How Hypocrisy Prevents True Gender Equality

The concept of “gender equality” is quite well regarded in our society today. The idea that men and women are fundamentally equal in capability and, therefore, deserving of equal treatment is mainstream, and essentially taken for granted in our culture. To go against this idea is to wade into the realm of the politically incorrect and invite severe consequences in the process.

Sports pundit Stephen A. Smith, a long time fixture at ESPN, has recently come face to face with this reality. Ray Rice, an American football running back currently contracted to the Baltimore Ravens of the National Football League, recently received a two game suspension from the league. Why?

Ray Rice stepped up to the microphone at a Ravens press conference Thursday morning. He talked about his two-game suspension– and publicly apologized to his wife.

“My actions were inexcusable. My actions are something I have to live with the rest of my life,” he said.

Suspended by the NFL for the first two games of the season, the running back has been quiet during camp. But his critics nationwide have been quite vocal about what many feel was a lenient punishment after he was indicted for physically assaulting his then fiancee.

Infamous TMZ Sports video shows Rice dragging his now-wife, Janay Palmer, from an elevator at a casino in Atlantic City in February after prosecutors say he punched her.

A judge put Rice in a first-time offender program, meaning no jail time and a clean record. But NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who met with Rice and his wife, says the assault warranted suspension.

“We simply cannot tolerate conduct that endangers others… This is particularly true with respect to domestic violence and other forms of violence against women,” said Goodell in a letter to Rice.

Rice’s conduct will cost him a two-game suspension and half a million dollars.


That Ray Rice assaulted his girlfriend is not really in question. What is notable, however, is the action that preceded the assault: Rice’s girlfriend actually was the first to initiate physical contact, assaulting Rice and provoking a response. Both were initially charged with assault; though Rice dropped the charges against his girlfriend and she will face no sanction, Rice will be punished for his response.

On Feb. 15, at around 2:50 a.m., Rice and Palmer got into a fight in an elevator in Atlantic City’s Revel Casino. Security called police, who rolled back the surveillance tape and saw that the couple had “struck each other with their hands.” Shortly thereafter, both were arrested and charged with simple assault, suggesting that the cops believed them to be equally responsible. The two refused medical attention, according to the Baltimore Sun, and neither reported any injuries. The Sun also spoke with Rice’s attorney, Andrew Alperstein, who said the fight was a “very minor physical altercation” and “little more than a misunderstanding.” Early word around the Revel indicated otherwise, though at this point no one in any official capacity was reporting that Palmer had been knocked unconscious. The two were released and allowed to leave together, according to the Ravens’ vice president of public and community relations, Kevin Byrne.

Stephen A. Smith had something to say about this:

This quickly landed Smith in politically incorrect no-man’s land, forcing him to make an almost immediate apology.

Is it not prudent, however, to consider the implications of the fact that an apology has been deemed necessary in the first place?

If the concept of gender equality is to be taken at face value, then the actions Rice took in this case do not seem to warrant the consequences he now faces. He was faced with a physical assault and he responded in kind, producing a physical assault on his attacker. If the two are deemed to actually be equal, then it must be accepted that Rice does not deserve harsher sanction for his actions than his girlfriend in this case. They are equal, and equal actions warrant equal responses.

Many will respond to the above by claiming that there is a fundamental inequality here: Rice is a man, and a very strong one at that. Because of the size and strength differential between men and women, some will argue that a response in kind by a man to an instance of physical assault by a woman is not actually equal or justified. Comments trying to emphasize this point usually read something like this:

Men can seriously hurt women. It doesn’t matter if she deserved it. Most women cannot hurt a man but a man can seriously hurt most women.


This line of reasoning essentially privileges the physical differences between men and women above all else, and claims that said differences warrant a double standard here: larger, stronger men should not be able to hit women even when assaulted, since smaller women are physically less capable than they are. It is more wrong for a man to assault a woman than vice-versa.

Such an argument doesn’t seem entirely irrational at first glance. It is true that men are generally much stronger than women, and it is true that in most instances they are capable of physically hurting her more than she can hurt him. The argument begins to fall apart when you start considering its implications: should a larger and/or stronger male be prohibited from physically retaliating against a weaker and/or smaller male attacker? Those who use this logic to defend women like Rice’s girlfriend in this case do risk the potential for a slippery slope.

If we are to accept the use of fundamental differences in the physical capabilities and composition of male and female bodies in the creation of one double standard (in this case, the double standard relating to a man’s ability to defend himself from the an assault by a woman), then we necessarily open the door to the use of said distinctions in the creation of other double standards. If it is alright to assume that obvious physical distinctions between men and women allow for women to be given more leeway in one regard (assault), what is to stop us from also assuming that said distinctions allow for men to be given privileges in other regards (e.g., vast over-representation in certain high-paying fields that privilege their physical advantages and exacerbate the persistence of the gender pay gap)?


Is the fact that male sports consistently outdraw their female counterparts by a vast degree to be accepted on the basis of the fact that men are simply more naturally athletic? Should we just accept that, no matter how hard we attempt to promote them and no matter how committed we are to the idea that they are worth as much as their male counterparts, female athletes will never draw the attention and financing of their male counterparts? Should we allow such knowledge to limit enforcement of initiatives like Title IX and the promotion of women’s athletics? Physical differences can be used to justify this double standard, just as they have been in the case of Ray Rice and many others.

And what of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM)? Credible studies exist that indicate a natural male advantage with regard to hard technical/mathematical study. Should we allow such studies to limit our enthusiasm for promoting gender equality in STEM fields?

If we let the use of physical distinctions between the sexes inform and justify double standards privileging one sex over the other in this instance, then we necessarily condone the use of said distinctions to justify double standards in many other instances. Are those who stand for “gender equality” and the defense of Rice’s girlfriend despite her own clear guilt in this instance (she also assaulted him) willing to accept this reality?

Hopefully they are, because there is not much of a compromise that I can see here. If we are truly committed to the notion of gender equality and the idea that natural distinctions between the sexes should not be used to privilege one or the other in any way, then we must apply it in all respects: equal actions must invite equal consequences. We would need to take the fact that Ray Rice’s girlfriend physically assaulted him just as seriously (no more, no less) as we are currently taking the fact that Ray Rice responded in kind. Neither would be considered more severe than the other, and both genders would have equal responsibilities to go along with equal consequences for neglecting them.


If we are to accept that physical distinctions between the sexes can alter the application of said equality (thus justifying the treatment of Rice’s offense as the more severe), then we must apply that conclusion in all respects, and accept that one gender may be privileged over the other in some regards and not others. Consistency is essential if we are to maintain any degree of intellectual honestly with regard to this topic. The sexes are either equal or they are not — there is no middle ground.

Read Next: Women Are Lying When They Say They Want “Equality”

265 thoughts on “How Hypocrisy Prevents True Gender Equality”

  1. There is no gender equality when you have the following:
    -Women getting full custody of kids, the house and cars and men having to pay not only child support, but vaginamony (ailmony) which results in 90% of his cheque being depleted.
    -Women filling up the entire college campuses and where men are falsely accused of rape and expelled with a criminal record and the women is not scrutinised whatsoever.
    -Women receiving all the jobs in this horrendous service sector economy, based on affirmative action, her good looks and sex appeal, and not based on hard work and merit where men have to prove all the time.
    MGTOW for life.

    1. Agreed, and yet they have the nerve to say how “oppressed” they are! The mainstream media is one sided and keeps up the pro woman agenda, encouraging a victim mentality. If we looked at who has it worse in America, it would be blatantly obvious that it’s men! But not even one news source will come out and say it, because they have to keep the sheep under control.

      1. But on this site do not mention the intersectionality of feminism, communism, minority voting patterns and a blind eye to chosen regimes in the ME. Or the Pickelhaub’ed One will get all huffy.

  2. Either women don’t understand what equality means, or where lying all along. Equality means both genders can do the same thing, 50/50. When women say equality, they mean 60/40 equality, or 70/30. Women want to be equal when it’s convenient, and have exceptions when it’s not.

    1. When men are being scrutinised by the corrupt family courts, the mainstream media is silent on the issuew. But when women for a change, are forced to pay ailmony, then the issue becomes a big serious matter.
      I remember watching on CNN a show a live panel show where the women were complaining of paying ailmony and how it needs to be stopped and CNN trying to defend their views. Double standard hypocrites. Where was CNN when men were being destroyed?

      1. That’s why it annoys me when men do not fleece women in court, because that’s the only way the laws are going to change.
        Nobody cares when men lose money, but when women lose money it’s suddenly a big deal.

      2. Exactly, and that is because feminists literally control every TV show and website. This is one of the few sites i can post without having my comments censored. Here are the sites feminists now control:
        1. CNN
        2. MSN
        3. Yahoo
        4. Slate
        5. The Atlantic
        6. Salon
        7. Buzzfeed
        8. Cracked
        9. Mother Jones
        10. Thought Catalog
        11. Vice
        12. Jezebel (obviously)
        13. Countless others I can’t remember at the moment

        1. Cracked was my source of humor. Until it fucked up with that anti red-pill listicle. Everything has been downhill since then.

        2. Thought Catalog at least still has the very funny feminist satire troll columnist, Anne Gus.

        3. Let’s not forget the major New York publishing houses, like Bedford, Pearson, etc.
          They ensure that educational textbooks remain feminist. In addition, they only support mid-level authors that voice their ideas via fiction.

        4. I remember thinking to myself, “Wow, these articles are starting to read like some serious horseshit all of a sudden. I didn’t come here to feel like shit about myself. Where did the comedy go?”

        5. I instinctively stopped reading Cracked not that long ago…
          Interesting that we’re all on the same page with this.

        6. Go to 9gag. Men and women alike actively shame fat people and feminists there… and it’s hilarious too.

        7. Agree. I’ve stopped watching TV and reading certain sites because of all of the double standards and the nonsense.
          Women want to be treated like equals….but only sometimes.

        8. Nope. They don’t control Thought Catalog. I’ve been posting red pill comments over there for months (along with a few other guys), and have been having a blast. No censorship so far. They’ve even been posting articles by red pill authors, such as Judgy Bitch. The feminists are freaking the fuck out, because “their” site is being taken over by “misogynists”. It’s hilarious.
          They DO outnumber us, but they literally can’t come up with a coherent argument to save their lives. They end up looking like complete fools.
          I’d really encourage you guys to head over there and drop a few comments. They have a large blue pill audience, and the complete hypocrisy and blatant lack of critical thinking skills becomes extremely obvious to anyone reading when we force these idiots into debate.
          Hell. I bet they’d even publish articles by the guys who write columns here, if they’d try to submit something.

        9. Which is a real shame, as I used to wake up every day at 5 am and would always visit around 6 when the new articles were just recently updated. I’ve been visiting since 2006 and now it’s gone into the gutter.

    2. There’s no such thing as equality. Seriously. It doesn’t not exist in nature. “Equality” is an ideal, a method for people with low status to increase their status. After all, if you’re at the bottom of the social heirarchy then “equality” is an improvement for you. But hold on, it turns out people don’t actually want true equality, they only say they want it. Take the Communist government, which was often made up of lower status workers. Once they got in power do you think they wanted to be equal to their fellow communists? Hell no, they lived extravagant lifestyles! Take the Founding Fathers of the USA. When they were subjugated under the British crown they beat their chests about equality, yet held slaves and only allowed men who owned slaves to vote. When George Washington was elected, only 6% of the people in the USA were allowed to vote. How is that equality? Don’t fall for it folks, “equality” is a technique that the lower classes uses the overthrow the upper class, and then establish themselves as the upper class.

      1. you should amend that. It’s a word used by a minority elite to trick lower order people into signing on to an agenda that will primarily benefit that minority elite. British people were well aware of the hypocrisy of chancers like Washington and Jefferson.
        Yankee Doodle was a figure of fun, but Brits were also aware that the colonies were broadly more democratic than the mother country. That’s why the King had to contract the fighting to Hessian mercenaries and keen imperial administrators like Cornwallis or local Tory-boys with Tarleton’s Dragoons. No one in England was motivated to dispute independence with the Yanks. Even a conservative like Edmund Burke (who saw right through Jefferson) didn’t care for the Crown’s cause.
        However, the “all me are created equal” preamble is a poison pill that has devastated good sense.

        1. I agree that “all me are created equal” is a poison pill. The fact is, we could not have evolved from microorganisms to the incredibly complex mammals we are today unless someone was always better. Someone HAD to be better. Equality does not exist. It is a myth. That’s why we have a social hierarchy. There’s no way around it. Jefferson was an intellectual, but he still lived BEFORE Darwin and couldn’t explain why everything seemed so well “designed.” Further, he invoked this deity because it was the only authority considered greater than the king. He was really trying to challenge the king’s authority over the colonies. Currently, “equality” is used by the unfit as means to take resources from the fit. Everyone knows they’re giving jobs to people who are incompetent and don’t deserve them. Their dead weight is being carried by the fit. Throughout most of history the unfit were culled through natural selection, but Leftists now have social programs which preserve this inferior DNA, and indeed even incentivize them to reproduce. Ugh.

        2. He’s in hell getting butt fucked by MLK. just like his legacy on earth is getting reamed.

        3. Yes. All men are CREATED equal, but it’s up to the individual to make something of themselves.

        4. Humans were NOT CREATED. We’re not equal because every person is different. We’re random combinations of genes all competing for superiority. Sex is nothing more than trading genes like kids used to trade baseball cards. Your value is based on the value you provide to your tribe. In order for everyone to be equal we would all have to be EXACTLY the same. Even then, biological twins aren’t exactly the same as they have different experiences and nutrition, not to mention brain elasticity.

      2. Washington was the richest man in the colonies. Jefferson at least at that time was filthy rich. Adams fils were loaded. Patrick Henry was a shipping tycoon. The American fracas was not a lower order overthrowing an elite by any means. Everyone knew this. What was clever was to get just enough ordinary men to invest in the separation and to make an alliance with a revanchist French crown.

      1. Amen brother. Like the $16 trillion debt? …. Follow the money. YKW is paying for all this stupidity.

    3. You notice how “women are weaker than men and need to be protected” when we’re talking about a lawsuit(and there’s money to be made), but when a girl wants to join the infantry all of a sudden women can do anything a man can?

    4. Keep in mind that equality as a concept only exists as an instrument for leftists to realize their emotions, usually a pathological form of altruism where the “victim is always right”.

    5. Especially in relationships, women are repulsed by equality. All of us here on this site know that if you treat your girlfriend like your equal she will lose respect for you and walk all over you. Every single one of those “I can fuck around just like men” kinda girls get dry as a desert when a guy gives them equality by asking her opinion on things and caring about her feelings.
      Its hypocrisy at its finest and when you really start to understand that most everything an American women says is hypocritical you realize how little time and energy you shoud reserve for these creatures.

      1. yes, we all know this, and on this site and some others that truth is regularly articulated, yet it remains unofficial and acknowledged truth. The idea of feminist hypocrisy, and the split personality of women more generally needs to find itself into the public consciousness. Needs to be demonstrated

    6. Agree. Women don’t really want true equality. Many only want to have the ‘good things’ that equality brings into their lives while still complaining (or whining) about how much stronger a man is physically and he can hurt a woman.
      Well, maybe she deserved or had it coming (as in this case)? Many people have had that very thought when they pass by a couple and the women is beating on the man (true equality?).
      No, it’s more like hypocrisy at it’s finest.

    7. I agree that men doesn’t have gender equality. But Mrs.Watson describes perfectly the meaning of feminism:
      “The “HeForShe” campaign just launched by the UN has a clear aim: we want to end gender inequality – and to do that we need everyone to be involved. Above all, we want to try to galvanise as many men and boys as possible to be advocates for equality between the sexes.
      I was appointed as a UN Women Goodwill Ambassador six months ago, and the more I have spoken about feminism, the more I have realised that fighting for women’s rights has too often become synonymous with man-hating. If there is one thing I know for certain, it is that this has to stop.
      For the record, feminism by definition is: “The belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes.”
      I started questioning gender-based assumptions as a young girl. At the age of eight, I was confused at being called “bossy”, because I wanted to direct the plays we would put on for our parents – but the boys were not. At 14, I started being sexualised by certain elements of the press. At 15, my girlfriends started dropping out of their sports teams because they didn’t want to appear “muscly”. At 18, I found my male friends were unable to express their feelings.
      I decided I was a feminist and this seemed uncomplicated to me. But my recent research has shown me that “feminism” has become an unpopular word. Apparently I am among the ranks of women whose expressions are seen as too strong, too aggressive, isolating, anti-men and unattractive. Why is the word such an uncomfortable one?
      As a British woman, I think it is right that I am paid the same as my male counterparts. I think it is right that I should be able to make decisions about my own body. I think it is right that women be involved on my behalf in the policies and decision-making of my country. I think it is right that socially I am afforded the same respect as men.
      These rights I consider to be human rights – but I am one of the lucky ones. My life is a sheer privilege because my parents didn’t love me less because I was born a daughter. My school did not limit me because I was a girl. My mentors didn’t assume I would go less far because I might give birth to a child one day. But not all women have been afforded the same rights that I have. In fact, statistically, very few have been.
      In 1997, Hillary Clinton made a famous speech in Beijing about women’s rights. Sadly, many of the things she wanted to change are still a reality today. But what stood out for me the most was that only 30 per cent of her audience were male. How can we affect change in the world when only half of it is invited or feels welcome to participate in the conversation?
      Men – I’d like to take this opportunity to extend to you a formal invitation. Gender equality is your issue too. Because to date, I’ve seen my father’s role as a parent being valued less by society despite my needing his presence as a child as much as my mother’s. I’ve seen young men suffering from mental illness unable to ask for help for fear it would make them look less “macho” — in fact in the UK suicide is the biggest killer of men aged between 20 and 49. I’ve seen men made fragile and insecure by a distorted sense of what constitutes male success. Men don’t have the benefits of equality either.
      We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes, but I can see that they are and that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence. If men don’t have to be aggressive in order to be accepted, women won’t feel compelled to be submissive. If men don’t have to control, women won’t have to be controlled.
      Both men and women should feel free to be sensitive. Both men and women should feel free to be strong. It is time that we all perceive gender on a spectrum – not as two opposing sets of ideals.
      If we stop defining each other by what we are not and start defining ourselves by what we are, we can all be freer and this is what HeForShe is about. It’s about freedom.
      I want men to take up this mantle, so their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice. But also so that their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human too – to reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned and in doing so be a more complete version of themselves.
      You might be thinking: who is this Harry Potter girl? And what is she doing campaigning for the UN? It’s a good question and, trust me, I have been asking myself the same thing. All I know is that I care about this problem. And I want to make it better.
      This is an edited extract from Emma Watson’s speech at the UN in New York. The full transcript is available at”

  3. “Men can seriously hurt women. It doesn’t matter if she deserved it. Most
    women cannot hurt a man but a man can seriously hurt most women.”
    Womyn in the army? Womyn in the police?

    1. LOLOLOL the Violence Against Women Act exists but they still should be able to serve in the frontlines!

      1. The pair should be threatened with 10 years in jail or join the military. Lol. Of course both will simply end up being disruptive scum any where you put them.

  4. “Men can seriously hurt women. It doesn’t matter if she deserved it. Most
    women cannot hurt a man but a man can seriously hurt most women.”
    Did Bobbit cut himself?

    1. Women of the past two generations have been raised to have no concern for men. It doesn’t how badly men get hurt, as long as women are coddled at the end of the day.

    2. ‘Men can seriously hurt women’, Yeah? A woman with a supplementary credit card can be scarier than a dude with a knife.

  5. Today’s women:
    -I want children. MY BODY, MY CHOICE
    -I want a vasectomy. MY BODY, MY CHOICE

    1. Haha, the “my body my choice” chant is especially good when used against feminists. Feminists get annoyed when you use their own words against them, because men aren’t supposed to have a “choice” in their book. This contradicts their views about equality.

  6. I do not believe in equality at all. I find it entertaining when black people smack EACH OTHER around. However, what I don’t get is why both of these savages are not in jail. The retard footballer is obviously going to assault someone again a la Simpson or Tyson.

    1. Specifically about OJ Simpson, you’re telling me you worship women that cuckold; never mind the fact OJ was indeed a cuckolding statistic.

      1. Simpson is a simian. He should have kept his Brillo-head down after walking away from a double murder.
        No skin off my nose with Nicole Brown. She got what every coalburner deserves and should expect from the Jenkem Posse. It’s a great pity that OJ didn’t kill his own children too. a real pair of mutants.

  7. Generally, women actually don’t want equality. They could give a rat’s ass about it. What most really want is the ability to extract as much wealth from a man as possible. Extract as much wealth from public and private sectors as is possible. And be subsidized by the government for having children as much as possible.
    Don’t play the game boys. Wrap it up, pull out, get a vasectomy. Whatever. But don’t subsidize this circus with your own money. Let the politicians pander for votes, and lick the cheese from the pussies of every marxist shit-beast out there. When you stop throwing your money and sperm in the pot, you get freedom, and they can go garnish some other suckers wages.

    1. Things are getting so bad for men that the pendulum will eventually swing the other way. No motivation for men to get married, have kids, date, or even work, and the system begins to be strained. All of this will come crashing down at some point, and then, feminists will get a taste of their own medicine.

      1. I was thinking a lot about this recently…
        I caught up the other night with an old friend of mine. This guy is the smartest guy I’ve known. Masters in Engineering… works in a hospital programming radiation therapy analytics… If you have a question… he will have the answer or just something to say. Truly a creative guy in many ways trust me.
        So we’re hanging out and he confesses that his LTR (5+ years) is falling apart. His gf keeps wanting to travel the world to study and work. She apparently has great ambitions of making lots and lots of money. He is financially secure but doesn’t give a damn about more money… his interests are intellectual and he wants to simply live with his gf while they’re young.
        So he is leaving her (which is a tough decision for him)… and told me he wants to quit his job and just cut down on expenses and just live his life. He doesn’t know about MGTOW or RedPill or anything like that but just instinctively he wants to check out and see if there is more to life than this racket…
        My point is…. I watched one of the greatest most talented minds that I’ve know in my life come to the same point that I’ve gotten to… of just saying fuck this shit… Whats the point of working your fucking ass off? If you can cut down what it is you need to live comfortably than why work your ass off for all that extra shit? His ambitions towards marriage and eventually family have been kinda crapped out… his gf basically got out of control and he picked up on it… He wants a girl to be with and not a girl who is spending her youth in careerland surrounded by thirsty dudes.
        When we give guys like this no incentive to care about society we are letting society drop in quality. This is a guy who could have invented something… This is a guy who could have really contributed something… And he’s saying fuck it…
        I left and just thought to myself… He is acting exactly how I was acting last year… Pretty much all guys I know who are not in the top 1% are saying that they don’t want to bust their balls working… They just don’t see the point.

        1. Men are pretty simple, really. We respond to incentives. If they’re not forthcoming, we check out.
          Your friend is on the right path. If he’s that talented and educated, there’s no reason why he can’t free agent his way around, living however he chooses and making a damn good show of it. He should dump cupcake and her ambitions off at the curb, and then go live for himself.
          Some people look back on the 40’s and 50’s with a kind of nostalgic traditionalist view. I shudder when I think about it… men harnessed to women by the age of 20 and forced to work their entire lives, and frequently into early graves, all so that cupcake could have her house and physical comforts.
          Not for me, thanks. I’m going fishing.

        2. When he quits he’ll probably start thinking about some sort of invention or something.
          My old school chum Leo, he bummed around in school and was unemployed for about 10 years after. He was in a bedsit in Manchester smoking weed. He ran into a kindly post PhD researcher in Mathematics at the Uni and they discussed some theoretical principles. The postdoc said just write it all down and present the paper in 6 months to the faculty and we will give you an MA in maths sans BA. So he did and he got the MA.
          Leo then got a job designing the 3D animation for the early Tomb Raider games. He also wrote a policy paper about switching to a coinage system based on units of 12.
          Then he went back to being a bum. It’s a funny old world. This guy could actually read code in real time (the theoretical Neo) as it cascades across a screen.

        3. Shudder, but don’t shudder too much. Yes, it is true that men all too often worked themselves into early graves working hard for women to have things. Here is what they got. Up until the 1860s Christian marriages were still in effect here in the USA in my opinion. Up until the 1960s, marriage as would be defined by most cultures of any race, ethnicity or religious belief existed existed in the USA, but does not now in true substance but rather in name only and mockery of a once fine institution in my opinion. Marriage is nothing more than a licensed boyfriend-girlfriend relationship now in the USA with men taking almost all of the risks and getting little to no benefits while women get most of the benefits with little to no risks where that was considerably less true in the past.
          They got to have sex more frequently with their wives than men do now. I remember reading at the Black Dragon blog in an article where he stated that people especially married couples had more sex on average throughout the year in the 1940s than they do now according to the statistics. No man could be indicted much less convicted of sexually assaulting or raping his wife until the late 1960s here in the USA, and theoretically no woman could be accused of doing the same at that time. Not all, but many states had laws on the books reflecting Christian morality as expounded by the letters of St. Paul in the New Testament of the Bible stating that no spouse, man(husband) or woman(wife), could refuse demands of sex from the other. In fact even outside of Christian morality, I had never heard of any religious belief or any other culture in which a spouse could sexually assault or rape his or her spouse until the 1960s up until now in 2014 USA.
          People like to think marriage started going downhill in the 1960s, but in fact it started going downhill in the 1860s here in the USA, while it went into steep decline in the 1960s. Up until the 1860s, if there was a divorce, a man usually initiated it plus he usually got the children and home while the wife got told to leave without making alimony and child support payments and there was only a 1% divorce rate. Then it changed to where women got the children and home most of the time after usually being the first to initiate divorce and the divorce rate rose to 10% by 1900 with the men paying alimony(and child support) without the women having any accountability of how the money was spent. Then in the 1960s, no fault divorce was put in and the divorce rate rose to 50% with women initiating divorce at least two-thirds of the time, receiving the children and home at least 85% of the time while the men paid child support(and alimony). As far as I can tell, most cultures throughout history usually handed over the home and children to the husband and father, not the wife and mother while bastard children always went to the single mother; and many if not most cultures around the world still do it this way. There was still fault divorce and you can not legally speaking sexually assault your spouse up until the 1960s.

        4. Great input. I’ve been thinking about this too. This is exactly what Helen Smith calls “going Galt”, a reference to John Galt in Atlas Shrugged. As you said, it doesn’t even take the Manosphere or “red pill” to make it happen, either; it seems to be a simple, natural reflexive reaction.
          I’ll be giggling like a fuckin Japanese schoolgirl watching this system collapse over the next few decades.
          How long can you treat society’s biggest producers, greatest innovators, stalwart defenders and protectors, healers, (all men) etc, like shit before they turn their collective back?
          How long will they support a system that forcibly extracts their resources in the form of taxes and then uses it to make their roles of husband and father obsolete via handouts, a system that gives women incentive and assistance to cuckold them, take their home and children, and still force them to support these same women via alimony and child support?
          Or a culture that indoctrinates its folllowers +
          Unleash hypergamy, and watch the good (if not particularly EXCITING or OMG SO HOT) men of society walk away, and watch the “exciting/hot/mysterious/other bullshit” loser trash of society take over within a few decades.
          Here’s a great essay on the matter. So long it can’t be read in one sitting, but good in smaller doses.

          It will end. And it’ll be a looong, slooow death.

        5. It’s not just the thanklessness of working and having it swiped. For 95% of post thirty American men, it’s also the hopelessness of ever so much as touching a healthy, sexually attractive woman. Bitter, methhead strippers don’t count. So you’re supposed to work all day, get all kinds of internet tail thrown at you, frustrating you and then agreeably accept the fact that you’ll never get any kind of real pleasure from a beautiful woman. EVER. The casket is coming before you ever spend the night with a beauty again. Most guys don’t even know how wrong that is. They think a beautiful woman is like playing ball back in the day. You just daydream about the glory days and mutter stuff to your buddies while drinking beer and watching football. Starting in your mid 20’s you’re already on the porch rocker reminiscing about things that should still be happening. Sad. Meanwhile, Cambodian, Venezuelan, Indonesian, Brazilian TAXI DRIVERS are getting waaaayyy better women than 95% of American doctors and lawyers.

        6. Yes. I think it’s the current 35-60 year olds who will get hit hardest by this new redpill option. How can they not ask the 800 pound gorilla/elephant in the room question;
          “Why in the hell am I giving my life to this other person? This person who clearly doesn’t appreciate it and who clearly doesn’t give a *&%$ about making me happy. This is my life. Why did I hand it over in sacrifice to this other, separate, autonomous life.”
          Add in the fact that cupcake was a sexual bore after, say, one year of marriage and the regret must be so overwhelming that denial is the only option; stay married and gossip with your equally miserable married buddies that the guy off in the world getting 20 year old beauties must be gay. Oh and drink your beer in the evenings and all weekend and suckle on sugar throughout your weekdays. Get through it with sugar and alcohol tingles.

        7. Most men are still too desperate to change course. Instant, free internet porn doesn’t help either. Sure, men have strong sex drives, but I think we’ve been made to obsess over it.
          Now people require all sorts of over the top sexual acts to keep things interesting. I remember a woman wearing underwear in a Sears catalog would get me going… Those days are over.
          If men weren’t so thirsty things would be different.

        8. “I’ll be giggling like a fuckin Japanese schoolgirl watching this system collapse over the next few decades.”
          Honestly, I don’t think it’s going to happen in your lifetime. If and when it does, men are going to be hit first, you can believe that.
          If women are suffering, men are dying.

      2. And they still have the gall to keep on wailing about where all the good men went. They simply went Galt baby! How’s about that now?

      3. Yes, the welfare state is built on the backs of men. I laugh my ass off (and cry on the inside) when feminist cunts like Hanna Rosin say “men are obsolete.” Bitch, without hard-working MEN feeding money into your life-sucking welfare state, and without MEN policing it and keeping the peace, and without MEN creating amazing new shit that makes your life even possible… you wouldn’t be jack shit. You’d be a monkey living in a cave, scissoring another monkey!

    2. I mentioned this elsewhere. It isn’t just women, humans as a whole aren’t interested at all in equality. “Equality” is a technique used by the lower-class to extract resources and improve their status at the expense of those in a higher class. When the Communists overthrew the Eastern European governments did you think they actually wanted to be EQUAL to former aristocracy? Hell no, they robbed them of everything they had and then established themselves as the new elite. Don’t fall for any of this “equality” bullshit. The dream of the slave isn’t to be equal to his master. The dream of the slave is to enslave his master! True Human Nature 101.

      1. Except that’s not exactly what happened, i get the sentiment. Many prominent Communists were Pale of Settlement Jews. Let’s go over them first. Many were highly proficient usurers, estate managers, provincial lawyers, brewers, grain factors, teachers, tax collectors, revenue inspectors, monopolists, pimps etc or closely related to them. They constituted a financial elite in competition/collusion with Aristocratic landowners. Almost all farmers were in debt up to their eye balls with these characters. Some were from impoverished branches of these powerful proto-oligarchies.
        The rest of the communists appear to have been fallen impoverished nobles who were “losers” for one reason or another in relation to the imperial regime.
        The Peasants were essentially a resource for the commies as much as they were alleged to have been for the Czar (though i’d dispute the idea that the Czar was tyrannical).

      2. When the brown-out occurs the story of the American Civil War is probably going to transform into a story about how the Slaves Rized Up! A racialized sort of Spartacus myth will prevail. The toady Union troops who actually did all the fighting (total suckers) will end up erased from the narrative.
        Denzel Washington and WEB Dubois together with Morgan Freeman will be airbrushed into an image of General Lee surrendering at Appomatox Court House. In a sense it would be honest about what went down in that war.
        There is an early example of this emanating from the UK. Mary Seacole [sp] was a black Jamaican who set up a commissary in the Crimea during the Crimean war in the 1850s. Currently she has supplanted Florence Nightingale in the National Curriculum in the UK as the female persona of that war. One has to assume that this is happening because there are so many black students in Birmingham, London, Manchester etc…mention the Crimea to english kids 8-25 these days and you will probably hear them reply about Seacole.

        1. Enough of the white genocide bullshit. Seriously, why do you care about white people so much? It’s not like white people would give a fuck about you. Just the other day, I saw a white guy kicking the living shit out of another white guy.
          If you were down and out, I assure you, most white people would not give a fuck about you. So seriously,
          take your aryan brotherhood and KKK mentality the fuck out of here. All humans are the same- we breath, we live, we die. End of. Period. No one gives a fuck for you or your family or race at the end of the day.
          Live your life to the fullest and stop worrying about race bullshit. Fuck humanity.

        2. I don’t like to see history dicked with. I’m not interested in these sorts of things to gain approval or a wider circle of friends either. Stop worrying about the mental and spiritual pain from what I have to tell you, eventually it’ll pass. Maybe you’ll start to notice things

        3. You are not arguing a point here. Most people from my POV are well aware that DWL (disingenuous white liberals) are highly motivated by ostentatious status seeking multiculturalism. The average anti-racist white will tend to live in a very white zipcode (increasingly postcodes see London) but bitch and moan about a working class whites in an ethnically Irish, Italian street abutting a black ‘hood. i notice things too Aurelius. You sound more like a hedonist epicurean than a stoic though. A stoic would, at minimum, at least define the malaise.

        4. This is true. I met an openly liberal woman who was offended that I had no desire to live in a “mixed income” neighborhood that was apparently “up and coming.” It turned out that she lived in the whitest, most exclusive neighborhood in the city. What a bitch! Apparently the issue isn’t that I preferred living with people like myself, but that I would actually say it out loud. You’re spot on that white liberals tend to live FAAAAAR from minorities. Their opinions on them are formed by liberal mass media and education, not based on first-hand experience. First-hand experience is the fasted way to turn a liberal into a conservative.

        5. Myself>any child of mine>siblings>parents>grandparents>cousins>neighbours>
          you can see the progression.

        6. “White > Everyone Else”
          HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! What a joke you are.
          Laxmi Mittal: $16 billion
          Shahid Khan: $4.3 billion
          Oprah Winfrey: $2.7 billion
          Bob Johnson: $1.3 billion
          Shah Rukh Khan: $600 million
          Tyler Perry: $400 million
          Bill Cosby: $350 million
          All of them are ethnic minorities and worth more than your loser white trash ass.

        7. People from India are intelligent. They have many accomplishments there. I have nothing against Indians. The rich Africans in the USA are entertainers who thrive off white money. Look, everywhere in the world there are great accomplishments. Even the Native Americans, who were completely isolated from the rest of the world, have Macchu Picchu, Tikal, and Chichen Itza. I suggest you spend a couple months exploring Europe. Learn about the history, and the endless list of contributions that Europeans (and their descendants) have bestowed upon the world. Let me know what you see and learn. After that, spend a couple months in Sub-Saharan Africa, where Europeans never set up colonies, and let me know what you find. Report back your findings.

        8. Looking back at history. Lets see…. White anglo Brits stole all the wealth and colonised India and Africa. Now lets look at the modern day british anglo white- still has the imperialistic mindset and colonial racist attitude embedded in their dna.

        9. Nice try. Colonization was only a few hundreds years after the middle ages. The rest of the world had impressive accomplishments in the ancient world, but where was Sub-Saharan Africa? The history books talk about them, so we know they had contact with the rest of the world. Below is a map of UNESCO World Heritage sites. Find the ones in Sub-Saharan Africa that are NOT nature reserves. 😉

        10. “People from India are intelligent. ”
          Not really. India is a 3rd world shithole that relies on UNICEF to feed its ugly children.
          Now, the small minority of Indians who are motivated and smart enough to move to the West are highly intelegent.
          Here’s a public service message that is currently playing on Indian tv, reminding people not to shit in the street.

        11. Indians still have the Taj Mahal and many ancient temples like Angkor Wat that at least I find interesting. They shit in the street because their population has grown out of control. Africans have this giant mud thing that they have to rebuild every year.

        12. Okay, randomly pluck a handful of Billionaires and a few millionaires out of the hat. Winfrey is the only impressive black one there. And even that is totally dependent on TV where she pretends to be a Hausfrau’s “imaginary black friend”.
          Mittal isn’t a black anyway. I don’t know what cast in India he belongs to but he’d probably say that his fortune is based on the stability that a white Europe provides for his Steel Empire. In all fairness i don’t have much of a problem with a rich Indian either. I’m pretty good friends with a branch of the Bhutto clan next door in Pakistan.

        13. The British brought development to Africa that would NEVER have otherwise developed without them being there. If the blacks had been more pro-active they could have piggy-backed on the early British introduction of the Train and steam engine. Especially in areas like South Africa or Sierra Leone.
          one other thing, the British actually outlawed slavery on the mainland in Africa after suppressing it in the Atlantic. Dr Livingstone broke the back of the Arab slave markets that extracted humans from the interior into Zanzibar and off to castration in Yemen, Arabia and the Ottoman Empire.
          Ungrateful swine really. As soon as White supremacy ended in Rhodesia Mugabe enslaved them as Zimbabweans.

        14. So… I’m wrong. Angkor Wat is an Cambodia and the Taj Mahal was designed by an Iranian architect. Still, the Indians have interesting Hindu temples. Just google for pics. I guess what I’m trying to say is at least they graduated to stone.

        15. Vlad Putin is worth around $70 billion. I shit you not. That’s just counting personal assets.
          Also, between 1936-44 Adolf Hitler was the richest man in the world.
          Bob Mugabe is the wealthiest man in Africa…
          See where that’ll get you?

        16. There was no serious colonization of the dark heart Africa until the 1880s. Even then it wasn’t colonization per se. It was whites building transportation, water and power infrastructure and planting a few rubber plantations. The black population boomed as a result of the improvements. Congo was for all intents and purposes impossible to inhabit until a variety of engineering and medical advances could be made. A human vectors for AIDS is most likely the result of that exploration.

        17. They are better than you and have more money than your BNP, EDL, KKK ass will ever have, you fucking loser. Its people like you that are the biggest hypocrites on the planet. You talk about multiculturalism failing and white genocide, yet it is you white people that are refusing to integrate and committing white flight so you can be in your trashy booze fuck fests in Spain and Australia. You still want to play the genocide card?
          Alright how about the fact that you white lovers are ethnically cleansing the Aborigines in Australia, or the time you wiped out the Native Indians in the USA. Fucking hypiocrites. You want to blame someone for the reduction in white people, blame your own fucking race, cause last time I checked, it was a white government that allowed the huge influx of immigrants into the USA and the UK.

        18. Yeah absolutely Australians pretty much wiped out the Aboriginal people in Australia and in the USA. What’s your point? It’s quite possible for a population to get wiped out! Thanks for proving the point dumbass.

        19. I’ll have to intervene here.
          The men who ended up controlling the diamonds in Africa were all Jews. Same with gold. Oppenheimer Baum etc. The heroin, tea and cotton from India were more or less controlled by David Sassoon a Baghdad Jew. He also controlled the diamonds from there. The biggest imperialist in that period was Benjamin Disraeli Prime Minister of Great Britain on two separate occassions. The clue is in his name. He was deposed after 1,000 British troops were cut to bits by Zulu and replaced by an anti-imperialist called Gladstone (not Jewish). Disraeli had a hard on for invading African statelettes.
          The only people who have to integrate are whites as you well know. The only people who willingly integrate are actually whites. As soon as golliwogs get a chance they always purge white populations. See Birmingham Alabama and Haiti.

        20. “I don’t like to see history dicked with.”
          Too bad, white knights generations, let alone millennia, before you already did.

        21. Retard, you are the one who started this race baiting bullshit. Most white people don’t give a flying fuck about your sentimental white people dying bullshit.
          The world would be a better place if assholes like yourself were the ones that were cleansed. Fucking pollute humanity by trying to play divide and conquer. Whats the point of my arguments? I guess you really are a stupid fuck to not understand.
          Try getting a job. Oh wait, the ethnic minorities are stealing the jobs right? Fucking asshole.

        22. Wowww. You would put yourself above your own son? Way to aid the matriarchy Alpha Male.

        23. ” Stop worrying about the mental and spiritual pain from what I have to tell you, eventually it’ll pass.”
          Yeah- same could be said to you. Stop worrying about white people.

        24. “People from India are intelligent. They have many accomplishments there”- go tell that to the above asshole who states: White> everybody else, yet these successful people have more money than probably the entire white race combined.
          “The rich Africans in the USA are entertainers who thrive off white money”- yeah…last time I went to a Dave Chappelle show or Spike Lee movie, most of the ticket buyers were black.
          “I suggest you spend a couple months exploring Europe. Learn about the
          history, and the endless list of contributions that Europeans (and their
          descendants) have bestowed upon the world”- Been around all the continents and speak multiple languages and have studied history. Last time I checked, most atrocities throughout time were committed by white people. Oh, I’m sorry, did I offend you there? Afterall, your kind loves to play divide and conquer. So why not enjoy a dose of your own medicine.

        25. I see you really are a stupid fuck since you do not seem to grasp the concept of all humans are the same- in the context of we live and we die, NOT talking about socio-economic factors you fucking retard.

        26. The British LOOTED India and were responsible for the division of the sub continent by stirring up the racial hatred and tension between Hindus and Muslims. That is a fact.
          The British are still the same in their mindset. One only needs to take a trip to cities like London, Bradford or Leicester to see the high reduction of white people and white flight committed since they refuse to intergrate with the ethnic minorities.
          And yet they got the nerve to play the genocide card? Fucking idiots.

        27. I take comfort in the fact that one day the entire world will be brown. Last night I dropped a load inside a beautiful blonde bombshell to help expedite that process. Her pure Aryan cuckold can take care of the bastard.

        28. I have no fucking idea. I think he monopolized a handful of industries in Europe. Oil, Gas, Bauxite…probably served on numerous boards and it was compulsory to buy Mein Kampf. Impressive accumulation. He confiscated a great of money from the Jews he expelled too.

        29. We will see what happens in Britain, France and Germany over the next few years.
          The voting patterns of whites in the US clearly contradict everything you suggest btw. The GOP could quite easily be seen as a white default. The Dems as an alliance of blacks, Jews, Asians, and self defeating-whites. All the exit polls suggest that America is racialising and whites are radicalizing.

        30. There was no India to speak of before the British built railways and abolished the petty kingdoms that were always at war with at each other.
          The role of Muslims in India is actually the only Genocide and looting spree that area has ever known. Since Muslims invaded India in the 800s they have been estimated to have killed around a billion Hindu. That’s not a debatable point. I telling you this for your own good. While the 100,000 or so Brits living among 400,000,000 Indians lived well they did not live as profligately as the Rajas that they defeated. You are such a badly informed fool. The Hindu were lucky to be rid of the Pakistanis. It gave them a chance to be a Hindu nation.

        31. Who gives a fuck about HOW they make their paper. The point is, human beings are competitive and the “elite” don’t give a fuck about the common man, as long as their hands are in YOUR pocket.
          The naivety is ridiculous.

        32. Their women suck up their resources and bend them over in the process, a lot to be proud of.

        33. I know Prescott had connections. What’s your point? Back during the 2000 elections the Kikes in the Democratic Party were highlighting the connection between Hitler and Bush family activities.
          How old are you Golliwog?

        34. There is a certain commonality with these types. They’re losers who can’t bed attractive white women and they find it difficult to face reality so they choose who they believe are the weakest targets.
          I’ve met white guys who were proud to be white and didn’t give a shit what others thought, but they weren’t losers posting anonymously on the internet day in and day out about the joos and niggers. They had attractive girlfriends and wives so they were simply “content.”
          ROK is here for you men though, we’re trying to raise that low self-esteem.

        35. This is occurring in a white homeland. It’s genocidal displacement. I’m not sure why it is actually called “white flight”. Ethnic Cleansing would be a contemporary term. The Brits never attempted (outside of North America) to completely or even partially deracinate or uproot an entire race and replace them with Brits. Same thing is now happening to the French, Dutch, Belgians, Germans, Swedes. It’s even occurring in Ireland ( where did the IRA vanish to?)
          As I pointed out, the only race expected to happily integrate are white Europeans and white Yanks. Africa for Africans! Asia for Asians! Europe for all!

        36. Can’t say anything racist on pain of arrest and financial ruin either… But who is counting eh?

        37. Users like you are the very reason why Return of Kings are under surveillance. Just admit it, you’re either an online instigator or StormFront user.
          You lost before you realized it.

        38. Lol. Well you’d be wrong there. I get what I want most of the time. The resentful blacks n browns are normally the ones shut out in my experience.

        39. You are utterly paranoid and a resentful little halfbreed rejected by the white part of your family.


          The truth is that stone construction in sub-saharan Africa is very old, as old as it is anywhere. The notion that they never “graduated to stone” is quite clearly false.
          If you’re going to come here and speak on a topic like this, attempt to become more informed about it first. Leave the uninformed, baseless fabrications to the feminists.

        41. I speak Russian and French- I have slept with some of the most beautiful and most sexiest White Russian and French women that you could never dream of.
          Is it time for you to claim your next welfare cheque? Better hurry up.

    3. “lick the cheese from the pussies of every marxist shit-beast out there”, classic….I doff my hat to you sir…..

  8. Get used to this PC nation and it’s emasculating apologies – it’s here to stay.. But sooner or later the masculine virtues will once again be held in high esteem – there will be no more “feminists” around when shit hits the fan. All of this equality bullshit will go right out the window once America has her next devastating war or crisis.

    1. Absolutely, all of this will come back to bite feminists in the ass. Every time they whine about how terrible they have it, we will remind them of all the men screwed over by the system. Fuck them, fuck them all.

  9. Yes, Feminists are hypocrites. No, the Feminists and the women advantaged by Feminist policy have no intention of ever accepting any of the negative implications of “equality”. Equality isnt their goal, its simply a pallatable cover, an excuse they use to gain political power over men. Dont think that the Feminists who are capable of understanding this dont already know, or indeed could care less.
    How many times must we go over it, pointing out the double standards that are somehow missed by these people who go on so much about equality? This shit is with us until the collapse, lets accept it and learn to deal, and stop expecting the Feminists to be fair, or to follow their own stated principles.

  10. I think at the end of the day as most have pointed out women are resource exploiters, it is my belief that it’s something natural/biology related.
    They will leave you in the long term or even short term if they sense you cannot be a provider/protector of them in their mind. I think this is a survival instinct that has been hijacked by feminists, pretty much any little thing in the U.S is grounds for divorce from the woman perspective, I believe it taps into that survival instinct that is unique to women.
    In the end all this will not end well as the odds of western style largesse and gluttony will not last forever and when the shoe drops they will be running to men for protection.

  11. “Gender Equality” is the most ass backwards, absurd, retarded, anti-nature, anti-reality ideal that has ever existed. The very fact that this idea has become mainstream show how dumb down the human race has become. Women are infeuor to men in every conceivable way possible. Except childbirth.

    1. Equality is the most anti-progress, anti-science ideology. And unlike shit like creationism, it defines the entire political left.

      1. When the rightwing abandons Creationism all hell will actually break loose. God fearing “Christianists” will flip their racial lids.
        Liberals ought to tread lightly when they mock the only ideology that actually prevents an unapologetic pushback with “extreme prejudice”.

  12. This is why working with females is so insufferable. They will often get very aggressive and insulting towards male co-workers in ways that men would not dare unless they were ready to get punched. The woman knows that she can get away with this by retreating to weak female mode should her target have the audacity to resist her onslaught (but not before much high-pitched tough-chick histrionics to attract attention before she collapses as the poor helpless, bullied woman). Most times the man just wants to get the hell away from her to avoid getting stained by a probable screaming meltdown and the inevitable manager bellowing “What the hell is going on here? What did you do to her?”. When a man insinuates physical aggression towards another man it seldom actually comes to blows, the adversaries huff and puff and tell each other to fuck off, and the manager tells them to cut it out and get back to to work, which they do with perhaps some grumbling and then it is forgotten. After the work pressure eases you may find those two chatting in the breakyard or having a beer together after work. Women on the other hand will embark on an eternal fuming silent vendetta and the inner rage which justifies using any tactic to discredit or take down their rival. Most often it is just a continued snotty attitude and refusal to communicate.
    It’s the core of their passive-aggressive mindset and they are masters at it. Encorpera enables and promotes it through constant reinforcement of rules for the comfort and security of women. Working in one of these feminized corporate shit-holes is a living hell for a heterosexual man.

    1. If i had 50 or so employees i’d make sure they had an interdepartmental boxing tournament. You can’t do that sort of thing with a half female workforce.

        1. lol. Unless it was Andy Kaufman and his intergender wrestling. Then it would be on TV.

  13. Unless this article was tongue in cheek, why on earth do you think equality exists?
    Also just say “sexual equality” , because “gender equality” is a leftist frame anyway.

    1. Thank you for the point of procedure. “gender” is part of the feminist institution embedding the notion that there are no differences between the sexes and that any observations contrary hitherto was due to premeditated “conventions”. Bullshit! None of that is true, “gender” is a made-up word entirely based in politics…we should not recognize it and stop using it. A person has a “sex”.

  14. Men and women are not equal, they are different. Male brains are wired front-to-back, and female brains are wired side-to-side. Women have better language processing, and men have better visuospatial abilities. Men and women are not, in any respects, the same and thus cannot possibly be equal. We are different, and provide to halves of a functioning whole. Just leave it at that.

  15. haha yay, gender inequality!

    1. Racial differences DO exist. That was proven as soon as they sequenced the human genome. Try to keep up with the genetics of the last 15 years.

      1. You don’t really need to delve into the DNA to see with your own eyes that the differences are profound: even in the most deprived and impoverished areas of either group. It’s like saying there is a no temperamental difference between an Irish Wolfhound and a Hyena. A German and a Congolese are quite clearly different breeds.

        1. Yes. It’s obvious niggers are less than human, I mean they’re ugly and dumb, of what use are they?

  16. Here is a man’s and a woman’s brain. Compared to male brain, notice how hollow and empty the female brain is !!

    1. The hamster does most of its spinning in the prefrontal cortex, apparently.

    2. You should post the original link and article this pic is based on.
      What this pic suggests is greater cross-connections btw left/right hemispheres in female brain particular in “higher order” cognitive areas… Probably language and social cognition structures.
      Male brain seems to have more long-range connections from visual and temporal cortex to anterior regions. Seems to suggest greater perceptual integration most likely for action, mental simulation, and manual control. Seems like much less cross-connections in male brain and probably higher specialization.
      This is coming from an MA in Neuroscience. Should post the original link though as I’m not gonna claim to be able to actually eye-ball this.

      1. It’s kind of remarkable how the narrative in modern academia revolves around the idea that women and men are equal – the difference purportedly only in the genitalia – which is contrary to every piece of evidence there is in the neuroscience literature.

        1. That isn’t my realm of expertise so I can’t comment on it although probably when I am finally done my thesis for September I’ll do my own research. Hell, maybe i’ll start posting RoK articles with journal reference lists on this issue… “A neuroscientists POV on gender differences”… add my own contribution.
          I bet there is TONNES of literature on that but the scientific community has to be very very careful about putting this research topic into any kind of politically incorrect framework.
          I’ll take care of that 😉

      2. Lol, Neuroscience has been stuck with connecting “active areas” for thirty years now.
        Until more advanced imaging methods become available they are basically jerking off.

        1. Compared to the other sciences psychology is the baby of science. Its only been around as a formal scientific topic for like 200 years or something.
          Compare that with physics or math which goes back thousands of years.
          I’m pretty sure neuroscience has barely scratched the surface of its potential.
          Many physicists take great interest in it as well so I don’t think the technology has yet hit its peak… With the tech we’ve already got new algorithms and analytics are constantly being developed.

      3. You claim to be an MA in neuroscience, and yet you call both the hemispheres “higher order cognitive areas”.
        Now I am beginning to doubt your claim.
        Here is the gist on this – The left hemisphere that is predominantly for logic and reasoning has its connections attached within its own sphere in men’s brains. As it should be.
        The right hemisphere that is primarily for emotional processing, is connected to within its own sphere in men’s brains.
        However, in women’s brains, get this, both the left and right hemispheres are connected to each other! .
        What does it tell us? Remember how women are considered more emotional? That they do not possess logic? This is the reason. When the logical and the emotional spheres are connected with each other, any and every logical decision will inevitably be influenced with emotions.
        Mixing logic with emotions? Hmmmm…how does one think it would go?
        In addition considering that women process information through the white matter more, and have an abundance of white matter in contrast with men who do so with gray matter, one can safely establish that when mixing emotions with logic, the emotions frequently trump logic.
        So mixing is bad as it is, and now we see that emotions are prevailing even then.
        This is the reason why it is only men that invent, create and innovate. Not women. Women do not possess these qualities. The higher cognitive capabilities that is. And note that I didn’t even mention the enormous role of testosterone yet.
        So all in all I personally would not hire a woman or accept a woman in a position where logic, reasoning and high cognitive capabilities are essential. Eg Scientists, surgeons etc. Repetitive, mundane tasks are OK.

        1. When I said “higher order” I was referring to anterior brain areas (closer to the forehead).
          The male brain seems to have more prominent long-range connections WITHIN each hemisphere. This suggests greater brain connectivity between visual areas found in the back of the head through areas reaching towards the front. Probably related to man’s predisposition of physically doing stuff (vision guides perception and action and utterly dominates the brain’s organization and processing resources).
          The girls’ brains seem to have more connections btw the hemispheres. These connections seem to be focused in the middle/front of the brain. These are considered “higher order” in a technical terminology. These areas are associated with language processing, emotional processing, etc.
          At the pre-frontal front of the brain areas you get the “highest order” which is associated with inhibition of behaviour, making decisions, reasoning, etc.
          I wont comment on the left-brain vs. right-brain issue. Though there are some clear differences in processing its too simplistic to say the left brain is all reasoning and the right brain is all emotion. The brains work together.
          This topic is something that sounds neat and was really trendy when it first came out. I don’t want to say anything about it kuz its hard to distinguish btw facts and pop-psychology. It is such a tidy and poetic way of thinking about the brain that I let myself think that way sometimes as well.

        2. You said “higher order cognitive areas”, whereas I believe what you meant was higher order function areas. When you assign the term higher order with cognition, it gives a different, superior impression of the cognitive ability.

    3. I am sure these maps of brain activity have no implications on actual performance whatsoever.

  17. Smith’s problem is he’s an idiot. He should “employ” women not to hit people. Men shouldn’t hit people except in self-defense and neither should women.
    If he had said that, maybe he wouldn’t be doing yet another pathetic apology.

  18. Feminist equality = all the privileges, being considered as the frail, graceful and innocent sex, while being treated exactly like men whenever it suits them.

  19. I hope Athlone just using enemy rhetoric to prove their hypocrisy.
    Because let’s not talk like gender equality is a desirable thing outside of legal rights. If men are more predominant in one field, or vice versa, what’s the problem?
    Unfortunately, there IS a middle ground in popular discourse. The left wing notion of equality is based on power dynamics, not equality. In this sense their understand of equality has less to do with fairness and everything to do with “pitying the victim”. And therefore, the middle ground is that the genders should be equal when the woman is disadvantaged, and not so much talked about when the man is disadvantaged.

  20. Ever been beaten up by a woman who had full intent to call the cops the moment you defended yourself?
    I have.
    Ever been told “you break up with me I’ll tell the police you tried to rape me”?
    I have.
    The only defense against this game is not to play it. Goodbye cunts.

    1. That’s what happened to Anthony Cumia. He didn’t fight back or pull his gun. But he lost his job for Tweeting mean things about the whore. Why I’m no longer a Sirius customer.

      1. unplug from Black Run America…if you can’t unplug from the N_______ Football League…
        All that will happen is that the wife will eyeroll and say she “wupped his ass1” and bawled him out and stole his Airjordans and the black jury will acquit him for assault. He won’t spend an extra day in jail for this. Two game suspension for cold clocking a skank that’s all the system will do? He’ll be in the dock again for more assaults and bankruptcy no doubt.

    2. The very moment a woman mentions cops in any discussion with you for any reason whatsoever is the moment she is outa there. Sorry honey, you just betrayed your allegiance to the state. Let it take care of you from here on out.

    3. Me too doktorjeep. At least the physical aggression & I’ll call the cops & lie thing to get my way.

  21. Athlone McGinnis,
    Excellent article. I’d like to add something. What would happen in the very rare case in which a woman had beaten a man like that? Take Rhonda Roussey as a woman UFC Champion and actress as an example. She could beat most men in a fight. Most of the public would mock, ridicule and insult a man who was beaten by her. Fewer people would try to comfort and coddle him the way they did with Ray Rice’s former fiancee and present wife, Janay Palmer. I doubt Rhonda Roussey would be punished as much as Ray Rice certainly in public opinion and maybe even professionally, criminally and financially. A much higher percentage of people would call the male equivalent Janay Palmer who married Ray Rice a DUMBASS for marrying a woman who beat him senseless, in this hypothetical case Rhonda Roussey beating John Palmer, while they were still boyfriend-girlfriend.

    1. I forgot to add the hypothetical question of what if a woman named Stephanie A. Rice said the same things as Stephen A.Rice did about John Palmer when Rhonda Roussey beat him? Do you think she would have suffered as much as Stephen A. Rice did for saying the same things or worse. I seriously doubt it.

  22. Damn, look at the manjaw on that one. It was probably just an honest mistake. He forgot she was female for a minute.

      1. Protracted jaws, big hands and feet, along with broad shoulders and log-like thighs, are the new genetic markers being selected for by American women’s reproductive practices. Soon we will have veritable amazons to bed in our never-ending quest for snu snu.

  23. What the negroes do among themselves should be really of no concern the “outside world”.

  24. The simple FACT is that equality is a huge myth. Now, will the mano-whatever be a part of what I think is a accelerating debunking of this myth, yes partially, but in tandem the very myth itself will help this process along. You see this article outlines a number of inconsistencies and double standards originating not from some patriarchal conspiracy but from the so called equalists themselves.

    1. Only in part. Partly because there is a myth running around here that all men can “awhl jess git a lown…” Or that there will be a future situation where all women are socially, intellectually, sexually, legally and emotionally subordinated to all men. Even in the heyday of Norman Conquest England or Medina and later the Umayyad Caliphate Umma that sort of a society wasn’t happening. Mohammad married a dried up vagina at first (then he got fucky and Aishi appears to have thoroughly dominated politics after he died) William Bastard was completely faithful to Matilda.
      What I see here is a bastard chile’s revenge fantasy on moms and big sistah for hitting him once too often? That’s at least some of it.
      The posters are simply attempting to construct another fantasy equality racket that parallels the myths of the “patriarchy” feminists moan about.
      There is no Patriarchy, that’s the inside joke. A father acts alone most of the time and under great stress and pressure. The solidarity of any union would be picked apart by other men immediately as we have seen with Trade Unionism.
      Even if you disagree with collective bargaining you can see that workers banded to together to look out for each other and a combination of Alinskyite/shyster frauds, trade rules, monopolist thugs and EEOC rules (racial equality) demolished the possibility of a rational organization of labour. The Germans appear to have integrated subordinated unions into the business model with success that is lacking in the “equal rights” obsessed US.
      Anyway I digress.

  25. Now black men are finding out what white men have known for a long time. The wrong comment and the PC police come down on you with a wrath so fierce. Talk about shock and awe. In some cases no amount of groveling will do. Stephen A Smith and Tony Dungy didn’t quite get the same treatment that Al Campanis and Jimmy the Greek did but I’m sure both of them will think twice before committing another speech crime again.

    1. haha yeah Dungy in particular got off with pretty much just a slap on the wrist mostly thanks to his longstanding reputation as a saintly Negro …

    2. This is quite interesting to see:
      1. Because these things are not murders like the OJ trial (this is relatively trivial to be fair) this sort of thing would in other circumstance just be local news and not a national story.
      2. There’s actually CCTV of the beat downs. Pre-camphone the videographer only showed up when the cops were whaling on the suspect. This sort of attack/fight can’t escape scrutiny.
      3. He can’t believe he’s guilty of anything, even though there’s a picture of him knocking her out. She’ll claim she started it in some ostentatious mea culpa so the jury acquits anyway. So he’s pretty brazen.
      4. Black women are masochists and slick hustlers. She’s going to squeeze this chump until his pips squeak. lol. What has he got himself into here? You can see him mentally subtracting cash out of his bank account.

  26. I read a UK study done for the police about domestic violence a couple of months ago. The finding of the study was that domestic violence will most typically follow the female. The men in the study usually didn’t have run ins with the police before they became connected with the provocative female nor after they disassociated with her…but her next man usually did.

  27. First Jay Z, now Ray Rice,
    The trend of women assaulting men is another sign of future trends of how western women are likely to become increasingly masculinized. And with media publicity of this case and the subsequent exoneration of such female behavior, it looks ominous that more women could follow suit in real life, considering the PC media influences women more than ever. Screw the degenerate scum of western women.

      1. They learned it from their American WF counterparts which you personally white knight, DUH.

        1. Sure dude. I think that Laqueesha and Latrina would be just as vicious without the example of Audrey Hepburn and Mrs Roosevelt.
          Have you seen your sisters reading their children? Not merely spanking but full beat downs of 5 year olds in public.
          Deep genetic differences are clearly at work. I’ve even heard baby mama say “black chirrens need to be hit”.

        2. Oh please, I’ve witnessed plenty of white women and other minorities get physically violent with their men. Even if it’s just a slap.
          You’ve got a real hard on for black people I’m noticing. One has to wonder what kind of deficiencies you’re trying to cover up.

  28. My god…just had a look at some dating websites for fun. The women who post their profiles are such self entitled bitches. They say the following things- I am looking for a man who:
    -Has his own place
    -Someone who treats me right
    -Someone who can make me laugh
    Yeah its all about you, you fucking stuck up asshole bitch. Is it no wonder why these women have to resort to dating websites since most men don’t want to date these fucking skanks.

  29. And to be 100% intellectually honest, we’d have to admit that the sexes are just not equal. It’s astonishing how much time the liberals devote to upholding a social construct.

  30. There will soon be one less woman in the world. The freedom to leave this planet is at our own will is the greatest equality we all share.

  31. First of all a professional athlete getting married is really really dumb. Marriage in general but ESPECIALLY if a guy is a rock star, movie star, professional athlete, etc. It is only going to end one way…he gets lots of pussy on the side and she gets 1/2.
    But onto the topic at hand. While I strongly suspect that he was provoked I have to disagree with the writer’s point about relative strength not being the key difference. I was a college athlete and a professional athlete vs. a petite women is not that much different between a 8 year old kid hitting their parent and the parent using that as an excuse to take their head off.
    The same can be said about a black belt in a martial art. They are considered weapons and treated accordingly. Same if one person has a knife or a gun and the other doesn’t.
    If a women (his gf, wife or finance) tried to provoke a physical confrontation you walk away and dump her as ASAP. Just my $0.02 worth.

  32. The ideal for equality created the opportunities for mass education and social mobility. If it wasn’t for people striving to provide equal opportunities for all, 99% of the posters here would be dumb ass ignorant peasants unable to read and write, let alone critisise another sex.
    Are women’s brains wired differently than men’s? Yes!
    Are women driven by emotions? Yes!
    Should they be allowed equal opportunities? Yes!
    The ideal for equality is not the problem.
    The problems occur when a group adopts the entitlement attitude.
    The problems occur when a group plays “the chosen people”.
    The problems occur when a group plays “the weaker sex”.
    Equal opportunity means a chance for any human being to achieve their full potential regardless of their sex, age, race and social background.
    Equal opportunity does not mean socialism, it means free market.
    You can not have a free market without half of the population being an active player in it.

      1. Same thing. Point is, all those here barking against the idea of equality are as mislead as the feminists are.
        We must not forsake the idea to strive for equality just because a bunch of unfucked women have hijacked the term.

    1. And do you believe when the feminists talk about equality, they’re talking about opportunity? This is clearly not the issue.

    2. Feminists don’t want equal opportunity, because they’ve had that. What they want is equal outcome, which is Marxism. An example of this is the so-called “gender pay gap.” Women make less than men, it’s true, but it’s because they tend to choose over-saturated, low-paying majors like Psychology. Men are more likely to go into higher paying jobs like Engineering and Computer Science. When you compare women and men working the same jobs the “gender pay gap” disappears. This is how feminists manipulate the masses to get the things they want. Sure, there’s social mobility, and then there’s dragging morons through the system by their ass when they should not be there.
      Exhibit A:

    1. That is why you don’t argue with women; she punched him but he will be going to prison and when the other prisoners find out what he did they will make his life hell (prisoners are surprisingly white knight-ish). You can never win an argument with a woman and if one tries to get physical you need to run the other way for your own safety – if she hurts her hand punching your face, you might get charged (seriously, a hurt woman brings out the mob instinct in people and they will swear you attacked her).

        1. Holy fuck that’s what it is! They gang-rape other dudes in a subconscious attempt to white-knight and gain female approval “Look! I raped the rapist! Now will you have sex with me?” Dudes are pathetic.

  33. Tiger Woods and various girls co-engaged in the same wrongful acts of sex outside marriage. Tiger PAID a terrible price; those various chicks RECEIVED PAYMENT. That is an example of “equality”.

    1. It’s rather unfortunate most American black women are unaware of Anglo/American feminism’s roots as a WF privilege, stemming from England.
      It’s a shame too that most American black women are not aware of Margaret Sanger’s legacy of advocating abortion on American black babies, despite being associated with Planned Parenthood.

      1. And Abolitionist! Golliwog would still be in fetters without do-gooder female abolitionists.

  34. She initiates the assault and he ends up being the one that receives punishment? No surprise here. Try to remember, women have rights and men have responsibilities.

    1. More like, unearned privileges for western women and more responsibilities for men.

  35. Many people believe in equality, but the people who administer it, do so because it advantages them – to state the obvious – that’s to say, equality is only of use to the extent that it can manipulated for individual or more commonly group advantage. In both cases, particularly the latter, manipulation of equality requires that it isn’t genuinely equal, isn’t administered fairly or logically, or consistently. There is no oversight here, no inability of the elite or aforementioned administrators to see the inconsistency of their interpretation: equality in an age of advanced democracy where force or any direct form of coercion is automatically de-legitimised is simply the preferred method of taking what doesn’t belong to you. Re-distribution on that basis is exactly the same as re-distribution by violence or force except the violence is covert and indirect. What this manipulation of high-minded principles that once arguably meant something actually means is that the appearance and the reality of the strong and the weak has effectively in fact been inverted, so that to day’s strength is to feign weakness and today’s weakness to assert strength.
    The sad thing is that at some level equality remains a beautiful idea, and might at some level on a limited basis be redeemable. Despite the above cynicism on my part Mr MgGinnis is I believe taking the correct approach. Not only may there be something salvageable in several centuries worth of beautiful and noble thinking, the only way to counter this is to assiduously and unfailing point out each and every inconsistency as it occurs. Lies can be exposed. They have grown out of hand because until recently nobody has been speaking up.

      1. thanks, in some ways the way equality is manipulated makes me think of the practice of arbitrage in financial markets – those who benefit often do so quite subtly

  36. If Mrs. Rice didn’t think this was a big enough deal to prevent her from marrying the guy why should anyone else think this is a big deal?

  37. I’m surprised the media went crazy in this situation. Ride is black and they are usually protected by the race card too. If Rice was White we’d have this in the news for months. Al sharp ton would shit a brick. Justice for travont.

  38. Wow.. it pisses me off that she was going to be charged and he dropped it and is still being charged. And I agree, he shouldn’t be apologizing to her, he should be telling her thats what she gets if she wants to punch him first.

  39. Arguing with B.S. always leads nowhere.
    Phoniness is what makes people have to argue about thing that are settled by common sense.

  40. I’d argue that what they did was not equal. If she hit him first and was verbally abusive first, you could make a case his response (or at least the initial physical hit) was warranted and he did nothing wrong. After all, if a dude hits me, I have every right to defend myself. Maybe he took his defense too far but I put this one 90% on the woman and 10% on Ray.

  41. The differences in assault have gone on for some time. So this isn’t exactly new. Just like how a drunk man can rape a drunk woman (because she lacks consent), but its irrelevant to answer the question if he was able to consent himself because the goal isn’t fairness. The goal has always been to absolve women of all responsibility for their action.

  42. Why on earth are you taking seriously the claims of modern blue pill morons to believe men and women are equal?
    We all know the score by now; women think the world is currently safe enough that they can play at being men without ever having to back any of it up. As soon as they run into a situation they can’t handle, they’re women again fast as you please. Everyone accepts this because our protectiveness towards women is wired in, it’s biology. It’s one thing to discuss how women are just as good at running fortune 500 companies over a cup of coffee at Starbucks, it’s another to actually watch a woman get blasted in the face by a man and not be horrified.

    1. Right, but if a small man hits you in the face, the law likely wouldn’t find it justified if you, say, turned around and hit him with a shovel. There’s a lot of room for exploration re: the inconsistencies when it comes to “gender equality,” but I don’t think the author picked the best example in this case.

  43. Women are currently;
    -Proclaiming victimhood under the patriarchy
    -Proclaiming that they have won the gender war and are now the ascendant, superior gender
    -Proclaiming that men are obsolete.
    -Proclaiming that men need to ‘man up’ (Why? If they are obsolete? Is it to hasten their obsolescence?)
    I don’t mean different factions of women picking their group. You will see any woman subscribing to all of these stances simultaneously. There is a complete lack of reasoning. Which is it? Pick one. It can’t be all. ‘Oh yes it can,’ says the hamster.

    1. I think the one the manowhatever should really focus on, particularly for the younger gen M’s, is how women are saying they’re superior. This shows that feminism is a supremacist movement and it flies in the face of everything progressives have been saying. Show this to a blue piller and let it sit like a seed, sooner or later, many (perhaps not all but enough) will on their own see whats’ really in front of their face.

      1. That’s actually important to emphasize. Every ism is a bid for supremacy. Feminism is simply one manifestation of attempts aimed at dispossessing and exterminating YOU.

  44. “A lot of liberals talk about, ‘let’s have an open, honest dialogue on race,’” he said. “That’s what’s gonna be able to solve these problems we have in the communities and what not. But they do not want that. They do not want open and honest dialogue. They want you to agree with them. They want the continued victimization and excuses that go out. The second you literally bring up the real problems that are happening in this country as far as certain communities go, you’re chastised, you’re given the scarlet letter which is now R – “racist”. And there’s no way to discuss this as a white, especially male American without being called a racist.”
    “White males are just the abomination of the United States right now,” he said. “They’re looked at as jokes, as horrible people that are so against diversity and everything, and when you look back at the history of this country, the achievements that white males have made in this country is astounding. And regardless of what diversity might bring to this country, you can’t discount what white men have done for this country.
    “When you watch any of the footage of any of the Apollo programs over the years and you look at the control room of mission control, what do you see?” he asked. “Do you see diversity there? Honestly! Let’s be honest. You’re seeing white males smoking cigarettes, drinking coffee at the console and putting people on the moon. How is this a horrible thing? How is this something to look at and say, ‘We need to change this by injecting people that do not pay attention to the laws of this country, do not assimilate to the culture, do not work and contribute to this nation’? Why is this a good thing to then add these people into the formula to make this a great country? Diversity for the sense of just diversity is not a good thing.”

  45. Regarding the assault, there are standards for disproportionate response. If a normal man pushes a trained martial artist, for instance, that man is expected to have the restraint to defend himself proportionally and not use it as an opportunity to dismantle the other man physically.
    Similarly, you can see in the video that Rice had knocked her out. Likely even without taking in to account gender inequity you could reasonably ask if his response wasn’t disproportionate.

    1. The standards are about escalation. And now, some states may have laws that give more leeway with that. If a man A hits man B, man B can and should defend himself. So if man B is hit but is just hit, and man B hits back and knocks man A to the ground, and then proceeds to pick up a bat or other object and continue to hit man A, man B has gone beyond self defense. Man A could actually press charges. But if man B is simply a better fighter, whether trained or not, he isn’t relegated to just push a man back if he has been pushed.
      So if man B with martial arts training hits man A one time and incapacitates him, he still will be in the realm of self defense. If Ray Rice, being hit first, and allegedly spat on, hits back one time, knocking her out wouldn’t matter. And shouldn’t if the law is truly blind to gender.
      Nobody has brought up whether she was actually unconscious. I mean all the way out from being hit. Since she was supposedly drunk, combine large amounts of alcohol she may have just been so faded that she was unresponsive. So instead of walking, or carrying her, he dragged her. Plenty of people have seen super drunk people that once they’re in an inclined position, they fade out.
      And as of yet, I haven’t heard whether it was a definite punch, or whether he pushed her to get her off him. She could’ve been knocked out from hitting her head after he pushed her off him.
      I haven’t followed this story in a couple of days. But I did tweet the espn moderator in the clip with Stephen Smith to see if I could get her opinion on the points made in this post.

  46. The aggressor sets the rules. Anyways, he has been forewarned now about her behaviour, he is now forearmed about her behaviour, and buddy, she in not 1 in a million, she is 1 OF a million. Do not marry this woman.

  47. That Michelle Obama-chin of hers just confirms that she does most of the talking in that relationship (and probably not much else…). Rest-assured that she negotiated a marriage in return for not pressing charges. I guarantee that she will divorce him and will take half of his earnings. The rest will be mis-managed by this poor dumb bastard and he will end up as a high school PE coach somewhere, IF is he lucky.

  48. Stephen A. Smith’s apology for that ridiculously long-ass-winded (Whata Hot Air Machine blabber mouth, btw!! LOL)… Man oh man.
    Him Pussy-tip-toeing around the little issue of women having *some* culpability, an iota of agency as an adult.
    -i.e. these females hitting men, talking that mad shit to men while knowing they’re driving the guy out of his mind into distraction and emotional boiling point.. ..repeatedly slapping, punching, cussing, insulting…
    Smith ~bravely~ (LOL) says please sisters, LADIES(?)— ,in not so many words, maybe TRY to Not To Be A Crazy Abusive Cunt, Deliberately Provoking, Attacking Men Because sometimes when you know the guy’s been made very, very upset and is tired of being physically and emotionally assaulted by you, he may commit the most evil act in the world and grab your hair or slightly hit you back.
    Again he should be -fill-n-black- (tortured, beaten-down by me and my white knight homeboyz and the cops and thrown in jail for years after having his career ruined, and millions taken away, etc?)
    Smith is a bitch.

  49. Steve McNair. That story didn’t make it through a news cycle. But let some cunt get what’s coming to her and the world goes to pieces.

  50. She must have hit him hard enough to addle his brains – starting off married life with a woman who has no problem initiating violence is just a disaster waiting to happen – he should not have hit her back but just left and never looked back.

  51. His first mistake was getting married. His second was staying married to a woman who thinks it is ok to assault him and put him in that situation. Goodell is a fucknuts cuck, for this and many other reasons.

Comments are closed.