But I’ve just lost alot of respect for Susan Walsh. If she’s going to ban PMAFT from her blog, how in the hell does she feel entitled to respond or post at his? But for this post and the prior one I haven’t seen hardly any posts of AFT’s where Susan Walsh has been the focus or mentioned more than en passante except perhaps I think I remember one when he was first banned. So he hasn’t been kicking her around, and to be fair to her , she hasn’t been kicking him around on her blog. Susan won’t get a pussy pass here, and I’m sad she thought she would.
Clarence you ended up more right than you knew. Susan Walsh wrote this today:
Shaming language is appropriate when the behavior is shameful. You know perfectly well I’ve extended the olive branch to you in the past, which you ignored. Furthermore, you read my blog and feel free to post about it, quoting from the Comments, yet I am not permitted to address your accusations? This is shameful, especially when you either misunderstand or deliberately distort my meaning. Why not just engage in a two way conversation?
I banned you originally for your overtly hostile remarks. I have never written about you since. If you don’t want to have a productive debate, fine. But it’s intellectually dishonest of you to post about me, and then keep me from responding.
And here goes this comment into permanent moderation……
I love how the definition of “intellectually dishonest” is sending comments to moderation and then posting them unedited either as a comment or as part of a post. I didn’t realize I could prevent you from discussing this anyplace else. The Fifth Horseman said that women don’t understand cause and effect very well and this is another example.
Conversation? Productive debate? Don’t make me laugh. To have such a thing we need to dispense with vague, subjective “feelings” and discuss what is actually happening. ”That group of men scares me” is not productive debate.
Your blog is public and subject to public scrutiny. I wasn’t even reading your blog but other were and since I actually READ the comments of the men of The Spearhead I saw their links to your site.
Lastly, this is a pussy pass free zone. My girlfriend doesn’t even get a pussy pass from me.
“Shaming language, behavior is shameful, ignored, accusations, shameful, misunderstand, deliberately distort, overtly hostile, dishonest,” and the coup de grace, ME.
I guess the general thrust is that you should be ashamed, may need a re-read but I’m pretty sure that’s the jist of it.
Shameful because you won’t allow her to control the language and terms of the debate?
Oh the humanity!
OK, how about this? You are free to comment on my blog anytime you wish (I never actually blacklisted you anyway). It would be nice if I were free to comment here. You think we’re adversaries, but we don’t need to be. We actually agree on quite a few things.
Is that your picture, Susan? Kind of reminds me of Bebe Glazer.
Wow, I can’t stand this female. She is so ego driven and smug, it’s disgusting. I remember reading one of her blog posts about, man before I even found the spearhead, and she talked about how her own son was pissed about the blog and how he just shrugged in a moody way when she started talking about beta males and what not.
She reminds me of my mom, the radical feminist, that has made me, at the age of 23, pretty much give up on girls, dating, and marriage. I guess the good thing is that I can still get laid when I have the patience and sexual hunger to actually have to deal with a female for more than 10 minutes, but it really sucks knowing that the person who gave birth to you and raised you see’s you as nothing more than chattel. Remember female projection guys. Learn the concept of projection. Females talk about how they were treated as slaves, chattel, and beasts of burden for all of history. I looked up my own family history and found matriarchal lines in it, females used to have complete control of their reproduction but only outside of marriage. Meaning that if they were married, the husband got the kid and house, but if they were single they had their OWN kid and the kid took the mothers last name and she wasn’t allowed child support or anything else. She was actually equal. Now females get the house, cars, kids, and a monthly allowance and that’s in marraige. Outside of marriage they get the same freakin thing.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. They can’t exclude men, push us towards the edge, dis-enfranchise us and not expect a reaction. I used to think that females were just dumb, and sometimes I fall back into the evo psych line of thinking that they no not what they do, but now I realize something else entirely.
How can so many females get so many degrees in so many areas and still refuse to see the truth? Feminists have degrees in anthropology, economcs, sociology(99% female), Psychology(again), Religious Studies(again), philosophy(not 99%, but about 70%, especially bio-ethics(abortion)), and so on. How can they be the ones doing the studies and still claim that boys don’t need a father? Cause a woman a man like a fish needs a bicycle! How? My feminist, lawyer, of a mother has a bachelors in physics. She still believes this shit.
This woman, she has a degree in economics. Or atleast she bragged about it on her blog when I trolled across her blog a long time ago. I think, if I remember correctly, that she got it from harvard.
http://trollkingdom.blogspot.com