Tuesday, 4 December 2007

Parasites-in-waiting

A conversation in my current workplace last week featured around the stupidily high house prices in the UK, and how even two incomes - let alone one - are barely enough to get on the property ladder.

After I admitted I was content just to rent, one woman snootily insisted she'd rather own a home (she's 27 and still lives with her parents) than rent, but admitted that she couldn't possible even cover the monthly payments on a mortgage ("My credit card bills are so high, (GIGGLE!)") let alone be able to save up for the deposit.

In fact, she'd rather "own" a home someone else paid for. A man, ideally.

"What I need," she honestly and unashamedly declared, "is a rich man with a house of his own. Then he can marry me and I won't need to buy a house."

"Then if you divorce him, the house is yours," brayed another woman, some forty-something spinster who honestly looks a lot like this...





...only less green. But fatter. And more piggish.

There was much approving laughter and chuckles amidst the female pack of the office. Then a few sneering comments about the lack of 'good men.' Or rather, the lack of men with good houses for women to legally pinch via the sick joke that the marriage laws have become.

And these, ahem, "ladies" have the nerve to wonder why I choose to be a bachelor.

25 comments:

Uncharted Thoughts said...

Ha!

Next time I hear some ditz say she wants a man with money I'm calling her a parasite.

I'll let you know how it goes, any predictions on a response?

Uncharted Thoughts said...

Wait edit my previous post, I'm calling her a Sycophant. Those idiots won't know what it means and Sycophant doesn't sound like an insult, it is.

"a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite"

Anonymous said...

I have been reading feminist leftist writer Naomi Kliens book "the Shock doctrine" about disaster capitalism and it has struck me that this is EXACTLY what women do to us.

Step 1) Wait or even self create shock / or drama
Step 2) Mercenary cash grab
Step 3) repeat


Max - Sydney

phoenix said...

Haha! Women are always like that. They live off their parents and wear high heels, but they'll immediately disparage a man's income or living arragements and his height. Everytime I see a girl with 6 inch heels disparage a male that she's barely an inch taller than I just don't know how to even react. I mean common sense dictates without the heel you're a lot shorter, so why would you even make that attack?

maturin said...

Uncharted thoughts,

If you say that at work the most likely result is a rapid trip to HR where something unpleasant will happen. Learn from the mistakes of others - at work speak to women only about work-related topics.

Anonymous said...

God is good to have you back EB. This thing had me laughing out loud, although perhaps it wasn't entirely the sane kind. For such are the times in which we live.

Hmh said...

They really cannot see what they look like when they're doing this, can they?

Walk away from them. Don't even bother trying to fight them, they're addicted to the superiority without work crap. Be nice to women who are a) honourable and b) feminine and make damn sure that the group of not-married-never-marry-hags see you doing it.

Anonymous said...

Lads, a very good reply to the very common "where are all the good men" etc etc is this:

"Living happily with all the GOOD women." It's a witty reply,seemingly innocent, but it's not and they know it's not, for you're getting in a dig at them,suggesting that they're most certainly not good/decent or worthy of good men.They'll be scratching their heads and muttering amongst themselves, for you will have scored points in a breezy,non-threatining manner.
Peace.

Anonymous said...

"What I need," she honestly and unashamedly declared, "is a rich man with a house of his own. Then he can marry me and I won't need to buy a house."

"Then if you divorce him, the house is yours," brayed another woman, some forty-something spinster who honestly looks a lot like this...

This is exactly what they do in the US. I know someone who BUILT his own beautiful home only to have it taken away from him by his exwife who didn't put a penny or an ounce of sweat.

Women are disgusting pigs. Even joking about this things are a disgrace and exposes them for the materialistic evil gold diggers that most of them are.

ex-boyfriend said...

Tell her that there are loads of rich men in Saudi Arabia, or Libya, or Sierra Leone, just waiting to find a lovely young English girl to buy a house for. Tell her she should go on vacation (holiday for you UK folks) to one of these countries, so she can find herself a nice prince charming, instead of these sorry UK men she has to put up with. I guarantee you: the men she meets in these places will take really good care of her, and give her everything she deserves and then some.

Make sure to wave goodbye and good luck to princess at the airport...and try to restrain your laughter until her flight to paradise takes off.

Xaver said...

Living with parents at age 27 or older is not an indication of laziness or worthlessness per se, especially amidst real estate bubbles.

Nevertheless, the parasitical hussy in question is probably racking up credit card debt without planning to pay it off herself. In times of plenty, she squanders all. The hussy’s vanity overbears to the point of delusion, leading her to believe that self-sacrifice is not required for securing her financial future. Like many deluded women, she probably gambles on the gullibility of fools, anticipating the day when a somewhat well-off moron eagerly ties the knot with big sister.

She likely thinks, “I deserve a rich husband but am forced to compromise so I'll settle for plundering a lesser man instead. That is, right after I’ve finished partying.” Like the irresponsible fools who overvalued their inflated houses, she too has overestimated her real worth, which will inevitably sink in. Her bubble will burst upon discovering that less than wealthy men (leftovers) actually reject her as a wife and will pursue her for nothing more than vacuous sex. (Some women regard this as rape out of resentment.) Good men, rich or poor will of course continue to shake their heads and avoid such women entirely.

The pigs at work may be laughing now but when reality sinks in, the joke is on them. Finally, if this woman were male, he would be the biggest loser imaginable to those cheering swine.

Anonymous said...

After I admitted I was content just to rent, one woman snootily insisted she'd rather own a home (she's 27 and still lives with her parents) than rent, but admitted that she couldn't possible even cover the monthly payments on a mortgage ("My credit card bills are so high, (GIGGLE!)") let alone be able to save up for the deposit.

In fact, she'd rather "own" a home someone else paid for. A man, ideally.

"What I need," she honestly and unashamedly declared, "is a rich man with a house of his own. Then he can marry me and I won't need to buy a house."

"Then if you divorce him, the house is yours," brayed another woman, some forty-something spinster who honestly looks a lot like this...




Why is that so interesting?

Well, in former times nubile girls were married young and in fact they changed the father for a husband, means they the man that provided for her was the husband instead of the father.

That was the way it was done and viewed as good.
Of course it sounds extremely sexist.

Some modern christians still think it is the way to go with daughters.


It makes me thinking that this woman actually will trade her father for a husband willingly and unashamedly.

She does not want to work like a man.

As if there had been no womens liberation at all, she in fact behaves like a victorian nubile girl. Without the benfit for the husband.


It makes me ask: Maybe the old thinking and arranged marriage of girls was in fact something girls themselves wished?

Anonymous said...

Awesome blog.

Anonymous said...

Women who deceive:
http://men.style.com/details/features/full?id=content_5092&pageNum=3

Then in August, he says, she told him she was pregnant and was keeping it. "She was pregnant all of May, all of June, and all of July," Jeremy says. "I said, 'Why didn't you tell me about this sooner?' She's like, 'I didn't want you to influence my decision.' Something that has potential impact on me for the rest of my life, she doesn't want me influencing her decision!?"

More than a year and $6,500 in legal fees later, Jeremy has a 7-month-old boy he's never met, a child-support case pending, and a judge who's less than sympathetic toward his allegations of contraceptive deceit. Even his own attorney told him he'd better ditch that dream of becoming a full-time musician and focus on the computer gig that he'd hoped would only supplement his income: "She was like, 'You know what? You gotta be a man. You're gonna have to have a job 40 hours a week, and you need to support this child—this is your responsibility and your obligation.' And I'm thinking to myself, like, 'How is all of this my responsibility and my obligation when none of this was my choice?'"




If you have dreams in your life, if you want to achieve something do not marry and do not have children.

You will have to work your ass off in the most boring job.

It is the decision of the woman if she get pregnant, remains pregnant or not.

A man has no say in it. He just have to pay money and does not see his child. But he pays and pays and pays.

The courts do not protect his rights.


Do not marry, do not have children.


But if you marry, marry an extremely religious, virgin woman.

Anonymous said...

Wondering what you think about this.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/65416.php

"CASSELBERRY, Fla. — A police officer who slipped and injured a knee during a rescue call has sued the family who phoned 911 after their 1-year-old boy nearly drowned.
The child, Joey Cosmillo, fell into the family pool in January. He was resuscitated but suffered brain damage and can't walk, talk or swallow. He lives in a nursing home and eats and breathes through tubes.
Police Sgt. Andrea Eichhorn alleges the boy's family left a puddle of water on the floor, causing her fall during the rescue effort. She broke her knee and missed two months of work.
Eichhorn's attorney, David Heil, said she now has persistent knee pain and will likely develop arthritis. He said city benefits paid by workers' compensation and some disability checks helped with medical bills, but it wasn't enough.
"It's a situation where the Cosmillos have caused these problems, brought them on themselves, then tried to play the victim," Heil said.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.
"The loss we've suffered, and she's seeking money?" said Richard Cosmillo, the boy's grandfather who lived in the home with his wife and the boy's mother. "Of course there's going to be water in the house. He was sopping wet when we brought him in."
Eichhorn's personnel file includes numerous commendations. The 12-year veteran has worked as a hostage negotiator and prostitution decoy, and even wrestled razors away from a suicidal person. "

phoenix said...

ex-boyfriend: I don't think that will work like we'd think it would. Those countries are becoming feminized too, and this will just make it quicker. Have you seen what's happening in India? Their VAWA is even more extreme than ours. I actually feel very sorry for our foreign brothers, as I think their cultures will make men even less adept to dealing with feminist women than ours.

Hmh said...

"Finally, if this woman were male, he would be the biggest loser imaginable to those cheering swine."

Fuckin' A Xaver.

If you look at women like this and hold them to the precise same standards that young men are held to, it's amazing how many of them suddenly look like the idiots they are: mired in debt, stuck in dead-end jobs, angry, fat, delusional losers. Unfortunately they've been taught from birth that not only do they have a right to be in command, they MUST be in command. Just what we need eh?

Anon 03:24 - that is a very interesting point, but I've just thought of another. Aren't these the precise same Victorian women who'd drive their husbands crazy?

Anonymous said...

Anon 03:24. Of course women wished the old marriage arrangement. They were mislead into believing they wanted to work.

I wrote a text explaining my ideas about that. It's a bit long but it's worthwhile. I call it "History of feminism" and I will appreciate any comment. It is as follows:


Back then, in the “patriarchy”, women worked hard inside home and men worked even harder outside home. But, because of contraceptives (who reduced the number of children), compulsory schooling, universal water and electricity supply, home appliances and illegal nannies and servants, housework was made easier and easier, producing more and more free time for the housewife.

How was this new free time to be spent? Distributing it equally between men and women (so both sexes would have a part-time job) was never considered. Giving it entirely to the wife (who could watch TV or chat with friends) was preferred by higher classes. But most families spent this time making the wife work outside home. With more money and more employees, things became more expensive and purchasing power of salaries plummeted so this double professional work did not produce more wealth for families.

Of course, no sane woman (or man) would trade being at home (with her children or wasting time) for being slaved in a job with a boss. So this change had to be sold. The incentives were women’s sexual freedom and the “entitlement” fantasy, according to which women could have it all (a perfect career and family, which is impossible because there is no time enough for both) and were ENTITLED to having it all.

So women entered into the workplace, thinking they would find the sanctuary of male power or the glamorous place they saw in Cosmo. And many of them found themselves stuck in a bad job (not a “career”) and in a crappy place.

Moreover, since sexually liberated women were giving away sex, men realized that them did not have to marry and provide all his life in order to get laid. Because of this and the way men were treated in divorce courts, marriage rates plummeted. Even women who were in a marriage were dissatisfied because the entitlement fantasy taught them they could have the PERFECT marriage (with a rich, handsome, alpha male and sensitive guy, which is contradictory).

Women were sure they were entitled to a perfect family and a perfect career but they found themselves with a crappy job and a “crappy” marriage (or no marriage at all). They weren’t able to blame feminism for this (because they considered feminism their ally). So they blame men (the perfect enemy). Women became bitter, rude and angry with men which decreased even more marriage rates, make women angrier and so on and so forth.

Anonymous said...

Let's have a vote:

Who wants Duncan to reconstruct his blog in its entirety, including all of the old posts?

Please respond to this.

Anonymous said...

@hmh

"Aren't these the precise same Victorian women who'd drive their husbands crazy?"

I think that in victorian times many women drove their husband crazy sometimes. But these men never punished, abused them or behaved violently. It was just something that happened, something a man had to endure and he did.

You are right: these women look totally stupid and only because they have a nice body and men like to help women, they will find a husband and never face criticism.

Take me: I have no debts, no car, I wear the same clothes every three to four weeks and some are 7 year old.
But I have a small bunch of money and hope to make it bigger.

Anonymous said...

Everything is male dominated.

"In this male dominated society women have few options to assert their rights [therefore they chop off men's penis]"

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=10924


Even mutilations are always excused. how a society can be male dominated and at the same time allowing cuting off penises is hard to imagine.:-))

Were Thailand actually male dominated, there would be no chopping off penis.

barnoz said...

Duncan,

Great blog, keep it up. I have just started a blog myself -

http://barnoz.wordpress.com/

Don't let em get you down. There is another 50% to the 6 billion on our planet :-)

Barnoz

Anonymous said...

Girls and bad boys.

We know that girls are attracted to exciting bad boys.

In this article, the times says that british girls get raped and forced into prostitution by pakistani.

But the Times also says that the girls do like to befriend these men and are attracted to them, they are not literally raped but rather decide to live an exciting life themselves.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2538090.ece


Now think: in the old days girls were constantly supervised until married. It seems harsh and exaggerated to do this.

But the british example shows, that if you do not do that, the girls will deliberately decide to date the bad boys, pimps with money and BMWs.

It is shocking.

ex-boyfriend said...

Phoenix:
Maybe in India it's a fem state, but not in places under Sharia (Islamic) law. I'm not saying I approve of Sharia (I sure as hell don't), but you can rest assured it would not be friendly to the western-world concept of feminism. If Andrea Dworkin lived in Iran, they'd have given her a "crane ride" in no time flat.

I can see your point about how some foreign countries are following the US's lead (or outdoing us, as is the case with Sweden), but there are still many places where life is just too brutal for any nonsensical entitlement mentality to take any meaningful hold.

Trust me: in the places I mentioned, any western princess would be in for the rudest awakening of her existence.

Anonymous said...

EB, why not use the H.R department and beat them at their own game. that sort of talk about men only being good for their money is sexist and derogatory. stick a gag in 'em and whach them choke!