Re: I have been raped by women.

Message has been deleted

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 19, 2007, 7:38:53 PM1/19/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>
> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>
> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised by
> the media, and so on.
>
> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous emotional
> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
> rape victim.
>
> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate, seeing everything through
> the prism of your trauma... these are just some of the psychological
> terrors I have to face.
>
> The rape of women is thought to be a serious crime in our society. But
> what about the thousands of men who's dreams of a relationship are
> shattered every day? Their dreams are raped. My life has been raped.

So who, specifically, should be punished for this alleged "rape."

Turin

unread,

Jan 19, 2007, 7:42:50 PM1/19/07

to

Johnston postulated:

You have a lot in common with dweebs like Andre Lieven,
who's so lonely that he recently pretended to get married.
Yep.

I suggest you look him up and form a support group.

- - -

This has been another enlightening moment, with:

Turin

I have such sites to show you...
------------------------

http://members.fortunecity.com/turinturambar/
http://groups.google.com/group/Men_First/

------------------------

"He who changeth, altereth, misconstrueth, argueth with,
deleteth, or maketh a lie about these words or causeth them
to not be known shall burn in hell forever and ever...."

-----

Message has been deleted

dan74

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 4:47:45 AM1/20/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>

For some men-- it can be.
But, society really doesn't give a shit about this.
Society doesn't care about the men at the bottom
who aren't coping with life.

I think this can be attributed to basic gender roles.
The man has to "prove" himself in society - he has to be the "go
getter".
Women don't have to "prove" themselves in the same way.
It's quite Ok for a woman to be passive in life.

Men from a young age are taught to be "strong", and not to
be a "cry baby". Any emotional insecurities are scorned at-
because the male must to be "tough".
Therefore, if a man is not like this...he pretty much is on
his own. This is probably one reason for the high suicide
rate amongst males (that, and males being better at killing things,
including themselves)

Women are 'allowed"
to be insecure - indeed, some say that women are 'insecure'
by nature. So, if a woman is 'shy' or 'insecure', there is a support
structure for her, because it's "OK" for a woman to be that way.
This is not the case for a man - he had better get rid of all his
insecurities, because in a relationship, he'll be spending most
of his time trying to make his insecure girlfriend/wife feel secure!

So, I know that rejection can be traumatic and devastating - but,
sadly, no one will give a shit (especially *women*).
Society will just say to you "be a man, get over it".

And if you can't get over it, then perhaps the "manly" solution
is to put a double barrel shot gun in your mouth
(yeah, I'm in a bad mood today).

Message has been deleted

Turin

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 10:03:20 AM1/20/07

to

Johnston postulated:

>> So, I know that rejection can be traumatic and
>> devastating - but, sadly, no one will give a shit
>> (especially *women*). Society will just say to you "be
>> a man, get over it".
>

> If you have been rejected by women, the response is
> always to blame the man, to blame the victim. He is
> always called a "loser" who can't attract women. I hate
> this blaming the victim mentality.
>
> There is no regard for the man, a person who's dreams
> have been shattered.

There's no regard for twerps who keep calling themselves
"strong", anyway.

...any more than for pitiful women who pose as Men so that
they can keep casting rejection by Men as rape.

August Pamplona

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 2:06:15 PM1/20/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>

> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>
> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised by
> the media, and so on.
>
> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous emotional
> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
> rape victim.
>
> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate, seeing everything through
> the prism of your trauma... these are just some of the psychological
> terrors I have to face.
>
> The rape of women is thought to be a serious crime in our society. But
> what about the thousands of men who's dreams of a relationship are
> shattered every day? Their dreams are raped. My life has been raped.

Let's see how things look to some woman in an in an alternate
reality. Call it Darfalzworld:

"When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a woman caused by
repeated rape by men, is as bad as a man being rejected.

In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rejection of sexual
advances.

However, if a man is rejected, he goes to the police, it is a huge

event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised by
the media, and so on.

The violation of my being I suffered has caused horrendous emotional

damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a

rejection victim.

The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate and self-blame, panic
attacks, flashbacks, seeing everything through the prisms of your

trauma... these are just some of the psychological terrors I have to face.

The rejection of men is thought to be a serious crime in our society.
But what about the thousands of women whose dreams of not being violated
are shattered every day? Their dreams are denied. My body's autonomy has
been rejected and denied."

Guess what? It doesn't work. And you know why it doesn't work?
It doesn't work because you are a whiny idiot with a gross sense of
entitlement.

August Pamplona
--
If you could prove religious beliefs with the scientific
method, it would be science.....and nobody would believe it.
- Stephen Colbert

a.a. # 1811 apatriot #20 Eater of smut
Proud member of the reality-based community.
The address in this message's 'From' field, in accordance with
individual.net's TOS, is real. However, almost all messages
reaching this address are deleted without human intervention.
In other words, if you e-mail me there, I will not receive your message.

To make sure that e-mail messages actually reach me,
make sure that my e-mail address is not hot.

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 3:03:42 PM1/20/07

to

Troll wrote:
> "subversive blossums" <gospe...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1169253533.7...@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com:

> The skanks who brutally reject men after leading them on.

You sound like a psycho-killer.

popp...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 4:14:01 PM1/20/07

to

subversive blossums wrote:
>
> You sound like a psycho-killer.

Qu'est-ce que c'est?

pug

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 5:48:33 PM1/20/07

to

>On 20 Jan 2007 01:47:45 -0800, "dan74" <daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Holy shit Dan, you do sound like you are in a bad mood today. But hey,
we all go through such days.

>>Johnston wrote:
>> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
>> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.

>For some men-- it can be.
>But, society really doesn't give a shit about this.
>Society doesn't care about the men at the bottom
>who aren't coping with life.

My opinion is society doesn't give a shit about anyone (man or woman)
unless this so-called society can get something from that person. But
then again, I am a misanthrope and of course my views may be slanted
(just a tad).

Just like the old saying goes, it is a "dog eat dog" world. I honestly
believe true altruism and selfless caring for individual humans not
directly related or near to oneself is very rare in this world.

Therefore yes, society doesn't care about men at the bottom who aren't
coping with life. Who are you to society? What can society get from
you to care about your "coping" skills?

>I think this can be attributed to basic gender roles.
>The man has to "prove" himself in society - he has to be the "go
>getter".
>Women don't have to "prove" themselves in the same way.
>It's quite Ok for a woman to be passive in life.

I'll be honest with you. I haven't met very many truly "passive" women
in my life. Now I have met a shit load of "passive-aggressive" women,
yes.

>Men from a young age are taught to be "strong", and not to
>be a "cry baby". Any emotional insecurities are scorned at-
>because the male must to be "tough".

Is this still true, in today's feminized societies? It seems to me a
good percentage of boys and young men are raised by single/divorced
mothers, with the father not in the picture. Are women teaching their
sons to be "strong" and 'tough?"

It seems to me men are getting mixed signals in this society.

>Therefore, if a man is not like this...he pretty much is on
>his own. This is probably one reason for the high suicide
>rate amongst males (that, and males being better at killing things,
>including themselves)

You may have something there.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/suifacts.htm

Males
Suicide is the eighth leading cause of death for all U.S. men
(Anderson and Smith 2003).

Males are four times more likely to die from suicide than females (CDC
2004).

Suicide rates are highest among Whites and second highest among
American Indian and Native Alaskan men (CDC 2004).

Of the 24,672 suicide deaths reported among men in 2001, 60% involved
the use of a firearm (Anderson and Smith 2003).

Females
Women report attempting suicide during their lifetime about three
times as often as men (Krug et al. 2002).

> Women are 'allowed"
>to be insecure - indeed, some say that women are 'insecure'
>by nature. So, if a woman is 'shy' or 'insecure', there is a support
>structure for her, because it's "OK" for a woman to be that way.

Perhaps if you are speaking of battered women, yes there are lots of
support structures for such "insecure" women.

As to shyness, I don't think society believes it is "OK" for anyone,
male or female to be an introverted, social "loser."

>This is not the case for a man - he had better get rid of all his
>insecurities, because in a relationship, he'll be spending most
>of his time trying to make his insecure girlfriend/wife feel secure!

Secure in what way?

Financially?

Emotionally (whatever the hell *that* means)?

My definition of a secure person is someone who knows who they are as
a person. Someone who understands and admits to their own faults and
strengths. Someone who has morals and is not swayed by what "society"
thinks. Someone who is honest, intelligent and can support
him/herself, by him/herself if need be. Someone who doesn't fawn over
others because he/she expects everyone to like him/her.

Of course a secure person will still have insecurities, but hopefully
a secure person will not allow his insecurities to paralyze him.

>So, I know that rejection can be traumatic and devastating - but,
>sadly, no one will give a shit (especially *women*).
>Society will just say to you "be a man, get over it".

Be a person with integrity and get over it. Seriously. Fuck society.
The majority of people in society are users. Why let them have so much
control over you?

Fuck rejection. So someone doesn't like you? More than likely you
weren't meant to be with that person anyway.

Rejection will happen in all aspects of life. In my own life I have
been rejected by so many jobs that I have become numb to the whole
"workplace" game -- in fact it has become humorous to me, it is no
longer devastating and traumatic.

As to personal relationships, I will keep repeating this -- you need
to seek out like-minded people such as yourself. You can't keep trying
to ram the square peg (you) into the round hole ("normals"). Fuck the
"normals", why would you ever want to be around such dishonest, filthy
people in the first place?

>And if you can't get over it, then perhaps the "manly" solution
>is to put a double barrel shot gun in your mouth
>(yeah, I'm in a bad mood today).

Yes, suicide is always an option. I still think about it periodically,
but I am such a wimp, and I am afraid I would mess up and be in a
worse condition than I am now.

Hey Dan, you are a good guy. Believe in yourself and who you are. You
can become a strong man. Honestly, more of you guys should listen to
Ron W. and Hardpan. They really do have good advice with regard to
overcoming shyness and learning to stand on your own two feet and "be
a man" as they say.

pug

[I am in a good mood today, I am amazed.]
---------------------------------------
Going the Way of the Dinosaur...

http://home.earthlink.net/~blue_anise/

Darkfalz

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 7:10:41 PM1/20/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>

> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>
> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised by
> the media, and so on.
>
> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous emotional
> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
> rape victim.
>
> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate, seeing everything through
> the prism of your trauma... these are just some of the psychological
> terrors I have to face.
>
> The rape of women is thought to be a serious crime in our society. But
> what about the thousands of men who's dreams of a relationship are
> shattered every day? Their dreams are raped. My life has been raped.

I agree with you. Women cause as much hurt and damage every day as any
"rape", and get away scott free.

the wharf rat

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 7:11:27 PM1/20/07

to

In article <45b15def$0$16556$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,

Johnston <2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
>repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>
>In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>

Lol.

"Hey babe, wanna fuck?"
"No thanks."
"Oh no I've been devastated! My emotional health is shattered!"

If you're that delicate you don't have to worry about not getting laid
until you actually grow a pair, kid.

Darkfalz

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 7:14:14 PM1/20/07

to

> My opinion is society doesn't give a shit about anyone (man or woman)
> unless this so-called society can get something from that person. But
> then again, I am a misanthrope and of course my views may be slanted
> (just a tad).

It's not true. When a woman is hurt, or doesn't get the guy she
desires, it's a big deal. "Oh, you poor thing" and "How could he not
notice you?" - usually the case is that the girl is extremely average
and the guy she wants is way out her league, but you're still meant to
feel bad for her!

When a guy wants a woman who isn't interested, he's a "stalker" who
needs to "forget about it" in a big hurry.

August Pamplona

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 8:49:45 PM1/20/07

to

So what would your ideal world look like? What would happen if
one of these bad, bad women dared to say no to poor widdle Darkie and
hurt its poor widdle feelings?

Just wondering,

Antares

unread,

Jan 20, 2007, 10:00:56 PM1/20/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>
> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.

I've been raped by the absence of really fine coffee in my workplace.

Message has been deleted

Darkfalz

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 12:28:24 AM1/21/07

to

> So what would your ideal world look like? What would happen if
> one of these bad, bad women dared to say no to poor widdle Darkie and
> hurt its poor widdle feelings?

The penalty for crimes against men would be severe.

dan74

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 1:37:32 AM1/21/07

to

pug wrote:
> >On 20 Jan 2007 01:47:45 -0800, "dan74" <daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Holy shit Dan, you do sound like you are in a bad mood today. But hey,
> we all go through such days.

Yeah, it was a "bad hair" day for me.

>
> Just like the old saying goes, it is a "dog eat dog" world. I honestly
> believe true altruism and selfless caring for individual humans not
> directly related or near to oneself is very rare in this world.
>

Yep. Empathy is sorely lacking in the world.

> Therefore yes, society doesn't care about men at the bottom who aren't
> coping with life. Who are you to society? What can society get from
> you to care about your "coping" skills?

Well -- I work, pay taxes, I contribute something to society.
I'm not complete asshole - I think I can be of use to someone.
Someone should care about my coping skills -- lol.

But, you are right...society often neglects those who aren't
considered "hot" (look at how we treat our elderly).

> I'll be honest with you. I haven't met very many truly "passive" women
> in my life. Now I have met a shit load of "passive-aggressive" women,
> yes.
>

Well, "passive-aggression" is just the negative manifestation of
being 'passive'.

Actually, I think the one true gender difference between men and women
is that men are more direct, women are more indirect (you're an
exception, pug).

Some will argue this makes evolutionary sense -
the job of the man was always very direct, as in "must hunt buffalo".
Men always had to deal with 'A to B' problems
i.e. 'not have buffalo --> must get buffalo'
Because women lacked physical strength, they needed to develop
more indirect skills to get what they wanted.

>
> It seems to me men are getting mixed signals in this society.

Yep. Very, very true Pug. This might be the root of a lot
of problems in guys.

>
> Males
> Suicide is the eighth leading cause of death for all U.S. men
> (Anderson and Smith 2003).
>
> Males are four times more likely to die from suicide than females (CDC
> 2004).
>
> Suicide rates are highest among Whites and second highest among
> American Indian and Native Alaskan men (CDC 2004).

Like I said, men are probably "better" at suicide from a practical
point of view (they're good with guns, and so on), but I also think
the mixed signals men recieve, and the lack of emotional
support, is another reason.

> Perhaps if you are speaking of battered women, yes there are lots of
> support structures for such "insecure" women.
>
> As to shyness, I don't think society believes it is "OK" for anyone,
> male or female to be an introverted, social "loser."

Like Darkfalz said, I still think there is a bit of the "you poor
thing"
thing directed at women who are shy and insecure. Insecurity in
men is scorned at much, much more.

>
> Secure in what way?
>
> Financially?
>
> Emotionally (whatever the hell *that* means)?

I don't want to generalize about the entire female
population (of course, we don't do things like that
on usenet ;-)), but
many women I've gotten to know in my life were
'emotional vampires' - they needed emotional
reassurance* all the time. There was absolutely *no*
room for a man's insecurities or feelings at all...
it was all about "them".

*by emotional reassurance, I mean that these women
needed to be reassured how "attractive" they
are from almost every man and his dog; they needed to
constant attention, day and night, in order to feel secure;
they basically behaved like spoilt babies most of the time.

I think I've just had bad luck in meeting emotionally unhinged
women.

>
> My definition of a secure person is someone who knows who they are as
> a person. Someone who understands and admits to their own faults and
> strengths. Someone who has morals and is not swayed by what "society"
> thinks. Someone who is honest, intelligent and can support
> him/herself, by him/herself if need be. Someone who doesn't fawn over
> others because he/she expects everyone to like him/her.

That's a good definition.

>
> Be a person with integrity and get over it. Seriously. Fuck society.
> The majority of people in society are users. Why let them have so much
> control over you?

Good point. Easier said than done, but a good point.

>
> Fuck rejection. So someone doesn't like you? More than likely you
> weren't meant to be with that person anyway.

True. But, constant rejection can really grind your ego down.
It's the 'constant rejection' I was talking about.

Perhaps another gender difference is that men need women
more than women need men (romantically speaking). So,
maybe it's easier for a woman to deal with rejection. I don't
know.

>
> Yes, suicide is always an option. I still think about it periodically,
> but I am such a wimp, and I am afraid I would mess up and be in a
> worse condition than I am now.
>

Well, hang in there Pug. Death will come for us anyway, so there's
no reason to sprint towards it.

By coincidence, I used to listen to Joyce Meyer at the same time
you did (late nineties).I kind of lost patience with her after a while,
but I've been listening to her again. Yes, believe it or not...I'm
also adopting the "let God steer my life" attitude.
..and I am technically an athiest and a misanthrope!
Wonders will never cease.

> Hey Dan, you are a good guy. Believe in yourself and who you are.

Thanks pug.

>You
> can become a strong man. Honestly, more of you guys should listen to
> Ron W. and Hardpan. They really do have good advice with regard to
> overcoming shyness and learning to stand on your own two feet and "be
> a man" as they say.

RonW has a lot of interesting things to say, true. Hardpan is a
straight-talker who says a lot of
true things, but I'm not sure if I agree with his 'revenge' ideas
against
females

>
> pug
>
> [I am in a good mood today, I am amazed.]

That's good to hear, Pug.
Be careful, though -- if you stay in a good mood long enough,
suddenly that asteroid you've been praying for might hit the
earth finally...lol.
Take care pug.

Message has been deleted

MrWigglesworth

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 6:41:17 AM1/21/07

to

The job market has raped me by not giving me a seven figure salary. My
dreams are shattered. My life is in ruins. Who will pay for these
crimes?

Message has been deleted

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 7:43:09 AM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> > The job market has raped me by not giving me a seven figure salary. My
> > dreams are shattered. My life is in ruins. Who will pay for these
> > crimes?
>

> It is not reasonable to expect such a salary. But it is reasonable to
> expect companionship. I think everyone deserves a fair go at having a
> relationship.

I don't know that the word "deserve" makes any sense at all (sort of
like "God"), but I grant you that it's a reasonable goal for people who
are willing to go to the considerable amount of effort needed.

> Women get a fair go, even if they are fat and/or mentally ill.

The trick is to find a woman who's mentally ill enough to have sex with
a shybie loser.

> I just think every man should have the opportunity to experience female
> affection, rather than just the top 20% of high-attractiveness males.

Where'd the 20% come from? No, don't tell me! It came from the New
England Journal of Pulling Figures Straight Out of Your Ass (DarkFalz,
ed.).

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 7:43:58 AM1/21/07

to

I'm emotionally damaged by my lack of a yacht.

Message has been deleted

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 8:07:39 AM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> > Where'd the 20% come from? No, don't tell me! It came from the New
> > England Journal of Pulling Figures Straight Out of Your Ass (DarkFalz,
> > ed.).
>

> The 80/20 rule.
>
> 80% of women have sex with 20% of the men.

And where'd that come from?
Ibid, presumably?

Message has been deleted

michaela

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:00:47 AM1/21/07

to

ohnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused
by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>
> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>

> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised
> by the media, and so on.
>
> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous
emotional
> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
> rape victim.
>
> The undermining of self-esteem,

The problem seems to me to emerge when we give someone else permission
to take away our SE. The only sane answer IMO is to slowly start
getting
out there in the big world and giving ourselves permission to
experiment
and mess up etc.

Of course you can also sit there and continue to blame the world for
their
bad attitudes or have elaborate fantasies of wiping all earthly
inhabitants
out...

- Michaela

michaela

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:13:51 AM1/21/07

to

A South African I know --after having heard it voiced a thousand
times--
spelt what you just said as "Kess ka sę". This of course would prolly
only
be funny to a bilingual South African.

- Michaela

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:34:03 AM1/21/07

to

Aren't all mass murderers obsessive loners who externalize all their
psychic pain?
Blaming everyone else is a sign of some kind of arrested development.

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:43:43 AM1/21/07

to

I've been raped by not having a window near my cubical. Waaaaahhhh!

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:54:55 AM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> > Where'd the 20% come from? No, don't tell me! It came from the New
> > England Journal of Pulling Figures Straight Out of Your Ass (DarkFalz,
> > ed.).
>

> The 80/20 rule.
>
> 80% of women have sex with 20% of the men.

That's pretty funny. (Laughing...as the gene pool narrows.)
Some of those 20% guys must have dicks of steel!
Where does the line form?

mickey

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 12:47:38 PM1/21/07

to

This is actually true, not necessarily the 80/20 statistic, but that
human sexual networks are power law based with a few individuals doing
significantly more fucking than the rest. A little googling will give
you peer reviewed papers on this. Since humans are a polygynous species,
this distribution is more skewed for men than females, that is, there
will be few mean with large number of partners (in the thousands), while
there will also be a large number of men (in the tail of the
distribution) with few or no partners.

-M

dan74

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 12:52:06 PM1/21/07

to

I always thought it was more 60/40
(just freshly pulled from my ass).

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 1:14:53 PM1/21/07

to

One guy - screwing "thousands!" LOL!
Is he screwing them all more than once? How many is he screwing per
day?
How do you get the numbers on that? Is that over a lifetime?
Or is it that I'll only screw 20% of the guys (provided I'm not
wasted?)
In our up-right monkey ancestors - how did this work. One male monkey
screws 80% of the females in his troop and all the other males watch
and jack off? Or do they screw the 20% that the alpha males don't
screw?
Or is it that 20% of us fuck 80% of the total fucks that occur on
average?
How many times per week do I have to fuck to join the top 20%?

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 1:29:50 PM1/21/07

to

Euuuwww - stinky!?
Well, clearly, I've not been picky enough.

pug

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 2:49:05 PM1/21/07

to

>On 20 Jan 2007 22:37:32 -0800, "dan74" <daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Well, "passive-aggression" is just the negative manifestation of
>being 'passive'.

>Actually, I think the one true gender difference between men and women
>is that men are more direct, women are more indirect (you're an
>exception, pug).

Yes, that is pretty much true (at least in my experiences amongst
people).

>Some will argue this makes evolutionary sense -
>the job of the man was always very direct, as in "must hunt buffalo".
>Men always had to deal with 'A to B' problems
>i.e. 'not have buffalo --> must get buffalo'
>Because women lacked physical strength, they needed to develop
>more indirect skills to get what they wanted.

I suppose that could be one reason for the differences between men and
women. But now that women are "equal" and can provide for themselves,
why do many still playing the passive-aggressive game? Let me tell
you, women just don't play the game with men, they play it with other
women too.

>> As to shyness, I don't think society believes it is "OK" for anyone,
>> male or female to be an introverted, social "loser."

>Like Darkfalz said, I still think there is a bit of the "you poor
>thing"
>thing directed at women who are shy and insecure. Insecurity in
>men is scorned at much, much more.

When I was growing up and was being harassed and spit at for being shy
and quiet, I didn't have any "you poor thing" support from ANYONE.

The sisterhood hated me even more than the guys did.

But that's just my experience. As an adult, I am only privy to the
sisterhood as an outsider who observes and listens. I don't get the
"you poor thing" support from females, probably because I don't have
any female friends and most females think I am a whack job.

>many women I've gotten to know in my life were
>'emotional vampires' - they needed emotional
>reassurance* all the time. There was absolutely *no*
>room for a man's insecurities or feelings at all...
>it was all about "them".

Yeah, that "sucks" (no pun intended).

>*by emotional reassurance, I mean that these women
>needed to be reassured how "attractive" they
>are from almost every man and his dog; they needed to
>constant attention, day and night, in order to feel secure;
>they basically behaved like spoilt babies most of the time.

Are those the type of women who always get "The Gold?" What I mean by
the gold is their boyfriends and/or husbands constantly have to buy
them stuff to make them feel wanted.

You can find my funny take on "The Gold" here:

http://home.earthlink.net/~blue_anise/posts/thegold.htm

>I think I've just had bad luck in meeting emotionally unhinged
>women.

I guess so. But everyone has some degree of "emotional unhingeness."
You have to decide if it is worth the effort to deal with such
women/people.

>> Be a person with integrity and get over it. Seriously. Fuck society.
>> The majority of people in society are users. Why let them have so much
>> control over you?
>
>Good point. Easier said than done, but a good point.

Everything is always easier said than done, unfortunately. :-(

>True. But, constant rejection can really grind your ego down.
>It's the 'constant rejection' I was talking about.

Yeah I see your point. So what can you do? I say lay low for a while
and stop worrying about relationships, girlfriends, friends, etc.

>Perhaps another gender difference is that men need women
>more than women need men (romantically speaking). So,
>maybe it's easier for a woman to deal with rejection. I don't
>know.

I would think it would be the opposite. Women need men (romantically
speaking) more than men need women. Men can always go to prostitutes
for sex. Women very rarely seek out male prostitutes (does it ever
happen?)

But then I wonder... Why don't women seek out male prostitutes (other
than most male prostitutes are gay)? There is no need because most
women do not have a hard time finding men for romantic/sexual
relationships.

Hmmm...something to think about...

>> Yes, suicide is always an option. I still think about it periodically,
>> but I am such a wimp, and I am afraid I would mess up and be in a
>> worse condition than I am now.

>Well, hang in there Pug. Death will come for us anyway, so there's
>no reason to sprint towards it.

Yeah, I am sure there are a lot of people who would love me to kick
the bucket today. LOL!

>By coincidence, I used to listen to Joyce Meyer at the same time
>you did (late nineties).I kind of lost patience with her after a while,
>but I've been listening to her again.

I like Joyce.

I know, hard as it may be for the sisterhood to believe, pug actually
likes and respects a woman!

As I said before, I have seen a change in Joyce Meyer's "preaching"
style since the late nineties. Today, she is very inspirational on an
individual level.

>Yes, believe it or not...I'm
>also adopting the "let God steer my life" attitude.
>..and I am technically an athiest and a misanthrope!
>Wonders will never cease.

I listened to her a couple of days ago and she was speaking again
about letting God steer your path. Trust in God and stop trusting in
people to help you. Trust in God first and he will give you inner
peace send the right people into your life.

I know it sounds rather new-age touchy feely, but damn if what she
says about trusting God hasn't helped dear 'ol pug these past few
months.

Just last night I conversed with God (I guess one would call it
praying), and I said to him that I was feeling rather OK about my
life. Even though my life is in the "crapper" right now, I actually
"feel good."

Yes, I have no job.

Yes, I have no romantic relationship.

Yes, I live with and take care of my mom.

Yes, I am living off my savings and it is only a matter of time before
I need to get another dreaded "job" or go live under a bridge.

But over the past few months that I have followed Joyce's advice of
only trusting in God (and not myself or other people) --

I have met a few new online friends.

I have had a wonderful time writing mine and my sister's second
screenplay (which is almost complete)

I am still in great health.

And I am going to Paris in March something I have always wanted to do.
(woo hoo! my sis finally said she would go with me so I won't have to
go alone)

Yeah, maybe what I stated above is not much in terms of "living" but I
am finally learning to enjoy the ride instead of concentrating on the
final destination.

I do believe God can and will open doors, if you ask him to. At least
I am hoping and keeping my fingers crossed. But you have to be aware
some of the doors may lead to places you do not want to go (at least
not at first) -- and it could be years before you see any real
"breakthrough" (as Joyce calls it).

That's OK, I am not going anywhere anytime soon, I have a lot of time
to work on myself and my relationship with God; and when God sees I am
ready, I will walk through the doors he opened and hopefully I will
finally be on the path God wants me to be.

>That's good to hear, Pug.
>Be careful, though -- if you stay in a good mood long enough,
>suddenly that asteroid you've been praying for might hit the
>earth finally...lol.
>Take care pug.

Well an asteroid hitting the Earth is still OK in my book. But until
then, I'll continue to watch Joyce and let God steer the bus I'm
riding.

pug
---------------------------------------
Going the Way of the Dinosaur...

http://home.earthlink.net/~blue_anise/

Pies de Arcilla

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 3:07:47 PM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>
> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.

It's awfully arrogant of you to say that. You can't possibly compare
without being raped.

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 3:58:39 PM1/21/07

to

mickey wrote:
> Antares wrote:
> > Johnston wrote:
> >>> Where'd the 20% come from? No, don't tell me! It came from the New
> >>> England Journal of Pulling Figures Straight Out of Your Ass (DarkFalz,
> >>> ed.).
> >> The 80/20 rule.
> >>
> >> 80% of women have sex with 20% of the men.
> >
> > And where'd that come from?
> > Ibid, presumably?
> >
>
> This is actually true, not necessarily the 80/20 statistic, but that
> human sexual networks are power law based with a few individuals doing
> significantly more fucking than the rest.

Many phenomena obey power laws (Zipf distributions), but that has
nothing to do with the poster's original "point." I can't imagine he
cares about how much sex the alphas are getting. His point was that
only 20% are getting any at all.

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 4:02:56 PM1/21/07

to

subversive blossums wrote:
> mickey wrote:
> > Antares wrote:
> > > Johnston wrote:
> > >>> Where'd the 20% come from? No, don't tell me! It came from the New
> > >>> England Journal of Pulling Figures Straight Out of Your Ass (DarkFalz,
> > >>> ed.).
> > >> The 80/20 rule.
> > >>
> > >> 80% of women have sex with 20% of the men.
> > >
> > > And where'd that come from?
> > > Ibid, presumably?
> > >
> >
> > This is actually true, not necessarily the 80/20 statistic, but that
> > human sexual networks are power law based with a few individuals doing
> > significantly more fucking than the rest. A little googling will give
> > you peer reviewed papers on this. Since humans are a polygynous species,
> > this distribution is more skewed for men than females, that is, there
> > will be few mean with large number of partners (in the thousands), while
> > there will also be a large number of men (in the tail of the
> > distribution) with few or no partners.
> >
> > -M
>
> One guy - screwing "thousands!" LOL!
> Is he screwing them all more than once? How many is he screwing per
> day?
> How do you get the numbers on that? Is that over a lifetime?

I imagine so, otherwise it's totally nonsensical.

MrWigglesworth

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 4:16:34 PM1/21/07

to

Yes, that is how it worked. The alpha male had a harem of females and
the rest were genetic cul-de-sacs.

Message has been deleted

Lisa

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 5:53:11 PM1/21/07

to

Someone should volunteer to rape him so he can make an informed
comparison. Everyone who will throw themselves on Johnston for the sake
of science and statistics please take two steps forward.

Dustbin

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 6:47:51 PM1/21/07

to

What if others have done the damage.

Females can complain that males do them all
manner of damage - including emotional; yet men
should not be allowed the same recognition or
any protection in respect of it.

Under these circumstances it is no surprise that
we have loners who withdraw after having their
lives mangled by females; and may eventually end
up on the streets disturbed and killing.

Ironically it is the psychological aspects of
rape that feminazis have highlighted in an
attempt to maintain that rape is not to be
dismissed as merely sex without consent and, as
such, not overly serious.

But, if men suffer psychological problems as a
consequence of female anti-social behaviour that
is to be dismissed; and in the more serious
cases he may be labelled and abused further and
even end up a killer. But no one will take his
complaint seriously

Add to this that psychologists have for decades
recognised fem,ales as the "social/emotional
experts". In other words, they are adept at
damaging him; while he has not defence and no
right either. I have long given up on blaming
men who break and kill. It is society that must
afford men proper protection form abusive females.

D.

--
=======================
Women have spent the last
30 years proving that men
have been right for the
last 30 centuries.
=======================

Dustbin

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 6:54:43 PM1/21/07

to

August Pamplona wrote:
> Johnston wrote:
>> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
>> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
>>
>> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>>

>> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
>> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised
>> by the media, and so on.
>>
>> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous emotional
>> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
>> rape victim.
>>

>> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate, seeing everything

>> through the prism of your trauma... these are just some of the
>> psychological terrors I have to face.
>>
>> The rape of women is thought to be a serious crime in our society. But
>> what about the thousands of men who's dreams of a relationship are
>> shattered every day? Their dreams are raped. My life has been raped.
>

> Let's see how things look to some woman in an in an alternate
> reality. Call it Darfalzworld:
>
> "When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a woman caused by
> repeated rape by men, is as bad as a man being rejected.
>
> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rejection of sexual
> advances.
>
> However, if a man is rejected, he goes to the police, it is a huge

> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised by
> the media, and so on.
>

> The violation of my being I suffered has caused horrendous emotional

> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a

> rejection victim.
>
> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate and self-blame, panic
> attacks, flashbacks, seeing everything through the prisms of your

> trauma... these are just some of the psychological terrors I have to face.
>

> The rejection of men is thought to be a serious crime in our society.
> But what about the thousands of women whose dreams of not being violated
> are shattered every day? Their dreams are denied. My body's autonomy has
> been rejected and denied."
>
> Guess what? It doesn't work. And you know why it doesn't work?
> It doesn't work because you are a whiny idiot with a gross sense of
> entitlement.
It doesn't work because the culture has already
defined which way around it will work. The
feminazis challenged the assumptions of society
- why can't we?

D.
>
> August Pamplona

Dustbin

unread,

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 8:06:09 PM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> > Many phenomena obey power laws (Zipf distributions), but that has
> > nothing to do with the poster's original "point." I can't imagine he
> > cares about how much sex the alphas are getting. His point was that
> > only 20% are getting any at all.
>

> No. I said that the top 20% of men get the top 80% of women.
>
> There is the still the other 20% of women who the remaining 80% of men
> get to fight over.

I work in the tech industry, not exactly fertile ground for "alpha
males", and the vast majority of my coworkers have families. While I
think your idea is correct, your figures are probably way off. Only a
handful of guys are left high and dry in this way, probably less than
1%.

Message has been deleted

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 9:01:10 PM1/21/07

to

Johnston wrote:
> > Many phenomena obey power laws (Zipf distributions), but that has
> > nothing to do with the poster's original "point." I can't imagine he
> > cares about how much sex the alphas are getting. His point was that
> > only 20% are getting any at all.
>

> No. I said that the top 20% of men get the top 80% of women.

But that's clearly rubbish, right? The number of people paired off,
male and female, is equal at any point, and it's pretty high (at least
70% or so, given that 50% of the population is married). So what you
probably mean is that the top 20% of men get to "experience" 80% of
women at some point---which I still find dubious. But even if you're
right, why would we care about that? What's the relevance of the top
20% of men having gone through lots of women *at some point in their
lives*?

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 9:02:55 PM1/21/07

to

Troll wrote:
> Johnston <2...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:45b3eeb0$0$5749$afc38c87
> @news.optusnet.com.au:

>
> >> Many phenomena obey power laws (Zipf distributions), but that has
> >> nothing to do with the poster's original "point." I can't imagine he
> >> cares about how much sex the alphas are getting. His point was that
> >> only 20% are getting any at all.
> >

> > No. I said that the top 20% of men get the top 80% of women.
> >

> > There is the still the other 20% of women who the remaining 80% of men
> > get to fight over.
>

> And actually similar distributions apply to wealth as well.

With wealth, you're actually right. But that's because there's no
obstacle to accruing lots of wealth to one individual, whereas with
women the logistics can get 'complicated.'

Antares

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 9:07:36 PM1/21/07

to

MrWigglesworth wrote:
> I'll volunteer to be raped (by a woman) so I have a basis for
> comparison. I'm willing to throw myself on that grenade. Perhaps
> multiple times.

You, sir, are a gentleman and a soldier!

Message has been deleted

August Pamplona

unread,

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 10:31:32 PM1/21/07

to

That is, obviously, wrong. I doubt the number of virgins above 25 is
over even 1% of the population.

-M

Message has been deleted

August Pamplona

unread,

Jan 21, 2007, 11:49:25 PM1/21/07

to

Don Juan Rodenta wrote:
> Overall, it wasn't as bad as I thought. Autorape is the way to go!-

Not when you are cursed with an iron grip as I am.

William P

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 12:57:15 AM1/22/07

to

Johnston <2...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:45b43bc9$0$23346$afc38c87
@news.optusnet.com.au:

>> With wealth, you're actually right. But that's because there's no
>> obstacle to accruing lots of wealth to one individual, whereas with
>> women the logistics can get 'complicated.'
>

> Wrong... one man can service many women. The lack of loyalty to one
> woman should be a concern, but not in modern relationships.
>
> Women would rather be cheated on by a bad boy than go out with a "loser".

Yes, and men would rather screw a slutty girl once than commit himself to a
woman with zero sex appeal. (So much so that many will pay for it.) We're
a species in which sexual selection plays a role, as much as we might wish
we weren't. As far as tendency goes, we're somewhere towards the polygamy
end of the spectrum goes, as far as ape species on earth are concerned.

The key question is whether you are content to be the loser, and stay that
way. Many people are, but I am not. That sexual selection by females
exists is just a defining fact of who we are though.

Bernd Jendrissek

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 4:22:23 AM1/22/07

to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <1169253533.7...@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com>
subversive blossums <gospe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>So who, specifically, should be punished for this alleged "rape."

Are we talking diffusion of responsibility here?

- --
I still tend to think there is a "spiritual" world of some sort, but I don't
think there are any people who actually understand it. The ones claiming to
do so most loudly certainly don't. - RK
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFtIE2wyMv24BBd/gRAv1sAJ9YLmA/1EcM+zczPL5tbUu7MIwvGwCbBBah
GjV9dFtmtQ8V0jSoZMmgXck=
=oDjF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bernd Jendrissek

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 4:37:33 AM1/22/07

to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <1169398495.6...@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
subversive blossums <gospe...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Johnston wrote:
>> The 80/20 rule.
>>
>> 80% of women have sex with 20% of the men.
>

>That's pretty funny. (Laughing...as the gene pool narrows.) Some of
>those 20% guys must have dicks of steel! Where does the line form?

The reason you find these claims so ridiculous is because they
contradict YOUR personal life experience. As a woman, YOU find it easy
to get sex whenever you want to, and due to your personality you project
YOUR perception of reality onto EVERYONE. But it still doesn't mean
that your truth is everyone's truth.

Hint: It isn't always all about you!

- --
A PC without Windows is like ice cream without ketchup.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFtITFwyMv24BBd/gRAqh3AJ9zFue/Yj4u+3rtom+5+e0Tjfj6KACfTel+
ymLNTMtZbkM8IrYGCJP9gco=
=TG0Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bernd Jendrissek

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 4:41:00 AM1/22/07

to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <1169425125.7...@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com>

subversive blossums <gospe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>It's almost pointless to try to explain that to them because they
>cannot empathize with women in any way.

That may be so, but I just wanted to say that in a sense you and they
have this one thing in common. I guess that's why you hate each other
so much.

- --
I still tend to think there is a "spiritual" world of some sort, but I don't
think there are any people who actually understand it. The ones claiming to
do so most loudly certainly don't. - RK

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFtIWUwyMv24BBd/gRAhw7AJkBnGzf8au1Uxf5Z8Mkz1SJNkzpygCeLa0+
Vmn3GuB1llCBSmQV7dVfKB0=
=yqIj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 7:54:32 AM1/22/07

to

I have been raped by life.
Do I have a case?

dan74

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 8:31:09 AM1/22/07

to

pug wrote:

>
> When I was growing up and was being harassed and spit at for being shy
> and quiet, I didn't have any "you poor thing" support from ANYONE.
>
> The sisterhood hated me even more than the guys did.
>
> But that's just my experience. As an adult, I am only privy to the
> sisterhood as an outsider who observes and listens. I don't get the
> "you poor thing" support from females, probably because I don't have
> any female friends and most females think I am a whack job.

You poor thing...that you don't get the "you poor thing"
from the sisterhood. I really thought this was one privelage
of womanhood...but, obviously not always the case.

>
> Are those the type of women who always get "The Gold?" What I mean by
> the gold is their boyfriends and/or husbands constantly have to buy
> them stuff to make them feel wanted.
>
> You can find my funny take on "The Gold" here:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~blue_anise/posts/thegold.htm

Yes, a lot of them fall into this category. The ones that love
big, shiny things.

> I guess so. But everyone has some degree of "emotional unhingeness."
> You have to decide if it is worth the effort to deal with such
> women/people.

Yep. It's all "emotionally unhinged" land out here.

>
> Everything is always easier said than done, unfortunately. :-(

You said it.

>
> Yeah I see your point. So what can you do? I say lay low for a while
> and stop worrying about relationships, girlfriends, friends, etc.

Very good advice.
But, some of us here at a.s.s. have been "laying low"
for entire decades (talk to Antares).
I had to wait for more than a decade for my first relationship.
If that wasn't 'laying low', I don't know what is.

>
> I would think it would be the opposite. Women need men (romantically
> speaking) more than men need women. Men can always go to prostitutes
> for sex. Women very rarely seek out male prostitutes (does it ever
> happen?)

I've never been to a prostitute. The idea just doesn't appeal to me.
>
> But then I wonder... Why don't women seek out male prostitutes (other
> than most male prostitutes are gay)? There is no need because most
> women do not have a hard time finding men for romantic/sexual
> relationships.
>
> Hmmm...something to think about...

Well, this is an old a.s.s. chesnut...yes, I think it's an established
a.s.s.
"fact" that women can get sex anywhere, anytime.
Jeez...I sometimes wish I was a woman.

> Yeah, I am sure there are a lot of people who would love me to kick
> the bucket today. LOL!

Their life can't be that crash hot either, if your death would give
them some satisfaction.

>
> I like Joyce.
>
> I know, hard as it may be for the sisterhood to believe, pug actually
> likes and respects a woman!

Joyce Meyer definitely is the most sincere evangelical christian out
there, IMO.

>
> I listened to her a couple of days ago and she was speaking again
> about letting God steer your path. Trust in God and stop trusting in
> people to help you. Trust in God first and he will give you inner
> peace send the right people into your life.

Well...that's what I'm kind of doing right now. I just simply
don't have any better ideas...so I might as well give my life
over to a god who may or may not be there.

> Just last night I conversed with God (I guess one would call it
> praying), and I said to him that I was feeling rather OK about my
> life. Even though my life is in the "crapper" right now, I actually
> "feel good."
>
> Yes, I have no job.
>
> Yes, I have no romantic relationship.
>
> Yes, I live with and take care of my mom.
>
> Yes, I am living off my savings and it is only a matter of time before
> I need to get another dreaded "job" or go live under a bridge.
>
> But over the past few months that I have followed Joyce's advice of
> only trusting in God (and not myself or other people) --
>
> I have met a few new online friends.
>
> I have had a wonderful time writing mine and my sister's second
> screenplay (which is almost complete)
>
> I am still in great health.
>
> And I am going to Paris in March something I have always wanted to do.
> (woo hoo! my sis finally said she would go with me so I won't have to
> go alone)
>
> Yeah, maybe what I stated above is not much in terms of "living" but I
> am finally learning to enjoy the ride instead of concentrating on the
> final destination.

Good for you, Pug.
>
> I do believe God can and will open doors, if you ask him to. At least
> I am hoping and keeping my fingers crossed. But you have to be aware
> some of the doors may lead to places you do not want to go (at least
> not at first) -- and it could be years before you see any real
> "breakthrough" (as Joyce calls it).

Yes, I'm familiar with Joyce's ideas on "breakthroughs".
I think I lost patience with Joyce a little because she was
so hard on "the flesh". You know -- saying that you're not
supposed to like any 'fleshy' thing.
But dammit, I like fleshy things!
I like sex, romance...the good stuff.
Joyce always talked a lot about how the fleshy stuff
is bad...but, she also once gloated about having a big house,
and how she finds her husband "hot" (I think she said that once!)

I have an open mind to Joyce, but I think she's a bit tough with
the flesh stuff. We are only flesh and bone after all! (and, some
cartelige).

>
> That's OK, I am not going anywhere anytime soon, I have a lot of time
> to work on myself and my relationship with God; and when God sees I am
> ready, I will walk through the doors he opened and hopefully I will
> finally be on the path God wants me to be.

Well, that makes two of us, OK? Let's hope this inscrutable,
invisible god will help both of us.
I really hope for that (no sarcasm or irony intended here).

>
> Well an asteroid hitting the Earth is still OK in my book. But until
> then, I'll continue to watch Joyce and let God steer the bus I'm
> riding.
>

Well, I'm not worrying about any asteroids either.
God bless.

August Pamplona

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 9:11:28 AM1/22/07

to

subversive blossums wrote:
> popp...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> subversive blossums wrote:
>>> You sound like a psycho-killer.
>> Qu'est-ce que c'est?
>
> Aren't all mass murderers obsessive loners who externalize all their
> psychic pain?

Probably not even most.

> Blaming everyone else is a sign of some kind of arrested development.

Arrested development on a.s.s.? Hard to imagine, it is.

patrick...@standardregister.com

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 11:37:19 AM1/22/07

to

subversive blossums wrote:
> Dustbin wrote:
> > Add to this that psychologists have for decades
> > recognised fem,ales as the "social/emotional
> > experts". In other words, they are adept at
> > damaging him; while he has not defence and no
> > right either. I have long given up on blaming
> > men who break and kill. It is society that must
> > afford men proper protection form abusive females.
> >
> > D.
>
> Here we go again - the "conspiracy" of psychologists! Not another one!
> Of course you don't blame men who "break" and kill. You can't recognize
> the humanity of women. You're a bigot.

Somehow if it had been said the other way around -- "It is society that
must afford women proper protection from abusive men" -- I doubt you
would have had a problem with it. You strike me as being a bigot
yourself. Bigotry is a matter of being intolerant of differences in
others. The funny thing is how some people think that as long as your
intolerances are politically correct ones, your bigotry is perfectly
justified.

August Pamplona

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 1:08:43 PM1/22/07

to

"Abusive females" as used by Dustbin in this context means
females who don't say yes to a man every single time.

Bernd Jendrissek

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 1:32:35 PM1/22/07

to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <51kcslF...@mid.individual.net> August Pamplona

<cosm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Abusive females" as used by Dustbin in this context means females who
>don't say yes to a man every single time.

Which makes all women either sluts or "abusive females".

- --
Problems experienced downstream are symptoms of neglect upstream.
Upstream problems can only be solved upstream. - someone

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFtQIswyMv24BBd/gRAqW0AJwOK4ezIUQrNlEK2BNS/eLqIgqxhgCfX47L
zilND5v+fj8nQeN1wrIdONk=
=qAo4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message has been deleted

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 7:24:12 PM1/22/07

to

MrWigglesworth wrote:
> I'll volunteer to be raped (by a woman) so I have a basis for
> comparison. I'm willing to throw myself on that grenade. Perhaps
> multiple times.

[With tears of admiration in my eyes...] he's so brave!

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 7:27:42 PM1/22/07

to

MrWigglesworth wrote:
> Johnston wrote:
> > > Many phenomena obey power laws (Zipf distributions), but that has
> > > nothing to do with the poster's original "point." I can't imagine he
> > > cares about how much sex the alphas are getting. His point was that
> > > only 20% are getting any at all.
> >
> > No. I said that the top 20% of men get the top 80% of women.
> >

> > There is the still the other 20% of women who the remaining 80% of men
> > get to fight over.
>
> I work in the tech industry, not exactly fertile ground for "alpha
> males", and the vast majority of my coworkers have families. While I
> think your idea is correct, your figures are probably way off. Only a
> handful of guys are left high and dry in this way, probably less than
> 1%.

unread,

Jan 22, 2007, 8:43:28 PM1/22/07

to

You think? The male to female ratio at my work is probably about 20:1

> I think we
> have one whole floor, you can smell the testosterone just walking in
> there.

I thought you were a full-time music student.

Adven...@nospam.com

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 12:10:14 AM1/23/07

to

ROFLMFAO....

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

pug

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 12:45:30 AM1/23/07

to

>On 22 Jan 2007 05:31:09 -0800, "dan74" <daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Yep. It's all "emotionally unhinged" land out here.

Yes, that is why I have been harping here on a.s.s. about making the
effort to find "like-minded" people to hang with in your life. You
need to stop trying to be someone you *ain't* and instead be
yourself, warts and all. There are other people with warts out there,
you just have to find them. But again, it is "easier said than done."

I am only looking for a few like-minded people to hang with, I know I
will never be a social butterfly, it is not in my nature.

>But, some of us here at a.s.s. have been "laying low"
>for entire decades (talk to Antares).
>I had to wait for more than a decade for my first relationship.
>If that wasn't 'laying low', I don't know what is.

I was 25 before I had my first relationship. I have had a 5 year and 2
year drought between relationships. Again what are you going to do? I
really don't know much about your situation, but I have been told that
if I wasn't "so picky" I wouldn't be alone today. Perhaps there is
some truth to that.

I know you and many guys here say that you have been rejected by many
girls. How much of that has to do with "being picky?" OK, I know I am
opening up the whole, "girls can be picky but guys can't" can of worms
--

But I agree, one shouldn't have to settle for just anyone.

>I've never been to a prostitute. The idea just doesn't appeal to me.

I guess for some guys prostitutes are the way to go. The whole
stripper/prostitute "thing" seems pretty dicey in my opinion. Just
look at the Duke Rape case here in America. Guys can go to jail for a
long time even just for "looking" and not "touching."

The whole stripper/prostitute scene is full of dirty, disease-ridden,
criminal druggies, in my opinion.

>Well, this is an old a.s.s. chesnut...yes, I think it's an established
>a.s.s.
>"fact" that women can get sex anywhere, anytime.
>Jeez...I sometimes wish I was a woman.

I guess if a woman is not "picky" she can. :-)

What is wrong with being a man, Dan? (sorry about the alliteration)

You are who you are. Believe in yourself. That is what I have been
working on myself these past few months. I am me, and I am a pretty
damn good person in my opinion. Not everyone is going to like me (in
fact most people won't), and I'm OK with that.

>Joyce Meyer definitely is the most sincere evangelical christian out
>there, IMO.

I agree. Lately, she has been on the war path against "Sunday Morning
Christians" -- yes, I have definitely seen a change in her these past
ten years.

>> I listened to her a couple of days ago and she was speaking again
>> about letting God steer your path. Trust in God and stop trusting in
>> people to help you. Trust in God first and he will give you inner
>> peace send the right people into your life.

>Well...that's what I'm kind of doing right now. I just simply
>don't have any better ideas...so I might as well give my life
>over to a god who may or may not be there.

Me too. Basically I finally gave up this past November. I put the
brakes on with regard to my life and my two main goals (to work a
creative job and to get married). I couldn't do it anymore, I was
getting depressed and miserable striving for stuff in my life that
just wasn't working.

I do believe I have received a couple of positive signs from God since
I have "put the brakes on." That is a good thing in my opinion.
Perhaps he does exist.

>Yes, I'm familiar with Joyce's ideas on "breakthroughs".
>I think I lost patience with Joyce a little because she was
>so hard on "the flesh". You know -- saying that you're not
>supposed to like any 'fleshy' thing.

But you have been watching her lately, right?

Just today she was speaking about "Living Big." She has been pushing
for people to "live" and really live, not just exist.

Yes, back in the late nineties she was hard on "the flesh" but she has
mellowed these past few years, and even she has said that. She has
said that it has only been these past few years that she has learned
to relax and mellow out. That is why her television program is called
"Enjoying Everyday Life."

>But dammit, I like fleshy things!
>I like sex, romance...the good stuff.

Me too, and as does most people, including Joyce.

>Joyce always talked a lot about how the fleshy stuff
>is bad...but, she also once gloated about having a big house,
>and how she finds her husband "hot" (I think she said that once!)

I watched her a couple days ago and she stated she is now 62 years old
and finally enjoying her life. She has also admitted to having a
facelift. She does look damn good for a 62 year old woman in my
opinion. Besides the facelift, she does keep herself trim and has
finally ditched her flashy "evangelical" wardrobe for something much
more tasteful.

>I have an open mind to Joyce, but I think she's a bit tough with
>the flesh stuff. We are only flesh and bone after all! (and, some
>cartelige).

Yes, she does talk about how we need to stop living in the "flesh" and
start living for God. But that is her main point. You need to go to
God first, and live for him. He will then send you the flesh you need
and crave. I know it sounds weird --

>> That's OK, I am not going anywhere anytime soon, I have a lot of time
>> to work on myself and my relationship with God; and when God sees I am
>> ready, I will walk through the doors he opened and hopefully I will
>> finally be on the path God wants me to be.

>Well, that makes two of us, OK? Let's hope this inscrutable,
>invisible god will help both of us.
>I really hope for that (no sarcasm or irony intended here).

Hopefully hope will turn to faith, and with faith all things are
possible. That is where I am at right now with my "walk with God" -- I
am on the hope/faith fence. I am hoping there is a God, and over time,
perhaps my hope will turn to faith and trust in this God.

I need a hope/faith/trust in some sort of God, as I no longer have any
hope/faith/trust in people. Maybe I am grasping at straws. But that is
the chance I am willing to take. When you have nothing else, except
suicide, a belief in God is not a bad thing to hold on to.

But that is just me.

>> Well an asteroid hitting the Earth is still OK in my book. But until
>> then, I'll continue to watch Joyce and let God steer the bus I'm
>> riding.

>Well, I'm not worrying about any asteroids either.
>God bless.

Dan, I am not an evangelical Christian, and I am not trying to shove
religion down your throat. I don't work for Joyce Meyer Industries.
But believe me, make it a goal of yours to watch Joyce for the next
two months, and then see if any positive change comes to you
internally.

I knew when I decided to let God steer me in my life this past
November that real change would not happen overnight. It is going on
three months and as I said before, by human standards, my life is
still in the "crapper." But by God's standards I wonder where my life
is? Only time will tell.

To be honest with you, the reason I decided to trust in a God, is
because I was sick of being depressed and shoving my depression on
others. People can't help me with my depression. My depression is mine
and mine alone to deal with. I decided I needed help on a higher level
to help me control my depressive moods. Yes, I still get depressed,
but I am working on shortening my depressive fits.

When I get depressed now, I go to God. I don't take it out on people
around me. Even if many atheists here think I am a fruitcake, they
have to at least agree that by my believing in a "God" I am making the
world a better place by not taking out my depressive frustrations on
others.

I know things will get better for you Dan. But you have to be in it
for the long haul. That is my goal, it is going to be hard, there are
days agnosticism and atheism rears its ugly head, but I am going to
stick with God. It is my time, perhaps it is your time also.

Take Care
pug

subversive blossums

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 12:53:11 AM1/23/07

to

I was - a graduate student. I left last year. I also have a degree in
English.

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 7:44:57 AM1/23/07

to

conn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> August Pamplona wrote:
>>
>> Or maybe the "feminazis" have feminized you so much that you
>> feel entitled to not be rejected to the point that if some girl says no
>> to you it makes you want to eat a gun? It is truly sad that you feel
>> that this entitlement would be right and that you would gladly accept
>> it. Think about it, you pitiful idiot! If every girl you meet is
>> guaranteed not to reject you (presumably under penalty of law) due to
>> some dystopian universal male entitlement to not be rejected, what would
>> not being rejected mean to you? It would mean nothing.
>
> Girls rarely make the 1st move because they want the power to
> accept/reject that move.
>
> Ive been rejected 100's of times

You poor thing!

> perhaps every woman needs to be raped
> at least once in their lives to feel the immense emotions attributed to
> the opposite sex saying 'fuck off'.

Won't mommy kiss it and make it better?

>
> Might as well be gay.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

patrick...@standardregister.com

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 9:12:52 AM1/23/07

to

Pies de Arcilla wrote:
> Johnston wrote:
> > When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> > repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
> >
> > In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
>

> It's awfully arrogant of you to say that. You can't possibly compare
> without being raped.

No, I say it's awfully arrogant of you to say that. How do you know
what his emotional makeup is? You have no more right to judge him for
making the comparison than he has for making the comparison in the
first place.

patrick...@standardregister.com

unread,

Jan 23, 2007, 9:22:28 AM1/23/07

to

August Pamplona wrote:
> Dustbin wrote:

> > August Pamplona wrote:
> >> Johnston wrote:
> >>> When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a man caused by
> >>> repeated rejection by women, is as bad as a woman being raped.
> >>>
> >>> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rape.
> >>>

> >>> However, if a woman is raped, she goes to the police, it is a huge
> >>> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised
> >>> by the media, and so on.
> >>>
> >>> The loneliness and rejection I suffer have caused horrendous
> >>> emotional damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to
> >>> that of a rape victim.
> >>>
> >>> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate, seeing everything
> >>> through the prism of your trauma... these are just some of the
> >>> psychological terrors I have to face.
> >>>
> >>> The rape of women is thought to be a serious crime in our society.
> >>> But what about the thousands of men who's dreams of a relationship
> >>> are shattered every day? Their dreams are raped. My life has been raped.
> >>
> >> Let's see how things look to some woman in an in an alternate
> >> reality. Call it Darfalzworld:
> >>
> >> "When you think about it, the emotional devastation to a woman caused
> >> by repeated rape by men, is as bad as a man being rejected.
> >>
> >> In terms of emotional damage, it is equivalent to rejection of sexual
> >> advances.
> >>
> >> However, if a man is rejected, he goes to the police, it is a huge
> >> event, the perpetrator is caught and jailed. The event is publicised
> >> by the media, and so on.
> >>
> >> The violation of my being I suffered has caused horrendous emotional
> >> damage. The symptoms I exhibit are in many ways similar to that of a
> >> rejection victim.
> >>
> >> The undermining of self-esteem, the self-hate and self-blame, panic
> >> attacks, flashbacks, seeing everything through the prisms of your
> >> trauma... these are just some of the psychological terrors I have to
> >> face.
> >>
> >> The rejection of men is thought to be a serious crime in our society.
> >> But what about the thousands of women whose dreams of not being
> >> violated are shattered every day? Their dreams are denied. My body's
> >> autonomy has been rejected and denied."
> >>
> >> Guess what? It doesn't work. And you know why it doesn't work?
> >> It doesn't work because you are a whiny idiot with a gross sense of
> >> entitlement.
> > It doesn't work because the culture has already defined which way around
> > it will work. The feminazis challenged the assumptions of society - why
> > can't we?
> >
> > D.
> >>
> >> August Pamplona
>
> No, dipshit, it doesn't work because the two things have
> nothing to do with each other and can't in any meaningful way be validly
> analogized.

>
> Or maybe the "feminazis" have feminized you so much that you
> feel entitled to not be rejected to the point that if some girl says no
> to you it makes you want to eat a gun? It is truly sad that you feel
> that this entitlement would be right and that you would gladly accept
> it. Think about it, you pitiful idiot! If every girl you meet is
> guaranteed not to reject you (presumably under penalty of law) due to
> some dystopian universal male entitlement to not be rejected, what would
> not being rejected mean to you? It would mean nothing.
>

I didn't see anything in the original about a sense of entitlement to
not be rejected. I think you've just built yourself a strawman. All I
saw was a claim that emotional damage from rejection has been minimized
or ignored. I see no implication from there that there is a right to
not be rejected, only a call for awareness that rejection is hard on a
person's self esteem.