They are bigger than mine, have to fix that....

As dearly as we love em!. One does have to wonder how they are capable of reaching the responses and reactions they do. Feminists are no different obviously, as they are predominately saturated by that very sex and that would actually explain how one can never really have a reasonable discussion with them veering off on another tangent without any provocation whatsoever..

It is probably the main reason men are so fascinated when they come across an intelligent female, whose responses are closer to our own rather than the standard examples we read about, talk to and see on a daily basis. Meeting one is like winning a lottery and out the window flies that special effort required to bite the tongue and whip out the brain cells for a readjustment to mindless maudlin in mediocrity, the effort required to deal with the situation..

It is also why I relish in the fact that when I see an article or post that actually considers a broader perspective or a considered meaningful viewpoint,  instead of the usual standard level of discussion one is attuned to as well as come to expect, is obviously refreshing. I could name a few offhand, who consistently express reasonableness as well as a deep POV that stirs the senses. But it is not the norm, unfortunately. Normally the tangent evolves around actions and areas one really does not give a rats arse about, like shopping, dancing and partying, areas already sufficiently covered by those magazines, that can stay in written print without ever being repeated, as far as I am concerned but unfortunately it's not the case..

One does want to question feminists on their mind lock but it is an effort in futility as the response does actually encourage and present that cognitive dissonance one hopes to spend their life, avoiding..

  And in the case of intelligence, there are actually grounds to infer that provided-for women who never have to do anything except shop shop shop, text text text and dance dance dance finish up actually losing their intellectual capabilities.

Spending one's life deciding what colour that item should be to an unrecognisable level of insignificance or that automatic response to answering the phone when it rings as if someone's life was in balance when in reality, it's just more gossip, the decision of what to wear for a specific occasion while already knowing precisely what outfits one has, discourages practical brain activity, demanding that to functions similar to watching television, already demonstrated that the brain functions stands at zero, ahh! thats better..

That claim made by feminists that women somehow hover in a higher sphere is soundly discounted by watching their behavioral patterns, reading their endless complaints and one wonders just how many more lies they can get away with..
 

Lessons from nature: Brain in a vat

In this somewhat tongue-in-cheek article we examine the difference in intelligence between men and women. The normal bell curve distribution is often addressed metaphorically to describe women’s distribution in parameters like intelligence as being taller and narrower, while that of men’s is flatter and wider. This essentially makes the point that men occupy a wider variation on parameters like intelligence; from incredibly dumb to incredibly smart, while women occupy a comfy medium. There is less variation in performance and abilities among women than there is among men. It turns out that, on average, the intelligence of men and women is the same.
This is all well and good, except that there is another dynamic playing out in gender differences. There is something called sexual dimorphism. [11] This is a term from the mainstream biological sciences where the male and female evolve to acquire different phenotypic traits. And in the case of intelligence, there are actually grounds to infer that provided-for women who never have to do anything except shop shop shop, text text text and dance dance dance finish up actually losing their intellectual capabilities. In their provided-for lives, without moral responsibility, their brains actually appear to rot. They do become dumber. In order to appreciate why this should be so, we need to dump the mainstream evolutionary psychology (EP) paradigm grounded in genocentrism. [5] If this offends genocentrists, then be warned. Muff your ears and cover your eyes. This article is not for you.

Habits of indulgence

Men and women value attractiveness in women. Especially within the Anglosphere, a woman’s entire worth is established almost exclusively on her physical appearance and how she packages it. The EP crowd have an explanation for the importance of female beauty. They will blather on about attractiveness as being an indicator of health, superior genes, etc. Meanwhile, the Game and PUA community worship beautiful women at the Altar of the Vag, and women who can package themselves to look attractive enjoy privileges and entitlements that are not extended to those women who either fail to pay attention to their packaging, or for whom no amount of packaging can salvage.
But there is one dimension of womanly existence that is never taken seriously, especially within our current zeitgeist, and that is a woman’s intelligence. Personality may rate to some extent…her readiness to laugh at men’s jokes, her social savvy, her ability to get drunk just like men do, her ability to establish belonging within a huge group of girls, etc. But these are aspects more related to group-think and conformity rather those deeper qualities that we associate with intelligence… such as curiosity, integrity, skill, commonsense, courage, etc. This raises a most important question. Can the disconnect between beauty and brains ever be reconciled? In terms of universal possibilities, I’m confident that it can; in terms of human life on Earth and our current trajectory, the answer is no, it cannot. Trying to reconcile the beauty-brains disconnect within the context of our zeitgeist and culture is a fool’s errand.

Atrophy of the mind

It is well established now that PUAs, as performing seals begging for fish, routinely work themselves into a lather about what women think of them, and then construct elaborate strategies to demonstrate to their objet de l’amour that they don’t care what women think of them. The extent to which women’s opinions matter is proportional to where these women rate on the attractiveness scale. The unspoken rule is that the opinions of nines and tens are weighted more than the opinions of fives and sixes, while the opinions of ones and twos are weighted probably nothing at all. There is no rational reason for this instinctive association between attractiveness and credibility. It’s a subconscious reflex, a bias.
This manner of thinking comes about because of the EP paradigm and the genocentrism on which it is based. Women who are deemed to be attractive are valued more, and so game theory extends the fantasy by rationalizing that they must also be “better” at other things, such as intelligence. These “higher quality” women demonstrate their intelligence in their social savvy. This is naught but projection, receiving its inspiration from a culture obsessed with female beauty and then attributing to it various assumptions that are unfounded.
But let’s take a closer look…What if the reverse is actually true? What if intelligence is more likely to be inversely proportional to attractiveness? There is sound reason to expect precisely this to be the more likely truth. There are various theoretical frameworks available to suggest this; whether they are grounded in religion, customs, psychology, semiotics or science, for example, and within many of these frameworks is the idea that habits play a crucial role in character formation. [6][7][8][9]
Sometimes these habits might be described in terms of “units of imitation”, and this brings us to the field of memetics and the spread of memes. [10] Where do these habits, or memes, come from? The answer is…culture. The provided-for sex has permission to be, well, provided for. These days, a woman has permission to work (if she wants) or to do nothing (if the fancy takes her). Affirmative action grants her freebies and entitlements to which men have no comparable access. And of course the prettier that a woman is, the more privileges and entitlements she can wallow in. For all her practical utility, she might as well be a brain in a vat.
Traditionally, women’s stay-at-home option was a part of the marriage contract, a division of labour that came with responsibilities, from raising and schooling children to domestic and social duties. Implicit within this contract was moral conduct. Sharing the load with her husband, these environmental pressures and the attendant division of labour between the sexes constantly tested everyone at the boundaries between self, family and environment. So imagine how intelligent…not…today’s prettiest stay-at-home must be, given that she no longer bears the onus of these responsibilities. Today’s provided-for stay-at-home must be the ultimate hippopotamus wallowing in freebies for which she does not have to account. She is a parasite sucking the lifeblood from her clod provider and as useless as a brain in a vat. A brain in a vat is not sustainable – without stimulation from the environment, it is destined to turn to mush.
Now it is true that women often derive considerable stimulation from texting, gossiping, shopping and dancing. However, these forms of stimulation are not comparable to things like fixing a car, creating a computer, composing a work of art, or working out a business strategy. So what do we notice here in the differences in the ways in which men and women think? In women, it’s the absence of decision-making. There is no outcome to decide on in the process of texting, gossiping, shopping or dancing, beyond consolidating popularity with your girlfriends or more simply: pure indulgence for its own sake. And while housework and shopping for the family have an important part to play in domestic responsibilities, decision-making is rarely as consequential for women as it is for men.
There are limited risks in deciding on one brand of hairspray over another. For women, there are no consequences for mistakes that are comparable to getting sand in your engine, or misaligning the head of your engine, or messing up a masterpiece, or creating a short circuit on a circuit board, or your opponent getting wind of your strategy. Men have to make things work… often to the extent that it can become a matter of life and death. For women, texting, gossiping, shopping and dancing are not quite as dangerous or risky. Many things that women do can be done in their pyjamas, without even having to venture beyond the front door. Women’s activities may stimulate memory and white matter (glia), but they won’t stimulate the grey matter…the neurons. Maybe that’s why women age so much quicker than men…with the limited stimulation that texting, gossiping and dancing can provide, things must get old for them very quickly.
And here we come up against an essential property of all living things. Namely, a mind that is never tested is a mind that atrophies. Use it or lose it. And it does apply as much to men as it does to women, it’s just that men’s role as utility device limits their options for being an unproductive parasite. There is evidence that the “use it or lose it” principle is pervasive throughout the animal kingdom.

Australian feminasties were mortified and besides themselves when some "man" decided to state that maybe being a little more practical could solve a few more problems where women were concerned. But, just as that policeman in Canada dared to proffer a suggestion about the way women dressed, encouraged the childish slutwalk hysteria; those comments thus invoked similar hysterics when these two gentleman come to suggesting that women could use a bit more common sense when going out and maybe resist the laddette culture of getting  pissed and blacking out or spewing and sleeping on the street. Maybe that type of behaviour required some reappraisal as any thought capable human being may interpret it as such. We have the modern woman now ofcourse where their rise to stardom did not include a functioning frontal lobe capable of reasoning, I forgot.
But as women do, tell them they can't and they will go out of their way to show with fashion enhancements, that they can and don't ever even think about criticising any princess as that would be breaking the number one golden rule of "Never criticise a Woman", EVER..
The damage to their ego is apparently unrepairable..
Thank goodness there are a few exceptions. One willing to tell it like it is..

Miranda Devine has a bit of a go at it..
THE birthrate paradox is the phenomenon that the fewer children in a society, the more childishly the adults behave.

I made that up, but it makes sense that our declining birthrate would be linked to the infantile fury that greets any grown-up who imparts home truths that might impinge on people’s lifestyles.
God forbid that the grown-ups’ words of wisdom might cause people to take responsibility for their own behaviour instead of crying victim when their lives go pear-shaped.
Especially if that grown-up is a man.
Take the mouth-frothing abuse heaped on two men in the last week. NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione was abused for warning young women of the hazards of going out and getting blind drunk.
And Perth obstetrician Barry Walters was viciously pounced on for daring to say that women who have put off having babies until their late 30s are “self-centred”, and risk miscarriage, pregnancy complications and birth defects.
For his trouble, Scipione has been branded a “rape apologist” and patriarchal busybody who doesn’t realise that having random unwanted sex when blotto is every woman’s human right.
Walters has been denounced on TV, radio, columns, blogs and twitter, as a know-nothing dinosaur suffering from PMS, as in “Pale Male and Stale”.
Hello, ladies. These bearers of bad tidings might be male, but they actually had your best interests at heart.
Scipione was responding to the epidemic of drunk, drug-addled young women staggering around city streets in various states of undress and dangerous vulnerability, vomiting, passing out in the gutter, and being hauled into hospital by ambulance to have their stomachs pumped

Well, at least we did not get the lame excuse we got from some other poser. Demi's solid rebuild only cost her 226,000 pounds apparently and now complains bitterly that she cannot find work in the feminised capital of misandry, Hollywierd Hollywood and that's just terrible. After continually denying the fact that she is the result of a highly imagnative cutter and that people generally, probably not women, are sick to death of all that fakery, would prefer the real thing instead of obvious plastic implants or other re-adjustments just to get more attention than usual. How many times have you read about a female tossing in a relationship after a new boob job, which he paid for, as the extra attention waxes the female ego like it enhances the finish on your new sports model..

Well, it's desperation ofcourse, no one is as desperate for attention than a former face on the big screen and it's not getting any younger either. Then there is that endless claim of pending divorce which has been running rampant for the last couple of years while married to metrosexual and full time wimp Kutcher. But that could just be a plan to promote his inclusion into the two men etc. program. Be okay if it could possibly grow a decent stash but even that is a problem and so could being married to mommy create an image issue..
My apologies for exposing you to this crap (I thought it was funny) but it makes an almost change to the usual topic..

Please donate hair for new almost mustache..

Yes, we know..

Unless you have lived on the planet Zog for the better part of your life you would have noticed how the mating game has changed. Changed to such a degree that the desperation of the opposite sex is plainly and clearly demonstrated via endless moaning and whining about their failed efforts as they refuse to adjust to being reasonable and also the desperation demonstrated by older women chasing younger lads which works a treat apparently for at least six months and it's time to move on and it's mostly the lads who has had enough. Who wants to live with mother, right.,

Females have been informed, nee brainwashed into thinking that men are that desperate to find a partner and they are the only option as far as they can see. It fails to cross their minds that Men have been released from that duty and now have a few extra option they never had before, the main one is to be single and going your own way without the threat of state or judicial interference. To a fair amount, this appears to be a viable option as the word spreads that the shackles no longer have to be fastened and a lifetime of servitude can be avoided as well as the reaming one receives via the courts when the "till death do us part" princess decides times up and it's pay up time..

Men have until recently as in the past assumed that women were what they used to be, a caring and sharing individual who life blossomed when children played at her feet and the picket fence just received a fresh coat of paint. They have been told otherwise by a bunch of lying harpies and lesbians whose intent was to destroy that partnership regardless of the damage caused and women have swallowed it whole as it came with the promise that their lifestyle would improve as they would no longer have to do the dishes and change nappies. Conned and lied to, they now have new realisation to face up to, it's all changed and the sun don't shine from their anatomy anymore..

Poor things really, they have a major education coming but prefer to just keep their heads in the sand as long as they can, their astrologist did not advise them.. 

Meanwhile, by the way of an example " New Zealand has 50,000 unmarried bachelors (ave.Income 60,000) compared to 25,000 of the same in the female population(income unknown). Even that ratio is not tempting enough to even consider tying the knot. Men today are sick to death of the selfish, self serving attitude of today's females and they are now witnessing that inevitable rejection..

Dalrock describes how courtship has changed in the last 50 years, resulting in women ratcheting up their standards to ridiculous levels, making the search very costly for men:

Women traditionally were able to bask in the courtship process because they were the center of attention and men bore the financial, emotional, and social costs of the selection process.  What men typically find grueling women find delightful.  However, in cultures with traditional courtship men perceive the rewards to be high (lifetime commitment).  In addition, in such cultures the risks are moderated by rules of decorum and formal and informal pressure on the woman to minimize the number of men she allows to court her. While the average woman might wish to be courted by 50 men, the average man is in no position to bear the expense of courting 50 women in order to find a wife.
Ever since the beginning of the sexual revolution women have perceived the incentive to prolong courtship in one way or another.  The old rules no longer restricted them from extending the courtship period or required them to keep their lifetime commitment, and many men initially continued to play by the old set of rules.  This is at the very heart of choice addiction

 Screwed either Way..

.

Your body, your decision, right ?

Like a previous "world domination" dictator, demanding a superior aryan race, feminism decided that they too wanted a superior female sex but the end result was nothing short of dissappointing. They won't do as they are told. unleashing women has only unleashed their base instincts and behaviour which is directly opposite to the wet dream wish feminists had in mind..

There is, apparently, a difference between manipulating DNA to achieve that result or just imagining it to be true. Femmies have been fawning over the superiority of women ever since they introduced their "stats by design" expert reports to point out that the girls were actually, well, different. Who could argue against that. The repeated assaults were dramatised by the onside mass media with theoretical imaginations designed to demonstrate exactly where those speciality genes and dna enhancements were..

Ironically, feminists have also argued that both sexes are the product of their environment and there is fundamentally very little difference between the two. Hypocrisy much ?

I will have to dregg the history a little to find their illogical claims as all were clearly demonstrated to be a figment of their imagination except one. The one ability that has escaped argument and discussion (well, not really) is the fact that women do talk more but verbal diarrhoea does not a communicator make. So the "World's Greatest Communicator" got it's assessment as femmies were indeed making all sorts of claims regarding that enhanced ability. It forced the science boffins to poke and prod for evidence and promptly released studies to demonstrate that it was just another unfathomable assertion with no grounds in reality for the assumptions they were making. Verbalising every issue and act, during one's day (sleep time was excluded as boffins wanted to be present, teddy and all), does not indicate either an increased level of intelligence, ability or better communication techniques. Basically, when faced with verbal barrage, one's brain just shuts down and wanders to that little creek in the paddock which is your "safe zone" to combat stress and strain, just like your therapist told you to..

Femmies were not happy lying about just one imaginary trait, they had to invent a few more. The next one was the "Supermom", this one came about because femmies were slanging mothers like they wanted it out of fashion and have obviously succeeded. Supermom was their capitulation to the howls and screams the moms raised in the media and feminasties relented as they were making enemies of the sex they were supposed to be supporting. Studies now reports an increase in illnesses, psychological issues, health issues and exhaustion as outcomes of the "Supermom" indoctrination methodology and do I have any sympathy for the suckers who fell for that load of cobblers, guess. Even today that support relies totally on the politics of the female, Palin, Whitman, etc.(Palin is toast) are good examples of what happens if you got a job but your politics is wrong even though you are a member of the same sex. Femmies don't care about women more than their doctrine and politics. It's what they have always done..

So we have "Multitasking" which we have done to death already on this blog and it is really is too boring going down that same pathway again, it's probably flooded by now..

So there are just a few example on how comprehensively feminists lie and how totally fooled the female sex is and how ready that same sex is to jump aboard any indication that there may be something somewhere that will elevate that deflated ego after it has been walloped and knocked about by life and it's endless demands..

Next time, hopefully, you and others will not fall for the great con just because it appeals to the ego..
Feminism is akin to those emails you receive from Nigeria where you are promised a lot for little input but end up getting screwed..

One does have to wonder why women are having such a problem with relationships when all we hear is their endless moaning and bitching regarding it and it is never their fault. Have you noticed. They will talk endlessly to their girlfriends about all the issues that they perceive to be one, even intimate details are mulled over. The problem that creates is that whenever she invites her friends over they are all aware of every minute detail between the two of you and have already derived an opinion or judgement regarding the match up without knowing the other side of the story.

Even Hymowitz has a go at explaining the aversion..

Shocked? I wasn t. During the last few years researching this age group, I’ve stumbled onto a powerful underground current of male bitterness that has nothing to do with outsourcing, the Mancession, or any of the other issues we usually associate with contemporary male discontent. No, this is bitterness from guys who find the young women they might have hoped to hang out with entitled, dishonest, self-involved, slutty, manipulative, shallow, controlling and did I mention gold-digging?

Let's have a look at the claims the guys make about young women in today's society and see why they would prefer to stay clear of them at all costs. In other words they just don't like women and don't want a bar of them..

One has to bare in mind that the majority of females today are fully aware of all the details that feminists (riding in elevators with a member of the opposite sex is verboten) have introduced into society as all those trash ridden magazines are loaded with entitlement issues as well as manufacturers promoting the same thing like "because you are worth it". This ofcourse feeds the female ego like nothing else. Bear in mind also that from birth she has been given a free ride and continually informed what a princess she really is and those "positive reinforcing" comments stick like glue in their entitlement register permanently and it's like fodder to a hungry beast..
The ongoing assumption appears to be that she should have it all and anyone dares to refuse her wishes will be deemed to be a monster of every kind, denial is not something that registers in her cerebral cortex as that will be filtered out as undesirable and inconsequential..

Dishonesty
Dishonesty would also include the fact that she refuses to face up to reality and thereby wallows within a self induced delusional mindset that excludes any issue that she deems unnecessary or contrary to her needs. She will, at all cost ensure that her needs will be met first and every one else will be seen as being selfish as far as she is concerned. Being dishonest to herself about her own place in society is probably the worst of this self inflicted crime..

Self-Involved..
This could probably come under dishonesty as well but self involvement does cater to a slightly different meaning as well. Self involvement rules out other opinions as well as the needs of others as she always comes first. Whether it be work commitments or going out, any opposing view is considered to be irrelevant as she must always have right of way as she considers herself to be the most important person on the planet. She is special..

Slutty..
After those slutwalks, this would be an automatic conclusion as not one single voice was raised by that sex to discredit or requested they display some level of modesty. Sluttish behaviour is what you witness at night in bars and clubs where either their dress confirms it or their behaviour. Exposing copious amounts of their anatomy is apparently quite acceptable and deemed to be normal behaviour. It is also acceptable behaviour to indulge in sex at the drop of a hat and then wonder why they have a reputation that quickly builds and singles them out as a quick lay. Future relationships are harder to come by but she would be the last person she would blame for it..

Manipulative..
Manipulation is an inbuilt and automatic response process that women use to get their own way. Manipulation does and will be used in any way possible. Sex can be used as a bargaining chip in order to manipulate the unsuspecting mate who would be generally unaware that such behaviour would be used just so she can get her own way. That action states that it is not sex or money or dignity that encourages her to respond in that fashion (although it is quite often the case) but used solely so she will get her own way having been trained by her peers to perform it with perfection.

Shallow..
Shopping would be covered under this title as the act of buying anything of value does in actual fact give her a minutiae squirt of euphoria, about 25 milliseconds but that is enough to want to encourage that same response over and over again. Shallowness also covers quite a few other areas such as being able to jump from one relationship to another without a second of thought. It means that the marriage ceremony has to be the number one event and that is more important than the marriage itself, the act is more important than the deed.
Controlling..
One only has to witness any divorce procedure to witness this controlling freak. The divorce eventuates when she finally acts on it, she has already spent the year in consultation with shyster lawyers (similar to herself) as well as accountants to ensure she will get all what is coming her way  whether she deserve it or not. The controlling personality demands to know exactly where you are every single minute of every day as she is the one who feels insecure and requires endless confirmation..

Gold Diggers.
Women ofcourse will never marry down if they can help it. Their first response to any relationship is money and plenty of it. It is for that reason they are attracted to alphas who on most occasions are their own made man, with a sense and purpose to their lives. But they also don't have any issues with rejecting gold diggers as they are approached all the time by those type of women as their wealth can be seen by what they wear and what they drive. This makes them easy targets for gold diggers as gold is their first priority and second as well as third so a relationship with anyone who is loaded will be fair game. I have yet to hear a rich guy complain that he cannot find someone to date as they would be lining up for the privilege. Hopefully with the intention of either conning them into or blackmailing them into or manipulating them falsely into marriage or a partnership to ensure they will get a nice big slice of the pie. It's the gold diggers you have to watch a they will be your public enemy number one.

I have posted about this in the past but feel inclined to make another as I was once again confronted by it's reality. Question number one is "Who is the bigger liar, Men or Women ? ", this was asked by Chris Rock on one of his performances. As you can already guess, the females in the audience, very loudly exclaimed that it were men (loudly ofcourse, what else would you expect). Chris Rock, much to the chagrin of all women present stated that it were women without doubt who tell the biggest lies and goes on to give appropriate examples as follows -

Women lie without saying anything..

You ain't that tall without those high heels..
Your boobies ain't that big without those pushup bras..
Your hair ain't that long without that weave..
Your face ain't that colour..

Question number 2 was bought to my attention by one of those witless female magazine who did another article on the fake boob mentality and showed about a dozen Hollywood and other Entertainment females who were cosmetically enhanced by silicone, saline or whatever else they are stuffing in there at this point in time..

So I thought that a quick check may be well overdue just to see how many out there were not what they appear to be and while we were at it, what else were they hyping up to change their appearance. The popular girlie mags rage about this all the time and mos of us do not bother reading that brain dead drivel so we need some input to gauge reality..

The agency esti­mates the number of women worldwide with breast implants is between 5 and 10 million.

Whoa, the actual total of women receiving fake tit enhancement is apparently fairly vague as the number appears to be just a guesstimate..
Even the FDA is unaware of the total. Interesting, as there must be a fair amount of surgeries not registered or not supplying that information..

In England the total is as follows, the latest I could find was back in 2008..

Delegates to the annual conference of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (BAAPS) were shown the results of the largest ever UK-study into breast augmentation surgery.
It found the number of procedures for breast enlargements carried out by its members had risen 275 per cent - from 2,361 operations in 2002 to 6,497 in 2007.

Pamela Anderson

So what could be a better indicator on what the total actually is if the feds can only guess at the amount. What would be a better indicator on the amount of implants installed in any given year and who would know, the manufacturers ofcourse..

Allergan's implant business expected to record about $300 million in sales for 2010. The market for breast implants—both cosmetic and reconstructive—is about $820 million worldwide and growing 8% a year, according to Wells Fargo analyst Larry Biegelsen.

It will get to the stage where the new game would be "guess the female with real boobs" !!..
And ofcourse we must not forget the ever growing list of "stars" who line up for boob jobs..

• Pamela Anderson

• Bianca Beauchamp
• Linda Blair (later removed)
• Catherine Bosley
• Brooke Burke

Adriana Lima with breast implants

• Brett Butler

• Mary Carey (may not have implants)
• Asia Carrera
• Chelsea Charms
• Caroline Cossey

• Minnie Driver
• Amy Dumas

• Nicole Eggert (later reduced)
• Carmen Electra
• Erika Eleniak

• Morgan Fairchild
• Farrah Fawcett
• Lolo Ferrari
• Jane Fonda
• Patricia Ford

• Melanie Griffith
• Lisa Guerrero

Am I too Skinny, Not really Renee..

Now I am confused. Mostly due to the fact that regardless of height, weight or boob size, women are never happy about whatever they are. Something has to be wrong here, surely..

It's disheartening to think that while entire industries work to change their standards of beauty to more accurately reflect reality, many women are still so dissatisfied with their own bodies that they can't stand to see any representation of the female form -- be it plus-size or thin -- staring back at them from the pages of their magazine.

Yet they keep reading those magazines and from the look of it, just get pissed off by what they see. So the question would be, what would make them happy and what would they like to look like if given the chance..

I think plastic surgeons would also like to know the answer to that question as they would surely be given variations to that theme, done the job they were requested but afterwards be told that it just ain't right. Either wanted to be thinner, bustier, more arse or whatever part of the anatomy was causing offence and insult..

Meanwhile, the male side of the equation could not really give a rats rear about the whole issue as it's only of their own making, they are trying to fix an imaginary problem that they presume is an issue for someone who basically does not give a damn one way or the other. Weird, I know..

A controversial study published by Arizona State University, the University of Cologne in Germany and Erasmus University in the Netherlands found that ads featuring plus-size models cause women who are either normal weight or overweight to feel just as bad -- if not worse -- about themselves as ads featuring super-thin models.
Since the 2006 death of 21-year-old model, Ana Carolina Reston,who died due to complications of anorexia -- Reston was 5-foot 8-inches tall and weighed 88 pounds at the time of her death -- the fashion industry has been doubling back on its malnourished roots. 

The feminasties tried to pin the "anorexic" stupidity on men as being responsible for the inane actions of women, a fair stretch as they were promoting that women were strong and independent at the same time. So how do they justify that lie now that the facts are out and it is the case that regardless how they look, women just ain't happy..

Where did I put that Computer game again ?

Well, this is so really important it would appear as many have ofcourse casted aspersions about the Duchess and sister and one must decide for themselves whether or not that statement is true..

Buckingham Palace has released a statement concerning the Body Mass Index of the Duchess of Cambridge.
"Medical experts have confirmed that Catherine Middleton is within a healthy range," the statement reads.
"Please refrain from making disparaging remarks about the Duchess' weight. Such comments amount to skinnyism of a most serious nature."
The statement also refers to rampant arseism surrounding the Duchess' sister, Pippa: "She would dearly love to put this unsavoury incident behind her," it says.

Kate and Pippa obviously do not suffer from anything besides the envy of English as well as American women wishing they were half their own size..
Envy is a shocking thing. The ongoing harping of women pretending to be journalists cannot resist sniping about what they wish they had and looked like..

It does remind me of the words in that song by Van Morrison "All the girls walk by dressed up for each other". If you have a look on the web it will demonstrate exactly what that means when you type in Pippa or Kate's name..
Not that I actually give a rat's rearend but it does create a distraction as well as mild entertainment..

Personally, I like my woman with a bit more meat on em!!



More like this..


Bought to you by the Heart Foundation for the Benefit of Men's Health and Wellbeing..

Allure magazine offered support for this new trend when their 2011 Beauty Survey found "64 percent of all our respondents think women of mixed race represent the epitome of beauty."...In 2011, Allure also announced that Angelina Jolie had replaced Christie Brinkley as the new face of beauty, proclaiming there was "no longer such a thing as an all-American look." Americans, they said, "have branched out beyond the Barbie-doll ideal and embraced something quite different."

-While 73 percent of women said that a curvier body type is more appealing than it had been in 1991, 85 percent still said they wish their own hips were narrower.

-93 percent of women said the pressure to look young today is greater than ever before.

-In the 1991 beauty survey, men said women were at their most beautiful at age 31. In 2011, that ideal age had been reduced to 28.

-86 percent of men said that they wanted to weigh less as compared to 97 percent of women.

The above article is the usual bit of nascent belief that those childish glad mags promote as they do, really have a religious following to such a degree that it's almost akin to a drug habit, those magazines repeat over and over again the same inane message they promoted 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago and still the record player is stuck on stupid. But their addicted audience still pay their abeyance while absorbing the drivel and change their lives accordingly..

All I have noticed over the last ten years is that one of the preconditions of the front cover is to have at least one diet with questionable results, if not downright unhealthy and the other condition is to have either some member of royalty or some narcissistic example of womanhood lacking a good feed..

So to the survey we go and immediately we notice the narcissism arise as it just demonstrates how unhappy everyone is generally about their weight, their hip size, the age of their anatomy, it's not as if the plastic surgeons are not busy enough implanting, cutting and dicing, vacuuming and filing as well as readjusting bodies to smaller sizes..

I was always of the opinion that beauty was in the eye of the beholder plus it's only skin deep. Character and behaviour in my opinion is much more important than the shape of the nose or eyebrows. But heh, I may just be a realist rather than a follower of fairy tales. I cannot see the benefit of trying to achieve the impossible goals set by magazines whose sole object in life is to sell advertising..

Now this may come as a revelation but I have only ever originally heard the term "Tramp Stamp" used by women about other women. You know, the blameless..

So pick your favourite., if you can stomach it that is..