American Women

[Mmbmmb]

Jelly Donut,

I think that only partly it’s a problem with desire. We simply should support the financing of researches on cloning. Maybe it would solve the problem of desire.
And nobody undermines Polvo’s skills. I just can have the same for free. You can’t know the skills of AM I’ve met.

And you’re right. These words are also from St Matthew’s gospel (7:1-6) but you can find them in St Luke’s version of Sermon on the Mount (6:41-42).

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...2;&version=49;

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...6;&version=31;

I simply don’t remember all Bible by heart. I translated the sentence from memory and now I see that I even made some mistakes. Sorry.

Besides I’m not a good catholic. I don’t go to the church. For me celebrating Easter means visiting friends and family, going to the graves of relatives etc.

Don’t think that Poland is very catholic country. Most people don’t read encyclics although sometimes a stain on glass can become a Mother of God’s miraculous portrait and gatheres a crowd of believers.

Anyway the level of faith and its maturity in Poland has nothing to do with the thread about AW.

[Jelly Donut]

mmbmmb -

One other thing, I read your last post completely just now.

I can't resist the irony of correcting you on this point - since you seem to celebrate Easter this past weekend and you are not among saints here. I'm pretty sure you are quoting the book of Matthew, not Luke. Sermon on the Mount.

Not that I'm being judgmental or anything like that....

Unfotunately judging the others they forgot about Christ’s words from St Luke gospel " Why do you see a splinter in your brother’s eye and you don’t notice a beam in yours? "

[Wet Nose]

fascinating story about erin prizzey - a woman i take my hat off for:
==================================================

how feminists tried to destroy the family

erin pizzey, founder of the battered wives' refuge, on how militant feminists - with the collusion of labour's leading women - hijacked her cause and used it to try to demonise all men.

during 1970, i was a young housewife with a husband, two children, two dogs and a cat. we lived in hammersmith, west london, and i didn't see much of my husband because he worked for tv's nationwide. i was lonely and isolated, and longed for something other than the usual cooking, cleaning and housework to enter my life.

by the early seventies, a new movement for women - demanding equality and rights - began to make headlines in the daily newspapers. among the jargon, i read the words "solidarity" and "support". i passionately believed that women would no longer find themselves isolated from each other, and in the future could unite to change our society for the better.

within a few days i had the address of a local group in chiswick, and i was on my way to join the women's liberation movement. i was asked to pay £3 and ten shillings as a joining fee, told to call other women "sisters" and that our meetings were to be called "collectives".

my fascination with this new movement lasted only a few months. at the huge "collectives", i heard shrill women preaching hatred of the family. they said the family was not a safe place for women and children. i was horrified at their virulence and violent tendencies. i stood on the same platforms trying to reason with the leading lights of this new organisation.

i ended up being thrown out by the movement. my crime was to warn some of the women working in the women's liberation movement office off shaftesbury avenue that if it persisted in cooperating with a plan to bomb biba, a fashionable clothes shop in kensington, i would call the police.

biba was bombed because the women's movement thought it was a capitalist enterprise devoted to sexualising women's bodies.

i decided that i was wasting my time trying to influence what, to my mind, was a marxist/ feminist movement touting for money from gullible women like myself.

by that time, i'd met a small group of women in my area who agreed with me. we persuaded hounslow council to give us a tiny house in belmont terrace in chiswick. we had two rooms upstairs, two rooms downstairs, a kitchen and an outside lavatory. we installed a telephone and typewriter, and we were in business.

every day after dropping my children at school, i went to our little house, which we called the women's aid. soon women from all over chiswick were coming to ask for help. at last we had somewhere women could meet each other and bring their children. my long, lonely days were over.

but then something happened that made me understand that our role was going to be more than just a forum where women could exchange ideas. one day, a lady came in to see us. she took off her jersey, and we saw that she was bruised and swollen across her breasts and back. her husband had taken a chair leg to her. she looked at me and said: "no one will help me."

for a moment i was somersaulted back in time. i was six years old, standing in front of a teacher at school. my legs were striped and bleeding from a whipping i had received from an ironing cord. "my mother did this to me last night," i said. "no wonder," replied the teacher. "'you're a dreadful child."

no one would help me then and nobody would ever imagine that my beautiful, rich mother - who was married to a diplomat - could be a violent abuser.

until that moment 35 years later, i had buried my past and assumed that because we had social workers, probation officers, doctors, hospitals and solicitors, victims of violence had enough help.

i quickly discovered, as battered women with their children poured into the house, that whatever was going on behind other people's front doors was seen as nobody else's business.

if someone was beaten up on the street, it was a criminal offence; the same beating behind a closed door was called "a domestic"' and the police had no rights or power to interfere.

the shocking fact for me was that there had been a deafening silence on the subject of domestic violence.

all the social agencies knew about domestic violence, but nobody talked about it. i searched for literature to help me understand this epidemic, but there was nothing to read except a few articles on child abuse in medical journals.

so in 1974 i decided to write scream quietly or the neighbours will hear, the first book in the world on domestic violence. i revealed that women and children were being abused in their own homes and they couldn't escape because the law wouldn't protect them.

if a husband claimed he would have his wife back, she couldn't claim any money from the department of health and social security, and social services could only offer to take the children into care.

meanwhile, our little house was packed with women fleeing their violent partners - sometimes as many as 56 mothers and children in four rooms. all had terrible stories, but i recognised almost immediately that not all the women were innocent. some were as violent as the men, and violent towards their children.

the social workers involved with these women told me i was wasting my time because the women would only return to their partners.

i was determined to try to break the chain of violence. but as the local newspaper picked up the story of our house, i grew worried about a very different threat.

i knew that the radical feminist movement was running out of national support because more sensible women had shunned their anti-male, anti-family agenda. not only were they looking for a cause, they also wanted money.

in 1974, the women living in my refuge organised a meeting in our local church hall to encourage other groups to open refuges across the country.

we were astonished and frightened that many of the radical lesbian and feminist activists that i had seen in the collectives attended. they began to vote themselves into a national movement across the country.

after a stormy argument, i left the hall with my abused mothers - and what i had most feared happened.

in a matter of months, the feminist movement hijacked the domestic violence movement, not just in britain, but internationally.

our grant was given to them and they had a legitimate reason to hate and blame all men. they came out with sweeping statements which were as biased as they were ignorant. "all women are innocent victims of men's violence," they declared.

they opened most of the refuges in the country and banned men from working in them or sitting on their governing committees.

women with alcohol or drug problems were refused admittance, as were boys over 12 years old. refuges that let men work there were refused affiliation.

our group in chiswick worked with as many refuges as we could. good, caring women still work in refuges across the country, but many women working in the feminist refuges, about 350, admit they are failing women who most need them.

with the first donation we received in 1972, we employed a male playgroup leader because we felt our children needed the experience of good, gentle men. we devised a treatment programme for women who recognised that they, too, were violent and dysfunctional. and we concentrated on children hurt by violence and sexual abuse.

yet the feminist refuges continued to create training programmes that described only male violence against women. slowly, the police and other organisations were brainwashed into ignoring the research that was proving men could also be victims.

despite attacks in the press from feminist journalists and threatening anonymous telephone calls, i continued to argue that violence was a learned pattern of behaviour from early childhood.

when, in the mid-eighties, i published prone to violence, about my work with violence-prone women and their children, i was picketed by hundreds of women from feminist refuges, holding placards which read: "all men are bastards" and "all men are [CodeWord127]".

because of violent threats, i had to have a police escort around the country.

it was bad enough that this relatively small group of women was influencing social workers and police. but i became aware of a far more insidious development in the form of public policy-making by powerful women, which was creating a poisonous attitude towards men.

in 1990, harriet harman (who became a cabinet minister), anna coote (who became an adviser to labour's minister for women) and patricia hewitt (yes, she's in the labour cabinet, too!) expressed their beliefs in a social policy paper called the family way.

it said: "it cannot be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life, or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion."

it was a staggering attack on men and their role in modern life.

hewitt, in a book by geoff dench called transforming men published in 1995, said: "but if we want fathers to play a full role in their children's lives, then we need to bring men into the playgroups and nurseries and the schools. and here, of course, we hit the immediate difficulty of whether we can trust men with children."

in 1998, however, the home office published a historic study which stipulated that men as well as women could be victims of domestic violence.

with that report in my hand, i tried to reason with joan ruddock, who was then minister for women. the figures for battered men were "minuscule" she insisted and she continued to refer to men only as "perpetrators".

for nearly four decades, these pernicious attitudes towards family life, fathers and boys have permeated the thinking of our society to such an extent that male teachers and carers are now afraid to touch or cuddle children.

men can be accused of violence towards their partners and sexual abuse without evidence. courts discriminate against fathers and refuse to allow them access to their children on the whims of vicious partners.

of course, there are dangerous men who manipulate the court systems and social services to persecute their partners and children. but by blaming all men, we have diluted the focus on this minority of men and pushed aside the many men who would be willing to work with women towards solutions.

i believe that the feminist movement envisaged a new utopia that depended upon destroying family life. in the new century, so their credo ran, the family unit will consist of only women and their children. fathers are dispensable. and all that was yoked - unforgivably - to the debate about domestic violence.

to my mind, it has never been a gender issue - those exposed to violence in early childhood often grow up to repeat what they have learned, regardless of whether they are girls or boys.

i look back with sadness to my young self and my vision that there could be places where people - men, women and children who have suffered physical and sexual abuse - could find help, and if they were violent could be given a second chance to learn to live peacefully.

i believe that vision was hijacked by vengeful women who have ghetto-ised the refuge movement and used it to persecute men. surely the time has come to challenge this evil ideology and insist that men take their rightful place in the refuge movement.

we need an inclusive movement that offers support to everyone that needs it. as for me - i will always continue to work with anyone who needs my help or can help others - and yes, that includes men.

[Wet Nose]

article written by a good ol' southern girl who appears to have ended up on another planet, which just so happened to be columbia university

http://www.nysun.com/article/47267?page_no=1

excerpts:

"one particularly disturbing day, my professor said, "all of you who are victims of [CodeWord123] or attempted [CodeWord123] raise your hands." as more than half the class raised their hands, i began to think weird thoughts. i wondered if my college required a solid sat score and emergency room records for admission.

it took me weeks to realize their definition of [CodeWord123] was not exactly webster's. we began to study andrea dworkin who said, "romance is [CodeWord123] embellished with meaningful looks." and catherine mackinnon who said, "politically, i call it [CodeWord123] whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." and marilyn french, who famously said, "all men are [CodeWord127] and that's all they are." you can imagine my disillusionment to learn mister rogers of "mister rogers' neighborhood," and mahatma gandhi were predators."

[Jelly Donut]

Why life is always so problematical?

I think it has something to do with desire.

You should take Polvo's offer. 50 percent off for a guy with his kind of experience is a fantastic deal. He knows things about vertical wall push-ups and side-scissor positions - makes me blush just thinking about it.

[Mmbmmb]

Angus Magee, the clip only confirmed me in my belief that there are still wonderful AW. Look at the mother of this girl. Maybe she isn’t so young and beautiful as her daughter but she hasn’t “garbage in her head’. Gentlemen, you have a woman with experience, full of life, who doesn’t want your money because she has her own one and what’s the most important she loves AM. How can you complain now ?

Polvo, believe me that there was a big smile on my face when I saw your post and proposition but I’ll be sincere. As long as AM will give me sex for free I won’t pay even 1 cent for it.

[Polvo]

Dear gentlemen, .........And I don’t want anyone to judge me too. It’s my own business if I pay handsome Slovak guys for sex or not. .........Give me hope.

Mmbmmb:

You sound fascinating. To give you hope, to show my appreciation for your intelligence, your education, and as I am not Slovak I would be honored if you accepted my offer of a 50% discount .

Suerte!!

Polvo

[Yogin]

Thanks for the vid. So funny because it's true. Captured perfectly the essence of AW who demand it all, play by no rules, take no responsibility for their actions, believe they can control the sexuality of all men, and then cry & pout like a little girl when it all comes back to them.

[Mmbmmb]

Dear gentlemen,

1) Viva Chicas: Mmbmmb is likely a woman. No man would write that way. She is tying to infiltrate into the system like an insurgent.

Yes, I am a woman. I already wrote it and I’m not an insurgent. I repeat on more time, nobody pay me for my writing. I would like someone to do this but nobody wants to waste his/her money.

Besides it’s an internet forum. Everyone can write what he/she thinks. You wrote that my post was a crap. Why? I don’t understand what crappy was in it. Please, when you write something like it, write also what caused your opinion.

And by the way, what’s Panoche? Sorry my English isn’t so good. Isn’t it a Spanish word?

2) Jelly Donut: I'm a bit confused by the whole section that you write after that point. Are you joking around? Are you flipping sex roles in order to make some kind of point?

Yes, I was joking a little. But this situation was true, even if he was only joking with me (at least I hope he was). My Slovak friend really thought he’s very handsome: .) and wanted 100$. I think that if I would smile nicely to him he agreed for the 30$; ) Anyway my chances were small from the beginning because he had too many pretty Slovak and AW around him. But as I wrote: c’est la vie; .)

I wrote about him because I wanted to say that my EE male friends hadn’t problems with picking up AW and these American girls didn’t look like Quasimodo (from the Hunchback of Notre Dame by V. Hugo).

Besides I noticed that most posts in the thread were so serious, without any humor but full of bitterness and I don’t like to take life seriously.

Wasn’t it Shakespeare who wrote:

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player

That struts and frets his hour upon the stage

And then is heard no more: it is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

But enough of philosophy. I noticed that it’s not popular lately. You have to forgive me my humanistic education: .)

And would I pay the Slovak guy 30$? I don’t know, unluckily I had no chance to find out it.

"Maybe we can work out a swap of some kind? "

Interesting idea but I like my country even if it’s far away from being perfect. Why life is always so problematical?

3) Yogin: Your response was that of a thoughtful mature adult, without any recriminations against us.

Why should I have any recriminations? Because you don’t like AW or, maybe, you pay prostitues for sex? Yogin, what can I tell you? I understand who created this forum but I don’t really care about it. I mean I don’t know you and to tell the truth I don’t want to know where you live, work and if you have family or not. It’s not a purpose of our "conversation". I think noone has right to judge other people. I saw too many good catholics (peculiar character of my country, nothing against Catholicism) who were more saint then pope; .) Unfotunately judging the others they forgot about Christ’s words from St Luke gospel " Why do you see a splinter in your brother’s eye and you don’t notice a beam in yours? "

And I don’t want anyone to judge me too. It’s my own business if I pay handsome Slovak guys for sex or not. Luckily our deputies hadn’t such stupid ideas as their Russian colleagues that Russian women should belong only to Russian men and it should be approve as a law: .) But it’s a subject for another discussion.

"Yes "Keeping up with the Joneses" is not a uniquely American thing, but our consumerist society has perfected it to a new low. We treat people as disposable consumer commodities. "

I guess you found an answer why some AW behave in the bitchy way. But what’s sad that you can expect such behaviour from different people and in different places. Good example is what you wrote about teaching job. When I was in US I tried not to touch any child, but also generally people. And I think that people at this forum aren’t the only ones who are fed up of it.

"The first thing a woman asks me upon meeting is "what do you do" meaning "how much $ you make". Often the 2nd-3rd question is "what kind of car you drive". "

Not even 1, only 1 woman, asked if you like your job and she didn’t mention the money or car?

Give me hope.

[Angus Magee]

I am sure that this small clip will be appreciated here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApG7CYuq8Pc

Had me in stitches. The daughter is portrayed perfectly.

[Yogin]

dear mmbmmb,

thanks for the followup. thanks for telling us who you are. nothing wrong with being a woman, writing like one, and posting on this site. so please don't apologize for sounding like one or trying to change. unlike most aw, you own your femininity, a refreshing change of pace for us here in sex prison usa. your response was that of a thoughtful mature adult, without any recriminations against us. but you know what? 95% of aw, after reading this thread, would be furious, full of ridiculous denials, and would call us women-hating/beating, perverted losers. truth is, the ideas & opinions presented here are either typical of am who can't espouse them publicly for fear of reprisal, or they are so desperate for lack of decent aws that they will accept any loud cow who moos their way, or they truly are ignorant of the big wonderful world out there that offers far better choices of women.

yes "keeping up with the joneses" is not a uniquely american thing, but our consumerist society has perfected it to a new low. we treat people as disposable consumer commodities. the first thing a woman asks me upon meeting is "what do you do" meaning "how much $ you make". often the 2nd-3rd question is "what kind of car you drive".

this site is for men to exchange information on how to get sex, whether or not for money. i like to think that most guys here want to treat a woman like a lady (whether she is a prostitute or a prime minister) and don't hate women. we are just fed up with all the paranoia & suspicion, as if we're potential [CodeWord127] & molestors. i open doors for women, offer them my seat on the train, even when i get a dirty look for doing so. were i to apply for job teaching children, they asked me why i want the job, and i said "because i love kids", they would call the police on me. and we're sick of feminists complaining about how "oppressed" women are here, when in fact they run the country in every sense of the word.

[Jelly Donut]

Thanks.

Well, I appreciate your appreciation of American men and I'm happy you think the guys you met were "nice".

I'm a bit confused by the whole section that you write after that point. Are you joking around? Are you flipping sex roles in order to make a point?

I guess so.

Anyway, it's true. There are a vast number of fantastic American women here in the United States. It sounds like they would be happier in Poland. Maybe we can work out a swap of some kind?

JELLY DONUT:

Did you ever date American women?

No, I didn’t because I’m not a lesbian. I’ve dated only American men and I have very nice memories:.). And even if nobody bought me expensive presents I have to say that American men are in the top of list the most cute guys I’ve ever met;.) Anyway a far as I remember my EE friends (male) didn’t have a lot of problems with picking up American girls. And believe me they weren’t millionaires. I would even say that AW spoiled my EE friends. [Here I agree with you that they are horrible;.)] At the beginning my handsome, Slovak friend said I can do with him anything what I want for 30 $;.) I said "What? ! For 30$? I won’t pay so much. ". I hoped to beat the price, after all I’m only a poor girl from EE;.) but I thought over his proposition and said to myself "Don’t be greedy. ". So I agreed to pay the price but he told me " Now it’s 100$. " "What? ! 100$, why? " It turned out that for AW 30$ isn’t exorbitant price or at least he told me that and he didn’t want to date with me. Oh, c’est la vie! Thanks God there were AM who wanted to kiss my breasts absoloutly for free and particularly one AM did it with such passion as he would work for 100$;.) I’m a lucky girl;.)

But seriously, I guess gentlemen that you’re still convinced that AW are the worst in the world. But for me people are the same all over the world. The difference between USA and other, not so developed countries is that US society is very consumable, maybe more then other societies. What doesn’t change the fact that they try to catch us society up.
.

[CBGBConnisur]

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...l=7&thispage=1

Here is an Oregon story detailing how an overpaid doctor put a hooker through university, bought her a car, paid her rent and got fucked over by her. Guys, please remember hookers exist only to be fucked and to catch our sperm. If you do anything else, you will get fucked.

No matter whether we are talking about the sluts of Thailand or the States, the message stays the same. Cum on them, pay them and leave. Do not get involved.

Excellent advice, it says volumes about a woman's character when one lives in a rich Western country and has sex with men to make money, in general this rule is for women in all societies, rich and poor. Thai women can never be trusted.

[Viva Chicas]

Mmbmmb is likely a woman. No man would write that way. She is tying to infiltrate into the system like an insurgent.

Mmbmmb is not in search of Panoche, she has one!

Her writing was many paragraphs of emotional theory. If Mmbmmb were a man, especially from Eastern Europe, he would never be writing that crap.

That's just my opinion, and it should be your's.

[Lomusa]

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey...290.xml&coll=1