1 5 10 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 35 40
Quote# 54120

[on a poll about if their son had a boyfriend]
I would have to wonder where I went wrong that he would even possibly consider doing this. And if he did, I would forbid him to ever see this person again, remind him of exactly how and why this behavior is sinful, take him to a priest for confession, go to confession myself for my failure in allowing it happen in the first place, and then have both of us do serious penance.

Farlander, Gamefaqs 50 Comments [12/12/2008 12:59:56 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Wackadoodle
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 22609

(concerning this comment: http://www.fstdt.com/comments.asp?id=22219)

some asshole submitted a quote from this group to this site.
Some atheist thought he was funny. Well he wasn't because he is an atheist and therefore he is wrong.


Alex Wainright, Facebook: Allow Prayer in Schools 34 Comments [3/27/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123191

[Reacting to the official reveal that Tracer, the mascot of the video game Overwatch, is a lesbian]

This decision ruins her character, now she's no longer a role model for little girls, because being gay isn't normal and shouldn't be promoted to children or teenagers.

Kograk, Battle Net Forum 52 Comments [12/23/2016 2:35:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: The Reptilian Jew
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123271

Massively overstating my ass---the number of muzzie terrorist attacks WORLDWIDE, NOT U.S. since 9/11 stands at 28,135 as of today.
Criminals can always get guns. As long as the public can buy them to protect themselves theres NO issue at all. Dirtbag breaks in, attacks, rapes whatever-shoot dirtbag dead (center of mass or headshots preferable)--end of story.
Use a gun in a crime--execution if you dont get shot dead.
The ONLY permissible government assistance should be to veterans as they have performed their duty for the people of this country, and those who are CERTIFIABLY unable to work in any capacity from disability.
Lunatics? There used to be state hospitals they were locked up in, NOT the Federal governments problem. Criminally insane as in killers? Old Sparky, some sodium cyanide, (or in Utah) a gallows or bullets will put a permanent end to that behavior.
Booze? Personal problem. No one forces anyone to drink until stupid and have issues, but if one is ignorant enough to drink and drive, AND kill someone--25 years minimum in the joint. Second offense--execution.
Those who choose to live stupidly and harm others ARENT victims, they are criminals and should be dealt with accordingly
Its called personal responsibility and is an alien concept to liberals.?

Dave Miller, YouTube 8 Comments [12/27/2016 8:31:14 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 22702

The gays need to be the ones in jail. Being a gay should be illegal these kids where piss drunk and the gays tried beating their ass and where gonna try to knock them out and take advantage of these poor kids. Put the gays in the jail they will be with their own kind.

USA, Topix.net 25 Comments [3/29/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123208

I hate "le depressed" normies

Somehow they wanna kill themselves but then you read "my boryfriend/girlfriend of x years" sometimes followed with "just left me" and that just gets me riled up, like fuck off you have something to live for, we have nothing.
FUCK OFF ALREADY NORMIES YOU FUCKING PIECES OF SHIT

Notsadhonestly, /r/incels 20 Comments [12/27/2016 8:43:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123251

I also remember very clearly my own prepubescent sexual desires, which started further back than I can remember since my very earliest memories consist of lusting after girls and women around age four. If there is such a thing as childhood sexual innocence, it only pertains to knowledge rather than desires. I would call it ignorance, and it's not something worth idealizing. For example, as a prepubescent boy I was too ignorant to know that there was nothing wrong with the angle of my erect penis (I thought it pointed too high to fit in a vagina and was supposed to stand 90 degrees out), but I sure as hell knew I wanted to fuck women, and I *know* I would have benefited from actually doing so instead of the masturbation I was confined to. Criminalizing representations that "sexualize children," then, becomes a desperate attempt to suppress facts -- facts which most people must know deep down since they lived through it. Feminists use the police state to enforce a lie, which is very naive and would be comical if the consequences weren't so ghastly.

Eivind Berge, Resisting the sex-hostility of our times 6 Comments [12/27/2016 8:23:19 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Xavier Luigi
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 1213

while the earth was young it was covered with water. the flood happened while the earth was young. my source was the discovery channel. and everybody knows thats what scientists think anyways. thats why there are so many expaditions to go look for lost ships of the flood and stuff like that."

"yes i do admit that the colarado river does do erosion to the canyon but i and many others believe that the river couldnt have eroded that much i 6,000 years. and the canyon is very high. the river was not that deep at one time to have washed out the top and bottom of the canyon. it would have only eroded the bottom."

"whatever. continental drift. its hard to believe thats how all these fossils of things that were way at the bottom of the ocean have been found up there. but believe what you want. i dont care.

punkrocker71, POD Warrior Forum 3 Comments [11/1/2002 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 1475

1 ) ok ill get his name. Hitler also killed on the basis of evolution so theres one. The founder of planed parent hood(once a nazi scientist) was a devout evolutionist. Theres tons! 2) Where does it say its not ok? What if i dont care about surviving? We all die dont we? Its my life not yours. What are u saying evolutionist have laws like the ten commandments? That some supernatural force will act on me if i dont obey those rules? Isnt that objecting to your argument? 3) They had evolution in schools and were strictly taught it was truth. People throughout histroy who did not have Gods words (middle ages, today etc) Raped murdered scammed whatever. What would it do if god taught lizards were green? Well that obvious and does not do anything for your argument. If u think u can have god with atheism ur contradicting urself and must not have a clear understanding of the english language.

asbesttes, POD Warrior Forum 9 Comments [11/1/2002 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123203

There must be some kind of "collective amnesia syndrome" concerning the long-range memory of most people, because I have no trouble remembering the sexual desires I had for select female classmates as far back as 3rd grade (and beyond).
And some of those desires were a bit fornicative in nature as well.

And, no, they were not caused by any "acts of molestation" by any adults in my life. In fact, if anything, I kept my thoughts and fantasies a secret from, especially, my parents and other relatives. And never shared them with any classmates either. I already figured out they were a bit of an "oddity" on my part as no-one else seemed to have any of the kinds of hang-ups that were the norm for me. My desires and fantasies were purely of my own making---stuff I came up with.
I'm quite convinced that if the people in my life knew half of what I was visualizing in my mind at the time they would have been quite shocked.
Oddly enough, to this day, a lot of what would turn me on with a woman is the same things that were turning me on with the girls in my class.

But, on the subject of "childhood innocence", yes the sexual desires start prepubescent. However, due to cultural taboos and the fact that most parents wait until their offspring is "old enough to" understand certain select "facts of life", there is still that overall naivety children have about the subject as they still have no total concept of all the nuances of the subject itself, of just how involved and abstract (in the lascivious sense) the adult versions can get (and let's face it: A lot of adult sex can get WAY OUT THERE).
As such, a child's version, lust-filled as it can be, is still quite tame in comparison, even when mildly perverted. In short: A kid exposed to some of the harsher versions of "adult sex" does stand to suffer a sizable degree of "culture shock". I'm not questioning that.
I'm only stating that a lot of the basic sexual desires don't "wait until" the teenage years to start manifesting themselves mentally, emotionally,and psychologically.
One thing: I was so naive at the time I honestly thought my lust and erotic fantasies were "proof of my 'being in love with'" said classmate (I was only 9 and 10 at the time, so cut me some slack).

Tal Hartsfeld, Eivind Berge's Blog 3 Comments [12/27/2016 7:40:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123256

As 2016 comes to an end our dear Comrade Micah Johnson is still the US record holder for most coppers killed since 9/11. Martyrs are Immortal!

Comrade Voltairinede, /r/fullcommunism 3 Comments [12/27/2016 8:26:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123232

[Reacting to a post saying that a homophobic culture helps cultivating tragedies such as Orlando]

As a Christian, can I just say that I absolutely do not agree with homosexuality, but you can hate the sin and not hate the person. My absolute best friend in the world is a lesbian, and I still love her to pieces. I may not agree 100% with her choices, but she’s still an amazing human being. Do not let one person speak for those who love people regardless of their lifestyle.

itskafrinn, Tumblr 6 Comments [12/27/2016 8:09:41 AM]
Fundie Index: -1
Submitted By: The Reptilian Jew
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123249


Going back to your view that "these churches should also resign from acting as legal registrars", I think that this is not necessary, the reason being that whatever one's orientation, sexual activity is not necessary for an individual's survival, and therefore it is not wrong to form a judgment on the morality of homosexual activity. Churches are therefore at liberty to refrain from marrying same-sex couples; it is right that they continue to act as legal registrars, however, because heterosexual marriage is the foundation of human survival as a whole.

Spud, Religion and Ethics 2 Comments [12/27/2016 8:22:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Nearly Sane
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123239

´I can't be not mysoginist if I have not had a single interaction with a female that was not terrible.

All the females I know have done me wrong and the rest refuse to help me even when I beg on my knees. How can I love those that refuse to save me from my suffering? It cannot be done. It has led to me getting more twisted even and I know have something that will never leave my mind because of it.


BananaBeem5Loaded, /r/incels 4 Comments [12/27/2016 8:12:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123230

I also remember very clearly my own prepubescent sexual desires, which started further back than I can remember since my very earliest memories consist of lusting after girls and women around age four. If there is such a thing as childhood sexual innocence, it only pertains to knowledge rather than desires. I would call it ignorance, and it's not something worth idealizing. For example, as a prepubescent boy I was too ignorant to know that there was nothing wrong with the angle of my erect penis (I thought it pointed too high to fit in a vagina and was supposed to stand 90 degrees out), but I sure as hell knew I wanted to fuck women, and I *know* I would have benefited from actually doing so instead of the masturbation I was confined to. Criminalizing representations that "sexualize children," then, becomes a desperate attempt to suppress facts -- facts which most people must know deep down since they lived through it. Feminists use the police state to enforce a lie, which is very naive and would be comical if the consequences weren't so ghastly.

Eivind Berge, Eivind Berge's Blog 2 Comments [12/27/2016 8:07:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Xavier
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123206

That's it I'm done: New years resolution: I'm becoming asexual

Women are impossible to please even when you take their advice on how to seduce them. I'm tired of feeling like shit and unworthy because of them.

By becoming asexual and apathetic, I alone will be in charge of my happiness and self worth; being able to focus on other pleasures in life without them.

dontcryimalreadydead, /r/incels 10 Comments [12/27/2016 7:46:46 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123259

Just in case many of you guys don't understand why it seems like the West gets inexplicably more leftist and degenerate with each decade

It all derives from the Enlightenment. This basic fact most reactionaries understand, but what the reactionary sphere doesn't yet understand (but we Propertarians do) are the more precise mechanisms underlying these sociological phenomena.

With the ascent of mobile capital and the rising bourgeoisie it powered, a reformation of the aristocracies had to occur, but the landed elite of the time suffered from a combination of an unwillingness to share power and an inability to cognitively delineate the emerging technologies in such a way as to codify them into law (this is the uniquely innovative space Propertarianism is operating in and is its sole raison d'être).

This led to an institutional 'gap', where sociological phenomena occur that are not coordinated and theft and fraud of opportunity costs are primed for execution (ancaps understand this principle when applied to currency manipulation, but it applies to any circumstance where theft of opportunity costs is concealed by what we call institutional conflation).

So, the path of least resistance was to overthrow the aristocracies and then justify it with post-hoc romanticism. The principle of the deceit, however, would have to be tolerated for centuries, lest the con be determined and an aristocratic reformation ensue. This principle of profiting from institutional gaps was the bread and butter of the Anglo ascent into expansionist commercial power, and such free-riding on cultural investments had to be tolerated by the ascendant bourgeoisie, as there was no longer a principled defense against it.

Everything was for 'the individual', and this had to cascade into further social degeneration. Traditional culture had to continue to be liquidated. The trauma the Industrial Revolution and corporate finance did to the aristocracies led to a tragedy of the commons in that space of cultural investments. Now, more and more people free-ride on restraint and what was known as 'moral decency'.


of_bronze_and_fire, /r/Anarcho-Capitalsim 4 Comments [12/27/2016 8:27:10 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 120864

(WorldGoneCrazy talking about the forum posters here at fstdt, and stating that all the posters here are sock puppets of one person)

The dumbest of the dumb hang out at Valri's fundie site.

Of course, they are all socks of Valri, so the logistics are not too difficult. :-)

WorldGoneCrazy, Live Action News 81 Comments [8/1/2016 2:38:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 11
Submitted By: Jocasta
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 105085

I know that 2 + 2 = 4. I don’t know this inductively because I have examined all possible answers to the question ‘what is 2 + 2?’. I know it deductively through other methods. As such, I don’t need to have examined all possible answers to the question (thankfully, since there are an infinite number of possible answers). If someone told me that 2 + 2 = 5, I know that they are wrong. I’ll examine their reasoning to help show that they are wrong, and why they are wrong.

Now, if someone came up to me with a twenty page paper, with hundreds of equations, big long explanations and proofs, and at the end it appeared that they have proved 2 + 2 = 17, well, I know that they are wrong. Even if I go through the paper quickly and don’t identify right away where they went wrong, I know that they are wrong, because I know that 2 + 2 = 4. And I know that for reasons other than the need to disprove their apparent proof here in this paper. So I can happily stand on the truth of my position while I try to determine where their proof falls apart. Maybe they divided by zero in some complex, easy to miss equation. Maybe they made a logic error. It could be all sorts of things. So I’ll go through it and try to see where it fails, all the while knowing that I am correct about 2 + 2 = 4, because my knowledge of that doesn’t rely upon disproving this person’s apparent proof that 2 + 2 = 17.

It’s similar with Christianity. I know that Christianity is true via divine revelation. My knowledge of this isn’t based upon inductively proving other worldviews false. It’s based upon the revelation of God which He has made evident to me in such a way that I can know it, and can’t be wrong about it.

So when discussing the issue with someone else, and critiquing their worldview, I can stand completely firm on the knowledge of the truth while I examine the ways the other person’s worldview falls apart. Some are simple, like atheism or deism – they essentially refute themselves before getting out of the starting gate. Others may be quite complex and difficult – Judaism and Roman Catholicism both have many aspects of the truth in them, and therefore it’s more difficult to peel back the layers and show people where their position falls short or breaks down. But ultimately, all non-Christian positions fail to provide a foundation by which a valid epistemology, metaphysic, or ethic can be held in a consistent, non-arbitrary way.


Johnathan Bradford, Anwsers for hope 36 Comments [12/5/2014 6:31:57 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
Submitted By: Tony
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 117643

“Equal Rights” for All But Christians"

The Tri-State Freethinkers atheist group in our area of Northern Kentucky-Greater Cincinnati, who say they are “advocates for equal rights,” continue to make it very obvious they don’t want equal rights for Christians.1

Both Christian and secular media outlets have reported on these atheists’ plans that the Tri-State Freethinkers describe this way:

"We have launched an IndieGoGo campaign to fund our billboard that will counter the Ark Encounter grand opening in July. The replica of Noah's Ark is the newest project by Answers in Genesis to promote creationism. While they have a legal right to celebrate their mythology, we find it immoral and highly inappropriate as family entertainment."

Now in the first place, an atheist group has no basis for accusing anyone of being “immoral.” They have no basis for absolute standards—only subjective fallible opinion!

The billboards they plan on putting up in our area will look like this:



Note the wording, “Genocide and Incest Park.” Again, how can atheists, who have no basis for any absolute standards accuse anyone with such a moral judgment, such as genocide and incest?

Atheists believe that all life arose by natural processes and that man is just an animal related to all living things. Because they believe humans evolved from some ape-like ancestors, evolving humans, just like animals, would have mated with whomever they wanted, whenever, with no restrictions except whatever they could accomplish for their own desires. And really, from a truly consistent atheistic perspective, that belief would not change for modern humans.

Christians, however, believe that all humans—back to Adam and Eve—are related but only to each other. Also, biblical Christians build relationships according to what our Creator God, the only absolute authority, has determined. Thus marriage, which was invented by God as recorded in Genesis, is for one man for one woman. (Genesis 2:18–25; Matthew 19:4).

Now I encourage you to watch the promotional fund raising video produced by the Tri-State Freethinkers and their president, Jim Helton, who is also the regional director for the American Atheists:

(Video on site)

First, it should be very obvious that ultimately they are not against the Ark project but Christianity and the God of the Bible. They are just using the Ark project as a way of shaking their fist at God. Note how the president of this group throws the Bible, treating it as a contemptible object. I wonder if he would ever do that so publically with the Koran?

Secondly, note his reference to what he calls the Ark Encounter’s “discriminatory hiring practices” and “tax incentives.” He forgot to mention that a federal judge recently ruled that Christian organizations do have equal rights with other organizations under the First Amendment and its free exercise clause. The judge ruled that Answers in Genesis could not be discriminated against to receive Kentucky’s facially neutral tourism tax incentive program.

By the way, Helton does make a point at the end of the video of reminding people that donations to the Tri-State Free Thinkers are tax deductible, and they do state on their website that they are a 501(c)(3) tax deductible, non-profit organization. In other words, they receive benefits from the government by the very nature of their non-profit legal basis!

Helton also failed to mention that the federal judge also ruled that as a religious organization, the Ark Encounter can use religious preference in hiring as legally allowed by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I’m also sure the American Atheist organization (also non-profit and tax-deductible), which he represents, would discriminate against employing a Bible-believing creationist.

In 2007, an atheist group in Kentucky organized a protest outside the gates of the Creation Museum when it was opened. Their protest only brought more publicity to the Creation Museum and an increasing recognition of these atheists’ intolerance to anything Christian and their rejection of equal rights for Christian groups. I’m sure their latest proposed protest of the opening of the Ark Encounter will likewise bring more attention to this world-class, themed attraction.

THIS GROUP HIGHLIGHTS THE OPEN HOSTILITY AND GROWING AGGRESSIVENESS OF ATHEISTS IN ATTACKING THE BIBLE AND THE GOD WHO REVEALED HIMSELF THROUGH ITS HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS.

Really what these atheists are doing is summed up by one verse of Scripture where we read about those “who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18).

By exhibiting their intolerance of the Ark Encounter this time, this group highlights the open hostility and growing aggressiveness of atheists in attacking the Bible and the God who revealed Himself through its historical accounts. This particularly highlights the intolerance for the Bible, which itself was the moral framework and foundation of Western political philosophy of liberty and equality.

In 2 Peter 3, the Bible speaks of such scoffers who deliberately reject Creation and the Flood. What we experience from these modern scoffers, must be just a fraction of the scoffing Noah must have endured. All but his own family had rebelled against a Holy God who had every right to mete out righteous judgment because:

"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." (Genesis 6:5)

The life-size Ark will be the largest timber-frame structure in the world—an engineering and architectural marvel. The scores of exhibit bays inside will be filled with world-class exhibits that I believe will receive rave reviews. This family-friendly facility will open July 7, 2016. For more information on this themed attraction and to purchase tickets, go to ArkEncounter.com.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
Ken



Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis 47 Comments [3/23/2016 3:37:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 18
Submitted By: Arceus
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 99023

Evolution is a big lie perpetrated, not by autocrats or Big Brother, but by people who fancy themselves intellectual and scientific. Such beliefs prove one thing: intelligence is no guarantee of wisdom.

If the rest of this piece seems just a tad on the facetious, cynical side, it's simply because this writer has a hard time being serious while discussing such silliness as Darwinism. Nevertheless, where the context demands it, we will of course be properly pedantic.

A definition of evolution is in order: it is the theory that all life-forms evolved from lower forms, and in the beginning a single cell, which mysteriously appeared from non-living organic matter, was the great-great-etcetera-grandfather of all life. Everything evolved strictly by accident, random events, uncontrolled changes without logic or reason. There was no intelligence or purposefulness behind the staggering number of transitions that started with Cell One and wound up with ants and elephants and hummingbirds and oak trees and human beings, with frogs and philosophers.

To appreciate the absurdity of it, consider this mathematical trivia: if one of each letter from a Scrabble game is dropped in a pile and chosen at random, the probability of selecting them alphabetically, or in any other specified order, is 26 factorial, meaning 26 x 25 x 24 and so on. That comes out to one chance in a bit over 400 septillion (4 followed by 26 zeroes).

403,291,461,126,605,635,584,000,000

Now imagine, if you will, that the 3,568,489 letters of the King James Bible are spread out across a parking lot. A chimp is then assigned the job of picking up the letters and laying them in a row. Evolution's principle is that letter by letter the text of the Bible is perfectly reproduced.

Needless to say, the mathematical odds against accidental, uncontrolled evolution beginning with a single cell and ending with the diversity and disparity of life forms now on Earth are too enormous to even calculate. (It was estimated that the chance evolution of a horse involves odds of one in 10e60000, which is the technical way of saying 1 followed by 60,000 zeroes. Some odds!)

DoctorDoom, Where Liberty Dwells 56 Comments [1/28/2014 4:19:49 AM]
Fundie Index: 35
Submitted By: Rabbit of Caerbannog
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 14209

I often debate with evolutionists because I believe that they are narrow mindedly and dogmatically accepting evolution without questioning it. I don't really care how God did what He did. I know He did it.

TexasSky, Christian Forums 155 Comments [8/24/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123218

JFK put a an on the moon, Obama put a guy in the ladies bathroom

Slimjeezy, Reddit 24 Comments [12/23/2016 4:14:03 PM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Demon Duck of Doom
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 123221

What is a woman?
A woman, as we have already said, is, in contrast to a man, a human being who does not work. One might leave it at that, for there isn't much more to say about her, were the basic concept of "human being" not so general and inexact in embracing both "man" and "woman."

Life offers the human being two choices: animal existence - a lower order of life - and spiritual existence. In general, a woman will choose the former and opt for physical well-being, a place to breed, and an opportunity to indulge unhindered in her breeding habits. At birth, men and women have the same intellectual potential; there is no primary difference in intelligence between the sexes. It is also a fact that potential left to stagnate will atrophy. Women do not use their mental capacity: they deliberately let it disintegrate. After a few years of sporadic training, they revert to a state of irreversible mental torpor.

Why do women not make use of their intellectual potential? For the simple reason that they do not need to. It is not essential for their survival. Theoretically it is possible for a beautiful woman to have less intelligence than a chimpanzee and still be considered an acceptable member of society.

By the age of twelve at the latest, most women have decided to become prostitutes. Or, to put it another way they have planned a future for themselves which consists of choosing a man and letting him do all the work. In return for his support, they are prepared to let him make use of their vagina at certain given intervals. The minute a woman has made this decision she ceases to develop her mind. She may, of course, go on to obtain various degrees and diplomas. These increase her market value in the eyes of men, for men believe that a woman who can recite things by heart must also know and understand them. But any real possibility of communication between the sexes ceases at this point. Their paths are divided forever.

One of man's worst mistakes, and one he makes over and over again, is to assume that woman is his equal, that is, a human being of equal mental and emotional capacity. A man may observe his wife, listen to her, judge her feelings by her reactions, but in all this he is judging her only by outward symptoms, for he is using his own scale of values.

He knows what he would say, think and do if he were in her shoes. When he looks at her depressing ways of doing things, he assumes there must be something that prevents her from doing what he himself would have done in her position. This is natural, as he considers himself the measure of all things - and rightly so - if humans define themselves as beings capable of abstract thought. When a man sees a woman spending hours cooking, washing dishes and cleaning, it never occurs to him that such jobs probably make her quite happy since they are exactly at her mental level. Instead he assumes that this drudgery prevents her from doing all those things which he himself considers worthwhile and desirable.

Therefore, he invents automatic dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, and precooked foods to make her life easier and to allow her to lead the dream life he himself longs for.

But he will be disappointed: rarely using the time she has gained to take an active interest in history, politics or astrophysics, woman bakes cakes, irons underclothes and makes ruffles and frills for blouses or, if she is especially enterprising, covers her bathroom with flower decals. It is natural, therefore, that man assumes such things to be the essential ingredients of gracious living. This idea must have been instilled by woman, as he himself really doesn't mind if his cakes are store bought, his underpants unironed, or his bathroom devoid of flowery patterns. He invents cake mixes to liberate her from drudgery, automatic irons and toilet-paper holders already covered with flower patterns to make gracious living easier to attain - and still women take no interest in serious literature, politics, or the conquest of the universe. For her, this newfound leisure comes just at the right moment. At last she can take in herself: since a longing after intellectual achievements is alien to her, she concentrates on her external appearance.

Yet even this occupation is acceptable to man. He really loves his wife and wants her happiness more than anything in the world. Therefore he produces non-smear lipstick, waterproof mascara, home permanents, no-iron frilly blouses and throwaway underwear - always with the same aim in view. In the end, he hopes, this being whose needs seem to him so much sensitive, so much more refined, will gain freedom - freedom to achieve in her life the ideal state which is his dream: to live the life of a free man.

Then he sits back and waits. Finally, as woman does not come to him of her own free will, he tries to tempt her into his world. He offers her coeducation, so that she is accustomed to his way of life from childhood. With all sorts of excuses, he gets her to attend his universities and initiates her into the mysteries of his own discoveries, hoping to awaken her interest in the wonders of life. He gives her access to the very last male strongholds, thereby relinquishing traditions sacred to him by encouraging her to make use of her right to vote in the hope she will change the systems of government he has managed to think up so laboriously, according to her own ideas. Possibly he even hopes that she will be able to create peace in the world - for, in his opinion, women are a pacifist influence.

In all this he is so determined and pigheaded that he fails to see what a fool he is making of himself - ridiculous by his own standards, not those of women, who have absolutely no sense of humor.

DefenseOfTheRest, /r/incels 32 Comments [12/23/2016 4:30:53 PM]
Fundie Index: 18
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 1440

ON CREATION: I believe in special creation by GOD, not evolution. I do not accept macro-evolution. (I do not accept hydrogen gas becomes people over time.)" "WORLD RELIGIONS: I accept only the gospel. Most buddhism and hinduism dont even believe in a personal God. Isalm totally contradicts the bible. Judaism if fulfilled in Christ." "PHILOSOPHY: I reject any anti-christian philosophy. Including liguistic analysis, logical positivism, etc..." "OTHER ISSUES DOES ET EXIST? --- I think not due to theological problems. One rebel planet is enough. I think God creates all intelligent life forms with free will as in angels (some fell) and human. Therefore one incarnation to save people on this earth is it. However I am open to ET existing. Can some life exist and not sin (next to God?) NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCES--- I think some are legit. If they are biblical I can accept them. If they are not biblical I must reject them. Bias yes. SHROUD OF TURIN--- I am 98% sure its real. If so I believe the image was caused by Jesus resurrection. GHOSTS--- I think some are real. Most or all are demonic. OTHER UNIVERSES?--- If so God is sovereign.

res1fe8k, Rapture Ready 8 Comments [11/1/2002 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh
1 5 10 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 35 40