Don't Marry

Why Modern, Western Marriage Has Become A Bad Business Decision For Men

Essay

with 4,390 comments


The intent of this website is to help educate men about
the realities of today’s modern marriage. Please pass the word.

Why Modern, Western Marriage Has Become A Bad Business Decision For Men

This writing seeks to educate men about the realities of what they may be getting into when they marry a Western Woman. An informed decision is less likely to be one that may be regretted later in the marriage. The intent is not to dissuade men from marrying, but to encourage them to communicate frankly their concerns and expectations regarding marriage with their potential spouses. The secondary aim of this essay is to enlighten women to a few of the reasons why increasingly larger numbers of successful, eligible, unmarried men, who would otherwise prefer monogamous long-term relationships, are turning their backs on marriage.

Society typically paints a negative stereotype of men who hesitate, delay, or elect not to marry.

They are labeled as either:

A) Womanisers who are unable to participate in a long term relationship, or
B) Selfish, childish or irresponsible men who can not take care of themselves or another person.

No other explanation is ever explored.

The cost of proclaiming your undying love

In University, in professional sports, in politics, in the workplace; women have the same educational and professional career opportunities as men. Contrary to commonly believed feminist propaganda, women do indeed get paid the same salary as men, given that they are willing to work the same types of jobs as men, and work as many hours as the men do. Despite this reality, many women come into marriage with very few assets, and often are saddled with substantial quantities of debt. In general, men are the ones who save and invest. Don’t believe me? Count the number of women of marrying age that you know who subscribe to financial services magazines or newspapers. A significant number of 20-something and 30-something women spend all of their disposable income on luxury rental apartments, upscale restaurants, frequent exotic vacations, leased cars, spa treatments, and excessive amounts of clothing, purses, shoes and accessories. Yet ironically, in the media, men are the ones who are portrayed as reckless, irresponsible spendthrifts.

When marriage enters the picture, double standards and financial imbalances leave responsible men to pick up the slack and fix the mess she may have made of her finances. Men are forced to spend their hard-earned savings, or take out an usurious loan, on a diamond ring. Women justify this relatively recent, mid-20th Century ritual, which was spawned by a brilliant 1940’s mass-brainwashing campaign launched by DeBeers, by insisting that a man wants to buy her a diamond and that it makes him proud to be able to proclaim his love and affection towards her in this fashion. Granted there are some men who may be inclined to declare their commitment to a life-long partner in this way, but there are plenty of men whom seek a lifelong partnership and commitment who have no interest in buying diamonds. What choice do these men have? None! To many young men, the ring, catered wedding, and honeymoon in an exotic locale at a five-star hotel is an unwelcome land mine on their journey towards adult financial stability and independence. To add insult to injury, he is now locked into a lifetime of insurance payments for this grossly overpriced jewelry. Contrary to popularly held belief diamonds are not rare at all, but instead are common and inexpensive. Their high price is due to their supply having been artificially manipulated. Some men are more concerned with realising their dream of owning a home and becoming financially stable enough to begin a family and responsibly provide for their welfare. Men worry about these matters, because, ultimately, it becomes their sole responsibility.

The purchase of the diamond ring is a predictor of things to come. Immediately after buying it, the man may be rewarded with bridal demands to finance all or part of a lavish wedding, depending upon the size of his bank account and the ambitions of his fiancée. The average costs of today’s Western Weddings frequently exceed that of a house down payment or, in certain parts of the world, the entire cost of the house itself. If a man enters a marriage having saved up a down payment for his dream home, it can suddenly be snatched right out from underneath him. Many men may object to spending such a large sum of money on what is basically a very expensive one-day, four-hour party. He also will be spending a year of his life planning it, when he could use the same time to further his career or education. However, what a man wants is really not of any concern anymore at this point in the proceedings. His wants, desires, hopes and dreams are ignored almost in their entirety. Her opinions regarding the wedding are frequently non-negotiable. A wedding is no longer an event that is equally for the bride and groom. As many of today’s Bridezilla’s will gleefully remind you, “Today is MY day!”. This gives her licence to become selfish, irresponsible, demanding and childlike. A man who balks at spending his entire life savings, or shouldering a five-figure debt load, for the ring, catered wedding and honeymoon in an exotic locale at a five-star hotel, can and will be labeled as a selfish cheapskate or not a “Real Man”. If a woman leaves such a man for him suggesting that they try to keep their costs under control, she would have the full support of everyone around her as she dumped him.

“She can do better”, “Clearly, he doesn’t love her”, “He doesn’t deserve her”, and similar sentiments will be muttered in quiet circles just out of his earshot. This is a sign of her good self-esteem and healthy self-image, and a sign that she won’t settle for anything less. She is the poster girl for the Modern, Independent Woman.

Imagine if a man demanded equal treatment and asked that she buy him a new bass boat, and a two-week bear hunt in Siberia as a condition of marriage. This would be viewed as absurd, yet women do it every day. Modern Western Marriage is supposedly an equal partnership, isn’t it?

The injustices go from bad to worse when children enter the picture. If he can afford to carry the entire familial financial burden, the woman may now elect to stop working entirely. She will often make this decision regardless of how he may feel about it. The day she stops working is the day that all of her past financial baggage unequivocally gets tossed onto his shoulders. If the woman has racked up substantial credit card debts, these are now his payments to make; if the woman has not bothered to pay off her student loans, these become his responsibility; if she owes an enormous sum on her luxury car note, it is up to him to pay it off. Irony of ironies is that he is now paying for her degree and she isn’t even working anymore! Can he object? Can he say: “No Honey, you made your mess, and it should not be my job to clean it up. You knew that you wanted kids even before you met me, and you should have planned ahead.” No, he cannot. The payments can’t be deferred until she is once again able to continue repaying them herself, not if he wants to retain a clean credit rating to get a loan for their dream home. If he even suggested that she return to work to pay off some of her own debt load, he opens himself to criticisms of being an unsupportive husband and bad father who is endangering the welfare of his children. Now the noose tightens and the responsible husband compensates for the mother’s freewheeling and irresponsible past, and begins slowly to pay off her old debts. In the most twisted turn of events yet, the debt he is paying off may often be on credit cards used to finance Vacations, Hotel Rooms and Christmas gifts shared with previous husbands, boyfriends, fiancés and lovers. Caveat Emptor! This is the reward for today’s man who works hard, makes sacrifices, plans ahead, and invests wisely. By getting married to the typical Modern, Western Woman, the man is certainly susceptible to being railroaded into this situation, because it is completely acceptable within today’s gender roles and societal norms.

Marriage can mean career slavery

Anyone who says, “Slavery is dead” clearly has not contemplated the predicament of the average Western Husband, where a good paycheck can mean career slavery. Merriam-Webster’s English Dictionary defines slavery as “…(T)he state of a person who is a chattel (an item of tangible movable or immovable property) of another person.” If the husband earns enough to support both of them, he would be hard pressed to make an argument to preserve equality and have her continue working as he does. If the wife decides to stop working, the man who has been left holding the financial bag finds his options very limited. He may find himself working in a career that he hates, for abusive and exploitative management, excessively long hours, in a position that is physically dangerous or demanding, in an organisation that has no growth potential, far away from home. At this point, considering the corner he’s been painted into, he is often powerless to affect any positive, meaningful change in his own life. He may have been harbouring delusions that once his wife was able to return to work, he would be able to gain some flexibility to rectify some of the shortcomings in his own career. Perhaps changing careers or accepting a lower salary at a different firm in exchange for better hours, a shorter commute, or more fulfilling work. Nevertheless, the distinct reality is that he will continue to shoulder the financial responsibilities of his family alone. His reward for working hard and getting ahead is to become trapped into his career, and become a specialised beast of burden to an emotionally and financially dependent family. Does it really pay to work hard anymore and apply oneself to his full potential?

If she stops working, she may never work again.

There are many debates about the merits of a stay-at-home mother vs. a working mother. My goal here is to simply educate the prospective husband on frequently unseen risks he is taking on when he agrees to accept 100% of the financial burden to allow his wife to stay at home. An informed decision is less likely to be one that may be regretted later in the marriage.

Every parent will agree that staying home with children is backbreaking and often mind-numbing labour. Many new fathers may concede that it is much easier to go to work than to stay at home with several children. However, the greatest imbalance in efforts and contributions to a marriage can manifest once all of the children are of school age. The house is now empty from 8am-3pm. The wife has 7 hours to herself while the kids are at school and the husband is at work. After a few years of hard work at home, many wives may feel entitled to “kick back” and take it easy. The good, supportive husband, however, has worked those same years, has done his 50/50 of the housework, and is still working just as hard to support the family once the kids are in school. His workload has not diminished, and it may have even increased as her expectations rise. He is rarely afforded the same option to scale back his daytime efforts.

What motivation does the modern wife have to return to work? Very little. For several years now, the man’s salary has been enough to live on. Otherwise, she would have been working to make ends meet. Unless tight finances dictate that she must return to work, the husband really has little say in this matter. The wife can hide behind many different excuses in order not to work, despite having little to do from 8am-3pm. Among the commonest are:

“I’m busy with the housework”
It is easy to exaggerate the labours of daily housework. Yet how long does it take to throw clothes or dishes into the washer, and remove them later? Vacuuming can be done in 1 hour a week. Grocery shopping is another hour per week. A decent meal can be prepared in under an hour. Does all of this add up to 7 hours a day? The lie that housework is hard, time-consuming drudgery is no longer as persuasive as it may have been in the past, because in an age of later marriage, many men are already experienced in cooking, cleaning, and general housekeeping and know that it doesn’t take that much effort or time. Humourously, not every stay-at-home-wife even performs all of these duties.

“I can’t find a job”
She has been out of work too long, and therefore is unable to find a job. This may be true, but many men do not consider this risk when they agree to support her while she “temporarily” stops working. Hopefully now they will, and can make a more informed decision. Many wives may use this as a convenient scapegoat to stop looking for any job at all. The next section describes how this can be used against him in the event of divorce.

“It doesn’t pay for me to work”
In the short run, the expenses of returning to work such as gas, lunch, clothes and day care may not make it worthwhile for her to return to the workforce. This may be true, but does that justify her playing tennis, drinking lattes and ‘catching up with her friends’ while her husband toils away? Many couples may be too shortsighted to thoroughly and comprehensively think through this issue. Initially, the cost to benefits ratio may not be ideal, but her returning to work will improve her job skills and network of contacts and over time the return on investment will improve. More so than strolling through the local mall every afternoon and window-shopping for new window treatments. Over time, as her career gets back on track, and she becomes qualified for better jobs, her salary should also improve.

It should be duly noted that some working wives view their salary as “personal spending money”, and still expect the man to pay all or most of the bills. Western Women are often heard to claim that, “What’s mine is mine, and what’s his is ours.”

Even more unfair double standards that favour wives

Cheating
If a married man cheats, he’s the scum of the earth. He is a selfish jerk that has jeopardised the family unit, done his ‘thinking with his little head’, and disrespected his wife and children. However, when the woman cheats, she’s portrayed as the victim of an insensitive and inattentive husband. “Poor thing, he ignores her. It is for her empowerment, to boost her ego. She deserves it after bearing and rearing his children.” It’s good for her self-esteem. Worse, her cheating is portrayed as the man’s fault. If he works long hours to provide for her and the children, he works too much. If he is tired at the end of the day from 13 hours of manual labour, then he doesn’t compliment her as much as she wants. Into this vacuum of conflicting expectations steps the first man who “makes me feel like a Real Woman again…”. You read that correctly; the man who is scrambling to pay the mortgage and car payments and is working double shifts to pay for the consumer goods she demanded to have is now considered a negligent and emotionally abusive husband. The man who may be working two jobs to allow her to be home with her kids is now considered a candidate for Domestic Violence.

When a woman cheats, the first thing people ask is what he did, or more often, didn’t do, to drive her into the arms of another man.

When a man cheats, no one ever asks the same question.

When a woman cheats, the reaction will be; “Oh, poor thing, I guess her husband couldn’t get the job done in the bedroom”.

When a man cheats, no one ever stops to think; “Oh poor fellow, his wife was horrible in bed.”

Let’s not forget what happens if a man were to leave his wife for a younger woman. This will become fodder at the coffee shop for months. It is automatically assumed that he is a shallow sex maniac whose only motivation was to be with a younger woman. The possibility that his wife was of a generation of women who were taught to hate men and that younger women do not, that she was lazy, or a reckless spendthrift, or verbally or physically abusive, or grossly overweight, or an incompetent mother, are rarely considered and are often totally ignored. The myth is that the only reason a man leaves his wife is to be with a younger, more attractive woman. Never mind if she is a better match for him and a more supportive, nurturing mate.

Pre-Nups
If a man insists on a Pre-Nup, he is selfish and unromantic. However, when is the last time a woman who demanded a Pre-Nup was called “unromantic”? On the contrary, if a woman requests a Pre-Nup, she is being fiscally responsible, sensible and looking out for herself. (Note: If your fiancée refuses to sign a Pre-Nup, she has just shown her hand. Best to leave now.) Why is it that a woman can refuse a Pre-Nup, and it is accepted by society? In reality, the man should be outraged that she is after a legal contract, and not love.

What is astounding is the hypocrisy of the usual reaction towards Pre-Nups. Women can conveniently assert that a man is unromantic if he suggests a Pre-Nup. After all, how can a man pollute true love with the signing of legal paperwork! However, what is a marriage licence? Nothing more than a legal contract entered into between the man, woman and local and state government authorities. A woman does not seem to balk at signing this legal paperwork, which entitles her to at least half the assets a man has accumulated as well as half of everything he earns in the future, and obligates him to support her in perpetuity in the event of a breakup. Why aren’t men allowed to note how unromantic this contract is? The distraction of bridal magazines, place setting selection, floral arrangements, wedding dresses, receptions, wedding showers, and honeymoons have clouded the legal reality of what men are getting themselves into. Marriage is as much an unromantic legal contract as a prenuptial agreement is.

Initially, Pre-Nups were devised as a way to protect women. Nuptial agreements were popularised in the 19th century, mostly to protect heiresses from marrying men who were “out for their money”. Until the Married Women’s Property Act of 1848, under English Common Law, a woman’s property, upon marriage, was usually transferred to her husband.

“Stupid, Irresponsible” Men
Men are severely abused in our media, quite frankly. Just watch any TV commercial or sitcom and see how they portray men as idiots, dolts, or well intentioned, if bumbling, buffoons. If women were portrayed in commercials in the same fashion, “Women’s Organisations” would have a fit. If it weren’t for their wives in these shows and ads the men would be lost “animals”, unable to feed themselves or perform even the simplest of tasks. Other commercials make it appear that men act without thinking, only responding in an impulsive and irrational manner, and that the wife is the brains of the family. Even many women will agree that women often are the ones who act upon emotions and make judgments solely based up on emotional attachments and not logic or reason. Almost every “couples budgeting” article will portray the woman as the one who has to rein in the man’s childish spending, when in truth it is usually the woman who cannot control her expenditures.

Job Loss
If a husband loses his job and is having trouble finding work, the wife is completely and totally justified in threatening to leave him. However, can you imagine the reaction if a husband threatened to leave a wife who was in the exact same position? He would be vilified! If a man loses his job, the woman is justified in resenting the fact that the financial burden lies on her. He is no longer a ‘good provider’. When is a man allowed to resent this very same predicament? If a man is laid off and cares for the household and kids while the wife is working, he may be accused of not pulling his weight! Yet this is exactly the same situation that women demand more recognition for with each passing year! No matter what role the man plays, he loses!

Traditional Roles
It is perfectly acceptable for a woman to demand that a man make a certain salary, drive a certain car, live in a certain part of the city, have a certain job, have the ‘right’ manners, talk a certain way, walk a certain way, behave a certain way, have a degree from the ‘right’ University and dress in a stylish fashion, to be deemed “marriage material” and be able to provide her with the stability she feels she deserves. If a man demands his wife do the cooking and cleaning, he can now be labeled old fashioned and sexist. If he asks her to carry her weight financially, just as he does, he may be criticised as an inadequate provider. If a man insists that his wife honor the conjugal requirements of the marriage contract, he can and will be accused of sexual abuse, sexual assault or rape.

To add insult to injury, some women have gotten so pampered that they not only quit their jobs the day they find out they are pregnant, but they then go out and hire as many nannies, cooks, gardeners and pool boys as their husband can afford. Many Western Wives stay at home and hire someone else to rear the kids and clean up, while they drink lattes and go shopping all day with other pampered “stay-at-home” mothers. Does it pay to work hard and get ahead anymore, if this is how your hard-earned money is squandered?

The concept of the pampered wife is a relatively new one. Most of Western Civilisation was primarily an agricultural economy even up until the 1920’s and 1930’s. Western Wives contributed to the well being of the household by helping on the farm. A man needed a wife as an equal partner. It was not until the 1950’s that the first generation of Western Wives, first in The States and later in Europe, Australia and New Zealand, began to emerge as dead weight. Perhaps this coincides with the spiking of the divorce rate in The States, and later Europe and the other English Speaking Nations, and the rise of Feminism. Perhaps men have become tired of giving so much, while getting so little in exchange.

Divorce

43% of Western Marriages end in divorce, and 70% to 93% of these divorces are initiated by women.

All men should consult a legal professional before marrying, and understand the implications of divorce, because the chances are 1-in-3 that they will participate in one whether they like it, want it, inititate it or not.

Upon divorce, all assets accumulated during and prior to a marriage are subject to division. It has become, simply put. a licence to steal. Even if the woman has not worked in years, and has spent the intervening decade(s) shopping and lunching from 8am-3pm, she is entitled to half, or more, of everything the man worked for during the course of the marriage. Is this fair? How many people would ever agree to a job contract that stipulated that in the event of separation that one party would have to return 50% of the gross amount of everything in the pay packet? No one in his or her right mind would knowingly sign such an agreement. Yet Western Men unknowingly agree to the exact same insanity each time they sign their marriage contract!

“Assets accumulated prior to a marriage are exempt from a divorce”. In theory this is true, in practice it is not. If funds from an account are commingled or combined, it can become marital property. How do funds become commingled, or mixed? If even the smallest sum from a prior account is spent towards the marriage, all of that account will now be considered marital property. Buy your child a lollipop from your own account, and a good lawyer will take one-half of it for your ex-wife when you divorce. If a woman moves into a home the man owned prior to the marriage, it is not safe from divorce. If she so much as hangs up a sheet of wallpaper, puts up draperies, paints a wall, or installs a light fixture, the home is now classified as joint marital property, and is now subject to equal division. Worse actually, the man can be ejected from the home if she makes a false claim of domestic violence, physical abuse, verbal abuse or child abuse. Where is the equality and fairness?

Note: “Equal Division” is also somewhat of a misnomer. Often, she can get upwards of 70% – 90% of the assets, while the man gets the majority of the debts! She gets all of the benefits, he gets all of the responsibilities. This, of course, is just and right and is his reward for working so hard all of those years. He can afford it; she can’t because she was not working.

If you pamper your wife, it can be used against you

Imagine that in the spirit of generosity and kindness that you gave a beggar a hot meal. A generous act, indeed. Now imagine your reaction if that same beggar sues you in court. He is petitioning the judge to have you keep providing him with the food that you gave him willingly, freely, out of a big heart. The judge orders you to keep feeding the homeless man meals, indefinitely, forever, because he has become accustomed to eating those meals! This is categorically absurd, yet this happens to Western Men in divorce court every day. Instead of thanking you for paying her bills for all those years, what you get is the privilege of being legally forced to pay her bills forever!

After having children, many women demand to quit working and stay home. Before the kids came along, many of these same women may have been in careers they hated, working long hours, and enduring long commutes. It is the man’s generosity and dedication to his own career that enables her to walk away from her own career. During a marriage, a man with a stay-at-home wife might work long and grueling hours in order to support her. He will pay the mortgage, the property tax, grocery bill, phone bill, cable bill, Internet bill and electric bill. He also pays for her car, gas money, clothes, and vacations.

As one final slap in the face, the man may be punished for working hard enough to allow his wife to have the luxury of staying at home with the kids. As noted above, after the children are in school, the wife may enjoy a life of leisure and relaxation that is afforded to her by her man’s hard work. In the event of divorce, he will be legally obligated to support her for years or decades to come. Because she stopped working and led a life of leisure, the ex-husband is now responsible for supporting her, forever! History has a tendency of rewriting itself. Originally, a woman may have had a career that she may have hated, and was begging to leave. Western Women often “play” at work and career for a few years after University, and then when they near 30 or grow tired of the workplace they seek out a man to “take her away from all of this”, whatever “all of this” may be. In fact her desire to leave the world of work may have been her motivation to have kids in the first place. But now, in her eyes, and definitely her lawyers eyes, she “gave up” her career for her man and his kids. She is now “owed” all of her “lost income”. His gift of leisure and support to her has now become twisted and is viewed as her sacrifice! Another way in which the situation is turned against him is that he will be characterised as being threatened by her having her own career, and that he forced her to quit her “lucrative career” and stay home with the children. Her lawyer will now attempt to convince the judge that he wanted to “oppress” his wife and “keep her down”. Truthfully now, how many men do you personally know that are upset at having a wife that earns a good living? Many of these misleading stereotypes still run rampant in our society, and are routinely used to the woman’s advantage during a divorce. As a result of her not working, regardless of whether she was minding the home or not, she remains a financial liability.

Generous, caring men who spoil their wives should certainly think twice about how this generosity can later be used against them. The phrase used in divorce court is “She has become accustomed to a certain lifestyle”. A husband’s reward for spoiling his wife today is the legal obligation to spoil her indefinitely, forever. Buy her a luxury car today, and you may be obligated to buy her luxury cars after she leaves you for another man! Yet, imagine a husband that became accustomed to eating a home cooked dinner, or regular conjugal visits. Now imagine the courts obligate the ex-wife to continue cooking for him and sharing her bed with him and his new girlfriend each night, despite being divorced! Inconceivable, but it happens the other way around every day!

The ultimate insult, however, comes when the man loses half or more of his life’s assets even when she has decided to leave him. Yes, a wife can unilaterally decide to kick a man out of his own home, and have the courts force him to continue paying the bills, while she is sleeping with her new boyfriend in the very house the husband worked so long and hard to buy! She can, and often does, spend her alimony check on gifts for her new boyfriend or lover! How is it that the legal system supports a woman who feels entitled to this?

The risks are clear, yet what exactly are men getting out of marriage? Many times, the reasons men get married are unfounded.

Many of the traditional reasons why a man gets married are a myth.

“I won’t die alone”
Wrong. The simple fact is that one spouse WILL die alone. Visit the hospital and go to the terminally ill or cardiac departments. Few people have the time to sit with an ill relative all day and all night. Yes, you may get visitors, but they aren’t having the same thoughts as you are. You’re contemplating your mortality, while they’re wondering what food the hospital cafeteria offers. In the end, even with a loving and supportive family, most of us will leave this world alone, unless you both die simultaneously in an accident of some kind. Your spouse may die fifteen years before you, or you may be in the hospital for your last year. Ultimately, we all die alone. Married or not.

“I won’t grow old alone”
Not necessarily. A marriage can self-destruct at any time. Your partner may initiate divorce at age 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 or 70. Many married people end up in the same position (alone) as if they had never married at all. Now they enter their twilight years broke, as a result of being stripped of half or more of their life’s assets, losing half their retirement and pension funds, and being assessed alimony payments. Experiencing financial devastation from one divorce often may preclude a man from ever marrying again. This is a common observation of many middle-aged Western Women. Q: “Where are all the men?”. A: “He is broke from the divorce settlement, alimony and child support payments.” Thus these women don’t find him marriable, and he grows old alone and poor.

Men are led to believe that not marrying implies only one destiny; that of a solitary monk in a cave, a shunned loner. However, life is not so black and white. Not marrying does not mean you cannot continue to date or have meaningful relationships throughout your life. There are plenty of single people in all age brackets. A bad marriage can be the loneliest of institutions, because most of your emotional outlet and companionship is concentrated into one person who gives back nothing in emotion, affection or support. Young men in their 20’s and 30’s should be more aware of the alternatives that exist in life. They should be aware that marriage is a choice, and is not the only path life has to offer. An informed decision is less likely to be one that is later regretted.

“I’ll get regular sex”
Not from Modern, Western Women. Access to regular sex is the oldest and the most frequently cited reason to marry. Many men now know that Modern, Western Women frequently stop having sex after just a short time of being married. There are plenty of “sexless” marriages. Talk to a few married couples that are honest about their relationship. One or both partners may stop wanting sex after kids, or the sex may be as infrequent as once a year or once every six months, or the wife may only have sex when she wants the husband to buy her something, take her somewhere, or remodel the house. Read the honest opinions of married men on the Internet. Most Western, Married Men will have more sex with their Western Wives in the first six months of their marriage than they will in the next 40 years. Lastly, it remains to be seen whether sex with one exclusive partner for forty years or more is even a natural act, or just a man-made convention. In many Western Nations, the wife is no longer required to have sex with her husband. She can deny him at any time, for any length of time. She can, if she wishes, deny him sex forever and there is nothing that he can do about it. In fact, if he insists that she honor her end of the marriage contract by being available for sexual relations, he can and will be accused of, charged with, and arrested for Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault or Rape.

Marriage is hardly a guarantee of regular sex, as many people are led to believe.

“I’ll have someone to cook and clean for me”
Not necessarily. While a Modern, Western Woman is perfectly justified in quitting her job in the name of staying home with the kids, she can also demand that the husband pay for a cook, a maid, and a nanny. This leaves the man to earn the money, and leaves him to pay for maintenance of household and children, while the wife gets to play at being a housekeeper. Today’s woman is empowered by not performing the traditional housewife duties, regardless of whether she is working or not. If a husband asks that his wife perform traditional household duties because she is not working, he will often be labeled sexist, abusive or controlling, even if he is doing his “traditional role” of paying all the bills, providing for his family, and performing the traditional manly duties of vehicle repairs, maintaining the lawn and house upkeep.

“I have to be married to have kids”
Not anymore. Her ovaries do not physically need a contract at the government center in order to be fertilised by your sperm. Cro-Magnon man had children long before lawyers invented marriage contracts. Often, you do not need to be married in order to share health benefits. You do not need to be married to designate your partner on a life insurance policy. You do not need to be married to own a dream home together. It is ironic that responsible parents who raise a healthy family, but never actually sign marriage paperwork, get less respect than divorced parents or married parents who are ineffective, inattentive or incompetent.

-Having a lifelong, faithful, committed relationship has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Owning a beautiful dream home together has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Rearing healthy, happy, and successful children has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Building a family and life together has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Growing old together has nothing to do with being “married”.

In fact, recent changes in cohabitation, partner and marriage law have proven that the only tangible consequence of marriage is having a formalised separation process that usually requires the talents of an attorney.

You do need to be married in order to throw an extravagant four-hour party, and share the same last name.

You do need to be married in order to involve the state and government in your romantic affairs.

You do need to be married in order give away half of everything you own.

Besides that, marriage does nothing more than introduce lawyers and social workers into your life. These are people that otherwise would have nothing to do with your life or your relationship.

Men need to stop and ask themselves:

“Why exactly am I getting married? What exactly does marriage mean to me in today’s world? What is the benefit to me to get married?”

It is no longer a lifelong commitment, because it can be reversed overnight on her unilateral whim.

Marriage was originally created as a way for families to merge land, property, political power and influence; perhaps people should return to viewing it as just that and nothing more. The rest of it is fake modern TV Fantasy and Tabloid Gossip and Hype polluting the minds of today’s impressionable youth, and a way to keep the multi-billion-per-year wedding industry chugging along. Perhaps the only criteria should be to ask oneself: “How excited am I for us to merge our finances and assets?” When all the fluff and hype are boiled away, that may be the only remaining reality. Spend a day in divorce court, and you’ll see exactly what is real and tangible and lasting about marriage. You’ll see women who signed the marriage contract under romantic pretenses who are now expert laymen attorneys who can cite case law. Bouquet throwing ex-brides now embroiled in warfare to get everything that is coming to them and more! The rest are myths, lies, bold unsubstantiated promises, and maybes. “For better or for worse…”

The Western Divorce rate is 43%. It is higher in some parts of the world such as California, Great Britain and Australia. In Japan the recent change in pension law may have many pensioners out on the street. In India new changes to dowry law have men being threatened by their wives. Consider the number of people who are in a bad marriage, but elect to stay; Men who don’t want to lose 50%, women who know they can’t support themselves alone. Next, think of how many more couples stay together just for the sake of the kids. Of these “forced marriages”, consider how many of these marriages involve infidelity, no sex, or sleeping in separate beds or separate rooms. I estimate the percentage of happy and monogamous marriages to be under 5%. Are these odds you would take in a business venture, investment or loan? Most of the risk-averse population would not. Yet they seek this exception to the rule everyday through marriage.

Written by dontmarry

November 21, 2008 at 4:44 pm

4,390 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Every woman in Canada is a victim of rape every day. They can’t board a bus, get in a car, pick up a book (like that’s going to happen), or browse the internet without getting bent over the sink by a ravenous white male lurking behind them. The true rape rate is 10,000% – South Africa has nothing on the Canuck. Russian occupation of Berlin circa 1945? Mongol or Viking invasions? Pikers. The ancient world has nothing compared to Toronto today. Why you can’t walk down the street without tripping over two or three rapes in progress. It often makes me miss my bus as being an evil white man I can’t resist watching the foul proceedings. White men just can’t resist ugly, man jawed, morbidly obese, smelly, hairy, mustache thick land whales who trundle around in mobility scooters. Its true – raping them can be a chore as it is often times difficult to find the correct fold in which to ‘insert the patriarchy’ but somehow it is managed.

    So the next time you visit Toronto be sure to shed a tear for the billions of daily rape victims you are constantly seeing bellyaching about all the forms of oppression they endure as they sip their overpriced milkshakes in Starbucks. No one has ever had it worse than them.

    Remo

    May 2, 2015 at 1:55 am

    • what the fuck

      sud

      May 2, 2015 at 5:10 pm

    • Violence Against Women

      The common claim that males are universally more aggressive is not very accurate because men and women aggress in different ways. While male aggression almost always involves direct—often physical—confrontations, female aggression is typically indirect (also called “relational aggression” or “social aggression”) and usually involves attacking the physical appearance of one’s rivals, spreading rumours about her sexual infidelity and exclusionary tactics.[64][65][66][67]

      However, this form of aggression can escalate into cruel and violent crimes. This is what is seen in acid attacks, which were common female crimes in the United States and in Europe: acid served as the ultimate weapon to destroy the beauty of one’s sexual rivals.[68] There are also many cases known of women who killed wives in order to marry the husbands.[69] As previously mentioned in the first section of this article, the extreme cruelty towards domestic servants and slaves by women mistresses is a common theme throughout history. Here are some excerpts from an article from the 19th century discussing women’s violence against other women:

      “Woman sometimes displays the same amount of ingenuity in tormenting the helpless creatures who may be in her power. I do not know, says Bourgeval, any one more perfidious, immoral or perverse than the New Caledonian woman. In certain portions of Australia women are mortal foes to each other. When the men wish to punish any one of them, they turn her over to her companions, who indict upon her horrible tortures. Sitting on her body, they cut her flesh with sharpened stones.

      In Tasmania, as among the ancient Saxons, the unfaithful wife was punished by her companions; she was not killed, but she was tortured for a long time with sharp-pointed stones or knives, in all parts of her body.

      Women have often been cruel mistresses to their slaves. A lady in Guiana, being envious of a very handsome mulatto slave, had her branded on the mouth, cheek and forehead. In the case of another slave, who was also very beautiful, she had the tendon of Achilles cut, thus causing her to become a deformed and crippled monster.

      It is a notorious fact that Roman and Greek ladies often inflict most terrible punishments on their slaves, and that it was more particularly toward the female slaves, the ancilla, that the cruelty of their mistresses was shown.

      The Roman Indies, if, while they were having their hair dressed, they were vexed with their attendants, used to thrust pins into their arms and breasts. Darwin relates that at Rio Janeiro, an old lady possessed a kind of a thumbscrew which she had had made expressly to crush the fingers of her slaves.”

      Violence by proxy plays a key role in female–female violence as well. In most cases, their proxies are husbands or other male relatives and members of the community. At other times, they are daughters, other female relatives or acquaintances.[70] By accusing their rivals of violating social conduct, women instigate others to take action. Extreme examples can be found in the witch-hunts of the Middle Ages. Alleged witches were accused mainly by other women—often their sexual rivals.[71][72][73][74][75] The first Englishwoman tried under the Elizabethan statute was Elizabeth Lowys who was accused mainly by women.[76] The last witch to stand trial was Jane Wenham who was accused by another woman and herself implicated three other women.[77][78]

      DV research into LGBT populations can also offer us insight into female–female aggression. Women who identify themselves as homosexual constitute around 2% of the population[79] and so early researchers assumed that DV was not a significant problem among them. However, recent research has found that lesbian couples have the highest rates of DV—two-fold to three-fold higher compared to heterosexual couples.[80][81] The incidence of sexual abuse—especially violent sexual assault—is also substantially higher among lesbian couples.[82]

      Unfortunately, violence by women against other women is the most overlooked category in research.

      http://www.sciencevsfeminism.com/the-myth-of-oppression/violence-by-women/a-historical-review/

      Kirk

      May 25, 2015 at 11:12 pm

  2. Women in Toronto are victimized and sexually harassed on the streets every day. The Canadian government should increase the age of consent from 16 to 25 years of age to prevent child molesters and sexual predators from harming women in Toronto.

    Lilly

    May 3, 2015 at 2:02 am

    • Boys in the Toronto classrooms are victimized and sexually molested by old female teachers every day. The Canadian courts should sentence these dirty old women to life imprisonment so as to prevent these child molesters and sexual predators from harming boys in Toronto. Just because these women can’t attract men doesn’t mean that they have the right to victimize boys.

      Cynthia (Lily's Sister who thinks Lily is a Stupid, Sick Bitch)

      May 3, 2015 at 3:31 am

    • You think raising the consent from 16 to 25 years of age will eliminate some of the young competition so that an old cow like you will find a man? Not a chance. Since you like women’s vaginas and anuses so much, stick to lesbian porn.

      Larry

      May 3, 2015 at 3:33 am

      • THE AGE OF CONSENT SHOULD BE RAISED TO 30. OUR DAUGHTERS ARE NOT SEXUAL OBJECTS FOR YOUR PLEASURE.

        ASHANTI LOPEZ

        May 8, 2015 at 9:35 am

        • GO TELL THE FEMINISTS TO RAISE THE AGE OF CONSENT FOR FEMALES TO 30.

          STOP TRYING TO ELIMINATE YOUNG WOMEN FROM THE COMPETITION. EVEN IF THEY DID RAISE THE AGE OF CONSENT FOR FEMALES TO 30 NO DECENT MAN WOULD WANT A BITTER, UGLY, SICK, MISANDRIST, OLD HAG LIKE YOU.

          OUR UNDER-AGED SONS ARE NOT SEXUAL OBJECTS FOR YOUR PLEASURE, MARY.

          ASSAD LOPEZ

          May 8, 2015 at 12:01 pm

          • The age of consent will be increased to 30. Several states have already considered to increase the age of consent from 18 to 21 to prevent sex offenders from preying on younger women.

            It’s a matter of time that the worldwide age of consent will be 21 at least and men will learn not to dump their wives for younger women because fucking a 21 year old woman is pedophilia

            Mariah Braxton

            May 8, 2015 at 12:57 pm

            • No it won’t. Several states have considered raising the age of consent to 18. Go tell the National Organization for Women to raise the age of consent for females. See their reaction.

              If the worldwide age of consent will be 21 then more female pedophiles will go to jail. Older women (called cougars) who fuck younger men will go to jail. You won’t have that problem because you are too old, ugly and mentally ill to be fucked. You just want the younger women out of the way. And women dump their husbands for younger men. Raise the age of consent so they will be arrested. More women are being arrested for statutory rape.

              What did you do to that black boy, pedophile?

              Mario Braxton

              May 8, 2015 at 9:43 pm

              • Women today are unhappy bitches!
                My wife has taken me for a fool by wanting space and her goofy friend helps her by letting her house sit for her while she runs off with her domineering husband down to their other house. She is telling my wife to leave me. Meanwhile she kisses her lazy ass husbands ass by waiting on him hand and foot and tells my wife to leave me!
                I help clean house bring her flowers and tell her how beautiful she is not to mention give her space and not control her in anyway.

                This woman is fucking up my marriage because she is jealous and conniving! My wife is stupid enough to listen to this nut case! My wife had nothing when I met her and I sold my home so she could own her own home and have a good life.

                My wife got bored and began texting younger men and talking to them on her cell phone. She is almost 60 overweight and is not the beauty she once was. I am filing for divorce and working on a plan to buy her out on the house. All my friends and her sisters think she has gone off the deep end! She has cut all contact from her sisters.
                I realize now that she is doing me a favor.

                I am 58 in great shape and work out almost everyday. I have a great income and stand to inherite a nice amount of money. I keep asking myself what is wrong with women today? I have heard this happening quite a bit as I know of at least 5 other guys that are going through this.
                What is wrong with women today?
                I will never get married again!!!

                Don

                May 8, 2015 at 11:21 pm

            • You are Mary Gowans.

              Mario Braxton

              May 8, 2015 at 9:44 pm

            • CALL THE POLICE! THERE IS A FEMALE PERVERT JUSTIFYING STATUTORY RAPE HERE. SHE CLAIMS THAT MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TO STOP PEDOPHILIA AND THAT SHE IS DOING IT NOW! SHE IS ADVOCATING STATUTORY RAPE!

              Call the Police

              May 8, 2015 at 9:51 pm

        • http://www.sciencevsfeminism.com/the-myth-of-oppression/violence-by-women/a-historical-review/

          Violence Against Women

          The common claim that males are universally more aggressive is not very accurate because men and women aggress in different ways. While male aggression almost always involves direct—often physical—confrontations, female aggression is typically indirect (also called “relational aggression” or “social aggression”) and usually involves attacking the physical appearance of one’s rivals, spreading rumours about her sexual infidelity and exclusionary tactics.[64][65][66][67]

          However, this form of aggression can escalate into cruel and violent crimes. This is what is seen in acid attacks, which were common female crimes in the United States and in Europe: acid served as the ultimate weapon to destroy the beauty of one’s sexual rivals.[68] There are also many cases known of women who killed wives in order to marry the husbands.[69] As previously mentioned in the first section of this article, the extreme cruelty towards domestic servants and slaves by women mistresses is a common theme throughout history. Here are some excerpts from an article from the 19th century discussing women’s violence against other women:

          “Woman sometimes displays the same amount of ingenuity in tormenting the helpless creatures who may be in her power. I do not know, says Bourgeval, any one more perfidious, immoral or perverse than the New Caledonian woman. In certain portions of Australia women are mortal foes to each other. When the men wish to punish any one of them, they turn her over to her companions, who indict upon her horrible tortures. Sitting on her body, they cut her flesh with sharpened stones.

          In Tasmania, as among the ancient Saxons, the unfaithful wife was punished by her companions; she was not killed, but she was tortured for a long time with sharp-pointed stones or knives, in all parts of her body.

          Women have often been cruel mistresses to their slaves. A lady in Guiana, being envious of a very handsome mulatto slave, had her branded on the mouth, cheek and forehead. In the case of another slave, who was also very beautiful, she had the tendon of Achilles cut, thus causing her to become a deformed and crippled monster.

          It is a notorious fact that Roman and Greek ladies often inflict most terrible punishments on their slaves, and that it was more particularly toward the female slaves, the ancilla, that the cruelty of their mistresses was shown.

          The Roman Indies, if, while they were having their hair dressed, they were vexed with their attendants, used to thrust pins into their arms and breasts. Darwin relates that at Rio Janeiro, an old lady possessed a kind of a thumbscrew which she had had made expressly to crush the fingers of her slaves.”

          Violence by proxy plays a key role in female–female violence as well. In most cases, their proxies are husbands or other male relatives and members of the community. At other times, they are daughters, other female relatives or acquaintances.[70] By accusing their rivals of violating social conduct, women instigate others to take action. Extreme examples can be found in the witch-hunts of the Middle Ages. Alleged witches were accused mainly by other women—often their sexual rivals.[71][72][73][74][75] The first Englishwoman tried under the Elizabethan statute was Elizabeth Lowys who was accused mainly by women.[76] The last witch to stand trial was Jane Wenham who was accused by another woman and herself implicated three other women.[77][78]

          DV research into LGBT populations can also offer us insight into female–female aggression. Women who identify themselves as homosexual constitute around 2% of the population[79] and so early researchers assumed that DV was not a significant problem among them. However, recent research has found that lesbian couples have the highest rates of DV—two-fold to three-fold higher compared to heterosexual couples.[80][81] The incidence of sexual abuse—especially violent sexual assault—is also substantially higher among lesbian couples.[82]

          Unfortunately, violence by women against other women is the most overlooked category in research.

          Kirk

          May 25, 2015 at 11:14 pm

  3. Mary Gowans is an innocent woman. Her husband filed for divorce because he couldn’t handle a strong confident woman.

    The 14 year old male student should have been taught not to view his female teachers as sexual objects. A female teacher’s breasts and vagina strip are not sexual unless you perverts want to think about it as sexual organs.

    Denise Scott

    May 6, 2015 at 1:05 pm

    • Mary Gowans is a child-molesting pervert. Her husband filed for divorce because he doesn’t want to be married to a child molester. Who knows what she did to her kids?

      The 14-year-old boy is a victim. She made him a sexual object for her own sick pleasure. And stop posting crap about women’s breasts and vaginas. We know you are masturbating to your pedophile, lesbian fantasies.

      Dennis Scot

      May 6, 2015 at 6:26 pm

    • CALL THE POLICE! THERE IS A FEMALE PERVERT JUSTIFYING STATUTORY RAPE HERE. SHE CLAIMS THAT MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TO STOP PEDOPHILIA AND THAT SHE IS DOING IT NOW! SHE IS ADVOCATING STATUTORY RAPE!

      Call the Police

      May 8, 2015 at 9:53 pm

    • References

      1.UHoM. Violence by Women: Torture. ↲

      2.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Mothers. ↲

      3.Unknown History of Misandry. (2014) Serial Killer Moms & Step-Moms Who Murdered Children Aged 2 Years Or Older. Retrieved 2014 from http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2014/12/serial-killer-moms-step-moms-owho.html. ↲

      4.UHoM. Violence by Women: Revenge. ↲

      5.UHoM. Violence by Women: Murder Coaching Mothers. ↲

      6.UHoM. Violence by Women: Step-Mothers. ↲

      7.UHoM. Violence by Women: Torture. ↲

      8.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: “Baby Farmers”. ↲

      9.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Girls. ↲

      10.Unknown History of Misandry. (2012) Ogresses: Female Serial Killers of the Children of Others. Retrieved 2014 from http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2012/11/ogresses-female-serial-killers-of.html. ↲

      11.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Cannibals. ↲

      12.Cockburn JS. (1977) Crime in England 1550–1800, p. 57. London: Meuthen. ↲

      13.Beattie JM. (1975) The criminality of women in eighteenth century England. Journal of Social History, 8:80–116. ↲

      14.UHoM. Violence by Women: Torture. ↲

      15.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Aristocrats (Women in Power). ↲

      16.Science Vs. Feminism. (2014) Child Abuse: 14 Years of Data from DHHS (1999–2012). ↲

      17.Brayford J. (2012) Female sexual offending: An impermissible crime. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 14(3):212–224. ↲

      18.Solis OL & Benedek EP. (2012) Female sexual offenders in the educational system: A brief overview. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 76(2):172–188. ↲

      19.Andersson N & Ho-Foster A. (2008) 13,915 reasons for equity in sexual offences legislation: A national school-based survey in South Africa. International Journal for Equity in Health, 720. ↲

      20.Saewyc EM. (2008) It’s not what you think: Sexually exploited youth in British Columbia. University of British Columbia School of Nursing. ↲

      21.Boroughs DS. (2004) Female sexual abusers of children. Children and Youth Services Review. 26(5):481–487. ↲

      22.Department of Education. (2004). Educator sexual misconduct: A synthesis of existing literature. Office of the Undersecretary, United States. ↲

      23.Elliot M. (1998) Female Sexual Abuse of Children: The Ultimate Taboo. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Inc. ↲

      24.Ingram M. (1984) Ridings, rough music and the “reform of popular culture” in early modern England. Past and Present, 105:79–11. ↲

      25.Bates F. (1981) A plea for the battered husband. Family Law, 11:92–94. ↲

      26.Cockburn JS, 1977, pp. 49–71. ↲

      27.Davis NZ (1971). The reasons of misrule: Youth groups and charivaris in sixteenth century France. Past and Present, 50:41–75. ↲

      28.Barrett CRB. (1895) Riding Skimmington and Riding the Stang. Journal of the British Archeological Association, 1:58–68. ↲

      29.George MJ. (2002) Skimmington Revisited. Journal of Men’s Studies, 10(2):111–127. ↲

      30.Ingram M, 1984. ↲

      31.Rogers M. (1991) Montacute House (Somerset). The National Trust, UK. ↲

      32.Saenger G. (1963) “Male and female relationships in American comic strips,” In White DM & Abel R (Eds.) The funnies, an American idiom, pp. 219–231. Illinois: The Free Press. ↲

      33.Firor RA. (1968) Folkways in Thomas Hardy. New York: Russell and Russell. ↲

      34.UHoM. Domestic Violence by Women (19th–20th Century). ↲

      35.UHoM. Violence by Women: “Acid Queens”. ↲

      36.UHoM. Violence by Women: Torture. ↲

      37.UHoM. The Origin of Sati (or Suttee) in India. ↲

      38.Chambers W & Chambers R. (1890) Chambers’s Journal of Popular Literature, Science and Arts, pp. 236–238. Harvard University. ↲

      39.Unknown History of Misandry. (2011) Husband-Killing Syndicates. Retrieved 2014 from http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2011/09/husband-killing-syndicates.html. ↲

      40.UHoM. Husbandicide (1889). ↲

      41.Cockburn JS, 1977, p. 57. ↲

      42.Beattie JM, 1975. ↲

      43.UHoM. Husbandicide (1889). ↲

      44.UHoM. Why Are So Many Wives Killing Their Husbands? (1911). ↲

      45.UHoM. Chicago’s Reign of Terror… (1913). ↲

      46.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: “Black Widows”. ↲

      47.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Cannibals. ↲

      48.UHoM. Violence by Women: Murder Coaching Mothers. ↲

      49.UHoM. Female Serial Killers: Aristocrats (Women in Power). ↲

      50.Steinmetz SK. (1977-78) The Battered Husband Syndrome. Victimology, 2:499–509. ↲

      51.George MJ. (2003) Invisible touch. Aggression & Violent Behaviour, 8. ↲

      52.Fiebert MS. (2014) References examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners: An updated annotated bibliography. Sexuality & Culture, 18(2):405–467. ↲

      53.Science Vs. Feminism. (2014) Domestic Violence: Statistics Worldwide. ↲

      54.Cross CP, Tee W & Campbell A. (2011) Gender symmetry in intimate aggression: an effect of intimacy or target sex? Aggressive Behavior, 37(3):268–277. ↲

      55.Cross CP & Campbell A. (2012) The effect of intimacy and target sex on direct aggression: Further evidence. Aggressive Behavior, 38:272–280 ↲

      56.Bates EA, Graham-Kevan N & Archer J. (2014) Testing predictions from the male control theory of men’s partner violence. Aggressive Behavior, 40(1):42–55. ↲

      57.McLeod M. (1984) Women against men: An examination of domestic violence based on an analysis of official data and national victimization data. Justice Quarterly, 1:185. ↲

      58.Stets JE & Straus MA. (1989) “Gender differences in reporting of marital violence and its medical and psychological consequences,” In Straus MA & Gelles R (Eds.) Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families, pp. 151–166. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. ↲

      59.Lupri E. (1990) Harmonie und Aggression: Über die Dialektik Ehelicher Gewalt. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 42(3):479–501. ↲

      60.Magdol L, et al. (1997) Gender differences in partner violence in a birth cohort of 21 year olds: Bridging the gap between clinical and epidemiological approaches. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65:68–78. ↲

      61.Felson RB & Cares AC. (2005) Gender and the seriousness of assaults on intimate partners and other victims. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5):1182–1195. ↲

      62.Davis RL. (2010) Domestic violence-related deaths. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 2(2):44–52. ↲

      63.Stemple L & Meyer IH. (2014) The sexual victimization of men in America: new data challenge old assumptions. American Journal of Public Health, 104(6):e19–26. ↲

      64.Österman K, et al. (1998) Cross-cultural evidence of female indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 24:1–8. ↲

      65.Björkqvist K. (1994) Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression: a review of recent research. Sex Roles, 30:177–188. ↲

      66.Björkqvist K, et al. (1992) Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 18:117–127. ↲

      67.Lagerspetz KMJ, et al. (1988) Is indirect aggression typical of females? Gender differences in aggressiveness in 11- to 12-year-old children. Aggressive Behavior, 14:403–414. ↲

      68.UHoM. Violence by Women: “Acid Queens”. ↲

      69.Unknown History of Misandry. (2014) Wife in the Way: Female Serial Killers Who Eliminate a Wife to Marry a Husband. Retrieved 2014 from http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2014/10/wife-in-way-female-serial-killers-who.html. ↲

      70.UHoM. Violence by Women: Murder Coaching Mothers. ↲

      71.van Creveld M. (2013) “The Great Witch Hunt,” In The Privileged Sex, chapter 1.3. CreateSpace Publishing. ↲

      72.MacFarlane A. (2002) Witchcraft in Tudor and Stuart England, p. 160. New York: Routledge. ↲

      73.Willis D. (1995) Malevolent Nurture: Witch-Hunting and Maternal Power in Early Modern England, pp. 13, 97. Cornell University Press. ↲

      74.de Waardt H. (1991) “At bottom a family affair: Feuds and witchcraft in Nijkerk in 1550,” In Gijswijt-Hofstra M & Frijhoff W (Eds.) Witchcraft in the Netherlands: From the fourteenth to the twentieth century, p. 137. Universitaire Pers Rotterdam. ↲

      75.Geis G. (1992) “Lord Hale, witches and rape,” In Levack BD (Ed.) Witchcraft in England, pp. 54–57. New York: Garland. ↲

      76.Young AR. (1992) “Elizabeth Lowys: Witch and social victim, 1564,” In Levack BD (Ed.) Witchcraft in England, pp. 79–86. New York: Garland ↲

      77.Bostridge I. (1997) Witchcraft and its Transformations c. 1650–1750, pp. 132–134. Oxford University Press. ↲

      78.Guskin PJ. (1992) “The context of Witchcraft: The case of Jane Wenham,” In Levack BD (Ed.) Witchcraft in England, pp. 94–117. New York: Garland. ↲

      79.Ward BW, et al. (2014) Sexual orientation and health among U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey 2013. Division of Health Interview Statistics, National Health Statistics Reports, 77. ↲

      80.West CM. (2012) Partner abuse in ethnic minority and gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender populations. Partner Abuse, 3(3):336–357. ↲

      81.West CM. (2012) [Tables & summary] Partner abuse in ethnic minority and gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender populations. Partner Abuse, 3(3):1–8. ↲

      82.Girshick LB. (2002) Woman-to-Woman Sexual Violence: Does She Call It Rape? Northeastern.

      Kirk

      May 25, 2015 at 11:17 pm

  4. Do you have any evidence that Mary Gowans is a child molester? You should be incarcerated for defamatory libel.

    Female teachers in Toronto should be treated as human beings and not as sexual objects you friggin perv’

    Marilyn Munroe

    May 7, 2015 at 11:07 am

    • Do you have any evidence that the 14-year-old boy is a sexual aggressor? You should be incarcerated for defamatory libel and investigated for possible acts of child molestation. You talk like a child molestor does. You mentioned young boys and vaginas and breasts so many times over and over again. That is your fetish.

      Young boys in Toronto should be treated as human beings and not as sexual objects you friggin, man-hating pedophile. You realize that since you will never have a son, you want to molest young boys.

      Mario Monroe

      May 7, 2015 at 1:31 pm

  5. Mary Gowans took the risk to prevent pedophilia by turning his attention away from his Grade 7 peers. Girls should not be having relationships and sex until they are 30, and for this reason the age of consent should be raised higher to the 25-30 age range to prevent men from sexually abusing our daughters.

    The male student would have committed statutory rape when he had sex with a female under the age of 18 years, therefore he is a pedophile.

    ASHANTI LOPEZ

    May 8, 2015 at 9:34 am

    • Mary Gowans should call the police to prevent pedophilia, not engage in it herself. You have the perverted reasoning of a pedophile. Are you Mary Gowans?

      Go tell the feminists that women shouldn’t be having sex until they are 30. Go propose a law that prevents women from having sex until they are 30. Then go tell mothers that adult women should be allowed to have sex with under-aged boys in order to prevent pedophilia. Go propose a law that allows adult women to have sex with under-aged boys.

      Let’s see the reaction you will get. You are clearly a misandrist pedophile who wants to abuse under-aged males. You are clearly a statutory rapist.

      ASSAD LOPEZ

      May 8, 2015 at 11:57 am

    • CALL THE POLICE! THERE IS A FEMALE PERVERT JUSTIFYING STATUTORY RAPE HERE. SHE CLAIMS THAT MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TO STOP PEDOPHILIA AND THAT SHE IS DOING IT NOW! SHE IS ADVOCATING STATUTORY RAPE!

      Call the Police

      May 8, 2015 at 9:47 pm

    • CALL THE POLICE! THERE IS A FEMALE PERVERT JUSTIFYING STATUTORY RAPE HERE. SHE CLAIMS THAT MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TO STOP PEDOPHILIA AND THAT SHE IS DOING IT NOW! SHE IS ADVOCATING STATUTORY RAPE! SHE IS CALLING THE UNDER-AGED BOY WHO MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A PEDOPHILE! HOW DOES SHE KNOW WHAT MARY GOWANS WAS DOING? CALL THE POLICE!

      Call the Police

      May 8, 2015 at 9:50 pm

    • What flavour of crack cocaine are you smoking honey?

      John Galt

      May 9, 2015 at 6:56 am

      • My guess would be bitter spinster lurker flavor.She already admitted this is “lolz” for her and to using TOR browser to mask her IP address, and when it was pointed out that TOR browser is a favorite among pedophiles, well, the math doesn’t lie.

        Look, lurker/Mary Gowans/whatever dumbass name you are going by:

        We know you think you are getting delicious revenge on us for somehow making men not want to marry you but no. It REALLY IS your own damn fault you haven’t found prince rich’n’charming to buy you expensive shit as tokens of undying love.

        Perhaps if you found something more constructive to do with your life than sit around posting anonymously pretending to be a wanna-be demigoddess pedophile infatuated with her own asshole, breasts, and underwear, you might actually stand a chance in the actual dating world.

        But I guess we all know THAT ain’t happening, don’t we?

        Little Big Dave

        May 21, 2015 at 4:55 pm

  6. Mary Gowans prevented the 15 year old male student from statutory raping his 15 and 16 year old female peers.

    The age of consent in Canada should be increased from 16 to 30. Men should learn not to dump their wives for younger women.

    Mary Gowans is doing her best to prevent 15 year old male pedophiles from molesting our teenage daughters. What are you doing to stop teenage males from committing crimes?

    Mariah Braxton

    May 8, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    • You are a child molestor, Mary. You don’t rape a 15-year-old male student to prevent statutory rape. That is how a sex criminal tries to justify her own sick actions.

      Men can dump their wives if they feel like it. Women are the ones who file for divorce most of the time. Women shouldn’t get alimony and full custody of the kids.

      Sick female pedophiles should be banned from having sex with anyone ever again. Tell the feminists to raise the age of consent for women to age 30. I dare you.

      What do you mean Mary Gowans is doing her best to prevent 15 year old male pedophiles from molesting teenage daughters? Are you Mary? Are you having sex with 15 year old males? What crimes are you committing now? Is that why you are using TOR? What are you doing right now? What are you doing to stop female molesters from raping under-aged males? You will be monitored.

      Mario Braxton

      May 8, 2015 at 9:36 pm

    • CALL THE POLICE! THERE IS A FEMALE PERVERT JUSTIFYING STATUTORY RAPE HERE. SHE CLAIMS THAT MARY GOWANS HAD SEX WITH A 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TO STOP PEDOPHILIA AND THAT SHE IS DOING IT NOW! SHE IS ADVOCATING STATUTORY RAPE! SHE MAY BE DOING IT NOW!

      Call the Police

      May 8, 2015 at 9:48 pm

    • THIS HAS GONE TOO FAR. THE POLICE ARE BEING CALLED.

      CONCERNED CITIZEN

      May 8, 2015 at 9:54 pm

  7. So any way….

    To hopefully add to the article here are a few ‘recent’ developments that may be of interest.

    1. The Cohabitation rights bill is currently going through it’s second reading in the house of Lords (UK) – it basically formalizes the notion of the common law wife. It essentially states that if you live with a woman for 2 years and she can show she’s paid a few bills then she is your wife and entitled to ‘divorce’ you in the same manner, take half your assets and force you to pay ‘maintenance’ or ‘alimony’ as it’s called in the US. In Canada I believe the live-in term is 6 months and it will undoubtedly come down here too. Also the woman doesn’t have to have a job, nor any kids to qualify which essentiallly makes her a free loader.

    2. At the beginning of the year the head of the CPS(Criminal prosecution service), a woman named Alison Saunders declared that it is now the practice of the UK police to arrest without evidence any man accused of rape. In other words men are guilty until proven innocent. Combined with a new law introduced last year on domestic violence that allows a man to be removed from his own home for up to a month with no evidence this essentially makes a woman’s accusation of pretty much anything – guilt until proven otherwise. A little known historical fact about the UK is that the police reported way back in 1985 that the incidence of ‘no crime’ or false rape reporting was 45%, that is until the home office(uk govt) refused to allow them to report on any case where the woman had not explicitly admitted that she had lied; which is the same as saying you can only arrest a rapist who admits they did it. This directive has been in effect since then and still is today. To top it all off in an ‘affirmative-consent esque’ way rape crisis scotland consider any woman who has had ANY alcohol in her system to be incapable of consent – no doubt the UK will follow suit.

    3. Harriet Harmon, the woman who took over £70,000 from a paedophile organisation name PIE who wanted to lower the age of consent to 10 years old is now the temporary leader of the second largest political party in the U.K (Labour). Not only did she not loose her job but she is also noted as saying that ‘fathers should not necesarrily be considered a part of the family unit’. She is a feminist ‘extraordinaire’, hell bent on completely destroying any worthwhile social or legal commitment between men and women and just like Nicola Sturgeon of the Scottish SNP party was undoubtedly voted in by women

    4.Theresa May, Conservative home secretary and head of ‘women’s issues’ wants laws against ‘coercive and controlling behaviour’ which essentially translates into ‘now you can you not only not defend yourself from an abusive wife swinging a butcher knife but you can’t shout at her either’. She also is in support of blanket internet surveillance of every person in the country.

    next, an update on the state of sports, ‘equality’ at work media outright lies and the blocking of the male pill.

    John.

    John Galt

    May 9, 2015 at 7:25 am

    • Thanks for the update, John.

      Here is a story from the U.S.:

      Tampa Bay Times Bizarre Florida Sex change does not alter alimony payments, judge says Times Editor Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:08pm

      A Seminole man must continue to pay $1,250 per month in alimony despite the fact that his ex-wife is now a man, Tampa Bay’s 10 reports. Larry Roach’s 18-year marriage to a woman named Julia fell apart when she began injecting testosterone and became Julio. Now Roach says he hates pay day. “It goes for paying medication for steroids, testosterone, maintaining a beard, mustache and a penis,” he said. He took his case to court, but a judge ruled that a sex change does not mean a pay change. [Last modified: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:01am]

      So men now have to pay for their ex-wives’ sex changes.

      Kirk

      May 9, 2015 at 1:04 pm

    • And another story from the U.S.:

      Lee Kallett of St. Pete Beach, FL – Pays $4K in permanent alimony to lesbian ex-wife (www.youtube.com This is Lee Kallett and Elvina Kallett). He pays permanent alimony to a woman who left the marriage because she chose to live as a lesbian.

      Kirk

      May 9, 2015 at 1:11 pm

      • Here’s a quick summary list I thought might be good. Can anyone add to it?.

        —Don’t marry
        —Don’t Cohabit
        —Campaign for a male pill/contraceptive and failing that go the way of Japan/MGTOW (which essentially means casual sex, with less risk of pregnancy i.e safe sex/casual sex and no relationships or bachelorhood.
        —Protect yourself from allegation when being left alone with women/children(i.e don’t be)
        —If you want children use a surrogate or adopt them.
        —Never date in work (risks of sexual harassment claims)
        —Refuse to serve in the military(sexist conscription laws)
        —Sue companies who promote based on sex and positive discrimination (so called ‘equality’ laws).
        —For those of us already married, become a stay at home Dad then divorce your wife and take the family home and kids if you feel you’re not getting what you need from the relationship.
        —Shame her sexuality when you don’t get what you want and she isn’t enough of a woman to give it to you(and there are few real women left out there who even know what that means)
        —Refuse to fulfill any of your traditional roles because lets face it, she fulfills none of hers.
        —Stop trying to return to traditionalism – the laws make that path dead to all but the eternally dumb and sentimental.
        –Allow yourself to be intimate but never mistake intimacy for trust.

        John Galt

        May 10, 2015 at 8:42 am

        • Pretty good list. Also, if men don’t want children or don’t want any more children, get a vasectomy. That way, she can’t hit you with a child support claim after a night of pleasure. Women are entitled to abortions (at public expense), giving up the child for adoption (at public expense), going on welfare (at public expense) and/or grabbing child support (at the man’s expense) to spend any way she pleases without any supervision. So, don’t give her a chance to exercise her state-granted entitlements.

          Kirk

          May 11, 2015 at 9:08 am

  8. PALM SPRINGS, Fla. — Authorities say a Florida principal has been arrested after she was caught partially unclothed in a marijuana-smoke-filled car with a student.

    Police say 45-year-old Krista Morton of Wellington was arrested Wednesday in Palm Springs. She is the principal at Mavericks High of Palm Springs, a charter school.

    Authorities say they responded to a report of people involved in sexual activity in a car and found Morton with a high school senior. They say that when Morton opened the door, her shirt was unbuttoned, exposing part of her chest.

    Police say Morton told them she’d just met the teenager.

    But police say the student called Morton his principal. Officers report smelling marijuana in the vehicle.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/principal-arrested-partially-unclothed-with-student-in-car/ar-BBjr8eh

    Kirk

    May 10, 2015 at 7:53 am

    • I’m glad you were able to find this. Too few of these stories every make it to the mainstream news outlets because the press are so biased.

      John Galt

      May 10, 2015 at 8:44 am

      • Exactly. This has probably been going on for years. One adverse consequence of feminism is that more and more women are being treated according to the same standards to which men have been treated. As state funds, the tax base and the supply of alpha men all decrease, more of this will happen.

        We all know that feminism doesn’t generate revenue or wealth. Feminism simply demands that the existing wealth be redistributed according to their own terms. When there is no more wealth to redistribute, what will feminism do?

        Kirk

        May 11, 2015 at 9:18 am

        • I agree though I don’t class men as alpha/beta as I think that is a feminist/women’s construct. While men do compete it’s idiotic to assume that a ‘bull’ can’t be caught paying child support any less than a nerd. One just happens to service a woman’s need in one way and it is mostly women who make that distinction in their partner not men. Not to blow my own trumpet(pardon the pun) but I’m 6ft5 weight lift, jog, have been a photographer and artist most of my life and currently work in computer science. I’m about as much of a contradiction as you can get and when it comes to women the same applies. They see my car first, I’m a mark, they don’t I’m a lay – their perception is based on what they want not what I consider myself to be which is Paul Elam’s term ‘zeta male’. Women’s categorization of me truly means nothing to me now – I can see it coming a mile away.

          As far as the redistribution of wealth goes I can only chuckle at the armies of working women demanding that men fulfill all their previously traditional roles as well as the ones women used to fulfill and not a single one of them understands the impossibility of division of labour that goes against every biological drive in both sexes from hypergamy to child birth. Men liberated the domestic housewife ironically not to be a loving and free partner but to be the sex object they apparently feared so much, except of course in romance novels…

          John Galt

          May 12, 2015 at 10:14 am

        • You’re absolutely correct about feminism not generating revenue or wealth. Worse yet, it demands that said revenue be yielded to them as they struggle to remain relevant in a world that had no place for it in the first place. Follow the campaigns and it will lead you to the likes of Anita Sarkeesian and others who use their hateful tactics as a get-rich-quick scheme.

          The bigger problem, though, is just who exactly enables that to be so successful? Whether we like it or not, this bill is being footed by you and I, John Q. Public, out of our tax revenues. I am sick of it and I know I am not the only one.

          Little Big Dave

          May 21, 2015 at 5:02 pm

  9. A wiser man than I once said, “Why buy the cow when you can have the milk for free?” That pretty much sums up my life when it comes to women – the young women are giving away the best milk for free all the time, why would I want anything else? And to pay for it? Are you crazy? What I love about feminism is they have made a man’s life a million times better – as long as he never falls into the marriage trap. Keep up the great work ladies…

    Just Saying

    May 10, 2015 at 1:52 pm

    • Yes the tone has truly been set hasn’t it. I used to think it sad, the end of family and trust etc but the more I look at it the more I realize men are used in every way. Esther Vilar was right – men need to start thinking of themselves first – white knights and romantics beware – fools are everywhere.

      John Galt

      May 12, 2015 at 2:58 am

    • The age of consent for girls must be raised to 35 for perverts such as yourself. 18 is too low for an age of consent.

      A woman should focus on her education and career before pursuing sexual relations with scummy men

      Cameron Susan Lopez

      May 12, 2015 at 3:35 pm

      • And Mary Gowans would violate that age of consent as she did with that under-aged boy. Laws don’t stop sick perverts. That boy should have been allowed to focus on his education and not molested by Mary Gowans. Scummy, angry female rapists should go to jail. I called the police.

        Susan Cameron Ramirez

        May 12, 2015 at 4:46 pm

      • First of all if the age of consent were raised to 35 not only would we have more babies born with abnormalities but we’d increase the risk to women of things like ectopic pregnancies. As for your “Scummy Men” comment I can only imagine that having sex with you would incur a fire hazard as the friction from your withered frigid vagina would not only require large amounts of vaseline but a sick bag so I didn’t puke all over myself.

        John Galt

        May 17, 2015 at 1:44 am

  10. Mary Gowans did not do anything wrong. The male student forced Mary Gowans to send him X-rated pictures of herself!

    The male student should learn to respect the vagina, breasts and anus of Mary Gowans and treat her as a human being.

    Cameron Susan Lopez

    May 12, 2015 at 3:34 pm

    • Shut up, pervert. Mary Gowans is a pervert and we don’t want to hear about your nasty, middle-aged private parts. Yes, I did call the police.

      Susan Cameron Ramirez

      May 12, 2015 at 4:44 pm

  11. Hi,

    Thank you, :) the goverent with its laws
    Have screwed it up for men, actually
    There telling woman to be like this.

    J

    May 17, 2015 at 9:50 am

  12. Shauna Hunt should be commended for upholding the rights of women. Women should not be treated as sexual objects.

    Speaking about Mary Gowans, if she did expose her vagina to the 14-year-old male student, the Toronto Police Services have no jurisdiction to lay criminal charges.

    A woman in Toronto should not be punished if she wants to show her vagina to young children because that is sexist.

    What is wrong with a woman’s vagina?

    The Toronto District School Board should abolish all dress codes so that female teachers can dress as they please without the patriarchy forcing them to conform to dress codes.

    If a female teacher wants to walk to work naked and teach her students showing her bare breasts and vagina, the male students should learn to control themselves.

    If not, drug the male students with Amphetamines so that they will treat women as human beings. A woman’s vagina should not be offensive. Women do not rape. Men rape with their words, their thoughts and their penises.

    Respect women in Toronto

    May 17, 2015 at 11:42 am

    • An Australia woman who posted a photo on Facebook branding a man as a “creep” for taking photos of her children has apologized after she discovered he was just taking a selfie in front of a Star Wars display to send to his own children.

      In an interview with the Knox Leader newspaper, the woman, who asked to remain anonymous, offered a tearful apology, saying she wishes she had never put the photo on the social media site. “I just need to say sorry… for not letting (the police) do their job, and putting my concerns on social media,” she told the local paper. “My children are going through an enormous amount of pain (because of this) and I hate to think what (the man) and his family are going through.”

      She said she has been trying to get in touch with the man to apologize personally to him and does not know if he plans to take legal action against her.

      That man is a hero and he should take legal action against her. The woman was stupid for shaming a man without knowing all of the facts.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-apologizes-after-mistakenly-shaming-man-on-facebook/

      Yes, Toronto Police Services does have jurisdiction to arrest Mary Gowans if she shows her vagina to a 14-year-old boy, you sick, delusional pervert.

      A grown woman shouldn’t show her vagina to an under-aged boy, pervert. That is not sexism, that is perversion.

      The Toronto School Board won’t abolish the dress code because they know it is wrong for female teachers to dress as perverts. The sick, perverted matriarchy will not have its way.

      A female teacher should control herself and not walk naked in front of under-aged children, pervert.

      Women are offensive and women rape all of the time. Single mothers are more likely to raise rapists and to have their children molested by one of their sick partners. So now you want to drug under-aged male students in addition to exposing your breasts and vagina to them, pervert?

      You do realize that you are digging yourself deeper into trouble? I am calling the police again.

      Female Pervert Must Be Stopped

      May 17, 2015 at 9:26 pm

      • A few similar occurrences happened here in the UK last year. One man was arrested and strip searched because his daughter drew a picture of ‘daddy shooting the bad boys’. The teacher then called the police who went to his workplace and arrested then stripped searched him. The other was arrested by two security guards for taking pictures of his own daughter in a busy shopping centre.

        Any casual google search will reveal many more similar stories, however they don’t seem to spur any media outrage nor serious looks into problems of misandry and hatred of men. Similar accusations against women go ignored.

        The problem with such incidents is that not only do they split men, women and families apart but those who buy into the ‘man as paedophile/rapists/abuser’ feminist fantasy end up relying solely on the state for financial support and raising of children. Ultimately this gives government and businesses greater power and destroys the one person historically capable and statistically willing to protect women/family/children – the man.

        It also proves to men that women largely are not trustworthy, whether they in fact are or not, because the law supports them – at any stage of a relationship – in whatever way they want and we are a society of laws, not fantasy weddings. It proves to men that women as a sex object is the only marginally reliable way to look at a relationship, at least without sacrificing ones self respect and legal rights. The result – largely from women – of that revelation is not shock and horror at injustice, nor how to redress it but further shaming of men and denial of peer reviewed study, simple logic and mens’ departure from family life and society. The result from men is silence because speaking about any of this still incurs a ton of shaming language, packs of women and angry housewives doing anything but arguing the point or at the very best a failure to get laid.

        Which is why Winston Churchill’s words turn out to be correct:

        “You give women the vote and it will mean the end of social cohesion and the beginning of every liberal cause under the sun”..

        Blue and pink kinder eggs are ‘sexualising’ our children, men shouldn’t uncross their legs on public transport ‘coercive’ behaviour should be illegal(i.e you can’t shout at your partner) and ‘all men are rapists’.

        Men have been marginalized beyond the ridiculous and women given rights they didn’t earn nor the responsibilities that inherently go with them – women aren’t conscripted, aren’t punished at the same level for the same crime, are given ‘equality’ drives but only in jobs they find suitable and comfortable and then not expected to perform nor risk the same as men in jobs that aren’t. Children are isolated from male teachers and tax payers money goes largely to female medical research.

        Everyone wants intimacy, love and to be important to someone else but how much of your rights and self respect would YOU be willing to give up for a 50/50 chance at best? – that is the real question and one more and more men are answering with a big fat NO.

        Support the male pill.

        John Galt

        May 18, 2015 at 6:42 am

    • A woman should be allowed to expose her vagina to children? Drugging young male students?

      I called the police too. You need to be arrested.

      C.R.

      May 18, 2015 at 6:54 am

  13. Mary Gowans was innocent. She was the victim of a predatory adolescent male student who sexted her and forced her to send nude selfies to him.

    The male student sexually harassed Mary Gowans by groping her in her home. If Mary Gowans showed the student her breast implants, the student forced her to do it.

    Mary Gowans was sexually exploited by her student.

    Mary Gowans was innocent

    May 18, 2015 at 11:09 am

    • Mary Gowans was and is a pervert. The fact that you are speaking for her and defending all of the things you claim she did proves that you are either Mary Gowans or some sick pervert who fantasizes about her. How do you know what happened between Mary Gowans and the male student. The male student was never charged with sexual harassment. You are pervert who sexually exploits under-aged boys.

      I am going to keep calling the authorities. You will not keep posting your sick perversions here.

      Sick Female Pervert Needs to be Stopped

      May 18, 2015 at 11:54 am

  14. You sexist pig? So should this teacher be charged because a male student could not control himself ?

    A thong hides panty lines. If a female teacher wants to wear a thong to school, the students should learn to respect her. The teacher’s butt cheeks and anus are not sexual objects you fuckhead!

    Emily

    May 19, 2015 at 12:53 pm

    • Shut the fuck up, you pervert. The teacher should respect the students. I will get you arrested. I swear I will. The students are not your sexual objects, sick bitch.

      Concerned Parent

      May 19, 2015 at 3:51 pm

    • That teacher knew her thong was showing….she wanted attention…fucking whore! The teachers’ union encourages women teachers to wear sexualized clothing?

      That fucking teacher purposely wore that thong to class to entice her male students!

      FuckYou Bitch

      May 19, 2015 at 7:40 pm

      • Yes, our lurker craves attention too. That is why she is coming here posing as a wanna-be feminist demigod obsessed with pedophilia, thongs, breasts, and smelling her own shit hole. Pay her no mind.

        Little Big Dave

        May 21, 2015 at 5:12 pm

        • She keeps doing it because she is trying to show that she can get away with it. She is only digging herself deeper into trouble.

          Jail Perverts

          May 22, 2015 at 5:38 am

        • The fact that she is promoting sexual relations between female teachers and under-aged boys cannot be ignored. If there was a male promoting sexual relations between male teachers and under-aged girls, everyone would have condemned him immediately. I think this person may be engaged in this kind of behavior. I have already called the police. They say they are investigating but I will continue to call and notify them of this poster’s sick new posts. The fact that she made comments about Muslims and blacks is attracting their attention as well.

          Jail Perverts

          May 22, 2015 at 10:04 am

          • What did the police say about the female lurker who flashed her pink thong in a classroom filled with youngsters?

            Marc Rudov

            May 22, 2015 at 3:47 pm

    • Actually a teachers butt cheeks, anus and pink thong are sexual objects. Pink thongs are marketed as sexual objects just like many similar types of female clothing. It is no more appropriate to blame a teenage boy for finding an adult attractive than it is to blame a teenage girl for finding a male one such. The difference is that men do not use their sexuality to manipulate the other sex to anywhere near the same degree that women do. Your grasp on the basics of how human attraction works is not surprisingly laughable, not to mention your grasp on the law.

      Underage children, regardless of whether they are past puberty or not should not be objects of sexual gratification to either adult men nor adult women. There are appropriate forms of behaviour and dress around children and this teacher clearly does not understand that.

      No She is NOT entitled to wear what she likes anymore than a gay male teacher would be entitled to come in wearing assless chaps and a nazi helmet. The teacher was way out of line and consequently lost all the respect of her students as a teacher and became a sex object, something which she brought on herself.

      So to summarize, Fuckhead – try growing up and taking responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming them on a child.

      John Galt

      May 19, 2015 at 11:46 pm

      • Actually you are wrong. The female teacher’s pink thong is underwear. The students should consider themselves lucky that their teacher is teaching them to respect a woman’s body. She is preventing pedophilia because the male students would pounce and rape their female peers in class because they are perverts

        Angela Scott

        May 20, 2015 at 11:01 am

        • No, you are wrong. That is a thong and why is she wearing low-riding jeans? And why didn’t she wear a longer shirt that was tucked into her jeans? She wanted to attract attention, that’s why. How is showing a thong to students preventing pedophilia? You are the pervert. You want pedophilia as long as it is a female teacher doing it to an under-aged male student. Are you the teacher in the video? What male student are you pouncing and raping? You said that under-aged male students should be drugged. Is that what you do? This isn’t going to go away. I will not stop.

          Pervert Beware

          May 20, 2015 at 1:49 pm

          • NO U FUCKING MISOGYNIST!

            The teacher dressed appropriately. Period.

            What are you a fucking Muslim?!7

            That teacher’s g-string, ass cheeks and anus are supposed to be worshipped as God.

            The male students should have learned not to snitch on their female teachers.

            You are a sexist pig!

            I dare you to lodge a complaint to the teacher’s school board. You will be arrested because you are a Muslim.

            That female teacher’s anus is holier than Jesus, Muhammad and the Jewish rabbis.

            Evolve or die you pig!!!!

            Kick out Muslims

            May 20, 2015 at 3:05 pm

            • NO U FUCKING MISANDRIST PERVERT AND RAPIST!

              What are you a fucking child molester?

              She is not supposed to flaunt her G-string, ass cheeks and anus.

              The male students should tell the adults about the sick behavior this teacher is engaged in. The female students were laughing at her too.

              You are a sexist pervert cunt!

              Oh, I will file a complaint – guaranteed. You will be arrested because you are a pervert and you are so sick you are giving more information away. TOR won’t help you.

              You are the only one who thinks anuses are holy because are a sick, lonely pervert who can’t find anyone to lover you.

              Go to hell, you fucking sick cunt!!!! You will be caught.

              Jail Perverts

              May 20, 2015 at 5:35 pm

              • The students should consider themselves lucky that a grown woman flashed her thong and ass to her students.

                Would you want the male students to prey on their 12 year old female students in class and cause pedophilia?

                The female teacher’s ass cheeks and anus are not sexual you friggin pervert

                Yvonne

                May 21, 2015 at 3:04 pm

                • The students are not lucky that a grown, perverted woman flashed her thong and ass to her students. A grown woman preying on 12-year-old male students stops pedophilia according to you? How many times have you gone after 12-year-old male students in order to stop pedophilia? Give us a number. If you think you aren’t doing anything wrong, give us a number. Sick perverted bitch.

                  Jail Perverts

                  May 22, 2015 at 5:41 am

                • FYI Yvonne social scientific research over the last 2 decades has shown that abuse of children is as much a problem for young boys as it is for young girls whether that be physical or sexual abuse. The media simply do not reflect that because of men’s natural tendency to protect women as well as women’s own gender preference, something which has also been proven.

                  You clearly don’t seem to have any respect for male children – one can only hope you don’t have any – , nor any understanding of the nature of paedophilia.. Furthermore, sexuality is not something you can decide on a whim when you feel like it, if it was then sexual clothing, action and speech would be completely meaningless and women would wear sweaters and baggy jeans from dusk till dawn.

                  To use a colloquialism My rights don’t end where your feelings begin and that statement extends to a child’s rights in a protected environment with adults who should know better, respect their position and the children under their care.

                  John Galt

                  May 22, 2015 at 9:31 am

            • Mrs. Withworth is that you? How many students have you exposed yourself to?

              Why would you wear a bright colored thong with a low riding jeans and a top which doesnt cover your ass.

              Fuck ing whore

              How many male students did you seduce?

              Roger

              May 21, 2015 at 4:22 am

        • What a pointless and specious lot of garbage. ‘respect a woman’s body’. First of all respect is earned and not through wearing pink thongs. Secondly your veiled assertion that ‘all men are rapists’ is a clear indication that you have some deeply held radical feminist and sexist beliefs. How flashing pink thong, underwear is somehow ‘preventing paedophilia’ is a complete mystery to me and I would guess to any other rational human being capable of independent thought. So no I am not wrong but then I am clearly having a conversation with a feminist which is a pointless exercise.

          John Galt

          May 22, 2015 at 9:23 am

  15. A female teacher’s buttocks and anus are not sexual! Why are the police charging the female teachers for sending pictures to students?

    Misogyny and sexism should not be allowed! A female teacher’s anus does not corrupt morals! The 17 year old student should learn not to make false memories.

    Emily

    May 19, 2015 at 12:56 pm

    • You sick, perverted bitch. That woman is a rapist and a pervert. I am glad she was arrested. You should be arrested too and I am going to work on it. I swear I will. What sexual activities with minors are you engaged in right now, pervert? I knew you were a criminal. I knew it. And I swear I will do everything to find out who you are and have you brought to justice.

      Concerned Parent

      May 19, 2015 at 3:49 pm

      • I think given the language This is the same posting troll – don’t waste your time, you might as well throw bricks at a wall…. A big giant wall with the word ‘Paedophile’ written on it.

        John Galt

        May 22, 2015 at 9:35 am

  16. WAHT the fuck is wrong with these Toronto feminist perverts and female teachers who support other feamele teachers to wear g-strings to school?!!!!! fyuck you bitych emily

    FuckYou Bitch

    May 19, 2015 at 7:41 pm

  17. What is the big deal if a female teacher bends over and her thong is showing? Her ass cheeks and anus are not sexual.

    You all sound like a bunch of Muslims.

    Kick out Muslims

    May 20, 2015 at 3:13 pm

    • She shouldn’t show her cheeks and anus, you fucking, racist, misandrist pervert.

      You sound like a sick rapist.

      Jail Perverts

      May 20, 2015 at 5:30 pm

      • That posing nude in class isn’t necessarily risky…but it is exhilarating, exciting, and something every female teacher should do at least once in class.

        The female teacher’s pink thong is not sexual, and she is teaching the male students not to be attracted to underaged girls.

        Would you want your 17 year old daughter get fucked by a 17 year old pedophile? The female teacher is preventing pedophila.

        Julia Richards

        May 21, 2015 at 9:18 am

        • It is disgusting and perverted. By being sexual, she is teaching male students not to be attracted to underaged girls? When a male teacher is being sexual, is he teaching female students not to be attracted to underaged boys, pervert? How does your sick mind work?

          And two consenting 17-year-olds having sex is not pedophilia, stupid pervert. You don’t stop pedophilia by committing it, sicko.

          Jail Perverts

          May 22, 2015 at 5:35 am

    • Mann you’re going to regret making That comment… Or maybe we can use it as a launch pad back to the topic at hand, which getting this message out to the masses. Overall abuse of the matrimonial system!

      stepvan

      May 20, 2015 at 5:39 pm

  18. No woman should be made to feel ashamed of her body..

    In many places, topless women at strip clubs is permissible, and yet a female teacher who shows cleavage is automatically labelled a sexual predator.

    A female teacher’s breasts are for feeding her children.

    And don’t tell me it’s the woman’s fault, because many women don’t, and men and the male students are more responsible for sexualizing a harmless feature. Do we make cows wear shirts? Or female dogs? Nope, their breasts are just there. So why should female teachers be any different?

    Personally I find it ridiculously that covers for magazines such as nuts can feature two girls in lingerie provocatively licking each other without there being any complaints and yet people make a fuss when a woman dares to reveal something so inoffensive as a nipple or her ass cheeks to prevent heat stroke.

    A female teacher’s breasts and anus are not sexual.

    The female teacher whose pink thong and ass cheeks were exposed, she is the victim of the voyeuristic students. The male students should not be recording her pink thong, ass and anus without her consent. The male students should be incarcerated for recording child porn!

    Julia Richards

    May 21, 2015 at 9:14 am

    • Reveal her ass cheeks and nipple to make sure that everyone “notices”, The same reason women wear provocative clothing anywhere to get “attention”. Women crave attention. At every age or occupation.

      stepvan

      May 21, 2015 at 9:35 am

      • Muslim,No!

        The female teacher’s ass cheeks were exposed because the male students recorded her because they were perverts. The female teacher’s thong and ass cheeks are not criminal you fucking Muslim DIE MUSLIM DIE!

        Muslims are shit

        May 21, 2015 at 11:12 am

        • The female teacher’s ass cheeks were exposed because she exposed them. And why wasn’t she watching what the male students were doing? Why didn’t she tell them to stop recording? Because she WANTED TO BE RECORDED! SHE IS A PERVERT! Yes, it is criminal. And demanding that Muslims die is criminal, racist. You think you are going to get away with this, perverted, racist bitch?

          Jail Perverts

          May 22, 2015 at 5:26 am

    • A real woman doesn’t expose her body to children. A pervert does that.

      A teacher is not the same as a stripper, pervert.

      Exposing the breasts to children in a classroom is not the same as breastfeeding, pervert.

      Yes, it is the woman’s fault when she exposes her breasts to children. Should we let men be naked using your perverted logic?

      And a classroom of young children is not the same as a sex magazine that you keep describing. You are a classic pervert.

      Yes, a female teacher’s breasts and anus are sexual and she shouldn’t be exposing them to young children.

      How do you know the female students weren’t recording her? The teacher is not a child so it’s not child porn, perverted sicko. I am going to keep filing complaints.

      Jail Perverts

      May 22, 2015 at 5:32 am

  19. You should respect a female teacher even if she flashes her pink thong and exposes her white butt cheeks and anus to her students.

    Yvonne

    May 21, 2015 at 3:02 pm

    • You should call the police on a female teacher if she flashes her pink thong and exposes her butt cheeks and anus to her students. What difference does it make if she is white, you racist, sexist, perverted pedophile?

      Jail Perverts

      May 22, 2015 at 5:27 am

    • Judges are much more lenient to women than men. In Pennsylvania a judge reduced a woman’s sentence for child molestation dramatically because the woman claimed she could not control her sexual urges, did this judge release her on her guarantee she would offend again? What would happen to a man with the same type admission? Here is an excerpt of that article from the New York Daily News:

      — In May, former schoolteacher Kathleen Cawthorne, 33, of Rustburg, Va., successfully negotiated a reduction in her 11-year sentence for having sex with an underage student. Cawthorne’s punishment was set at only four months in prison when she presented the judge with a clinical diagnosis of “hypersexuality,” supposedly showing that she had little ability to control her desire to seduce the boy. [New York Daily News, 5-24-2013]

      Jail Perverts

      May 22, 2015 at 9:59 am

  20. Incredible amount of misogyny in the comments section.

    Amber

    May 22, 2015 at 8:09 am

    • Misandry – I think you need your bifocals checked – and maybe spend a little less time with your cats.

      John Galt

      May 22, 2015 at 9:36 am

    • So standing up against female perverts, rapists and pedophiles is misogyny in your sick mind?

      Jail Perverts

      May 22, 2015 at 9:51 am

  21. Are the police going to investigate the female lurkers Mary Gowans and Mrs.”Pink Thong” Witworth?

    Many of the posts sound like an arrogant female teacher who wants to dress like a whore to youngsters in class.

    Marc Rudov

    May 22, 2015 at 3:49 pm

    • They said that they are investigating. Apparently, this wasn’t the first time the authorities were called.

      Jail Perverts

      May 22, 2015 at 6:20 pm

      • What exactly did they say/do? – this thread is humungous now.

        John Galt

        May 24, 2015 at 9:35 am

        • After taking down my complaint, they told me that they are aware of the situation and that other complaints have been filed. They said that an investigation has been underway for quite some time. They don’t want to release any further details. I will see what happens and if I have to, I will take it to the media. She has made racial slurs, advocated that female teachers be naked in front of minor students and called for the drugging of under-aged male students. She has also defended female statutory rapists and provided surprising details about the relationships between them and their under-aged male victims. She stated that female teachers sleeping with under-aged male children is a means of stopping pedophilia. This is probably what she tells herself to justify the behavior in which she is engaging. She claimed to have illegally searched social security databases and that Muslims should die. This can’t be tolerated. I am convinced that this person is a criminal.

          Jail Perverts

          May 24, 2015 at 12:40 pm

          • lol are there any lines she/he/it hasn’t crossed? – jews, nazis, black people?.

            Comming soon to a bell tower near you…. Nut case and her trust sidekick head melter.

            John Galt

            May 25, 2015 at 3:12 am

  22. An investigation has been underway. Well, if this continues, perhaps the media should be alerted. I am sure we are dealing with a criminal.

    Jail Perverts

    May 22, 2015 at 6:22 pm

    • Violence Against Children

      It is frequently claimed that because women are the primary caretakers of children, they are inherently non-violent. Historical evidence not only nullifies this claim but reverses it: women are the predominant perpetrators of violence against children.

      Mary Pushman gave her baby pins with its liquid food, stuck pins in its tongue and tortured it to death. Mrs. Valazquez held her 6-year-old daughter against a hot stove, stabbed her with an ice pick, placed her in chains, tied her to a washing machine, held a lighted match to her lips and struck her on the head with a hammer. Mrs. Gertrude Baniszweski subject her teenage girl to long term torture: the girl was burned, beaten, scalded, branded and starved. Her body bore 150 wounds. Amy Imler put her 8-year-old asthmatic daughter through extreme physical violence and starvation. These are only some of the most inhuman cases on record.[1] At the extremes of filicide, there are the serial killing mothers who murdered 2 or more of their own children.[2][3]

      Women are known to kill their own children to exact revenge on their spouses. Anna Gades stabbed her 19-month-old son, and told the police that: “There was no reason to kill Hans, but when I could not get a chance to kill my husband, because he watched me so closely, I had to kill his son for revenge. I hated to kill the boy, but I wanted to make his father wretched.” Gladys Dunn murdered her 2-year-old son because she was jealous of the father’s love for the child. Bess Baldwin shot her 5-year-old son “because she was upset at her husband.” More recently, Theresa Riggi stabbed to death each of her three children eight times following a custody battle.[4] The most astonishing aspect of these killings are the women’s self-justifications. Even worse, there are many cases in which mothers coerce or intimidate their own children to commit murder.[5]

      Step-children were not spared from such cruelty. Ellen Jones tortured her 2-year-old step-son to death by beating him until he convulsed with spasms. Mrs. Edward Smith tortured her five step-children by pounding their fingers with a hammer and scalding their hands in hot water until the skin peeled off. A step-mother in Germany tortured her 5-year-old step-daughter to death: she beat her mercilessly until she became ill, bound her feet together with a rope and hanged her to a nail on the store. The girl almost unconscious from fear and suffering, was then bound to the bedpost by her step-mother who severely beat her with a club until she died. Jennie Anderson broke bottles on the heads of children and killed a girl by beating her with a nail-studded club. Anne Houde Gagnon beat her 16-year-old step-daughter, burnt her with a red hot poker and forced her to drink poison until she died. The post-mortem examination of the girl’s body revealed 54 wounds. A more recent case is that of Sara Rae Walters, who abused her 3-year-old step-grandson, resulting in over 60 different injuries. Mary Mazalic beat a 10-year-old girl with whips, burnt her with lit cigarettes and starved her until she was eventually rescued. The judge described her actions as “stark proof of how low humans can sink.”[6][7]

      In the Victorian era, there existed “baby farms” that took in babies in return for a commercial fee. They were generally staffed by women who provided care for the infants. There are many known cases of these baby farmers disposing of babies in inhuman ways. Babies were burnt alive, drowned, drugged/poisoned, suffocated, strangled and sometimes tortured until death.[8] There are also cases of serial killer girls who murdered young children under their care.[9] Apart from nursemaids and child care providers, there are other cases of women who killed children who were not biologically related to them.[10] There are also cases involving cannibalism.[11] Inhuman women of this strain appear to have survived as “evil step-mothers” in many fairy tales, and in folklore, as female entities who kidnap, murder and eat children.

      The extreme cruelty towards domestic servants and slaves by women mistresses is not limited to the time of the Romans and the Greek. Such incidents were commonplace in early modern England. The victims were usually young girls who were employed as maids.[12][13] There are many well-known cases of such incidents, some of which involved physical and sexual torture, often escalating to murder. Elizabeth Branch and her daughter Mary mercilessly tortured and murdered teenage servant girls.[14] Countess Elizabeth Bathory tortured, sexually mutilated and murdered hundreds of young girls. Empress Ta-Ki of China had young, pregnant women torn limb from limb for her amusement. Darya Nikolayevna Saltykova, a Russian noblewoman, tortured, sexually mutilated and killed hundreds of female serfs.[15]

      In the 21st century, women continue to be the predominant abusers and killers of children. Following the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) of 1988, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has been publishing Child Maltreatment reports on a yearly basis. DHHS data collected from the years 1999–2012 show that 70.1% of the children abused by one parent, were abused by their mothers and 69.8% of children killed by one parent, were killed by their mothers. Furthermore, mothers have been the predominant abusers and killers of children throughout this entire period of 14 years.[16] Recent research into female sexual offences against children find that there are as many female paedophiles as males.[17][18][19][20][21][22][23]

      Violence Against Men

      Women’s violence against their husbands is by no means a recent discovery.

      There exist many legal, clerical and other written records of women’s violence against husbands from the 15th–19th centuries in France, England and neighbouring parts of Europe.[24][25][26][27][28] Men who were assaulted by their wives were associated with the term “skimmington,” derived from the skimming ladle used by women for making cheese and depicted as a weapon to assault husbands with. They were paraded facing backwards on a donkey or horse in ‘charivari’ processions. A wide variety of historical artefacts including plates, illustrations and caricatures depicting skimmington scenes can be found in various publications from these periods, some of which originate from the 12th century.[29][30] The Great House of Montacute, built in the late 16th century in Somerset, has an original plaster facade in the Great Hall depicting a woman hitting her husband and then a procession with the husband ‘riding.’[31] The image of the victimized “skimmington” husband survived as dark humour in cartoons, postcards and stand-up comics[32] well after the custom was declared unlawful in the late 19th century.[33]

      Incidents of women’s violence against men were commonly featured in 19th–20th century newspapers, legal documents and other publications.[34] Many of these cases involved severe acts of violence from the use of weapons ranging from axes, hammers, hatchets, knives, leashes, razors, shovels, umbrellas and whips, to guns and chemicals such as poison and acid. The victims of vicious acid attacks were not only disfigured horribly, but often sustained permanent damage to other parts of their body.[35] There are extreme cases of women’s violence against men involving torture.[36]

      http://www.sciencevsfeminism.com/the-myth-of-oppression/violence-by-women/a-historical-review/

      Kirk

      May 25, 2015 at 11:01 pm

  23. Marc Rudov no way, right on, now this site has some power, let’s get some shit done! I’ve seen your videos You got my vote!

    stepvan

    May 22, 2015 at 6:44 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 193 other followers

%d bloggers like this: