Stating The Obvious 0261 – Femistatist Anarchists. I Told You So. Part 3 of 3

Remember when I said femistatists, homostatists and paedophiles were going to flock to the anarcho-capitalist sphere? It has begun.

For Julie Borowski – a Republican who calls herself libertarian – the feminism manifest as her assertion that women should be allowed to hit men.

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/what-the-mens-rights-movement-gets-right-and-wrong/

Is it ever acceptable for a man to hit a woman? Some people will say never, ever, it’s never okay, no matter what. Eh. My answer–which is the same if you asked me if it’s ever acceptable for anyone to hit anyone— is yes, for self-defense.

I’m very pro self-defense. If a woman has the potential to do real damage– then yeah, you got to do what you got to do to protect yourself. If she’s coming at you with a knife or a frying pan, then, clearly. Fight back.

But self defense should also include common sense and examining the threat.

I fully acknowledge that there are women who, in the heat of the argument, will push and slap and try to provoke the situation. This is beyond stupid and she’s wrong for doing so. Seriously. Stop that.

Is it acceptable for a man to hit a woman in that situation?

Some MRAs will say that a man has every right–and should– hit back.

Common sense says no.

Once again, examining the threat. In most cases, the man is not physically threatened. Unless your girlfriend is Ronda Rousey or something. Since men tend to be stronger than women, punching her would be an excessive use of force. Way overkill.

There are much better ways to handle the situation. Restraining her would be one until she calms down. Also, that doesn’t mean that the woman should face no consequences for her actions. How about dumping her? Separation? Requiring that she gets anger management to continue the relationship? Really reevaluate if this is is someone that you want to be with if they resort to violence when they’re angry. ‘Cause that’s not part of a healthy relationship or person.

I’m still making my mind up on the Men’s Rights Movement. We’ll see.

Now we have Julia Tourianski – who lays claim to anarchist as her identifying ideology – saying that women can hit men, men who do not serve women are beta males and that women should have children by men in prison then marry a different man to support that child.

Come along with me as Julia illustrates everything that is wrong with the female brain.

Women view themselves as victims, children or victimized children. Because they are emotion driven they need drama and conflict in order to feel alive. They need to be victims in order to have power over others and they need power over others so they don’t have to provide for themselves.

They also need power over others so they will never experience discomfort.

I have said over and over that society in the United States is entirely geared towards insuring that no white woman ever experiences discomfort. In this episode of Stating The Obvious I bring you massive evidence of this.

Women view other people as either victimizers or providers. If you victimize a woman you give her power. If you provide for a woman you give her comfort and remove discomfort.

If you do neither of these things you don’t exist as far as she is concerned.

You have heard of the rationalization hamster that lives inside the female brain. There is another hamster in there as well. The drama hamster.

Episode 0259 covers clips 1 and 2.

Clip 01 – Legalizing rape within marriage. Notice how marriage is geared (as is everything else) to what women want. Men want sex. Women want money. Men can’t even get sex when married. Yet women not only get money while married, if they get a divorce women still get the man’s money.

Oh the oppression.

Consider as well that the Wikipedia page is about MRMs, not by MRMs. But if it’s on the internet it must be true.

Clip 02 – A “conspiracy” against masculinity? What is a beta male? Her response “might be a little long winded”. Her daddy “sets the standard” for everyone else. Because her daddy is a provider.

Here daddy gave up his life to provide for women. That’s called being a beta male.

Men today don’t want to be fathers! Oh the trauma!

You can’t use your personal experiences to write comments on YouTube . . . but you can use your personal experience of your daddy as a measure of all men.

Episode 0260 covers clips 3, 4 and 5.

Clip 03 – “It takes two” but blaming a woman is “beta” because while it takes two, women have no accountability or responsibility for consequences.

Men being fearful of women is “crap”. Because women never kill men and get away with it.

When women go to bars “everyone around her wants to fuck her”. Damn. That’s some ego.

An “alpha” takes care of girls.

Clip 04 – “MRM. Fighting for the right to hospitalize a women if she slaps you.” Listen to the hamster wheel nearly fly of the axle as violence against men is excused and justified.

“Fighting for the right to hospitalize a woman if she slaps you.”

You do support women beating on men with no consequence.

You do have some choices. One of them is to slap her back.

She goes to the source. Her daddy.

Clip 05 – Most guys are stronger than most girls. Yes. Because men and women are different.

She then talks about hitting her borefriend, brags about how big and strong he is, and how he took this abuse like a bitch. And it’s totally acceptable because she is smaller than he is.

Notice the point she makes. For the weak to abuse the strong is acceptable because they are week. Sounds a bit like the idea that the poor can take money from the rich because they are poor. Notice the point is to transfer power from those to have it to those who lack it. Notice how this is counter to natural selection.

“Wow! Wow!” said every femistatist ever.

Women can hit men because men are stronger. Men can not hit women because women are weaker. Yet: Men and women are equal. Yet: Women can hit children.

“Proportional response” – A man can hit a woman without hospitalizing her. Listen to the dramatics here. Every time a man hits a woman she has to go to the hospital. Is she “strong and independent” by chance? Does she have Obama Care?

Women should be allowed to hit men because women can not control their emotions. I’ve gone my whole life and never had to hit any one. But I can control my emotions. And I don’t bleed every month.

A woman who hits a man is “strong and independent”. A man who hits a woman is a victimizer. And women need victimizers in order to be victims and have power.

Source for quote below: http://judgybitch.com/2015/10/16/more-thoughts-about-women-and-violence/

For example, feminists will argue that women should be firefighters on the grounds that they are just as strong and capable and brave as men (even though they’re not, and can’t pass the fitness test). They will argue that women should be permitted to join elite fighting units and be eligible for front line combat on the grounds that women are just as capable of wielding weapons and delivering violence and death as men. Feminists reject any notion that women will be paralyzed or frightened by the horrific violence of combat simply by virtue of the fact they are women: individuals might experience paralyzing fear, but that is a feature of specific individuals, and not women on the whole. Women should be police officers, because they can quell violence or apprehend uncooperative suspects with the same ability as men. They aren’t going to quiver with fear and wait for someone to rescue them. Women should be able to take on any physical challenge that men can take on and deal with the emotional and psychological repercussions of those challenges.

According to feminists, women are capable, tough, strong, resilient and perfectly able to deliver violence from mild to extreme levels, as long as there is a paycheck involved.

But, the minute the paycheck disappears, the strong, capable, resilient, magnificently violent woman disappears. Domestic violence is the perfect example of this phenomenon: when it comes to domestic violence, women are terrified, paralyzed, frightful, insecure innocents who can’t possibly engage in violence the same way men can.

Episode 0261 covers clips 6, 7, and 8.

Clip 06: MGTOW are beta males. Oh listen to her giggle.

Then the defense of the single mothers kicks in. Single mothers are such wonderful people who were screwed by men.

Then we hear about how women do not make a choice about who to have sex with.

Clip 07: We are born to eat, fuck and not die. “Our mating strategies have never changed.”

Women want the best men for mating but the best men don’t stick around. Thus the female strategy is to get the best man to impregnate her, then have “a lower guy on the scale” provide the resources to raise the child. And this is why men are evil – because they don’t want to raise another man’s sperm.

Women riding the cock carousel “reinforces community and kills competition”.

Clip 08: A woman who works as a prison guard fucks and get knocked up by a prisoner, gives birth to twins, and her boyfriend (not the prisoner) is paying for the children. Julia laughs at this and declarers this woman is a winner.

Episode 0261 covers clips 8, 9, 10 and 11.

Clip 09: Men have the highest IQs. Yes they do.

“The dumb women don’t die off.” No they don’t. But they should. However Obama is keeping them alive because smart women would not vote for him.

Clip 10: Yes. And all of this is done for the benefit of women.

Clip 11: Men are hit more than women as children. And by who? Their mothers. Last time I checked most mothers are women.

Source for quote below: http://judgybitch.com/2015/10/17/why-dont-women-like-libertarianism-more-responsibility-more-accountability-and-less-free-stuff/

Libertarianism requires women to accept that rights come with responsibilities, to understand that maintaining functioning, mutually beneficial relationships with an entire community is essential to well-being and safety, and to come to terms with the fact that bad choices will not be rewarded, but penalized. In other words, libertarianism requires women to be held to the same standards as men. Adult women are required to behave as adults, and not infantilized subjects of an expanding state, funded by the work of mostly male taxpayers.

40 years of feminism has effectively taught women they are children. Libertarianism holds that adults are adults regardless of their gender. If women are interested in genuine equality, they will find it in a libertarian world. And that is the heart of the problem: women are have no interest in actual equality. They are interested in loud proclamations of independence and demands for complete moral autonomy, while depending on the state for funding. The absence of women in the libertarian movement is a testament to women’s sense of entitlement to men’s money and protection. It’s time for women to grow up. Choose liberty. Choose freedom. Choose equality.

Choose libertarianism.