| What ever Man Does! |
it seems that making 2+ 2 is very hard for feminists, SO we go to make it more simple: Hidden portion! They are saying that, men cover the highest 2% of most intelligent persons in our societies. That is what they say, there are many different numbers on this "statistics". There are some article which refer to it with 10%, 15%,.... If we leave their shit approach to them, still we can ask a question: If there are 2% of men in highest level of intelligence and 2% of lowest, as they say, if we imagine the world population as less as 6 billions, we have 40% of this population as men, which make it about 2.5 billions, we say from them only 1 billion are what we are looking for. We have some thing like 20 millions of the bests in any things. Look at the hilly wood, Media, Newspapers, magazines, books, shows,...In last 50 years, where are they? Where are these 20 millions BESTS that actually they are leading the humanity and his progress toward the higher level of knowledge and sapiences. Where are they'? What they are doing? What they say about the world? What is their opinion? Who are they,Those in science, philosophy,arts, technologies, medicines, engineering, ... Disappointed!! You don't find them, because they are men. No Important, Listen to this report: "last minutes of prances DIANA!!!! And, what she did in her last minutes of her life!!!!!" It keeps going for more than 10 years!!!! Really such a big personage!!!!!!! " she was the person most photographed in the EARTH!!!!" Look Hilly-billy, she is not dead but makes lots of photo. The same SHAPE but with ten thousands different angels!! Such a great personage!! She has lots of photos. Fuck. They say that : Men are covering the 2% of the lowest intelligence level also!!!! Stupids, if he is the BEST, how can be the WORST!!! We know that it is hard for them to understand, but how can be a horse (as a specie) faster and slower than a donkey!! How we can say: male horses are slower and faster than females!! There are some male horses which are slower than a female ones, but they are not when ever they have the same possibilities. There re some female that can bit some men, but: with same conditions and possibilities (training, exercises, age,....) there is no female that can bit a man. This that "2%" which they are talking about, they never could and can surpass the limits: MAN. When he is the BEST, he shows and proves that NO ONE CAN DO WHAT EVER HE DOES. They take a good sport man, and ask him "what was the name of first woman that pissed in standing position?" then the result is "he is in 2% of lowest level!!!". They take a man who is the best in sciences, and they ask him which he is worst in it, THEN SHOW THE RESULTS!! Their acts are Intelligent and very honest, no?. Only a stupid can believe it. First they said: They are equal to men!! They never reached that level. Second "phase" of their crimes started by : "Why we should do what ever man does? It is full of mistake", not because they couldn't do it!! It didn't worked,because the man's ways are the right ones. They start with "new" phase!! How different and mysterious is the ways that a "woman" does the things!!! Incubating our genes is the only thing that a female does, "her" ways doesn't count any thing. |
| They see all the world's problems as their own PUSSY problems: Desertification.........It is desert around my pussy, where are the men? Poverty...................................................Poor my Pussy. Hunger..............No one is more hunger than my pussy. Help...... If you have a problem of how to use it, please refer to online Help section, Ass department. Education..............................................."women study" Children......................................My pussy, my choose. Peace.......................The peace way is the pussy way. Job...........................She made the first JOB in history. International confilicts.......................All is about pussy. Revolutions..........................shortage in pussy supply. Violence.............................Pussy didn't SUCK enough. Politics...................Who will defend my pussy's rights? Arts.....................................showing half of the pussy. Ecomonic...............What is her price in market today? Energy..............................................Is there left any? Health...................Healthy pussy, Mission impossible. Religions.....................Look at Bible, I was clear, NO? Sports............why you are in hurry? Slower, is better! Military......................................Paradize, lots of men. Justic.................will win any case,when ever I show it. Pussy is some thing that: bleeds one week, and, will cry other three weeks, for it. |
From Men's Sites:
"Amfortas
Posted: May 21 2005, 01:09 AM
I was a soldier. I have killed many. I have never let hatred rule and distort my judgement. We in
the men's movement must be able to effectively distinguish between enemy forces and innocent
villagers tilling their fields. Sure most women have a role in life that is different from men's roles,
and sure some women aspire, stupidly, to take the men's role. They usually f*ck up. Our enemy
isn't women. It is the dark force of lies and distortions put out by our political masters who want to
enslave us all - men AND women."
"Amfortas
Posted: May 21 2005, 01:09 AM
I was a soldier. I have killed many. I have never let hatred rule and distort my judgement. We in
the men's movement must be able to effectively distinguish between enemy forces and innocent
villagers tilling their fields. Sure most women have a role in life that is different from men's roles,
and sure some women aspire, stupidly, to take the men's role. They usually f*ck up. Our enemy
isn't women. It is the dark force of lies and distortions put out by our political masters who want to
enslave us all - men AND women."
From Men's Sites:
jtest28
Posted: Jun 2 2005, 05:36 PM
Why is it everyone at SYG keeps fighting feminism while at the same time defending women who
support it. WTF? (Most women do support feminism, therefore, generally women are not on our
side.) It's socially impossible to do because when you try to defend women and be Mr. Nice guy,
women will turn against you. If you are an anti-feminist, she will be pro feminist in an attempt to
rebel against you.
It's socially impossible to fight an idea while protecting the people who support the idea!
jtest28
Posted: Jun 2 2005, 05:36 PM
Why is it everyone at SYG keeps fighting feminism while at the same time defending women who
support it. WTF? (Most women do support feminism, therefore, generally women are not on our
side.) It's socially impossible to do because when you try to defend women and be Mr. Nice guy,
women will turn against you. If you are an anti-feminist, she will be pro feminist in an attempt to
rebel against you.
It's socially impossible to fight an idea while protecting the people who support the idea!
|
| Attention: Women Workers. |
From Men's Sites:
T. James Liu
Posted: Jun 11 2005, 03:34 AM
I just got pointed to MenForAPill.org: an incredible site with information that just blew me away.
For example, it seems there are safe, effective, medical contraceptives available for men today,
that are receiving virtually no attention whatsoever in the media (certainly, I've never heard of any
of these developments before today, and I'm probably at least a little more diligent about
monitoring the latest news in men's issues than most).
Of the various methods discussed, the one that most stands out (to my thinking) is Nifedipine,
approved by the FDA 25 years ago as a high-blood-pressure and migraine headache medication,
it seems it also happens to be 94-95% effective in rendering sperm infertile - when dosage is
stopped, the effect reverses in about 3 months. There seems either no, or very minor, side effects.
Did anyone else here already know about this? Does anyone else here know any men who might
be very interested in hearing about this? For myself, I would certainly think the option of some
kind, any kind, of reliable insurance against "oops" pregnancies would be of interest to many men
(regardless of being either married or single); isn't the worry over being "oopsed," one fine day
out of the blue, enough to give you a serious migraine, that could stand a bit of medical attention?
You'd think, wouldn't you?
In fact, as a medical hazard, wouldn't you think that an effective vaccine against being "oopsed"
(considering the damage it does, when it happens) would make at least as much sense, if not
overwhemlingly more so, than the current vaccines that are already covered in most men's health
coverage? I'd certainly think such coverage is a no-brainer, which begs the question: why isn't this
already the case?
The whole topic is making me a bit woozy... I think I need to see my doctor now. Right now.
Know any man who'd prefer not being "oopsed" one day? Spread the word.
T. James Liu
Posted: Jun 11 2005, 03:34 AM
I just got pointed to MenForAPill.org: an incredible site with information that just blew me away.
For example, it seems there are safe, effective, medical contraceptives available for men today,
that are receiving virtually no attention whatsoever in the media (certainly, I've never heard of any
of these developments before today, and I'm probably at least a little more diligent about
monitoring the latest news in men's issues than most).
Of the various methods discussed, the one that most stands out (to my thinking) is Nifedipine,
approved by the FDA 25 years ago as a high-blood-pressure and migraine headache medication,
it seems it also happens to be 94-95% effective in rendering sperm infertile - when dosage is
stopped, the effect reverses in about 3 months. There seems either no, or very minor, side effects.
Did anyone else here already know about this? Does anyone else here know any men who might
be very interested in hearing about this? For myself, I would certainly think the option of some
kind, any kind, of reliable insurance against "oops" pregnancies would be of interest to many men
(regardless of being either married or single); isn't the worry over being "oopsed," one fine day
out of the blue, enough to give you a serious migraine, that could stand a bit of medical attention?
You'd think, wouldn't you?
In fact, as a medical hazard, wouldn't you think that an effective vaccine against being "oopsed"
(considering the damage it does, when it happens) would make at least as much sense, if not
overwhemlingly more so, than the current vaccines that are already covered in most men's health
coverage? I'd certainly think such coverage is a no-brainer, which begs the question: why isn't this
already the case?
The whole topic is making me a bit woozy... I think I need to see my doctor now. Right now.
Know any man who'd prefer not being "oopsed" one day? Spread the word.
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Men, Women and Ability:
Sunday, May 31, 2009
By Jeffrey Asher
Camille Paglia observed: “As I drove across the Verrazano Bridge, I thought, ‘Men built
this.’ As I looked towards the New York skyline, I thought, ‘Men built that.’ If women
were in charge of culture, we would still be living in caves. Well-decorated caves, but
caves.” That story may be apocryphal, but correct. Men continue to create civilization.
All cultures, without exception, were built by Patriarchy.
But Feminist politics remain founded in indignation that women’s deserved
opportunities remain suppressed. Over forty years, majority-male governments
entrenched feminist jurisprudence. They decree that if women in any occupation rank
below half, that is proof of misogyny, requiring a minimum 50% female quota. Women-
dominated occupations are offered as proof of superior female abilities.
Sexual Politics.
Such claims are fundamentally flawed. The contrary evidence comes from around the
world, over the previous fifty, and even five thousand years. The entrenched quota
‘remedies’ are worse than mistaken or opportunistic – they undermine justice and
freedom. Democracy is not founded on obligatory outcomes, but in equality of
opportunity and equality before the law.
Independent studies show that since the 1960s, women have been hired in greater
proportion from the applicant pool, with lesser credentials, are less likely to apply for
promotion, but promoted with lesser achievements or seniority, are far more likely to
work on a reduced schedule, take years off work for personal and family reasons and
retire earlier, than men.
Clearly, the exclusion target is white, heterosexual men. In 1968, Martin Luther King led
Black Memphis garbage collectors, who wore placards, announcing, “I Am A Man”.
Few Canadians might understand if a White man now wore a placard pleading, “I Am A
Human Being”.
IQ:
Extensive recent and revealing evidence is now available about innate male and female
intellectual characteristics. IQ reliably predicts success in education, work and most
aspects of achievement and well-being. Individuals are born with different IQ potentials
and the effects of culture and experience on intelligence diminish rather than grow with
age. No amount of education or social engineering can make individuals with disparate
mental aptitudes into intellectual equals.
Studies of intelligence and sex consistently show the male advantage. But presenting
that evidence is hazardous. What results for the messenger is prompt alienation from
family and social circle and opprobrium from his profession and the media. This topic is
a notorious career-terminator. (Remember Lawrence Summers?) Therefore, few
researchers attempt a comprehensive view of intellectual sex differences.
Here goes.
Brain Size:
Male brains are 8.2% to 16.8% larger than females’. The single claim for greater
cortical density for women concedes it is, “The first report of such a sex difference … a
small sample (nine brains), … (and) requires replication”. Regardless, that study is
widely trumpeted as conclusive for female superiority.
In 2005, Richard Haier et al. reported, “Women show more white matter and fewer gray
matter areas related to intelligence. Men have more than six times the amount of gray
matter related to general intelligence than women, and women have nearly ten times the
amount of white matter. Gray matter is used for information processing, while white
matter consists of the connections between processing centers.” Among humans,
greater brain size and substantially more ‘grey matter’ indicate higher intelligence.
Male – female disparities in brain structure, hormones, needs, perception and
behaviour, are well substantiated. Those differences are evident over a century, in tens
of millions of evaluations, among others, in education, the armed forces and
employment. That irrefutable disparity evidence rebuts feminist claims of pervasive
opportunity discrimination against women.
Test Scores:
Feminists flaunt girls’ elevated GPAs (but not SATs) as proof that girls lead boys in
‘maturity’ and learning ability. A psychology professor claims, “There is no sex
difference in intelligence.” She should know better. Boys’ IQ begins to surpass girls at
age 14.
Higher female GPAs indicate political metastasis in Western education. Christina Hoff-
Sommers’ “The War Against Boys,” shows pervasive feminization of education,
suppression of boys’ nature and indoctrination of misandry. But the rising disproportion
of women in colleges and careers – like the purported superior intelligence of
Communist and Nazi Party members – indicates the triumph of politics over
achievement. Competence is subverted to social engineering. Ongoing suppression of
male abilities and creativity bode grave consequences for the West.
Irwing & Lynn’s examination of over 100,000 IQ tests and their meta-analysis of
hundreds of studies (“Nature” 6 VII 2006), found the overall male advantage at the mean,
of at 4.6 IQ points, Helmuth Nyborg cites +6.90 IQ points; Strumpf & Jackson measure
+8.4 IQ.
Even small individual differences in IQ result in significant consequences throughout
individuals’ social and economic lives. The comprehension and explanation skills of
those who score above the IQ mean are evident, even in ordinary conversation. In
Mensa the male-to-female ratio is 2:1. At IQ 130 (+2SD), males comprise 82%; IQ 145
(+3SD), 88% and at IQ 160 (+4SD), associated with genius, males comprise 97%.
IQ & g:
IQ tests derive most of their validity from their 90% correlation with the general
intelligence factor g, which is, “independent of cultural context” and a “hereditary
potential”.
In “Why g Matters,” Linda Gottfredson estimates that a minimum of IQ 120 is needed to
be competitive in “high-level” jobs … the probability is that only 37% of the workforce at
that level will be female.” Helmuth Nyborg explains, “Proper methodology identifies a
male advantage in g that increases exponentially at higher levels, relates to brain size
and [partially] explains the universal male dominance in society.”
However, government managers are over 60% female. The next time you benefit from
prompt, efficient and courteous government service, most likely, a woman should be
thanked.
Scores on the SAT, GRE, LSAT and similar knowledge and ability tests show a male
advantage, on verbal and wider on mathematics scores. That sex gap persists despite
over thirty years of ‘gender-norming’ of test questions, to inflate female scores –
founded in the testers’ presumption of equal intelligence. Previous to 1990, the male
test advantage was higher. Either, over thirty years, males have lost g and become less
intelligent, females conversely, or those tests are increasingly sex-rigged.
Christina Hoff – Sommers: “Males … score higher on tests requiring three-dimensional
skills, target-directed motor skills, and all forms of reasoning and logic. We are
forgetting a truth: that the energy, daring and competitiveness of normal, decent boys is
responsible for much of what is right in the world.”
Male Achievement:
Charles Murray in “Human Accomplishment” offers Lotka Curve and other analyses,
showing women comprise less than 2.2 percent of ‘Significant Figures,’ over 2750
years. Women’s achievements are mostly based in contributions to Western and
Japanese literature and art.
Women rank as 4.4% (n=35) of Nobel Prize laureates, with 66% of their awards in
literature and peace. Nineteen Prizes were won by organizations. The remaining 744
prizes were earned by men. All cultures and civilizations, throughout history, without
exception, were fostered and advanced by Patriarchy.
…
Accommodation:
Politically-correct evasions to this evidence include claims that IQ is meaningless,
examinations of innate ability among groups undermine democracy, Charles Murray is a
man, and the SAT and brain measurements are inconclusive and part of a Patriarchal
conspiracy.
The delusions of elites, from Jacobinism to Feminism, condemned citizens to
intractable suffering. Linda Gottfredson in “Why g Matters” offers, “Only by accepting
these hard truths about intelligence will society find humane solutions to the problems
posed by the variations in general mental ability.” Charles Murray urges, “Let us stop
being afraid of data that tell us a story we do not want to hear, stop the name-calling,
stop the denial and start facing reality.”
The IQ and achievement disparities between the sexes show that Feminist claims of
pervasive opportunity discrimination against women are unjustified. Such politics
demean women’s abilities, their commitment to society and diverse achievements.
Also dismissed is men’s need to provide for and protect women and children, and men’
s fulfillment in duty and honour.
Without inherent sex ability differences, the human race would have become extinct.
Effective social policy must be founded in the most reliable evidence, including innate
differences, and humane policy, to benefit most citizens.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
By Jeffrey Asher
Camille Paglia observed: “As I drove across the Verrazano Bridge, I thought, ‘Men built
this.’ As I looked towards the New York skyline, I thought, ‘Men built that.’ If women
were in charge of culture, we would still be living in caves. Well-decorated caves, but
caves.” That story may be apocryphal, but correct. Men continue to create civilization.
All cultures, without exception, were built by Patriarchy.
But Feminist politics remain founded in indignation that women’s deserved
opportunities remain suppressed. Over forty years, majority-male governments
entrenched feminist jurisprudence. They decree that if women in any occupation rank
below half, that is proof of misogyny, requiring a minimum 50% female quota. Women-
dominated occupations are offered as proof of superior female abilities.
Sexual Politics.
Such claims are fundamentally flawed. The contrary evidence comes from around the
world, over the previous fifty, and even five thousand years. The entrenched quota
‘remedies’ are worse than mistaken or opportunistic – they undermine justice and
freedom. Democracy is not founded on obligatory outcomes, but in equality of
opportunity and equality before the law.
Independent studies show that since the 1960s, women have been hired in greater
proportion from the applicant pool, with lesser credentials, are less likely to apply for
promotion, but promoted with lesser achievements or seniority, are far more likely to
work on a reduced schedule, take years off work for personal and family reasons and
retire earlier, than men.
Clearly, the exclusion target is white, heterosexual men. In 1968, Martin Luther King led
Black Memphis garbage collectors, who wore placards, announcing, “I Am A Man”.
Few Canadians might understand if a White man now wore a placard pleading, “I Am A
Human Being”.
IQ:
Extensive recent and revealing evidence is now available about innate male and female
intellectual characteristics. IQ reliably predicts success in education, work and most
aspects of achievement and well-being. Individuals are born with different IQ potentials
and the effects of culture and experience on intelligence diminish rather than grow with
age. No amount of education or social engineering can make individuals with disparate
mental aptitudes into intellectual equals.
Studies of intelligence and sex consistently show the male advantage. But presenting
that evidence is hazardous. What results for the messenger is prompt alienation from
family and social circle and opprobrium from his profession and the media. This topic is
a notorious career-terminator. (Remember Lawrence Summers?) Therefore, few
researchers attempt a comprehensive view of intellectual sex differences.
Here goes.
Brain Size:
Male brains are 8.2% to 16.8% larger than females’. The single claim for greater
cortical density for women concedes it is, “The first report of such a sex difference … a
small sample (nine brains), … (and) requires replication”. Regardless, that study is
widely trumpeted as conclusive for female superiority.
In 2005, Richard Haier et al. reported, “Women show more white matter and fewer gray
matter areas related to intelligence. Men have more than six times the amount of gray
matter related to general intelligence than women, and women have nearly ten times the
amount of white matter. Gray matter is used for information processing, while white
matter consists of the connections between processing centers.” Among humans,
greater brain size and substantially more ‘grey matter’ indicate higher intelligence.
Male – female disparities in brain structure, hormones, needs, perception and
behaviour, are well substantiated. Those differences are evident over a century, in tens
of millions of evaluations, among others, in education, the armed forces and
employment. That irrefutable disparity evidence rebuts feminist claims of pervasive
opportunity discrimination against women.
Test Scores:
Feminists flaunt girls’ elevated GPAs (but not SATs) as proof that girls lead boys in
‘maturity’ and learning ability. A psychology professor claims, “There is no sex
difference in intelligence.” She should know better. Boys’ IQ begins to surpass girls at
age 14.
Higher female GPAs indicate political metastasis in Western education. Christina Hoff-
Sommers’ “The War Against Boys,” shows pervasive feminization of education,
suppression of boys’ nature and indoctrination of misandry. But the rising disproportion
of women in colleges and careers – like the purported superior intelligence of
Communist and Nazi Party members – indicates the triumph of politics over
achievement. Competence is subverted to social engineering. Ongoing suppression of
male abilities and creativity bode grave consequences for the West.
Irwing & Lynn’s examination of over 100,000 IQ tests and their meta-analysis of
hundreds of studies (“Nature” 6 VII 2006), found the overall male advantage at the mean,
of at 4.6 IQ points, Helmuth Nyborg cites +6.90 IQ points; Strumpf & Jackson measure
+8.4 IQ.
Even small individual differences in IQ result in significant consequences throughout
individuals’ social and economic lives. The comprehension and explanation skills of
those who score above the IQ mean are evident, even in ordinary conversation. In
Mensa the male-to-female ratio is 2:1. At IQ 130 (+2SD), males comprise 82%; IQ 145
(+3SD), 88% and at IQ 160 (+4SD), associated with genius, males comprise 97%.
IQ & g:
IQ tests derive most of their validity from their 90% correlation with the general
intelligence factor g, which is, “independent of cultural context” and a “hereditary
potential”.
In “Why g Matters,” Linda Gottfredson estimates that a minimum of IQ 120 is needed to
be competitive in “high-level” jobs … the probability is that only 37% of the workforce at
that level will be female.” Helmuth Nyborg explains, “Proper methodology identifies a
male advantage in g that increases exponentially at higher levels, relates to brain size
and [partially] explains the universal male dominance in society.”
However, government managers are over 60% female. The next time you benefit from
prompt, efficient and courteous government service, most likely, a woman should be
thanked.
Scores on the SAT, GRE, LSAT and similar knowledge and ability tests show a male
advantage, on verbal and wider on mathematics scores. That sex gap persists despite
over thirty years of ‘gender-norming’ of test questions, to inflate female scores –
founded in the testers’ presumption of equal intelligence. Previous to 1990, the male
test advantage was higher. Either, over thirty years, males have lost g and become less
intelligent, females conversely, or those tests are increasingly sex-rigged.
Christina Hoff – Sommers: “Males … score higher on tests requiring three-dimensional
skills, target-directed motor skills, and all forms of reasoning and logic. We are
forgetting a truth: that the energy, daring and competitiveness of normal, decent boys is
responsible for much of what is right in the world.”
Male Achievement:
Charles Murray in “Human Accomplishment” offers Lotka Curve and other analyses,
showing women comprise less than 2.2 percent of ‘Significant Figures,’ over 2750
years. Women’s achievements are mostly based in contributions to Western and
Japanese literature and art.
Women rank as 4.4% (n=35) of Nobel Prize laureates, with 66% of their awards in
literature and peace. Nineteen Prizes were won by organizations. The remaining 744
prizes were earned by men. All cultures and civilizations, throughout history, without
exception, were fostered and advanced by Patriarchy.
…
Accommodation:
Politically-correct evasions to this evidence include claims that IQ is meaningless,
examinations of innate ability among groups undermine democracy, Charles Murray is a
man, and the SAT and brain measurements are inconclusive and part of a Patriarchal
conspiracy.
The delusions of elites, from Jacobinism to Feminism, condemned citizens to
intractable suffering. Linda Gottfredson in “Why g Matters” offers, “Only by accepting
these hard truths about intelligence will society find humane solutions to the problems
posed by the variations in general mental ability.” Charles Murray urges, “Let us stop
being afraid of data that tell us a story we do not want to hear, stop the name-calling,
stop the denial and start facing reality.”
The IQ and achievement disparities between the sexes show that Feminist claims of
pervasive opportunity discrimination against women are unjustified. Such politics
demean women’s abilities, their commitment to society and diverse achievements.
Also dismissed is men’s need to provide for and protect women and children, and men’
s fulfillment in duty and honour.
Without inherent sex ability differences, the human race would have become extinct.
Effective social policy must be founded in the most reliable evidence, including innate
differences, and humane policy, to benefit most citizens.
 |  |  |
| REALLY????? |