And if a woman says whatever it is that she is saying (not that anyone is telling us what she is saying) the man must be guilty, right?
His offense was that a woman claims to feel offended – which is pretty standard female reaction to a strong man who fails to make a pickup when she was expecting one, or who makes a pickup, and then makes a pickup of someone else, or who makes a pickup and then does not follow through, perhaps he was only joking, or who is already married and faithful to his wife.
This issue is much debated between PUAs and MRAs, between Pick Up Artists and Men’s Rights Activists.
PUAs say that men lead and women follow, that as bird must fly, and a fish must swim, men and women must follow their innate natures, that men must be strong.
MRAs point out that that is illegal. That by law men must submit and women command. Since women who command are unhappy, angry, and disagreeable, because they are acting against their natures, and are prone to issuing commands that are mutually contradictory and impossible to obey, the MRA solution is to run away.
Show me a household where the housework is equally and fairly shared, including such traditionally female tasks as picking up stuff, and I will show you a marriage where the husband sleeps on the couch, and once in a week or so the wife’s lover drops in to bang her on the main bed, rough her up a bit, take her money, and leave a mess for the husband to clean up.
When in doubt, do what Sean Connery would have done.
Watch Barbra Walters get wet when Sean Connery refuses to be bullied.
Sean Connery regrets nothing!
If Herman Cain refuses to be bullied, as Sean Connery refused to be bullied, the female voters will respond to Cain much as Barbra Walters did to Sean Connery.
There is a large and rapidly growing discrepancy between what is theoretically illegal, and what is in fact acceptable and commonly done. We are all felons now. The average honest respectable middle class entrepreneur has offenses worth several hundred years of jail time. It is near impossible to anything important in a way that is wholly legal, unless you are government employee, or an employee of a quasi governmental organization.
Such laws are enforced selectively, against such people as Herman Cain. Any political candidate that fails to please the ruling elite will get this treatment. No candidate that could possibly get us out of this mess will please the ruling elite, so any candidate that could possibly get us out of this mess will be charged with hate crimes and suchlike.
The average busy professional commits three felonies a day. Make sure you commit a few felony hate crimes among them.
True story: Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger was bicycling icognito, a press man with him, but no secret service. A woman recognized him and said “Oh my God, it is President Clinton”
To which he replied, “No, I am the other sex offender.”
Our sex offenders are better than their sex offenders!
Tags: appeasement, feminism
I just found it hilarious that after Connery finished with reiterating his previous remarks on slapping disrespectful women, Walters noted that he’d been married 31 years. Has Walters ever been married?
It seems to me that Connery is simply one of those men who stayed the same while things got more “progressive.” You used to see men slapping women in old movies. Maybe it was more commonplace back then.
I’ve never seen a woman leave a man who slapped her occasionally when she was disrespectful. Connery’s right: women are especially good at provocation, even when they’re allowed to have the last word. I wonder how many men have died becuase of this trait in women.
Exactly. Once everyone is a felon, the Cathedral can take out anyone, or any group of people. All they need is selective enforcement, with the occasional rewrite of the heuristics they use to apply the laws.
This point is commonly made by liberals against the War on Drugs (accusing it, predictably, of racism), but I don’t think any of them realize it applies to many of the initiatives they push: domestic violence, sexual harassment, hate crime, etc. legislation so nebulous as to undermine the rule of law and replace it by the rule of unelected bureaucrats indoctrinated in the dogma of the professorial and media classes.
In Tom Ball’s terminology, this is the Second Set of Books; in mine, it is the implementation of duocodicalism (transparently derived from Ball) to establish a Gumb government, a near-totalitarian state ruled by bureaucrats, the true nature of which is difficult to see because of said duocodicalism and the fact that the existence of the Second Set of Books is rarely, if ever, acknowledged.
Also, I find it interesting how many of Obama’s opponents have run into sex scandals, although this is the first time one has gotten hit this early.
Isn’t it only natural? We are all sinners after all. Priests used to be able to bully anyone, as we all are fallen since the original sin.
Seems to be the natural continuation of that.