Mar 032010

Like the universe the number of haters I have is always expanding.  MikeeUSA has now added himself to my haters.  He sent me two emails through the Spearhead email interface.

What is good for men? The following certainly aren’t bad for men, pro-women’s rights quisling scum are opposed to such things which are in the interests of men ofcourse, and such men make up the bulk of the “Men’s Rights Movement”. They think they can beg themselves into power or influence, they just want a scrap, a bone, that’s all… and isn’t that so… reasonable? They, like all pathetic appeasers, get kicked for their “efforts”, they come back ofcourse, and suggest that some more BAD men get thrown under the bus so that their own very small and inconsequential marginal interests might be listened to (which they aren’t). The following are suggestions that such men oppose… suggestions which are actually in the interests of all men

* Females be married once they are able to have children (usually at ages: 12, 13, 14).

* Men never persecuted for having relations with a young female of childbearing age.

* The marital rape exception reinstated (So that a man is never persecuted for raping his wife).

* If a man rapes a unmarried/unbetrothed++ virgin girl he marries her, pays her father some money, and doesn’t divorce her.

++Bethrothal here meaning female living with husband for about one year before the marraige feast/ceremony.

* Females barred from bringing claims against their husband (or similar) in court.

* Females barred from divorcing their husbands.

* Females barred from collecting monies from husband (child support etc).

* Other similar things to remove all power from females and make them what men desire.

(About Child Support: A saying from Bob is: child support is a seat at a Man’s table and a cot to sleep on in his house)


* Women’s rights activists be cleansed from the earth.

* All rapists, batterers, etc be freed from the prisons.


* Clone girls, sell them (untouched) to men, so as to constructivly change the market so that all men have what they wish to have.

* Investigate who brought women’s rights upon the world, destroy those who did (in much of the world women’s rights is new as of the 90s and 00s: in India, for example, it really started in earnest in the late 90s).


Young wives are a supreme pleasure to men. That is why they are now banned the world over

In most of the world it is now illegal to take a young wife under the age of 18 or to have relations with one’s wife at will.

And there is _nothing_ men can do about it.

Men have NO political power.

(You can’t jerrymander THIS 48 percent minority into a majority anywhere (because, unlike with races, men and women are dispersed together everywhere in the same ratio.)


“”Snark February 27, 2010 at 19:3

MikeeUSA is a woman. Those comments have to be written by a feminist posing as an embittered male. –antifeministtech

This was what occurred to me at first.

When feminists realise that MRAs are not trying to defend some u2018right to rapeu2019 or u2018right to beat womenu2019, but that we may actually have some issues worth consideration u2013 e.g. forced circumcision u2013″”

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. [c] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

If the Men who wrote the Bible are women, then yeah I’m a woman too.

You think that if you’re a “nice reasonable man” women will vote the way you want. You don’t understand human nature and you haven’t been paying attention to the last 150 years.

You’re a quisling piece of shit.

It’s been clear for a long while that the men in the MRM are NOT for the interests of men.

You just want a little less harsh version of women’s rights / feminism.

You are for “equality” “justice” etc, not for what’s best for your fellow man.

You are _scum_.


Antifeministtech (and pro-women’s rights friends): If you were about to be railroaded by your wife, and I knew how you could transfer your assets safely out of harms way, I would NOT tell you.

I would watch it happen. Later I’d say “sorry, didn’t want to help a scumbag that likes to see men who rape their wives go to prison”

“I’m glad you got fucked over”

“now you know how the men in prison feel”

“fuck you scumbag”

You’re a worthless quisling.

If I told any of the men at my school about this “movement” they’d laugh.

It’s a group of pathetic* fucks who don’t want to screw young females, nor wish to rape their wives at will, nor have any privledge and honor.

No they want to wallow in the muck begging for reasonable consessions.

Are you even men? You aren’t even attracted to young females of childbearing age.

*(who choose to be this way because they won’t even demand their liberties as men, nah, only impostor “women” do that… and the “women” biblical scribes from 5000 years ago)


Justus: I’m not a bot, I’m not advertising. You simply don’t like what I say, like most women’s rights supporting men. You and your kind is why women’s rights reign supreme around the world.


[quote]Snark February 28, 2010 at 06:45

Iu2019m sure I canu2019t be the only one disturbed by certain characters trying to bring Rape Rights and Pedophile Rights under the banner of the MRM.

To those certain characters: fuck off!

You are worse than most feminists.


You are disturbed because you are not an ally of men.

You support women’s rights and are a member of the male column that allows women’s rights to continue to exist. You are made of the same stuff as the valliant white knight that destroyes his fellow man for what is good and just and in the power interests of women.

You are an ally of the feminists and you should they ever fall, you and yours will surely be buried with them.

I also notice that your scumbag pro-women’s rights moderator has deleted my comments. He, like you, supports women’s rights. He wishes men to be jailed for having relations with young females of childbearing age. He wishes men to be punished for marital rape. He wished men to be punished severly for the rape of an unmarried virgin girl, rather than simply have the man marry his prize and live happily with the sweet female.

I don’t know what you people want. I just know that you are never going to get it. Men get nowhere by begging or being “reasonable”. You will just waste your lives. I guess that is an apt happenstance as the pro-women’s rights policies you do support degrades the lives of all your fellow men.

Death To women’s Rights.

Viva Men’s Liberties.


PS: I also noticed that you banned me from commenting (many times), thanks faggots. I will remember this forever.

However, Thank you to Arpagus for being infavor of that which is to the interests of men. It would be a better world if, rather than having a pluralistic democracy, we instead has a olargarchy where only men like Arpagus held power, rather than quisling scum that most of the rest of the men of the “Men’s Rights Movement” are.

This was the same thing that MikeeUSA was spamming several threads on The Spearhead Forum with.  The first line I bolded I didn’t even say.  Someone else said that, although I agree that MikeeUSA has to be a feminist woman who is trolling.  The second part I bolded is quite funny.  Anyone who knows my history knows I’m a hardcore anti-feminist and anti-female supremacist.  I have a long list of women telling me that I have a small dick from my science fiction post on The Spearhead last year as proof.  I have also been pretty open about not being married and how I never will get married.  I’m wondering where this “wife” that’s going to throw me in prison is going to come from.

Let’s take a look at the second email.


Snark (etc) February 28, 2010 at 09:18

[quote]PS: I also noticed that you banned me from commenting, thanks faggots.[/quote]

Nice work, Welmer. How about an IP ban this time?


Heh, IP ban. LOL.

You people are scum.

For all of human history men married sweet cute young females of childbearing age. People like you stop us now… and we want you gone.

Normal men appreciate young fertile females.

Worthless quislings do not.

You are the obstacle men need to grind into dust. You are the men who are our legistlative overloards, our judges, our jailers, our masters. You believe you do good by opposing nature and the interests of men.

It is bad for a man to be persecuted for taking for himself and unclaimed girl as his wife. It is bad for a man to be destroyed for having relations with his females at his will. It is bad for men to be denied the sweet brides they have always longed for (and in the past, before the acendancy of the Good Man, did aquire.)

You are the enemy of Man.

Your kind is the obstacle to our fulfillment.

You are the column of necessary masculinity that without which women’s rights would crash decisively against the rock that is the men of the world. You are their shield, and for us to get to claim our prize we must destroy you.

I wonder who this “we” he keeps talking about are.  Of course, MikeeUSA has a huge army behind him, and if you believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.  The Unabomber also talked used the word, “we”, and talked about how he was part of a group.  We know that was wrong, and I am sure MikeeUSA is the same way.

If you want to know why “MikeeUSA” is probably a feminist troll, look at his obsession with 12 year old girls.  Of course, “MikeeUSA” is trying to paint MRAs, MGTOW, and game practitioners are pedophiles.  The reasons for that is obvious.  Since we’re right, she is trying to discredit us through other means.  However, notice “MikeeUSA’s” lack of talking about most any issue caused by feminism & other female supremacism that actually affects men.  You might say what about the “wife” comment, but that doesn’t count because it makes no sense given the circumstances.  “MikeeUSA” tried to make MRA, MGTOW, & game issues all about 12 year old girls.

As an aside I wouldn’t be surprised if Globalman was a similar type of troll.  He does the same, “no issues affecting men matter” with his “you can reject the law” shtick.  I have found several court cases of people trying that and failing miserably.  Regardless, Globalman’s shtick conveniently avoids nearly all of the issues feminism and female supremacism have caused.  Since we know it has already failed, it means nothing except that the issues never get dealt with, and men trying to claim that the law has no jurisdiction over them just look guilty.

Avoiding the issues affecting men could be a good test for finding feminist trolls.

  9 Responses to “Haters: MikeeUSA”

  1. Heh … I was a little surprised when he kept quoting me and spamming his response everywhere.

    He/she is a jackass, we don’t want people like this in the Men’s Movement at all. As far as I know, MikeeUSA has been around before, and apparently got kicked off some feminist site, or he got his work deleted by some feminist host or something – can’t say I blame them.

    I do not believe Globalman is a troll, as I know him from other forums, and I just don’t think a troll would have put so much effort in, or been so consistent.

    He’s just tiresome, not very perceptive of the bigger picture, obsessed with ridiculous conspiracy theories (that’s not to say there aren’t conspiracies – he just seems to believe absolutely anything, to the point of absurdity), and routinely trots out his kooky theories on common law and legislation. Once in a while however, he posts something that is pure gold, and has me laughing for ages. Usually when he’s criticising feminism or feminised women. He has potential to be very funny then.

    • I do not believe Globalman is a troll, as I know him from other forums, and I just don’t think a troll would have put so much effort in, or been so consistent.

      In general that’s true and maybe I shouldn’t be using the word, troll. I’m assuming an ideological motivation rather the regular motivation for trolling.

      Truthfully, I am not sure Globalman is a troll either. I wrote that to be provocative and because there is no real effective difference between the two. Plus, at some point in the future I will write an article for The Spearhead about how conspiracy theories will become anti-male in the future which will explain my thinking on the subject.

      • Plus, at some point in the future I will write an article for The Spearhead about how conspiracy theories will become anti-male in the future

        Do you think that men are more likely to believe a conspiracy theory? I hadn’t really thought on it before, but a 5 second analysis would seem to point towards women being more influenced by what is considered mainstream, especially where shaming tactics are used to try to bring the thought back in line with the mainstream. That would leave men being the ones bucking the socially accepted theories/explanations. It seems ripe for further shaming of those men who hold a non-orthodox view

        • There’s several issues here so its a hard question to answer. First, men are more likely to be skeptical than women. That means men are more likely to be skeptical of a standard explanation of something than women are. However, that also means that men will be more skeptical of alternate explanations (i.e. conspiracy theories) as well.

          Second, there is more than one mainstream in this context. There can be a local mainstream for whatever subculture a woman is in that is different from the global mainstream. The conspiracy theory can be mainstream locally to a woman so in such a case you have the reverse.

          In the future what I think will happen is that women will be more influenced by conspiracy theories than men. This is because the standard conspiracy theory involves a “depopulation agenda”. As men continue to do rational things like not get married and not have kids desperate women and associated white knights/manginas will turn to conspiracy theories as a new way to shame men. The “depopulation agenda” concept fits their needs perfectly, at least for those on the conservative female supremacist side of things. I am not sure how many women and right wing manginas will actually believe the conspiracy theories but they will jump on the bandwagon due to desperation. And more women will jump on the bandwagon since it will be locally mainstream to them. This will be one of the next frontiers of anti-male shaming language since women and manginas will want to shut down the logic and reason of men who refuse to do what women and manginas want. This is how it will go:

          Man: Marriage is a bad deal for men. (Man gives reasons why.)

          Woman/Mangina: BUT, you are supporting the Illuminati depopulation agenda!!!!

          Man: I am not going to have kids since they can be taken away from me at a woman’s whim and I can be assessed for child support in amounts more than I actually make.

          Woman/Mangina: You’re letting the Illuminati win by not having kids!!!!!!!

          Man: I am paying for a child that I did not father. This is paternity fraud.

          Woman/Mangina: Why are you supporting the Illuminati? We need to support having more kids to fight their depopulation agenda.

          It very self serving for women and manginas as you can see. However, that’s why women and manginas will use conspiracy theories in the future against men. What better way to try and shame men than to claim they’re unwittingly supporting a secret, evil conspiracy by making choices that are perfectly rational and logical.

  2. Mikee has been around a few years. He/she has been kicked out of places before. Mikee may be a feminist/provocateur, but I think he is just nuts. He has been at it too long and kicked out of too many places to be a put up job IMO. His stuff seems to be flip side of scum manifesto type screeds.

    Globalman is kind of an interesting character. I agree with Snark, Globalman just seems to be ate up with his presumed solution to what he sees as a multimillenial conspiracy. The thing about his plan that always gets me is: If the PTB have built this elaborate illusion, why would they respect a demand for rights ? But, he does come up with some good zingers.


    • If the PTB have built this elaborate illusion, why would they respect a demand for rights ?

      I asked Globalman the same thing and he claims that the PTB “don’t care” because most people don’t know about it. I did some research and found some court cases where people tried the same thing Globalman is trying and they all failed. That’s the real answer.

  3. MikeeUSA is either extremist version of woman hater or one unhinged creep. I have seen creeps like him/her online.
    It is safe to say that MikeeUSA is a butch disguised as a man. It’s a feminist tactic to make any male look bad.
    Globalman is one weird guy, even though I read his posts online.

    To be a man, is to have dignity and standards

  4. I wonder who this “we” he keeps talking about are. Of course, MikeeUSA has a huge army behind him, and if you believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. The Unabomber also talked used the word, “we”, and talked about how he was part of a group. We know that was wrong, and I am sure MikeeUSA is the same way.

    Can’t be definitive either way, but it could be a genuine man. It is possible with the internet to find quite a few people who believe exactly as you do and as such makes your view appear more mainstream. There may not be more than 1000 people in the US who believe as Mikee, but finding them all active on the web would make him feel like there is more support than there really is. I think that the unabomber was much the same. After all, we all seek out people who have similar beliefs as ourselves so it is expected that they would find them as well.

  5. […] with teenage girls thing – and because many people rightly suspect that feminist trolls are trying to discredit anti-feminists by tarring them as pedophiles. Still, I think this issue needs to be approached in a sensible […]

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: