NO! to women

I came across this obnoxious Time magazine cover whilst reading a site I hadn't visited in a while - Rebuking Feminism.



I thought this was a fine way to start 2011 - by saying "NO" to women.
Strange how women will find ways and means to vilify and/or demean men. "An empowered woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" has been their war cry for much of 2010 and the years prior to that. As 2011 dawns and the second decade of the Millennium is well on its way, the realization that the bicycle doesn't need the fish either is slowly but surely sinking in.

But wait! It gets better! The fish will proclaim, evermore loudly and stridently that it doesn't need the bicycle, up and until something happens in which the bicycle is needed - think changing the air-conditioning ventilator, or the water in the car. Suddenly, these stinking women expect men to forget everything, automatically assume the mantle of Knight In Shining Armour and rescue her. I hate to burst the bubble for these pompous FemiStinks, but Damsels In Distress belonged to the Age of Chivalry. And Chivalry is long dead, thanks to the Femiturds.

Therefore I propose that in 2011, we say "NO" to women. All women. Since they voted en masse for a Feminist President to take the Oval Office, they can look to him when things go sour, as it ultimately will. You might think that I'm unfair in tarring all women with the same brush. Yes, since they spoke not against the tide of misandry, they are ALL guilty by association. No quarter asked and none given in return. In a later post I will offer ways to say "NO" to women.

Incidentally, notice that the cover of Time poses the rhetorical question "Are they happy?" My answer to that would be I don't know, I don't care and I don't give a flying f**k!"

Onward to a liberated 2011!