Part of the MABTW blog network - Last Updated Blog - The Decaying Sword

Feminised Australian Women suck

March 18, 2006

Let’s blame all things on Men……..

Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 3:49 pm

Reading comments about or from women around Australia is a good way of learning what women in this country are all about. Spoilt, selfish, self-interested, vain, inconsiderate and a “take all for granted” attitude is the norm here, the “we want it all and we want it now” mentality reigns supreme.

Sadly, Australian women are like their counterparts in America. They watch the same idiot programs ie. Oprah, Dr Pheel, Pathetic Housewives, read the sme trash magazines etc.They have the same mentality of “we are princesses” and “we deserve everything we get” is rampant.

But ask any one of these self-promoted princesses why they feel so entitled, so self-important, so deserving, so feminised and they will argue that they are not, it would be the same as asking her “why should I have a relationship with you”, what benefit does it have for me besides pain, suffering and financial ruin ? You will receive the same blank stare, vacant , deviod of consideration for others. The “I cannot believe you are asking that about me, just my presence alone should be enough” stare.

The current Affirmative Action laws guarantee Australian Women will be employed before any male, purely on the grounds of sex and not ability. This is another feminists gain for the spoilt sex, they deny it although it’s plain for all to see on the Australian Government Website under “women”, see for yourself. They have their own links and free loans department.

So where is this going ?
If for some masochistic reason you still want to engage in a relationship with one of these, I suggest you read

” The new marriage Contract”.

Australian Women Bookshop.

March 17, 2006

But it’s just not true…….

Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 12:43 pm

Feminism has destroyed the relationship that once excisted between the sexes. Now women have come to grips with money, vanity, self-promotion and this process has sent them spiralling into no-man’s land.
Men today are sick to death of the self-serving attitude of women and must now decide whether any relationship with this selfish sex really isn’t what it’s supposed to be.

Here we have a fine image of the whining womenhood.
Here we have a fine image of the ongoing whining, complaining, self-interested womenhood.

February 18, 2006

Child guru says nurseries harm small children

Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 7:45 pm

  • Australian feminists are demanding 24hr, 7 day a week child care so they can dump baby at the local baby-sitting facility and pursue more important things like shopping, massage and going to have the hair and nails done.
  • Child guru says nurseries harm small children
    Sian Griffiths

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    ONE of the world’s most popular parenting gurus is to warn that placing children younger than three in nurseries risks damaging their development.

    Steve Biddulph, whose books have sold more than 4m copies worldwide, says that instead of subsidising nurseries, which do a “second-rate� job, the government should put in place policies to enable mothers to stay at home with their babies.

    The advice signals a reversal of views for Biddulph, an Australian with more than 20 years’ experience as a therapist, whose previous bestsellers
    include Raising Boys and Raising Girls.

    In his ne]lbook Biddulph will admit he has changed his mind because of growing evidence of increased aggression, antisocial behaviour and other problems among children who have spent a large part of their infancy being cared for away from home.

    He argues that such children may have problems developing close relationships later.

    The criticisms by Biddulph and other experts are likely to bring them into conflict with the government, which has made expanding nursery places a key part of its family policy.

    In Britain nearly 250,000 children under three attend nurseries full or part-time. Worldwide, the number of babies and toddlers being cared for in nurseries has quadrupled in the past decade as mothers increasingly return to work.

    Labour has created more than 1.2m new childcare places for the youngest children since it came to power in 1997. Every child aged three is entitled to a free nursery session of 2½ hours a day and the government has carried out pilot schemes to extend these sessions to two-year-olds, part of the age group that is Biddulph’s greatest concern.

    Gordon Brown, the chancellor, has promised an extra £769m for early years state childcare between 2005 and 2008, while the government
    proposes to extend maternity and paternity leave, which makes it easier for women to keep their jobs after they have children.

    Biddulph admits he started out as a believer in quality nursery care and the role it played in broadening women’s lives but says he has found reality never matched the fantasy. “In fact it was often a disastrous disappointment,� he said.

    “The best nurseries struggled to meet the needs of very young children in a group setting. The worst were negligent, frightening and bleak — a nightmare of bewildered loneliness that was heartbreaking to watch.�

    Biddulph focuses his warnings on what he estimates is the 5% of British parents who “slam� their children into nursery for a large part of their day from the age of six months.

    He believes nothing can provide an equal substitute for one-to-one care for a child under two, ideally by a parent. He argues that infants’ brains need to be stimulated by loving interaction if they are to develop properly.

    Nannies, he says, can work well as a halfway solution but only if parents are “extraordinarily lucky� with the person they find. He says, however, that care by family or friends is “a much safer option�.

    Biddulph says it was five years ago that he began writing his book, Raising Babies: Should Under 3s Go To Nursery?, published next moj4h by Harper Thorsons. But he he was initially afraid to release it because its message was “so confrontational, so against the tide�. He points, however, to increasing evidence supporting the thesis.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2036862,00.html

    Women Who Make the World Worse

    Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 7:40 pm
  • Even wommin are getting in on the act, feminists are liars and totally biased and sexist.

  • EXPOSED: the hatred, hypocrisy, and totalitarian intolerance of feminists like Gloria Steinem, Maureen Dowd, Eleanor Smeal, and (of course) Hillary.

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Women Who Make the World Worse
    by Kate O’Beirne

    Who better to expose the destructiveness of feminism than a fearless female conservative?
    In Women Who Make the World Worse, National Review’s Kate O’Beirne takes on America’s leading feminists: Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Eleanor Smeal, Maureen Dowd, Kate Michelman, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and even Sex and the City’s Carrie Bradshaw. She opposes their propagandistic Leftist emotionalism and self-important grandstanding with irrefutable evidence that the feminist movement — including some of those very women — has hurt women far more than it has helped them over the last forty years.

    Women Who Make the World Worse shows how feminism has devastated American society:

    fracturing families;
    making American schools and workplaces into battlefields to advance feminist causes; and exalting working women among mothers and consigning millions of children to a soulless upbringing by daycare center employees.
    Through it all, O’Beirne shows that feminists have poisoned American public discourse about gender issues with politically charged claptrap about how a hostile patriarchy makes women its helpless victims.

    Yet O’Beirne proves here that it is actually men - and boys - who are bearing a considerable amount of the actual suffering. Millions of schoolboys are being feminized in American classrooms;
    boys’ sports are in retreat in schools everywhere;
    the “gender gap” deforms local and national politics; millions of husbands and fathers (and wives and mothers) believe that men are not needed in the raising of children;
    and worst of all, transforming the American military into a laboratory for large-scale social engineering puts us all at risk.

    O’Beirne establishes that the feminist agenda is at its core not pro-female at all; it’s merely anti-male. She demolishes the prevailing myth among feminists that men are the enemy of women’s progress. This provocative book is essential reading for anyone, male or female, who is looking for some old-fashioned common sense about relations between the sexes.

    Revealed — Feminism’s war on men, the family, and the military:

    How feminists insist that there are no innate differences between men and women — except when they find it convenient to argue the opposite

    The prominent feminist who dismissed the traditional family as a “storybook idea”

    The husband of a famous feminist who advised men not to marry feminists!

    How feminists ignored good news about declines in domestic violence rates and trumped up a “national epidemic” of such violence — largely in order to keep themselves employed

    Why the feminist movement has for so long been on a collision course with what we know to be true about the natural bond between mother and child

    The feminist leader who refused to acknowledge overwhelming evidence that most working women would prefer to stay at home, and that parents don’t want the government-run programs that she advocates for toddlers

    Hypocrisy: how the liberal proponents of center-based child care are in reality advocating the boosting of profits for big business, tax cuts for the rich, and the sabotaging of women’s choices

    How the media generally mimics feminist talking points and ignores the mountains of evidence that disproves feminist orthodoxy

    Disproved: the common myth that women with similar education, skills, and job experience work for salaries 25 percent less than those of men

    Women who wised up after mistakenly heeding the calls of feminist sirens to put off marriage and motherhood to chase career goals

    It’s sexual harassment if I say so: feminists who actually argue that whether or not actionable sexual harassment has taken place must be judged by a subjective standard based on what any particular woman might find offensive

    How the feminist theory on sexual harassment is clearly based on the work of Catharine McKinnon, who declared that all heterosexual intercourse was rape

    The destructive gender war in our schools and universities: how it has harmed girls, boys, and serious scholarship

    How gender warriors treat American boys as unindicted coconspirators in history’s gender crimes, while girls are taught to see themselves as helpless victims of a phantom, crippling gender bias

    Social engineering in the classroom: how it has become ever rarer for feminized, feminist educators to present boys with strong male role models

    Debunked: the feminist insistence that girls’ comparative lack of interest in athletics is the result of gender discrimination and social conditioning to avoid traditionally male activities

    How Title IX has not actually increased the number of girls playing sports, and has harmed athletic programs in general

    Women in combat: why it’s a bad idea — and how it’s endangering our troops in Iraq

    The myth, uncritically hyped by the media, that our patriarchal culture silences adolescent girls

    The double standard demanded by feminists for women in the military: it isn’t confined only to physical tests

    How feminists exploit the abuse and deaths of young women in combat situations to advance their agenda of androgyny and abortion

    How feminist political activists consistently refuse to face the implications of the fact that Republicans have been winning more presidential elections than Democrats — and even carrying more of the female vote

    The female Army Captain who successfully completed a mission to secure a dog kennel — and was hailed by the politically correct establishment as a new McArthur or Patton!

    Why modern feminism’s biggest enemies are the smallest of all humans: the unborn

    Exploded: the persistent myth that most women support the feminists’ abortion-on-demand agenda

    The pro-life agenda: is it really a vote-killer, as both parties seem to believe? Solid evidence that the pro-life advantage is actually unequivocal in the voting booth

    The feminist psychologist who began in 1975 to try to prove that there are no innate differences between men and women — and who now admits that “it didn’t work out”

    Little-noted, and highly politically incorrect, data about just how profoundly different men and women really are.

    The Recurring Pattern, Of Modern History.

    Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 7:38 pm

    The Recurring Pattern, Of Modern History by NiceGuy …
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Step 1: Men invent a new industry or technology.

    Step 2: As soon as the new industry or technology becomes super-safe to use and/or glamorous enough to be trendy, small numbers of women (brave “pioneers”!) become interested in it.

    Step 3: Brave pioneering women start to discover the new field isn’t a bowl of cherries.

    Step 4: Brave pioneering women get their feelings hurt and complain that men have developed the industry/field to suit themselves and have unfairly shut women out of their private little boy’s club.

    Step 5: After court papers are filed, men start to create special programs to lower standards and advance the number of women to top positions in the field while paying less attention to such irrelevant things as qualifications and ability.

    Step 6: After women achieve a number of high-level positions in the field, they begin gloating that men have lost their edge and no longer have what it takes to compete in this brave, new world of ‘ekwalitee’.

    Step 7: Repeat.

    Niceguy runs the Mancoat Forum - mostly for young MRAs - requires registration

    Why I don’t take feminists seriously, Part IV

    Filed under: Aussie women, Women generally — australianwomensuck @ 7:34 pm

    Why I don’t take feminists seriously, Part IV

    Jan 30, 2006
    by Mike S. Adams

    After Parts I, II, and III of this series, I have finally started to get a few hate males from feminist readers – letters usually known as “hate mails� when sent by non-feminists. One hate male writer said she couldn’t take me seriously because I am a hunter. That brings me to my next point about feminists.

    11. When faced with uncertainty, feminists have less self-control than hunters.

    Once when I was deer-hunting in Ivanhoe, North Carolina, I saw something moving in the brush about 100 yards away. It was foggy outside and I was looking through a 4 X 32 scope mounted on a Marlin 30-30. I never take a shot over 100 yards with that little brush gun. And I never shoot at anything unless I know exactly what is out there.

    That day I got to thinking about the feminist approach to abortion. Feminists often justify abortion by saying that the procedure is no different than picking a scab. That’s when I start asking questions.

    I often ask feminists about a film I saw of a fetus in the so-called “first trimester� of development. The baby (sorry, that is my opinion) was yawning, rubbing its eyes, and even rolling around and playing in the womb. I like to ask feminists whether they have ever seen a scab yawn.

    When I press them on the issue, they seldom admit that the fetus is a person. But they seldom state unequivocally that it is not. They usually say they “don’t know for sure.� And they say that I “don’t know for sure� either.

    That really epitomizes our differences. When I know it is a deer in the brush, I pull the trigger. When I know it is a human, I hold my fire. When I don’t know, I also hold my fire.

    The feminist who “doesn’t know� whether it is a person, has the abortion anyway. She just pulls the trigger. That really says it all, doesn’t it?

    12. Feminists cannot grasp the importance of gradual self-disclosure.

    Long before I earned a Master’s degree in Social Psychology, I learned that one of the keys to successful relationships is choosing the appropriate pace of self-disclosure. If you too rapidly reveal intimate details of your personal life, people tend to devalue your friendship. If you reveal things more slowly, stronger relationships tend to follow.

    People are often turned off to feminism because feminists tend to reveal intimate details of their lives very quickly. This is especially true of feminist professors in the classroom. The following complaint I received from a college student is illustrative:

    “Dr. Adams: I agree with your observations on feminism. I took an English class taught by a feminist who I liked very much at first. When she started complaining about her first husband I felt sorry for her. By the time she started attacking her fifth husband I wanted to withdraw from the course. I have no idea how many different times she’s been married. I just know that none of the divorces were her fault.�

    Sadly, it gets much worse than that in the feminist classroom. Feminist professors also discuss their sexual experiences – consensual and non-consensual – in excruciating detail in public. Venues include the classroom, books, and sometimes in “scholarly� articles. The First Amendment gives them the right to reveal what most people would say is “too much information.� But it does not give them the right to be taken seriously.

    13. Feminist-sponsored Masturbation Workshops on college campuses.

    No explanation necessary. But see the example from Grinnell College, if necessary.

    14. Feminists would rather solve a problem by changing “society� than by changing their own behavior.

    One obvious example of this is “love your body day� - not to be confused with masturbation workshop day. At many universities, “love your body day� concludes with feminists holding a beauty pageant featuring overweight models – usually with pretty faces. The purpose of this is to convince us that bigger women are just as attractive as smaller (by this, they mean thinner) women.

    Sociology professors often pursue the notion that beauty is not objective but “socially constructed� by showing their students medieval paintings of nude, pudgy women. The argument is that fat used to be considered attractive. Therefore, it can be that way again with enough social engineering. So, feminists seek nothing less than to change societal perceptions of beauty with millions of dollars of tax-payer funded programs.

    Wouldn’t it just be easier to exercise?

    Along the same lines, have you noticed how chic it has become for feminists to claim that they are Marxists? Feminist professors spend a good bit of time trying to persuade their students that Marxism is the answer to America’s problems.

    If a woman’s opportunities are better under communism, wouldn’t it be easier to get a job at the University of Havana than to start a bloody Marxist revolution?

    I’ve never seen a bunch of poor, oppressed feminists board a leaky boat in Miami in order to paddle their way to freedom in Castro Cuba. But I do have a few friends in South Florida who escaped from communism. They still have their boats. And we’d be proud to give these Marxist feminists a lift to Havana any time.

    So think about my offer, ladies. In the meantime, I’m going to smoke a good Honduran cigar while I’m writing Part V.

    Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and is a regular columnist for Townhall.com.

    « Previous Page

    generiert in 0.513 Sekunden. | Powered by WordPress