Pete Patriarch’s Musings

July 15, 2010

Yet another woman abuses child on plane, this time sexually

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 10:13 pm

Where is the outraged response? Where is the new BA policy that women must not be seated next to children? It ain’t the first time a woman has been a cunt towards a child on a plane – Woman physically abusive to child on flight.

Fuck all that shit, its a well plastered member of the Royal Sex doing the abusin’, I’m just waiting with bated breath for her defenders – fellow holders of the Pussy Pass, hags, feminists and – of course – White Knights whose knee jerk reaction is always “Its the man’s boy’s patriarchy’s fault! It has to be because, see here I’m a man and I’m evil and thus ALL MEN must be evil like me or worse!!!”

Woman on plane plied boy with drugs and alcohol to entice him.

Woman on plane offered 14-year-old boy sex, drugs
From Sun-Times Media
Link..
A Chicago area father is suing Southwest Airlines, alleging his 14-year-old son was forced to sit next to a woman who allegedly made sexual advances toward the boy and offered him illegal drugs during a flight to Florida.

The suit, filed Monday in Cook County Circuit Court, claims that the flight attendants didn’t protect the boy during the July 13th, 2008 flight from Chicago to Orlando.

“My client was a 14-year-old little boy when he was aggressively, sexually pursued by an older passenger who offered him drugs, who wanted sex from him,” said Chicago attorney Jeffrey S. Deutschman.

“He went to the bathroom four times, he asked to move and he was told to take his seat,” Deutschman said.

The boy was so “shaken” he refused to take the return flight home alone, the suit states.

“His father had to fly down and bring him back,” Deutschman said.

The suit claims the airline was negligent and failed to “remove the adult female who was obviously intoxicated and/or under the influence of other drugs.”

A spokesman for Southwest Airlines declined comment.

Who wants to bet that those motherfucking nancy boys in the air hostess uniforms didn’t even care or had a laugh about it? Like in that South Park episode,

“Help, there’s a drunk woman trying to rape me!”

“NIIIICE”

Male Contraceptives – here we go again.

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 11:35 am

It seems like every few weeks, there’s an article about another contraceptive pill for men.

Funny how nothing ever comes of it and how even though feminist pharma haters moan about how big pharma caters to men only, with the prime examples being Viagra and Rogaine.So what is it ladies? What is stopping big pharma from making a few big bucks off of a contraceptive pill for men? Imagine that, they could even market it with a ready-made slogan:

CHOICE FOR MEN

We still don’t have a male contraceptive on the market while women have oodles of options. Up to and including abortion – which, let’s face the facts, is basically counted as murder if someone else does it. Hooray for double standards. Or how about their other option, abandonment? Its A-OK if women do it! Or even adoption without the father’s consent? Basically anything goes because children are seen as women’s property in the eyes of our society.

Male Contraceptive Pill Shows Promise – GlennSacks.com
by Robert Franklin, Esq. on Jul 15, 2010 6:29 AM

This article reports on a new male birth control pill that’s currently in animal studies, but is scheduled to begin human trials in the U.S. next year (Telegraph, 6/28/10).  It was developed in Israel by Professor Haim Breitbart.
It’s a revolutionary concept in several ways.  First, it removes a protein in sperm cells that makes it impossible for them to fertilize an egg.  So it doesn’t have any of the odious side-effects of hormonal contraception, vasectomy or methods that block the vas deferens.  One of those side-effects of hormonal contraception is dramatically reduced libido which few men would find attractive.  And, at least in laboratory animals, the low-dosage pill lasts for one month and the higher-dosage pill lasts up to three months.
All in all, at this point the new pill looks like a breakthrough.  It would seem to be 100% effective, probably inexpensive, easy to use and with no side-effects.  It’s hard to argue with any of that.
It’s also hard to argue with finally (finally!) giving men some control over their own fertility.  For 50 years, women in this country have had access to fairly cheap, extremely effective contraception that suppresses ovulation.  Over the years, they’ve also had access to a bewildering array of IUDs, post-coitus interventions and abortion, in addition to the usual condoms and just plain abstinence.
Men’s contraceptive choices have been much, much more limited.  Essentially, they can abstain from sex, get a vasectomy or use a condom.  Of those three, the only one that can be chosen in private is vasectomy, which, because it’s expensive and surgical, is not an option for most men, particularly young ones.
But a pill, particularly if it has all the benefits touted for the one developed by Breitbart, will fix all of that.  If this one is as good as it’s made out to be, in the not too distant future, men will at last be able to control their own fertility cheaply, effectively and confidentially.
Now, what we know about the pill for women is that, while it can provide almost complete control over their fertility, unfortunately it has to be used – and used correctly – in order for it to work.  And in an alarming number of cases, it isn’t.  That’s the conclusion of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy that reports here that some 50% of all pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned.  To put it mildly, if there are that many unplanned pregnancies, women aren’t using the wide range of contraceptive options at their disposal.
And the same paper finds, based on research by Child Trends, that children resulting from unplanned pregnancies are far more likely to experience high parental conflict and breakup than are those who are planned.  In short, the failure to use contraception and use it properly results in unwanted children born into high-conflict households.  There’s nothing about that that’s good.
The remarkable fact is that, when young people are interviewed, they very often say that they don’t want children yet, but are using no form of contraception.  Needless to say, that doesn’t make sense, but it seems to be common practice.
Assuming this pill is as good as it says it is, that it’s on the market soon and properly publicized, I see no reason to believe that men will be more adept or conscientious about its use than women are about their contraceptive options.  But it’ll be one more safeguard against unplanned pregnancy and childbirth, and the first real way in which men can decide for themselves whether or not to father a child.

May 21, 2010

Yes Virginia, Sarah Palin is a feminist

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 11:43 am

You know, right around the time that the 2008 Presidential campaign really kicked into high gear, a lot of MRAs came out in support for McCain/Palin. Especially Sarah Palin, and not just because she was the alternative to VAWA-Biden.

Some men genuinely felt that she was the answer – that she was a traditional woman with conservative values that would take us back America back to its humble roots, achieve peace between the sexes, and so on.

How far we have come in two years.

After struggling with its definition and connotations, Sarah Palin has apparently made peace with the “F-word.” She freely used it in a May 14 speech for the Susan B. Anthony List, a PAC for antiabortion female congressional candidates.

Yes Virginia, she has come out and said it. She is a feminist. Just like every other politician, male or female. Until we men start to organize and make politicians see that the male vote exists and has value, this is what we’ll get.

Using grizzly bears as a metaphor, Palin seemed to imply that the tenets of feminism — or at least the word itself — need not apply solely to liberal, abortion-rights supporting (and, by implication, gun-eschewing, gay-marriage-advocating, reusable-eco-bag-toting, dangling-earring-wearing) women. Red-state PTA moms with a love of God and country can get in on the empowerment act too.

“The mama grizzlies, they rise up,” Palin said, adding that such women “can give their child life, in addition to pursuing career and education and avocations. Society wants to tell these young women otherwise. These feminist groups want to tell these women that, ‘No, you’re not capable of doing both.’ “

Now where have I heard this before? Oh yeah. Grrls can have it all. Same old tired shitty message, new lipstick on a retard-bearing pig.

January 23, 2010

Another winner of a mother

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 10:52 am

This woman is batshit insane. But she will likely have some white knight supporters who think that no woman can do any wrong. Maybe even some old-fashioned types (like the male judges that give women large female sentencing discounts) who will think that “she dun good dere by punishing her sonny.”

To give you a taste of what she did:

A Georgia mother is accused of forcing her 12-year-old son to kill his pet hamster because of a bad report card. It happened last Thursday at the family’s home, said Meriwether County Sheriff Steve Witlock. Investigators said Lynn Geter made her son use a hammer to kill the hamster.

Fucked. Up. Let me remind readers that boys who are caught torturing or abusing animals are usually treated as budding serial killers and are given heavy sentences.

Three things I’d love to see:

1. Where is the father. Did she use the power of the state to kick him out of her son’s life?

2. Is she partially responsible for the poor grades in question?

3. How long a rap sheet does she already have?

(more…)

January 15, 2010

The Feminine Mystique

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 10:06 pm

Lamebook.com is absolutely hilarious. Here’s a winner.

Women, oh women, why do you have the IQ of a baby?

Holy shit, is it women that are messed up or… Part II

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 3:14 pm

Well, after the few slut-defenders on the last post (I expected more, especially considering how it is de rigueur for anyone under a certain age to decry the slut/stud double standard as if it’s the most important thing in the world), I came across another winner.

This girl takes the cake. Like, seriously. I don’t even know what the fuck, but this is apparently the norm in adolescents in high school nowadays. If you aren’t infected with at least two or three STDs you’re a priss or loser.

She has a fucking deadline — she wants to get through all these boys before Summer of 2010!

She lists “V-Card” multiple times – for anyone who doesn’t know, that’s virginity. I guess it’ll go to whoever gets to her first.

She’ll only kiss Brian, but if he cuts his hair, he’s in for a real treat – maybe she’ll even swallow his cum!!

From the angry “NVM” – Never mind!! next to Jacob, one can only assume that he rejected her advances.

Can anyone pick out more hilarity from the picture? Full pic with comments after the break. (more…)

December 5, 2009

How modern feminist women get ahead, redux

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 11:09 am

I’ve covered in the past the Paul Wolfowitz-Shaha Riza case.

Woman benefits from man’s connections, man in trouble.

Wolfowitz forced to resign because of Shaha Riza

Dirt on Shaha Riza

Well, we have more of the same. This time it isn’t too bad, maybe because the man is an important player in the healthcare debate. But then he seems to be going against his own party, so … well, I don’t know. You decide for yourself.

Baucus nominated girlfriend for US attorney.

Notice the same pattern – BIG picture of the accused guy, nothing about the girlfriend, the one who stood to benefit from these shenanigans.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus was romantically involved with a former staffer when he recommended her earlier this year to become the next U.S. attorney for Montana, a spokesman said.

The Montana Democrat and his former state office director Melodee Hanes began their relationship in the summer of 2008 after Baucus separated from his wife, Ty Matsdorf told The Associated Press late Friday.

Baucus, a Senate leader helping to shepherd President Barack Obama’s efforts to expand health care, nominated Hanes for the U.S. attorney post in March. But she later withdrew, saying she had been presented with other opportunities she couldn’t pass up.

Well, so in this case she withdrew in the semi-final stage. Ostensibly because she had “other opportunities” but later on we learn that they had decided to start living together, and that is why they had decided that she should withdraw. What would you say to a thief who started breaking into your house, but then stopped because she saw “other opportunities”?

Well, that’s it. Another day, another story about a woman using a man to get ahead. The man gets thrown under the bus when the escapade is exposed, but the woman gets away without a scratch.

November 23, 2009

Woman dodges deployment orders, “Waah I’m a woman”

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 4:41 pm

“Waah I’m a woman, a big strong woman but I don’t wanna go to war, get shot at, you have to treat me special because I’m a girl and I’ll tell Mommy if you don’t let me have my cake and eat it too!!!”

That’s probably what the internal monologue of Alexis Hutchinson sounds like right about now. The draft dodger – by the way, is it a draft if you a) SIGNED UP, and b) are a glorified POTATO PEELER? – This fucking draft dodger up and ignored her deployment orders, and when the plane left without her, the army came a-lookin’ and they weren’t none too pleased. No siree. She’s in the slammer.

Her story? That nobody could look after her convenient little kid. Another single mother, another poor bastard whelped into the world for mommy princess’s convenience.

Naturally, the media is all agog. Look at the fucking headline “Mother refuses deployment.” If it was a Dad, not only would he have gone as thousands do every month, but on the off chance that he didn’t, he certainly wouldn’t have been portrayed as a caring loving father. Nope, he’d be an outright villain.

Of course, all’s well that ends well, right?

Kevin Larson, a spokesman for Hunter Army Airfield, said that he did not know what Specialist Hutchinson was told by her commanders but that the Army would not deploy a single parent who had nobody to care for a child.

Another male dumped into the meatgrinder to protect a member of the Royal Sex, ostensibly because she’s a “single parent”. And people wonder if bad choices are subsidized in the USA. Look for loads more crotch droppings as word of this gets out.

1. Enlist.

2. ???

3. Profit!!! On the taxpayer’s dime!

November 15, 2009

Unilateralism is the name of the game

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 11:53 am

Our dear friend Michael better be aware, and better be supplying his own rubbers, because her mind is MADE THE FUCK UP!!

Facebook post

 

Who wants to bet that the “just not any time soon” will turn into “I went off the Pill a few weeks ago and … uh … never mentioned it to you. Oh and I used the condoms you thought you threw away. Heh.”

November 13, 2009

Army gets creative – again!

Filed under: Uncategorized — Pete @ 9:40 pm

We all remember Jessica Lynch, right? That honorable, courageous, brave woman who practically channeled Rambo and the Terminator in dusty old Iraq … err I mean the lady who didn’t even fire a shot, and got taken care of very well by the Iraqis because she was a member of the Royal Sex.

Well, it appears we have another one. The Army just can’t stop its creative juices from flowing, can it?

Fatty

That's not how you put foot in mouth!!

Senior Sgt Mark Todd says he fired the bullet that brought the gunman down.

A witness confirmed Sergeant Todd’s account.In the interview, Sergeant Todd said he and Sergeant Munley had pulled up to the scene in separate cars at the same time. He said they began running up a small hill toward the building that held the processing center where unarmed soldiers reported for check-ups and vaccinations before deployment. The gunman was already outside, Sergeant Todd recalled.

“That’s when the bystanders were pointing in his direction,” he said. “And when we popped up, he was standing there, and we shouted our commands — ‘Police, drop your weapons!’ — and he just opened fire on us.”

Sergeant Todd said he was slightly in front of Sergeant Munley on the hill. “Once we took fire, she broke right and I broke left,” he said.

Sergeant Todd said he did not see Sergeant Munley get shot. He said he started to circle around the building, but then backtracked as panicked bystanders told him of the gunman’s movements.

“As it unfolded, I went a different direction and he went a different direction, and we met up in the front of the building,” he said.

Sergeant Todd said he then saw Sergeant Munley on the ground, wounded. He shouted again at the gunman to drop his weapon.

“Once I came around the front of the building, I caught his attention again, started shouting commands, and then he opened up a second time,” Sergeant Todd said. “And that’s when I returned fire, neutralized him and secured him.”

Two things here –

  • is this account accurate?
  • will the Army let his account stand? Sometimes the truth doesn’t make such a hot story…
« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.