Women truly are devious creatures. Over on MGTOWforums.com, a young fellow named Deano exposes yet more evidence of their accursed misandry: the dreaded stare-and-sneer!
Let’s let him explain:
[M]any women have trouble making eye contact when they approach a man who they know to be perfectly harmless and friendly. As they come within the range where a male acquaintance would simply look you in the eye and nod or say “Hi”, our female friends will stare down and sneer as if you’re a giant slimy turd they cannot bare to look at.
I confess I haven’t run across this so much, but let’s take him at his word: this happens ALL THE TIME! What’s even worse, those pretty princesses often do this even after you’ve spent the whole morning Going Your Own Way helping out cute girls in case this might lead one of them to give you a blowjob.
You may have just gone out of your way earlier that day to fix her hairdryer or carry something heavy up 10 flights of stairs but all of that is forgotten when she sees the opportunity to show what a sulky little bitch she really is.
But Deano is ready for them.
I like to point at the spot they’re staring at as I walk past – as if I have some special powers to direct their gaze. I don’t do it all the time, but it can be piss funny especially when other guys watching are in on the joke.
In your face!
Surprisingly, the story got a bit of a mixed reaction from the other fellows over there. Stonelifter, a true blue MGTOWer, responded with a terse:
I don’t have female friends
Dr. Poon, a medical doctor Going His Own Way who for some reason seems to have specialized in the ickiest parts of a woman, was a bit more supportive:
It is counter-intuitive, but you are doing everything right.
NEVER avoid a woman’s gaze, let HER break the eye lock first and look to the side or to the ground. The establishes DOMINANCE on your end and SUBMISSIVENESS on hers.
LivingFree has a simpler approach:
I usually avoid looking at them during passing. I dont want to give them any impression I value anything about them.
Exactly! That’s why, whenever I spot a girl, I run and hide in a bush. Totally puts them in their place.
I am glad I gave up that whole feminism thing yesterday. I am learning so much about these foul creatures I used to worship.
EDITED TO ADD: I found the picture above here. I added the little red arrow.
Man, there’s just no way to win, is there, Luke?
Either a man’s life is destroyed the instant a woman accuses him of rape and the police shouldn’t care so much about rape cases because whatabouttehmenz; or the idea that the police acted properly in this case means it was just a setup.
Luke-there has been no trial. That is why we have things like “release conditions” when someone is accused of a crime-it is to ensure there is an actual trial.
You are apparently okay with him skipping town (which he can easily do now) and never being brought to trial.
Again, if this is a setup: Really poorly done. I expect so much more from my feminist/illuminati evil geniuses.
“If there is reasonable doubt about his guilt, he has to be let go. That’s basic justice.”
What is your definition of “reasonable doubt”?
Performing sex acts on nonconsenting people is in and of itself violence. How about we expand your bullshit notions of assault to assaults other than sexual assault, luke? So, if A walks up to B and punches him in the face, B needs to be able to show that A did him violence other than the punch in the face. Yeah, that makes loads of sense.
Also, the poor logic of moving from “40% do not report” to “those who report are liars” is rather massive.
Hey, Luke, I’m taking off to go do some grocery shopping, but before I go, I have one question for you:
When was the last time a rape case became national news in which your immediate assumption was not either that the victim was lying or that she was somehow at fault?
“Again, if this is a setup: Really poorly done. I expect so much more from my feminist/illuminati evil geniuses.”
You’re overestimating them.
But don’t we get our monthly Feminist Ruling the World notes from Ami?
I’m confused.
Not anymore-apparently I have been stuck on Ami’s throne.
Kind of small since I am taller then she is.
The feminist possition is:
1) You state he’s RUINED FOR LIFE
2) People (feminists) point to the fact he’s still rich, still married, still a parent, still a highly placed member of the French political parties, and soon to be free to return to France. Oh, and evidence gathered and released so far points to him being a rapist who gets to avoid being prosecuted because his victim might sell drugs (which even the UN counsel on drugs has admitted is a Failed War)
3) You state how glad you are to be “anti-feminist”
Jeebus, you’re a moron.
“What is your definition of “reasonable doubt”?”
This means that the proposition being presented by the prosecution must be proven to the extent that there could be no “reasonable doubt” in the mind of a “reasonable person” that the defendant is guilty. There can still be a doubt, but only to the extent that it would not affect a reasonable person’s belief regarding whether or not the defendant is guilty.
” You state he’s RUINED FOR LIFE”
Where ?
“When was the last time a rape case became national news in which your immediate assumption was not either that the victim was lying or that she was somehow at fault?”
I don’t automatically assume that the victim is lying.
“3) You state how glad you are to be “anti-feminist””
I stated that if what the position that Elizabeth took was feminist, thatn I am glad to be an anti-feminist.
Considering your response on this one Luke-kind of hard to believe.
Dude, Luke, you know you can put more then one thought per post, right? That way you don’t have to fill up the page with endless amounts of really short posts?
“Luke-there has been no trial. That is why we have things like “release conditions” when someone is accused of a crime-it is to ensure there is an actual trial.
You are apparently okay with him skipping town (which he can easily do now) and never being brought to trial.”
It’s not me who decided that. It’s the court.
I guess what I am asking is, where do you draw the line, as far as reasonable doubt is concerned?
Does the notion that the woman in the DSK case lied in the past give cause for reasonable doubt? Or is it the phone call and bank deposit that was mentioned earlier? What about the suggestion that she is a drug dealer?
In my mind, none of those serve as sturdy enough reasoning to conclude that she was not raped. All the same, that is not to say that she wasn’t. Which is what the point of holding a trial is.
No, it is *my* position-yes I am a feminist but I am not all feminists so to say that was to imply my opinion reflects all of them.
And again, this one year he cannot run for an office. Which if he is, in fact, guilty of sexually assaulting someone, he should not be running for in the first place.
“You’re overestimating them.”
Really, Luke? This huge political machine that gets men to pass laws that are bad for men, topples powerful figures, and (oh, let’s see, what else do we do?) secretly runs the world — it’s overestimating them to think they could orchestrate a scandal that would stick for more than a month or two? It’s true that in the MRM narrative feminists oscillate between the Most Powerful People Evar, Who Must Be Dealt With Harshly! and a buncha stupid little girls, but still. I’m pretty sure the people who would benefit from DSK’s fall from power have enough money and sense to do a background check on the woman they got to falsely accuse him.
“I don’t automatically assume that the victim is lying.”
That should be a really easy question to answer then.
@Hippodameia Like any great leader, I delegate.
So you are saying you never ever ever ever disagree with a court then Luke?
Because this is not good since the man is now able to skip the country easily-that was the reason for the original conditions in the first place. Otherwise this court will have no ability to make him show up and there will be no trial. He has already been offered a chance to return to France where they have stated they will refuse to extradite him.
Hrm… ok… for tops… should i wear a sleeveless top that ties up at the back around my neck? or should i wear a cut off t-shirt? 😮 with my wings? 😀
(luke you can answer this too, everybody’s involved in teh Life of Ami, also if I should wear wings or not :D)
@bee
I have no idea what you are rambling about.
@papr1ka
It’s the prosecution who must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he’s guilty, not the other way round. In this case, it looks like they will not be able to do that.
The key word is also ‘reasonable person’. Not ‘person immersed in feminist dogma’.
@Elizabeth
Sure courts can be wrong sometimes. Still I don’t think there is a vast male conspiracy at work here to avoid bringing justice to the poort womenz. If I’m not mistaken, the judge was a women ?
What kind of wings? Like this?