Did Women Once Rule The World
wabond
conspiracy theory I have never come across, and that that is the
suppression of the evidence that women once ruled the world. The
irony is that there is far more evidence for this than many other
conspiracy theories.
In recent years archeologists have increasingly found more and more
evidence of the possibility of a Matriarchal age in the past. Yet we
do not hear about this in either the mainstream media or in the
alternative press. Yet if what is being discovered now is true, we
will have to re-write ancient history and rethink what is the true
nature of human beings. Because what archeologists are now
discovering suggests that in the stone age we were not the savage
brutes as portrayed in academic speculation. But we were in fact
peace loving people who worshipped a ancient deity called the Great
Mother. Recent archeological evidence shows that the history of war
and violence only began long after civilization got started.
The concept that women once ruled the world in ancient times is
nothing new. It got started by a scholar called J.J Bachofen1 in the
19th century. He brought together all the evidence of matriarchy in
ancient times then available. He was strongly criticized for this by
other scholars who dismissed and discredited his work. Yet in spite
of this, his work was to inspire the scholars James Frazer to write
his famous book, "The Golden Bough". It also influenced Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels who publicly praised Bachofen's work. As well as the
famous psychologist Carl Jung who developed from it the theory that
the ancient Great Mother was a very important archetype in the
collective unconscious. 2 In spite of the condemnation of Bachofen
the controversy wouldn't go away. Other scholars in the early 20th
century also wrote about matriarchy like Robert Briffault,3 Jane
Harrison4 and Dr Margaret Murray.5 But this argument was kept very
much within academic circles. Then in the 1940s the poet Robert
Graves wrote his book, "The White Goddess" which was the first attempt
to bring this argument to the general public, even though it was a
very complex book. Then on the wave of the feminist movement of the
1960s and 70s feminist scholars like Merlin Stone6 and Barbara G.
Walker7 also continued to dig deep into ancient history to find more
evidence of matriarchy in ancient times.
After the second world war archeologists started to make finds that
was also supporting the idea that there was a matriarchal age in the
past. This evidence was again dismissed by academics but feminist
writers like Elizabeth Gould Davis8 who was brave enough to directly
claim that women did once rule the world. And Riane Eisler9 who kept
strictly to feminist dogma and claimed that in the matriarchal age the
sexes were equal. But the biggest change in recent years is of
archeological evidence that supports the ancient Golden Age myth.
That has been written about in ancient Greek Legend, by the Taoist
Chinese, and even in the Bible in the story of the Garden of Eden
which comes from a Mesopotamian Golden Age legend. In fact most
ancient cultures all over the world have a Golden Age myth of some
kind.
Up until recently modern academics have rejected these legends as pure
myth. Not only do they sound too good to be true. Recorded history
shows a different story. It seems that the further you go back in
history the more brutal and violent, men seem to behave. For instance
to see gladiators fighting to death as a sport like in the Roman games
would be unacceptable in every society today. Though it has to be
admitted we still see war, genocide and torture in our modern world.
So it has been assumed by archeologists and scholars that people in
pre-historic times must of been even more brutal than people in
historic times. The only findings that contradicted this was
Palaeolithic cave art, found in France and Spain, which was so well
executed that it undermined the belief that Stone Age people were
ignorant brutes10. In fact Archeologists at first refused to believe
that these paintings could possibly made by Stone Age people. And it
was only modern dating techniques that convinced them. Also the
amount of feminine images found in both Stone-age and Neolithic sites
showed that Stone age people may have other things on their mind other
than violence. But academics dismissed these finds as being part of a
fertility cult and never took them seriously. During the second
half of the 20th century archeologists dug more and more into
Neolithic sites and too much feminine imagery was being found to be
lightly dismissed. And they began to find evidence that turned the
idea that we were brutal savages in pre-historic times, on its head.
In the 1960s a archeologists called Mellaart lead a team to excavate a
site in Anatolia in Turkey. This site turn out to be the oldest city
ever discovered11. Called Catal Huyuk it goes back over 9,000 years.
What was discovered goes against all assumptions archeologist have
about people living in Neolithic times. They couldn't find any
fortifications to defend the city or any weapons of war. Neither could
they find signs of violence committed on people buried in graves. It
was also a city full of feminine imagery to the degree that Mellaart
was force to say that the people worshipped the Ancient Great Mother.
So unsettling was these discoveries that the site was closed down for
thirty years and the academic world ignored the implications of this
find. Because the prevailing view was that the first civilizations
were created by warrior tribal leaders who conquered other tribes and
then had to build fortifications and organize the people to defend
himself. So to have the oldest city ever discovered that didn't have
any sign of fortifications, weapons of war or signs of violence
greatly contradicted this theory. As in many cases in science when
new facts opposed a very popular and fashionable theory then it was
the facts that are ignored until enough facts are produced to make the
fashionable theory untenable. So most academics chose to ignore this
find except one archeologist, Mariji Gimbutas, who was brave enough to
challenge the accepted wisdom of the academic world.
She was to say boldly:
"Archeologists and historians have assumed that civilization implies a
hierarchical political and religious organization, warfare, a class
stratification, and a complex division of labor. This pattern is
indeed
typical of androcratic (male dominated) societies such as
Indo-European but does not apply to the gynocentric
(mother/women-centred) cultures described in this book. The
civilisation that flourished in Old Europe between 6500 and 3300 BC
and in Crete until 1450 BC enjoyed a long period of uninterrupted
peaceful living which produced artistic expression of graceful beauty
and refinement, demonstrating a higher quality of life than many
androcratic classed societies."12
The late Marija Gimbutas was digging in another Neolithic sites in
Achilleion, Thessaly in Greece and also found finds, of feminine
imagery and no sign of violence and warfare. Also in her books and
scientific papers she highlight the Neolithic findings that
archeologists had made at Lepenski Vir and Vlasac in Northern
Yugoslavia. As well as the Neolithic findings by Soviet scientists in
Bulgaria, Romania, Moldavia, and the Western Ukraine. Western
archeologist had made similar finds in Crete, Cyprus, Thera, Sardinia,
Sicliy and Malta. All showing peaceful societies that worshipped the
Great Mother. Yet archeologists chose to ignore these findings,
because they contradicted the belief of the time that civilization was
started by warrior leaders. It was only Gimbutas who was brave enough
to take these finds seriously and she became a very controversial
figure.
Her work was for a long time forgotten and dismissed. But in more
recent times other archeologists also made similar finds. In the
excavation of Indus Valley civilization in Pakistan again
archeologists could find no signs violence or weapons of war13. The
same is true of Caral in Peru the oldest city ever discovered in South
America, going back to 5,000 years. Given the violent history of
later South American civilizations with mass human sacrifice,
archeologists expected to find the same thing. But no matter how hard
they looked they couldn't find any evidence of human sacrifice,
warfare, fortifications or any other indication of violence. And they
had to conclude that this civilization existed in peace for thousands
of years. It seems that Caral wasn't just a isolated city, as
archeologists found trading good at this site from all over South
America. Demonstrating it was the center of a vast trading network
that covered most of this continent. Which suggested that not only
did Caral lived in peace, but this was true for the whole of South
America at the time. 14
The overwhelming evidence of these finding have made more modern
academics wonder if Mariji Gimutas might be right after all. Some
archeologists are now supporting her like Richard Rudgley in his book
"Lost Civilizations Of The Stone Age", and his TV series "Secrets Of
The Stone Age".
So what is the implication of these findings?
As Richard Rudgley points out 95% of existence as humans is in
pre-historic times. Yet we know so little about this time, it is only
from the tools, paintings and carvings found in excavations can we get
understanding of what life must of been like then. All carved and
painted images found of human beings found in the Stone-age are
overwhelmingly images of women. What Marija Gimbutas shows is that
most of these images celebrate the whole process of birth from the
sex act to breast feeding. It seems in prehistoric times
menstruation, the vagina, the sexual act, giving birth, and breast
feeding was seen as something divine, holy and sacred. This is in
contrast to historic times where menstruation became taboo and unclean
in many societies. The sex act also become sinful and dirty. It was
also claimed that children were born in sin because they were born of
women, and even breast feeding become shameful, as even now many women
are reluctant to breast feed in public.
This is supported by the findings of Gimbutas who showed that the
downfall of many of the peaceful Goddess civilizations was caused by
violent patriarchal tribes invading them from the north. So it
suggests that it was the invention of war that ended the last Golden
Age. Where the new rulers behaved like Mafia bosses in imposing a
reign of terror on the people to control them, and started a
protection racket that was in effect the first taxation. Making the
rulers very wealthy and forcing poverty onto the people. Who now had
to, not only to work to feed and shelter themselves, but they had to
work to feed the new rulers and their armies, as well as build them
palaces and fortifications, and make arms and luxury goods. This is a
clear case where men like Adam had to work by the sweat of their brow.
While the new rulers encouraged men to no longer respect women and
make them their slaves.
This is clearly seen in the contrast between the findings of the
Neolithic age where we see a predominance of feminine images, and no
evidence of warfare and violence. With the later iron age were we
find more than anything else images of wars, violence as well as the
glorification of kings, rulers, conquest and wealth. Archeologists in
the iron age also find graves where people have clearly been put to
death through violence. We also have the first myths of the hero who
conquers other nations. As well as male gods who begins to lay down
strict laws and punish those who dares to disobey them.
Now evidence of matriarchy doesn't only come from the past, the
shocking fact is that the general public are completely unaware that
there are many matriarchy communities that have survived up until the
present day. The biggest is the The Minangkabau people in Western
Sumatra and numbers about 4 million people and is the largest and most
stable Matriarchal community in the world today15. In China there are
also Matriarchal community16, 17. In India there is a region called
Kerala18 which again is matriarchal and has a reputation of being a
well run, stable and prosperous area. There is evidence of
matriarchal communities that survived in Africa up until colonial
times19. There are even American Indian tribes that are still
Matriarchal20. I have been informed that there are over 150
matriarchal communities all over the world but you never hear about
this in either the mainstream or alternative media.
So if we are looking for a conspiracy we have to wonder why all these
facts have been kept concealed and covered up for so long. From the
time when Bachofen first put forward the idea that there once was a
matriarchal age in the past it seems that the establishment have
worked very hard to conceal this fact. To the degree of destroying
archeological sites. In Malta there is a very large Neolithic
Goddess temple. The first archeology done on this temple was done by
a Roman Catholic priest. His effort included rubbing off important
and irreplaceable wall painting from the temple walls. Then digging
up the temple floor and taken away all archeological evidence, which
has now mysteriously disappeared21. This behaviour is not unusual,
when the Christian Church or the state of Israel finance archeological
excavations in the Israel what they find fits in with what is written
in the Bible. But excavations carried out by universities who do not
have any affiliation to the Christian Church or the state find
something completely different. For instance in the homes of ordinary
Jews of two thousand years ago and older they find statues of
Goddesses. The evidence is that the ordinary people of Israel were
still worshipping the Goddess Asherah up until the Roman occupation.
Suppression of evidence to do with matriarchy and Goddess worship goes
back even further than this22. Dr Margaret Murray done research on
the witch hunts in medieval Europe. What she discovered wasn't that
the witch hunts were started by hysteria as commonly believed. But
was a ruthless campaign by the Christian Church to destroy a Goddess
religion that still existed among the peasant class. Going back even
further when both the Christian Church and later on the Moslems became
state religions, the first thing they done was to destroy as much as
possible all ancient knowledge. As feminists scholars have pointed
out there main targets have been Goddess Temples and female scholars
of the time. It seems that from then on all evidence of a matriarchal
age in the past has been suppressed or destroyed.
The reason for this is not hard to work out. If people in the last
matriarchal age were worse off than people in historic times there
wouldn't be a problem. Rulers in historic times could point to the
fact that people are better off under their rule than people in the
ancient past. But if the opposite is true then there is a real
problem. If it become general knowledge that people in our
matriarchal past were better off than people even today then that
would become political dynamite. Because people then would ask the
obvious question, "would we all be better off if we similar society as
we had in Neolithic times?" That is to say a society that respected
feminine values rather than masculine values23. This could create a
world wide social revolution that would greatly undermine the power of
our present ruling elite.
So the ruling elite does have a very good reason to suppress and
destroy these facts. Graham Hancock recently has attempted to get
archeologists interested in the possibility that there is ancient
cities under the sea that was flooded by the melting of the ice of the
last ice age. And was greatly puzzled that these archeologists showed
no interest in this. But if the ruling elite are aware that more than
likely these ancient cities were ruled by women they would have a very
good reason to not want archeologists poking about these sites.
Because finding indisputable proof that women did once rule the world
is political dynamite and could start and political revolution that
would sweep away the power of our present ruling establishment.
End
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DivineGoddess
References
1. Bachofen, J.J. Myth, Religion And Mother Right
2. Gabon, W. Elinor The Once And Future Goddess
3. Briffault, Robert The Mothers
4. Harrison, Jane Prolegomena To The Study Of Greek Religion
5. Murray, Dr Margaret The Witch-Cult In Western Europe
6. Stone, Merlin When God Was A Woman
7. Walker, Barbara G. The Women's Encyclopedia Of Myths And Secrets
8. Davis, Elizabeth Gould The First Sex
9. Eisler, Riane The Chalice And The Blade
10. Rudgeley, Richard Lost Civilisations Of The Stone Age
11. Mellaart J. Catal Huyuk: A Neolithic Town In Anatolia
12. Gimbutas, Marija The Civilisation Of The Goddess
13. Great Civilisations, The Indus (TV program)
14. Horizon, The Lost Pyramids Of Caral (TV progam)
15. Sanday, Peggy Reeves Women At The Center: Life In A Modern
Matriarchy
16. Abendroth, Heide Göttner The Mosuo as a Living Matriarchal
Society
17. Cai Hua A Society Without Fathers Or Husbands
18. http://www.hinduismtoday.com/1996/2/#gen169
19. Meyerowitz, Eve The Akan Of Ghana. The Sacred State Of The
Akan
20. Tile, Karin E. Kuna Crafts, Gender And The Global Economy
21. Hancock, Graham Underworld: Flooded Kingdoms Of The Ice Age
22. http://www.suppressedhistories.net
23. http://www.promatriarchy.net
Anonymous
http://stormfront.org http://www.kukluxklan.org
www.spearhead-uk.com www.whitecivilrights.com
"wabond" <wab...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:96e45fb1.02051...@posting.google.com...
> Because finding indisputable proof that women did once rule the world
> is political dynamite and could start and political revolution that
> would sweep away the power of our present ruling establishment.
>
THE REAL GOAL OF FEMINISM: TRANSFORMING SOCIETY
Antonia Feitz
Speech delivered at the Inverell Forum 2000, 2/3/00
1. The Problem
Ladies and gentlemen, my topic is feminism and some of you may be wondering
why, given our country's parlous state. Our national sovereignty is being
destroyed by the the over-riding of our domestic laws and the signing of UN
treaties - with no consultation and with no public or even parliamentary
debate.
So why feminism? Because feminists are at the vanguard of the phalanx of
fools, the useful idiots, the ideologues, who are destroying our hard won
rights and our national sovereignty.
We live in an age of ideology. God has been pronounced dead, and
Chesterton's witticism has proven true: when people no longer believe in
God, they'll believe in anything. And the post-Christian people of the West
are proof, holding beliefs which their grandparents would have dismissed as
absolute nonsense, and contrary to all common sense let alone morality.
Take extreme environmentalists. Apart from literally worshiping trees, they
exalt the welfare of frogs and even insects over that of people. Believe it
or not, there's even a Voluntary Human Extinction Movement [1]. Homosexuals
demand their relationships be accorded equal status with marriage, including
the 'right' to adopt children. And under the banner of multiculturalism,
Australian children are either kept ignorant, or taught to be ashamed of
their own heritage and history, while simultaneously being taught to value
ethnic and especially indigenous cultures.
But arguably, feminism is the most pernicious of the ideologies that plague
us, simply because the relationship between men and women affects all of us.
I must stress that modern feminists are not the heirs of the suffragettes
who fought for equal rights such as the right to vote and property rights.
Modern feminists are not seeking equal rights for women. They want to
transform society, and that's no conspiracy theory because they freely admit
it.
Take CEDAW. It's the acronym for the Convention on the Elimination of all
Forms of Discrimination against Women. (You can discriminate against men
till the cows come home). This convention's goals are not reformist, but
revolutionary. It openly calls for the elimination of traditional sex roles,
and the re-writing of text books to purge them of alleged sexual
stereotypes. The UN's call for the total disarmament of the world's people
is embedded in CEDAW's preamble.
According to the feminists who constitute the CEDAW Committee, until nations
achieve a 50-50 sexual split in everything - in occupations, in public life,
and even in the domestic sphere - they are discriminating against women. Now
that might sound far-fetched, but article 5 of CEDAW advocates "a proper
understanding of maternity as a social function." Note the socialist
bullying in the word, 'proper'.
This "proper understanding" demands that child-rearing - universally! -
should be "a fully shared responsibility ... by both sexes." It also insists
that society has an obligation to extend child care services to "allow
individuals to combine family responsibilities with work and participation
in public life."
The message to women is: you will participate in work and public life
whether you want to or not. In a now notorious interview with Betty Friedan,
Simone de Beauvoir said: "No woman should be authorised to stay at home and
raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not
have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many
women will make that one." [2]
So much for freedom of choice. These bully-girls demand "a change in the
traditional role of men as well as the role of women in society and in the
family ... to achieve full equality of men and women". Their version of
equality is complete identity. It's reminiscent of communist China in Mao's
time. The communists were all feminists too. Remember?
To achieve the goal of sexual identity, Article 10c mandates the revision of
textbooks, school programmes and teaching methods with a view to eliminating
stereotyped concepts. This must be why one of my children's French textbooks
showed Dad in an apron washing the dishes while Mum, dressed in a chic suit
and carrying a briefcase, waved ta-ta to the baby in the high-chair. A
French textbook! Textbooks in all subjects are being used to indoctrinate
children in our schools. It's just too bad if individuals prefer the
traditional roles when they have young children - as most people actually
do.
According to CEDAW's Preamble, all nations are "obliged to work towards the
modification of social and cultural patterns of INDIVIDUAL [emphasis added]
conduct in order to eliminate prejudices and customary and all other
practices which are based on ... stereotyped roles for men and women."
These intolerant ideologues who so loudly criticise Christian evangelists
are far worse. At least religious conversion is voluntary! But incredibly,
the CEDAW Committee has instructed Libya to re-interpret its sacred book,
the Koran, in ways that are permissible under CEDAW. The Algerian government
was castigated for "using religion as an excuse" for failure to comply with
CEDAW. The Committee has also instructed China to legalise prostitution. [3]
Whatever happened to national sovereignty? And how hypocritical is the UN?
On the one hand it supposedly values the diversity of the world's nations
and cultures. But on the other hand, with CEDAW, it demands that the world's
nations and cultures must conform to the deranged and frequently immoral
opinions of Western feminists who themselves are a minority in their own
countries...
The first lie is that men and women are interchangeable, and that there
aren't any differences between the sexes apart from anatomical ones. In
fact, feminists claim that there aren't two sexes at all but at least five
genders, which are socially constructed. They regard heterosexual men and
women as being hopelessly repressed in gender stereotypes forced upon them
by society. Their life's mission is to liberate us from these imposed
stereotypes.
To achieve the interchangeability, feminists at first tirelessly promoted
the traditional male life pattern of un-interrupted full-time work as the
norm for women. Creches and childcare were demanded to free women from
domesticity, whether they wanted to be 'freed' or not. In Australia, groups
such as the Women's Electoral Lobby fought to change Australia's tax system
from a family-friendly one to a profoundly unjust one where a married man
with a family pays virtually the same tax as a single man. They won, and
their victory clearly shows the contempt for ordinary women that is the
hallmark of feminism.
But seeing as ignoring babies doesn't go down too well with most mothers,
feminists have changed tack. If they can't force women to be like men, then
they'll force men to be like women. The sexes MUST be interchangeable for
their gender theory to work. This is behind the increasingly hectoring calls
for men to avail themselves of the 'opportunity' of part-time work and to do
more domestic work out of 'fairness'. Australian academic Ken Dempsey
deplores the fact that most of the women in his surveys on domestic work
perversely fail to see they're oppressed [5]...
The first lie was that there are no differences between the sexes. The
second and contradictory lie is that women are in fact superior to men.
Increasingly, feminists claim that maleness is some sort of pathology, in
need of a cure. And so there is a widespread demonization of men in our
culture, with disastrous effects on young males who are made to feel ashamed
of their sex and to scorn the manly virtues. And then politicians, academics
and social commentators have the hide to express concern about male suicide
rates.
Increasingly men are being regarded and treated as second class citizens,
being freely discriminated against in employment via affirmative action
programmes. Feminists contemptuously dismiss the achievements of Western
civilization as the product of 'dead white males'. And they're doing their
best to overthrow it and replace it with their own socialist hell where
every facet of life will be regimented, even down to doing the housework.
It's already happened in one German state [7].
There are some chilling prospects in store for men if they win. For instance
the president of the Center for Advancement of Public Policy in Washington
DC, has proposed that men's fertility be controlled by mandatory
contraception beginning at puberty. Boys would be forced to have
contraceptive implants along with compulsory DNA fingerprinting. Doctors
would have to report anybody who refused the implants or sought medical
attention after trying to remove them himself [8]. This is not sci-fi,
folks, this is now...
Only feminist ideologues could fail to see that the presence of women on a
battlefield weakens combat readiness. But for feminists, national security
comes second to ideological purity. The sexes must be identical, and it look
like Britain is set to jetison its military heritage and join the Americans
in having women in combat.
5. Education
In education, the transformation starts with unsubtle brainwashing in
pre-schools B. Believe it or not, Australian pre-schools have banned
Cinderella and Superman.
Yes, the National Childcare Accreditation Council's handbook states that
"anything that emphasises men and women in traditional masculine and
feminine roles" is outlawed [20]. Along with Superman and Cinderella,
favourite authors like Hans Christian Anderson and CS Lewis have also been
given the boot. Staff are discouraged from telling little boys and girls
that they look handsome or pretty respectively, and from providing
'stereotyped' toys. When the council's General Manager was challenged about
promoting views so contrary to community standards she defended the
guidelines claiming that they were voluntary . Well yes, I suppose if a
childcare centre is happy to risk its accreditation and hence funding, it
can choose to flout the 'recommendations'. Soft totalitarianism indeed...
1. www.vhemt.org
2. Quoted in Robert H. Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism
and American Decline, New York : Regan Books, 1997, p. 204.
3. Kathryn Balmforth, "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: an Open Invitation to
Radical Attacks on Sovereignty", Endeavour Forum Newsletter, no. 96, October
1999, p.2.
4. Christina Hoff Sommers, Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed
Women, New York: Touchstone, 1995, chapter 4.
5. Dempsey, Inequalities in Marriage: Australia and Beyond, Melbourne :
Oxford University Press, 1997, p.11
6. The Weekend Australian , 3-4/7/99.
7. Sun-Herald (Sydney), 30/5/99
8. http://members.tripod.com/~adviser1/medusa/ch07.html 9. Hoff Sommers,
p.211
10. Ibid, p.199
11. Karen Brownlee, "Men Can be Victims of Domestic Violence as Well",
Regina Leader Post and Saskatoon Star Phoenix, 22 October 1999
12. The Australian HES, 8/6/97.
13. Robert Pool, The New Sexual Revolution, London : Stodder and Houghton,
1994, p. 267.
14. Bettina Arndt, "Jobs For the Girls", Melbourne, The Age, 21/4/98.
15. Shirley Robin Letwin, "Law and the Unreasonable Woman", National Review,
November 18, 1991, p. 35.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
18. Bork, p. 219-220.
19. David H. Hackworth, "Why the troops are hanging it up", 15/11/99
20. (Sydney) Sun-Herald, 18/5/97.
21. Hoff Sommers, p.58
22. Kathy Kersten, "A New Heaven & a New Earth", First Things, March 1994,
p.10.
23. Margaret E. Mills, Woman: Why Are You Weeping, North Melbourne: News
Weekly, 1997, p.106
24. Ibid, p.108
25. Kenneth Minogue, "The Goddess That Failed", National Review, 18/11/91,
p. 46.
-----------== Posted via Newsgroups.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsgroups.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
militiaguy
> In the many conspiracy theory magazines and web-sites there is one
> conspiracy theory I have never come across, and that that is the
> suppression of the evidence that women once ruled the world. The
> irony is <snip>
finding indisputable proof that women did once rule the world
> is political dynamite and could start and political revolution that
> would sweep away the power of our present ruling establishment.
>
><snip>
Ask any married man... Women still rule the world!
Why we can't even have a militia meeting in our bunker (the garage)
because she parks her vehicle there. She claims our big belt buckels
scratched it up.
Which by the way used to be our command vehicle until she took it.
So you see...1 woman defeated our militia.
I said it before...women should be our first line of defense.
That way even if they lost, we could say...
"So ya beat a bunch of girls! Big deal!"
http://sonoguy.tripod.com/women.html