The sexodus: Men giving up on women and checking out

[canada-man]

FEMEN busted again for depending on men and their money. Femen is founded by a man and the models hand picked by him and treated like slaves. After that was exposed. They started getting funds from George Soros. Soros stop feeding FEMEN after they opened a branch in Israel. FEMEN continues to be at the mercy of men and depending on men and their money.


https://www.facebook.com/7314465335...41828.731446533565306/744458202264139/?type=1








Pussy Riot the Russian trouble makers that desecrated a church an act is is illegal in every country is also funded by the CIA's civilian arm the national endowment for democracy

http://joequinn.net/2014/02/26/pussy-riot-a-grotesque-creation-of-the-us-state-department/

http://www.constantinereport.com/th...ngineered-a-hypocritical-free-speech-scandal/



some FEMEN idiots are hired porn stars/escorts

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Les-FEMEN-ni-putes-ni-soumises-15096.html



because most women don't identify as feminists. they always resort to hiring protesters.

 

[canada-man]

i find stuff you decide



and the stripper who falsely accused the duke lacrosse players was convicted of murder


related book that will be released next month


http://www.amazon.com/She-Lied-Coll...ords=She+Lied!:+College+Women+Who+Cried+Rape:


She Lied!: College Women Who Cried Rape: An Emerging Social Issue from Duke Lacrosse to Rolling Stone



Publication Date: February 1, 2015
Unfortunately, women lie! This fact has never been more accurate concerning young woman in universities who have an ax to grind against an ex-boyfriend, a jaded lover or males generally.

Today, the many lessons learned during the 2006 Duke Lacrosse scandal has been forgotten by our society, our political leaders and current university administrators. The Duke scandal nearly destroyed the lives of three student-athletes, a coaching career and an entire team’s season over one false allegation of sexual assault. If you think this scenario can’t play out in another university think again! Universities are more anti-male than ever with the passage of the new “yes means yes” law in California and similar institutional policies elsewhere.

Today’s colleges and universities have turned a blind eye to an emerging false allegation epidemic. Most liberal and feminist administrators pounce on even the most unbelievable allegations of sexual assault due to political correctness. After the Duke University scandal, universities and many feminist lawmakers have pushed for and won strict anti-male sexual assault laws and institutional policies. Their aim was to take protections away from falsely accused young men. These actions only demonize all men and make it easier for manipulative women to make false allegations of rape “stick” in college tribunals. With California’s new “Yes means Yes” laws and other institutional policies in other states our sons have never been more in peril at the hands of university administrators. Now, all it takes is for a consensual sexual encounter to occur one day and a false sexual harassment complaint could be filed the next.

This book will look examine the disturbing trend of false rape and sexual assault allegations on college campuses after the Duke Lacrosse scandal. In addition, we will examine the need to protect the falsely accused from feminist, university administration and anti-male laws such as “Yes means Yes”. The public clearly needs more oversight into university tribunals and institutional policies… not to protect women, but the numerous young men falsely accused of rape and sexual assault behind closed doors.

 

[canada-man]

more stuff you cannot make up. exploit third world poor women cry misogyny when caught red handed

The editor of the magazine embroiled in the scandal of feminist T-shirts being made by women paid just 62p an hour has dismissed the controversy as ‘misogynistic’.
An investigation by The Mail on Sunday uncovered the shocking conditions in a factory making T-shirts bearing the slogan ‘This Is What A Feminist Looks Like’ for a campaign by the Fawcett Society backed by Elle magazine.
A union leader described the factory in Mauritius as a ‘sweatshop’ after the MoS report in November revealed that employees were sleeping 16 to a room.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...stunt-don-t-ask-investigation-getting-on.html



Ever since, those involved – including fashion retailer Whistles – have repeatedly refused to concede that the workers’ conditions were unacceptable or reveal the findings of their own investigation.
The latest rebuttal came yesterday as Elle editor Lorraine Candy claimed, ‘This was not a sweatshop by any standard’ – despite the cramped dormitories and employees being paid below the living wage.
It has also emerged that the Fawcett Society – which works for women’s rights – had reacted to the report by saying The Mail on Sunday ‘is not a friend of women’.

 

[canada-man]

The Damaged Feminist


Emily McCombs is a recovering addict with tattoos and a pierced nose, not to mention a history of bulimia and sexual perversion, so it only makes sense that she is executive editor of the feminist blog XOJane.com. Feminism is a movement of “broken people” who blame “society” for their misfortunes and thus feel compelled to avenge themselves by destroying civilization as we know it.
Now in her early 30s, McCombs confesses that she was an alcoholic, used “cocaine daily for several years” and spent “over a decade as an on-again-off-again bulimic.” As weird as that is, such symptoms of psychiatric abnormality are rather commonly found in the solipsistic “personal-is-political” narratives that feminists write when they aren’t too busy ranting about patriarchal oppression. Like so many other damaged women,McCombs rationalizes her lunatic life as a reaction to “trauma”:


I accept that I made these decisions, although I don’t know that I had much choice — I was so young and had experienced so much trauma that I was probably using the only tools I knew of to survive. . . .
However I explain my past, I have to accept the consequences of my actions.
What manner of “trauma” did Emily McCombs experience? It seems to have been mainly self-inflicted, as she elsewhere confesses:
I started having sex with adult men when I was 13 years old.
Neglected at home and ostracized at school, I found comfort in the sexual attentions of older men. Unlike boys my own age, who cruelly taunted me, older men were nice to me. Unlike my emotionally distant father, older men paid attention to me.
She packs an awful lot of self-pity into those four sentences. Her family “neglected” her, she was “ostracized at school,” boys her age “cruelly taunted” her, her father was “emotionally distant,” and so McCombs is entirely blameless for her adolescent promiscuity.
This is not self-awareness. It’s rationalization.
Feminism provides a political context within which women can exculpate themselves for every problem in their lives. Whatever a woman may do to contribute to her own unhappiness, she can never be blamed — because patriarchy! Male supremacy is the Swiss Army Knife of feminist theory, a universal explanatory tool capable of turning any misfortune in a woman’s life into proof of her victimhood.

more at http://theothermccain.com/2015/01/25/the-damaged-feminist/

 

[canada-man]

Puerto Rican Men Know All About Feminist “Verbal Abuse” Laws
Law 54 Disaster Offers Warning for Street-Harassment Prohibitionists

http://blog.panampost.com/frank-wor...en-know-all-about-feminist-verbal-abuse-laws/

Frank Worley-Lopez November 14, 2014 at 12:02 pm



In the last few weeks, feminists have been up in arms about a video of a woman walking through New York City and being harassed by men. The harassment the subject faced includes such horrid things as “hello” and “good morning.” Parodies have cropped up across the internet, including my personal favorite which features “Star Wars” heroine Princess Leia being accosted by everyone from the movie including dear old dad.

The group behind the original video, which I won’t give additional publicity to by mentioning their name, are working for legislation to outlaw street harassment. Apparently these strong, independent feminists, who don’t need a man, need the man of government to protect them from words they don’t like.
Curiously, while modern feminists deride men for such offenses as saying “damn” at a passing attractive woman, they have no issue with teaching little girls how to use really foul language to get a point across, as demonstrated in the “potty mouth princesses” video. (If you haven’t seen it, prepare to be offended.)


This is nothing new. The Marxists behind modern feminism have always sought new and creative ways to stifle speech and destroy the family unit.
In Puerto Rico, this started with the controversial Law 54 (1989) against domestic violence. Everyone is against domestic violence right? Yet within the original law is a section on verbal and psychological abuse. In plain language, that means if a man yells at a woman or tries to insult, control, or shame her, he can be charged with a crime and face years in prison.
Hard to believe right? No one could ever be jailed for calling his spouse a name? After all, don’t women outperform men when it comes to verbal abuse, intimidation, and manipulation? In my experience they do.
A few years ago I wrote a short piece on Puerto Rico’s Law 54, on one of my personal blogs. The article wasn’t even well written in my opinion; yet it has been among my most read posts ever. Despite not having promoted it much, it continues to be read on a frequent basis, and on occasion I still get comments.
One comment this week exposes yet another reason why people, men in particular, are leaving Puerto Rico for good. The anonymous individual shared his story of Law 54, and I have paraphrased it here for your entertainment and/or disgust:

I was accused under Law 54 two years ago for “verbal abuse,” whatever that means. In a phone conversation while my girlfriend was clearly out cheating, I called her a whore and a bitch. I made no threats, just two words.
She went to the police, and I was arrested at my house that night for Law 54 “verbal abuse.” I went to one hell of a dangerous prison and luckily was bailed out by a true friend who had to post US$7,500 cash as bond, since my bail was … ready for this? $75,000.
Yes, this was the first time I had ever been arrested. I didn’t even know calling a girl a dirty name was illegal in Puerto Rico. Perhaps I should make a cake and celebrate her cheating next time?
Well, after being bailed out from a third-world jail, I was ready to face a judge. Yes, it looked worse than those jails on Locked Up Abroad. There were drugs everywhere, no correction officers, 75 guys in one cage with cell phones, weapons, and gangs everywhere.
I went to court for the next four months every few weeks, since they kept postponing or denying motions. The woman who pressed charges never wanted me arrested; she was just doing what Puerto Rican women are trained to do: go to the police and cry.
She wanted the charges dropped, but she couldn’t manage that because it was the state versus me, not the accuser versus me. The prosecutor wanted three years in jail for me — I kid you not — for calling her a bad name. Three years out of my life in a stinky Puerto Rican prison.
Luckily the judge and eventually the prosecutor came to their senses and dropped the case. I left the island two weeks later, never to return.
I can’t explain how hopeless I felt, like I was in an Arab country being persecuted for something. And get this, I got lucky. When asked on trial if she needed a psychologist or was emotionally harmed by my two words, she said no. However, while I was in court I saw other girls cry and say “yes” that they needed counseling, and the men got whisked away for long jail terms.
Imagine if she had said yes. I would be in jail to this day.
It is crazy and corrupt in Puerto Rico. Do not come to visit or mingle with the women. It is a very serious problem, and I do not know of many friends who haven’t had Law 54 used against them. Only one deserved it, because he hit the girl. The other friends I know who faced Law 54 were simply there because their wives or girlfriends shed tears in front of a cop.
​

So there it is, in black and white. If this were an isolated case, we could brush it off, but both publicly and privately I have received information about this happening again, and again, and again.


This is standard neo-Marxist strategy, just like the street harassment video. Scream bloody murder at a problem that already has a solution, and then pass laws to protect people from imagined threats.
The result is an end to the family and an end to freedom. And don’t believe for a moment this strategy has anything to do with equality.
The solution? Personal responsibility and self-defense. If a man hits a woman, she has the right to protect herself; if a woman hits a man, he also has a right to self-defense.
In addition, the charges should never be the “state against the individual” in a crime between individuals. The crime should be heard as the person versus the person, and if the alleged victim says he doesn’t want to press charges, you should save the taxpayer money and drop the case.

 

[canada-man]

Jessica Valenti wants mentally ill women to know that their mental illness is the fault of the oppressive patriarchy:

A study published this month in the journal Sex Roles reveals that some of the sexism women face — from catcalling and sexual harassment to sexual objectification and violence — makes women generally more fearful and anxious. The researchers from the University of Missouri-Kansas and Georgia State University found a substantive “link between physical safety concerns and psychological distress” . . .
When I spoke to Dr. Laurel B Watson, an assistant professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and one of the researchers in the study, she told me that one of the hurdles in studying the impact that sexism has on women’s mental health is that women have normalized this fear and anxiety so completely. . . .
This fear and anxiety that women experience isn’t simply anecdotal: women are 70% more likely than men to experience depression and we’re twice as likely to have an anxiety disorder, something Watson,who has a degree in counseling psychology, says is “absolutely” related to living with misogyny.
“Over time, existing in a state of hypervigilance has a negative impact, and leads to a higher level of psychological distress,” she explained. . . .

You can read the whole thing, because (a) you have an expensive computer in front of you, (b) you’re sufficiently well-educated to be able to read at college-level and (c) you have nothing better to do with your time than to read a Jessica Valenti column, which tells you that (d) you’re living in a prosperous industrialized society. Congratulations!

Gratitude for one’s good fortune, however, is not what feminism is all about. Feminism is about endless misery and dissatisfaction and — lest we forget — blaming the oppressive patriarchy.
Would it surprise anyone to discover that Professor Watson’s undergraduate degree was in psychology, “with a concentration in women’s studies”? Perhaps you will also be surprised to learn that Professor Watson once worked as a counselor at an Atlanta abortion clinic, the Feminist Women’s Health Center. And I’m sure you will then be shocked to learn that Professor Watson’s publications include “Gay-Straight Alliance Advisors: Negotiating Multiple Ecological Systems When Advocating for LGBTQ” (Journal of LGBT Youth, 2010) and “Experiences of Objectification and Sexual Risk Behaviors Among Sexual Minority Men” (Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2014)? But here, let’s just look at the “Major Research Interests” listed on Professor Watson’s curriculum vitae:

Research interests include: women’s and gender-related themes, sexual objectification experiences, interpersonal violence and trauma, social justice and advocacy, LGBTQIQ-related themes, body image/disordered eating, race and ethnicity-related themes, feminist identity development, feminist pedagogy and epistemology.

Where does research end and advocacy begin, Professor Watson? And does it not occur to you that your own privileged position within the Feminist-Industrial Complex of academia — where you’re paid to produce research for such publications as the Journal of LGBT Youth — is evidence contradicting your basic premise, i.e., that American society is a wall-to-wall nightmare of sexist, racist, homophobic oppression so intensely traumatic as to induce psychiatric disorders?

Only within the comfort of the Higher Education Bubble, is it possible for Laura B. Watson, Ph.D., to assert that American woman are “existing in a state of hypervigilance” that “leads to a higher level of psychological distress,” and to have this bizarre assertion taken seriously.

You know what might cause “psychological distress,” Professor Watson? Murder. According to the FBI, the city of Detroit had the highest homicide rate (45 per 100,000 residents) in the country in 2013, edging out New Orleans (41 per 100,000 residents) as the most dangerous city in America. Checking the data provided on victims, we find that 78% of murder victims (9,523) were male, compared to 22% (2,707) who were female. Furthermore, 44% of murder victims (5,352) were black males, although black people are only 13% of the U.S. population, so that black males (less than 7% of the population) were overrepresented among murder victims by a factor of more than 6-to-1.

Males are at greatest risk of violent death, especially black males, yet here we have Professor Watson telling us that women are living in a condition “psychological distress”? Here we have Jessica Valenti using Professor Watson’s research to tell us that “everyday expressions of misogyny could be seriously impacting [women’s] mental health”? And here we have Professor Watson herself bolstering her assertions with a convenient anecdote:

For example, she said “I went for a jog recently, and I saw a guy in a van — and if I jogged past him, he could have opened the door and snatched me,” Watson told me. “I had an immediate response to move to the other side of the van or to change my direction, I didn’t think twice about it.”
“It’s normalized, but it has such an effect on your life — women constrain their behaviors every day.”

OMG! Men drive vans! Women are in “a state of hypervigilance”!


more at http://theothermccain.com/2015/01/27/feminism-and-first-world-problems-hypervigilance-as-irrational-phobia/

 

[canada-man]

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/homonormativity-101/

homophobia from a popular feminist website claiming homosexuality hurts feminism



2 month ago Rose Mcgowan attack gay men. claiming they are more misogynist that straight males

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...e-misogynistic-than-straight-men-9841873.html



but a few months earlier the C.E.O of Mozilla was descriminated based on creed when it was revealed he donated to an organization supporting the traditional definition of marriage. an act which is protected by the first amendment

 

[canada-man]

Anti-feminist Karen Straughan, aka GirlWritesWhat and member of the Honey Badgers, lectures about feminist bigotry, hypocrisy, and abuse of power. Delivered at the "Male Students In Peril" conference at Kennesaw State University in Georgia on November 1, 2014.

 

[canada-man]

all sex is rape unless the man "proves" the women said yes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...oman-said-Yes-under-tough-new-rape-rules.html

 

[canada-man]

her look these are Joy Smith's buddies!


http://theothermccain.com/2015/01/29/the-first-rule-of-feminism/

Feminism is the belief that men are entirely useless, except when men are destructive and evil. If you think any man ever had any skill, knowledge or virtue that entitled him to be treated with courtesy and respect, you are not a feminist. According to feminism, all that is good and worthy in human history — all important accomplishments, all acts of courage and kindness — has been done by women. Anyone who believes otherwise has been brainwashed by the patriarchal myth that males have imposed on society as “history” and so-called “science.”
Such are the esoteric doctrines of feminism, the c0re ideology that inspires their endless complaints about inequality and oppression. By proclaiming that they have a monopoly of wisdom and virtue, feminists thereby empower themselves to tell the rest of us what we are allowed to say and what we are permitted to think. If at any time you make any statement that is not consistent with feminist ideology, you will be vilified and insulted, shouted down by the feminist mob that exercises a heckler’s veto over public discourse. Totalitarian movements require totalitarian tactics, and the foremost goal of feminists is to silence those whom they aim to enslave or destroy. See for yourself:
RULES FOR MEN IN FEMINIST MOVEMENTS

• Shut up and listen
• Ask me, don’t tell me
• Prepare to be wrong
• Call fellow men out on problematic behaviour
• Never dismiss the lived experiences of women
• Do not attempt to take a leadership role

Feminists who say their movement is about “equality” are lying. Feminism is a movement about power — absolute and unlimited power — and therefore the first rule for men in feminist movements is, SHUT UP. (That list of rules has been “liked” or “reblogged” more than 20,000 times on Tumblr.com since it was posted in April 2013.)
The three principles of feminism are selfishness, dishonesty and hate. If feminism had a fourth principle, it would be more hate.



“I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding . . . time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. . . . I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”
— Amanda **********tte, March 2014




Feminism’s fanatical hatred empowers feminist dishonesty. They usually try to pretend that “choice” isn’t about hating babies, but the question remains: If feminists don’t hate babies, why do they want to kill them?
To which their answer is, SHUT UP.
We cannot be permitted to speak the truth about feminism. Facts and logic are tools of the patriarchy, and ordinary “common sense” — well, that’s just an obsolete male-supremacist myth!
A movement that systematically excludes honest, sane and intelligent people will tend to become a paranoid hive of fools. This brings us to “Ask a Radfem,” a Tumlbr blog that describe its purpose thus:
This blog exists to bridge a gap between people with honest questions about radical feminism, and radical feminists with something to say.
Let’s meet a few of the site’s contributors, shall we?

• Ash is a fat, creative writer, lesbian radical feminist from Australia who aspires to be a women’s health nurse. She is a gender abolitionist, is anti-kink culture and pro the destruction of the porn and prostitution industries – but supports porn actresses and prostitutes themselves.
• Cammy is a white-passing American woman from a Puerto Rican household. A bisexual radical feminist in the Southern U.S., she focuses on lesbians, childfreedom, gender and sex industry abolition, religious apostates and the poor. She is an atheist and a survivor of trauma from emotional abuse, molestation and rape dealing with C-PTSD, anxiety and depression. Past experiences include BDSM, polyamory, self-harming, abortion, an abusive marriage, Christianity and Islam.
• Blossom is an outreach worker from Canada. Her passion lies in harm reduction, outreach, & housing initiatives with people experiencing addiction & homelessness. She is a de-transitioned lesbian who lived “as male” from 2004-2011 and has experienced the process of transition and eventual de-transition with the help of mental health professionals and family. . . . She is also a former webcam girl and behind-the-scenes employee of various adult websites. She focuses on gender abolition, mental health, & lesbian activism.
• Lauren (Lo) is a 17-year-old white-passing Chicana from Southern California. Her career aspiration is to work against internet crimes against children for either local or federal law enforcement. She identifies as bisexual and is open about her struggle with anxiety disorder.
• R4df3m is a no-nonsense fat, disabled, bisexual radical feminist from Portland, Oregon who does not mince words. A former sex worker and abuse survivor, she speaks primarily about the harms of the sex industry and the realities of sex based oppression. As a bisexual radical woman in a heterosexual marriage she addresses the unique intersections of straight passing privilege and the abuse inherent to heterosexual relationships.

It’s an all-star lineup of feminist kooks. You could not assemble such a crew of weirdos by accident. The pattern is not random. Crazy movements attract crazy people. Here is one of the more seemingly sane contributors to “Ask a Radfem”:
Alisha M. is a feminist blogger, writer, musician, and poet, from the Southern United States. She is focused on gender abolition, women’s media, health, spirituality and activism for women with mental illness.
Feminism = “activism for women with mental illness.” Thanks for the concise definition, Alisha! Now let’s get to the big question:
Can/how a male promote radical feminism?
Listening. Really listening and being involved. Listening. This is something I’m trying to explain to my male friends who by some stroke of “altruism” really want to help be better allies. Just listen. Listen with empathy and emotions, be human, be vulnerable . . . accept silence on your part and accept sometimes being wrong.
-Alisha
In other words, SHUT UP.
Or applaud the feminist’s courage for killing her baby:
I couldn’t bring another monster into the world. We already have enough enemies as it is.
That’s from an article with the empowering feminist headline, “I Aborted My Baby — Because it was a Boy.”
Feminism is organized insanity. Why be merely crazy, when you can turn your mental illness into a political movement?

 

[gibsomstreet]

And now, for a little "outside looking in"...
http://www.motherjones.com/politics...mens-rights-movement-feminism-misogyny-trolls

 

[HentaiRanger]

I gave up dating for almost 4 years and started seeing MPAs, escorts or getting lap dances at mostly fairbanks.

 

[Forgeticame]

canada man, what is it about the propagation of the rights and safety of women that makes you so very very insecure? you certainly put a lot of time into reading publications whose journalistic integrity is questionable at best, looking for others as terrified as yourself; this is obviously an issue that means a great deal to you. yes, some people calling themselves feminists have done a good job of making a mockery of what is a legitimate and valid subject of study. but you won't admit, probably even to yourself, that advocating for the rights of women has any place at all in society.
you're handing your nuts over to the feminists you hate. your fragile masculinity shrivels at the very thought of women fighting for respect and equal rights because you del that the patriarchal status quo is defendable. feminists love scaring the shit out of misogynist douchebags, and your behaviour is that of a man who is very, very afraid.
if your sense of your own masculinity was impenetrable, ou wouldn't be kicking and screaming about feminism.
but really, i didn't have to point any of this out. your compulsive posting speaks volumes. i wonder why no one else pointed out the obvious. maybe forum tourette's is enough to give you some rank here.
shame. maybe you had some childhood trauma involving a feminist.

 

[checks]

but really, i didn't have to point any of this out. your compulsive posting speaks volumes. i wonder why no one else pointed out the obvious. maybe forum tourette's is enough to give you some rank here.
shame. maybe you had some childhood trauma involving a feminist.

Nobody pointed it out because most people probably have him on ignore. He's a misogynist, plain and simple. I read a few of his posts and I truly believe that he actually hates women.

 

[canada-man]

so instead of trying to refute the arguments check and forgetitcame(most likley men) resort to shaming tactics and cry "misogyny" i didn't kow posting in thread once a day is "compulsive posting" and yes if you criticize feminism (only 20% women identify as feminists) you hate women. and as usual criticize my masculinity when i don't toe the feminist partyline.





https://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:

“You misogynist creep!”
“Why do you hate women?”
“Do you love your mother?”
“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
“You are mean-spirited.”
“You view women as doormats.”
“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
“You are going to make me cry.”

canada man, what is it about the propagation of the rights and safety of women that makes you so very very insecure?

where in my posts i criticize the propagation of rights and safety of women?




few identify as feminists
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html



Jian Ghomeshi a male feminist allegedly sexually abusing women for years

 

[nobody123]

so instead of trying to refute the arguments check and forgetitcame(most likley men) resort to shaming tactics and cry "misogyny"

Dude, not everyone has the 17 hours a day to dedicate to reading your posts and linked material. Please, don't take this as a criticism. By all means, keep doing your thing. Just don't expect everyone to have the, errr, singular dedication to the theme that you possess. But, you know, whatever floats your boat. Keep fucking that chicken.

And now on what is shirley a note entirely unrelated to your relentless earnest injections into the discourse, here is a lovely comic about Sea Lions...

 

[canada-man]

nobody forcs you to read the thread

 

[nobody123]

nobody forcs you to read the thread

Thank Christ! Of course, by the same token, nobody is forbidding me from quickly scanning it to see if it contains anything of interest of value. Aaaaaaaaaaaand... still nope.

 

[nobody123]

Also why fuck chickens where there are ducks. yeah ducks. I don't often dress up like Shirley Temple and get spanked with a hockey stick but when I do I prefer to be spanked by a duck.

Love that Garfunkel and Oats. Nicely done.


And in case the reference was too obscure, "keep fucking that chicken" is what may well be the world's greatest on-air blunder, blurted out in 2009 by Fox News anchor Ernie Anastos:

 

[gibsomstreet]

http://mashable.com/2015/01/28/online-harassment-sarkeesian/?utm_cid=mash-com-fb-main-link