You simply assert that a thing is true and then don't provide much, if anything, beyond anecdote to support it.

    1. Then why don't you show us, with evidence, as a percentage of the male population as a whole, how many actually commit rape and other violent crimes on women, because they are women. We'll wait.

      1. Oh, I see you are now employing Roger's tactic. Shift the burden of evidence. I did not make the claim "Virtually no men are a menace to women!". You did that. I simply pointed out that you were not justified in doing so from the small anecdotal survey you presented. You certainly did not offer any actual evidence beyond your suvrey. You just stated it as though it were an undisputed fact. Well, provide the evidence. Provide the data. I have no burden here since I did not make a claim. Again, I questioned your claim.

  6. "I’m not trying to downplay actual violence toward women by any means…"

    Sure did fool me. Your entire tone, not to mention the content, is dismissive of the sexual discrimination of all forms, including violence, directed at women in our culture and around the world. But then you go on deluding yourself that you aren't trying to downplay violence toward women. Wait. Come to think of you it technically you might be right. Reading your comments closely I don't detect an intent to downplay it. But you managed to do it anyway. You'll just need to stop trying. You know what Yoda had to say about trying: " No. Try not. Do… or do not. There is no try." So stop trying not to downplay actual violence toward women and just do it. Perhaps you could post a commentary condemning violence toward women rather than criticizing others who actually talk about it and work to diminish its occurrence.

  7. 1 minute ago @ Bitch Spot – More Feminist Bullshit… · 0 replies · +1 points

    Do you realize this forum is an open debate and discussion setting? That means people may not agree with you. If that is threatening for you in any way, this may not be the right setting fo you to participate in.

    Deal with it.

    But yet you will sue people. So maybe this is not the right setting for you. Your harass people then sue them because they fire back and say you have emotional distress.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPG only)