Monday, July 31, 2006

Never Date Western Women

I have a policy of never dating Western women, and certainly never feminists.

Big cities like London, New York and Sydney are jam-packed with beautiful foreign girls from Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia. They are sexy, fun, good company and they treat men like human beings. They have not had their minds poisoned by feminist hate-speech. If they have recently arrived in this country, they want nothing more than to fit in, work hard and get on in life. What a contrast from those spoiled, manipulative, over-privileged, endlessly-complaining women who grew up here. As far as I am concerned, they have priced themselves out of the market.

My current girlfriend is from South America. She is far from being some downtrodden submissive as the feminists would no doubt say. Ironically, she should be a feminist role-model, having risen by her own efforts from a one-parent family in a third-world country to become a manager at a major international company. She regularly travels the world business class, personal achievement that I have nothing but admiration for. But she does not espouse the theories, so she doesn't really count as a feminist. She is shocked and sympathetic when she hears about the situation for men in this country, being seperated from their children, and being scared to help a lost child in the street in case they are accused of trying to molest it. These things are really just a curious Western fetish manufactured by feminists.

I urge all Western men to boycott Western Women if they can. Don't date them, don't marry them, don't have children with them. Find yourself a nice foreign girl, and find out what women should be like. If anyone asks you why, tell them it is a protest against feminist ideology. Once enough men start boycotting them, women will turn away from feminism.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey Heretic,

Before you imagine that Latin America is immune from the kinds of problems you indicate, why don't you ask your girlfriend what are the laws in her country regarding custody of children in the event of a divorce. She will probably start to complain about how awful are the men in her country that show no concern for their children, and possibly how much better are the men in your country, and she may well be right. But ask her if she knows what happens to the men who do care, especially in those cases where the mothers are determined to mess with them. Ask yourself too why many South American countries have active fathers rights and shared parenting groups. Yes, there are sexist laws that favor men, but there are also sexist laws that favor women, particularly when it comes to children. The women won't tell you about those and, by and large, neither will the men because their culture gets in the way even more than it does in the UK.

The fact is that many women in the UK & US are also shocked when they learn what a mother can do to an ex husband and her children. Until they see it with their own eyes, they think this kind of thing can't possibly happen (and that Fathers 4 Justice is a bunch of egomaniacal trouble-makers).

Finally, your girlfriend now, presumably, lives in the UK. I'm sure she's wonderful, but if you marry her and have kids with her and the marriage fails, might she not be tempted to take advantage of laws in her favor? She might even be able to take the kids back to her home in Latin America which is a far more effective way of separating you than simply messing with visitation.

Heretic said...

Dear anonymous, you made some good points, and I accept them. I know not all Western women have bad attitudes, but a lot of them do. The problem is partly that the mothers of today's Western women were 1970s feminists, and they indoctrinated their daughters into their man-hating ideology, and that isn't so true of foreign women. It's also perhaps that immigrants to the West consider themselves fortunate to be here, and have a more realistic attitude. Foreign women just don't seem to have these bad attitudes to the same extent. I'm sure a few do, no group is perfect. A boycott is a good campaigning tactic. Men need to learn how to take control of their relationships with women. If women think they can walk all over you, they will. If they think you can go somewhere else, it will give them pause for thought. Hey, it works for me.

jay c said...

Hope you don't mind if I copied this whole post into another forum. I gave you credit and a link.

UnicycleGuy said...

Hola Heretic,

I think you should avoid sweeping generalisations because they undermine your argument. You don't want to sound like those who say 'all men are rapists' or similar. My girlfriend is a very down-to-Earth, plain-speaking, Western, educated, middle class woman who has no time at all for the nonsense espoused by feminazis. Her female friends seem to be of much the same cast regarding feminism, including a lawyer specialising in rape prosecutions, as do other women I know with whom I've discussed it. Yes, that's anecdotal, but still...

If all women are boycotted, at what point have enough turned away from feminism for the boycott to end? Will it ever end? What is the benefit for a woman who ditches Dworkin? If only feminists are boycotted, there is instant benefit for those who do turn away. Of course, all this is predicated on the notion that successful dating is considered a benefit: but most people do seem to want that.

I would advise giving the benefit of the doubt, but get the Hell out the moment you hear the word 'patriarchy' or anything else from feminazi literature. Make a point of disussing these issues to elicit any revealing attitudes...

Just my 2p.

jay c said...

In my experience most western women don't claim the ideals of feminism until it really counts. They'll promise to obey until obedience means doing something they really don't want to do. Of course that makes the promise meaningless. Until you put her under the kind of pressure where patriarchal vs. matriarchal values *really* matter, you'll never know what she really believes.

Anonymous said...

Women in the West practice Al Carte Feminism. They claim they are not Feminists but reap the benefits of the FemNags and refuse to accept responsibility or true equality. They want Men to pay for their Mistakes and be absolved of the consequences of their decisions. They have become lazy Entitlement Princesses. I deserve it because I am a Woman... all rubbish.

Khankrumthebulgar

Katherine K said...

hello heretic,
i am an 19 year old feminist attending a prestigious university in california. as to your opinion that femininsts are lesbians gathering in secret blah blah crap, think about this:
the actually definition for feminism is believing that women should have equal rights to men. if you or your girlfriend dont believe that, welcome to the 21st century. times are changing, and your typical view of radical feminism and close minded conservativeness is falling further and further behind. not all feminists are bra burning lesbians (i'm certainly not). sexism is still prevalent today, which is why feminism is too. Feminists have an actual cause--were not just crazy women ranting about the unfairness that men like YOU caused. The ERA hasn't been passed--can you explain that? The government is full of conservative, close-minded, sexist men who still feel for some reason that men are superior to women. Anyways, I have ALOT more i could say, but i have to get back to writing my paper on how sexism is still present in the United States today. I actually found your site by typing in "sexist laws in the united states". Interesting, huh?
Oh well, I guess youre happy with your prejudiced, generalized view of feminists. As they say, "ignorance is bliss"

Anonymous said...

Katherine, you have been effectively brainwashed. Let me explain.

1.Women were suppressed.

No they were not, they have never been.
Why?
In former times women had always the easier life. Most men did not study, men were working very hard, many died during work. They did not have a career. They had jobs.

Men had to go to war.

Women in contrast remained at home, hich was a much easier task.



2.Women are suppressed.

No, they are not, they are privileged more than ever.

They are still not sent into war.

They still do the easy jobs that are not dangerous.

They receive better treatment in court, lesser charges.

They are privileged during divorce: they get alimony, children, the house.
The man gets nothing.

Women receive special scholarships for college.

They can falsely accuse men of domestic violence or rape at any time without being prosecuted.

Women can abort children without asking the father for permission.

And so on.


You have effectively brainwashed, Katherine.

I can imagine that at 30 years you will realise that the job you have does not constitute a career which is the same for most men.
You will realise that it is a boring job.
You will have no children and be desperate to find a man willing to marry a 30 yyear old.

It is your choice.

Rebecca said...

I dont normally comment on blogs etc but your respose to katherine a) got my back up and b) is wrong on several counts.

"In former times women had always the easier life. Most men did not study, men were working very hard, many died during work. They did not have a career. They had jobs."

Running a household, raising children, sexually pleasing men who had no concept of the idea that sex sould be enjoyable to both parties.

"Women are suppressed.

No, they are not, they are privileged more than ever." So...women were never opressed (as you just stated) AND YET we're now more privileged than ever. But we were never surpressed and had it so much easier than men before. Surely now we're less priviliged as we have to go to work, fill our empty little brains with difficult ideas like maths, literature,science, learning and edcation in fact? Oh how i long for the days when i had the easy (though perhaps boring, repetitive and hard) life cooking, cleaning and childrearing.

"They are still not sent into war."

last time i checked, national service wasn't compulsory for either sex.

"They still do the easy jobs that are not dangerous." such as?

They receive better treatment in court, lesser charges.

They are privileged during divorce: they get alimony, children, the house.
The man gets nothing.

Women receive special scholarships for college.

"They can falsely accuse men of domestic violence or rape at any time without being prosecuted." Except only 5% of men accused of rape are convicted, now you could argue that they were/are all innocent and deserved to be acquitted but i very much doubt that 95% of rape accusations are false. Also many rapes go unreported.

"Women can abort children without asking the father for permission."

Hey, the minute you have to support another life form for 9 months you're allowed an opinion. i'd be surprised if women are cavalierly having abortions at the drop of a hat, without a minutes thought, without the added complication of having to take into account the opinion of a man who, if he wants, after the child is borm can just go on his merry way, doing nothing to help with the upbringing of the child.

I await your accusations of being a man hating femminist.

Rebecca

oh and whilst Katherine may end up as a 30 year old single woman with a job, not a career, that she hates, its not a foregone comclusion and she'll be financially independent

Heretic said...

Dear Rebecca,
Thank you for your confused and rambling comment. I don't think the response to Katherine that you refer to was mine. Mine is here.

"last time i checked, national service wasn't compulsory for either sex."

Sorry, which country are you talking about? Military service is compulsory for men but not women in the vast majority of countries today, and was in your country until recently.

There is no question that women had an easier time than men in the past, and are even more privileged than ever today. To deny this is simply self-delusion.

The story that 'women were oppressed by men all over the world for 10,000 years until feminists came along and rescued them in 1970' is childishly absurd in every detail. It is a paranoid conspiracy theory. It is utterly baseless in fact. The fact that Western women believe it, believe that they are oppressed by men and have to fight back, is the reason why they are unsuitable partners, why we have so much social collapse in the west, and why I support the marriage strike. Find yourself a nice asian girl, gentlemen, leave Rebecca to her absurd persecution fantasies, her bitterness and her dildo.

Rachel said...

oh dear, I've just finished writing my dissertation on inequality in Western society based on gender specific roles and concluded that gender is an enactment. Open your mind blogger, read some Judith Butler then try to assert your opinion from the specific platform of 'male'.You'll find that your argument falls flat as we are all people, gender division is a learned response to sex differences and the problems concerning sexism are inherent in the binaries created by language.Your blog has just underlined my argument that division creates binaries and inequality. Thank you.

Heretic said...

Dear Rachel,
Ooh, I'm soo intimidated. Not.

I am a Philosophy graduate, and I have a post-graduate degree as well, and I found your comment to be barely even comprehensible. You have not even defined the word 'enactment', although it is central to your argument.

Judith Butler my arse. ANY treatment of sex which takes no account of evolutionion and reproductive biology is not worth the paper it is written on.

The idea that language lies at the root of all things is a joke. How do you explain the mating behaviour of animals? Is that socially constructed as well? Why do you think that evolution does not apply to humans?

Why do you see the relationship between men and women as essentially antagonistic? Why is it all about 'inequality'? What does inequality even mean?

The academic Left is flogging a post-1968 crypto-Marxist agenda. It has nothing meaningful to say about heterosexual relations.

What you have received is not an education at all, it is political indoctrination into a quasi-religious cult. Congratulations.

Rachel said...

If you're a graduate then surely you've studied under the same education system I have? Or is there a special one I'm not aware of? Damn, I'm jealous. I find your opinions extremely amusing and question whether you are ranting at feminists or simply being racist towards Western women?
I await further insults that will confirm my opinion. Fire away.

Heretic said...

Well, as a heterosexual white man, I should hardly need to point out to you that I am sexist, racist and homophobic.

Let's examine this 'Philosophy' of yours: 'There is too much bigotry in the world, and it's all the fault of heterosexual white men'. That's pretty much it, isn't it? Irony, anyone?

I see you have not addressed a single one of my points.

These books might be of interest to you: Click here

Rachel said...

I'm certain I never mentioned heterosexual white men. That would be a sweeping generalisation...
oh, but you're familiar with those aren't you?
I didn't address your 'points' because you failed to understand the point I made. I think you should reconsider what 'gender' actually is.
And instead of giving me a booklist on your charming ideology, why don't you tell me which educational institute you graduated from, as you clearly weren't subjected to the 'political indoctrination' I was. Or were you? I find it interesting that you call it that. You must feel so above everyone else.

Heretic said...

My 'charming ideology' is secular classical liberalism, the Enlightenment, democracy. The one which has given you a life more privileged than that of a Roman Emperor, and which as a feminist and cultural Marxist you affect to despise.

I find it amusing when people like you tell me to open my mind. If you are college age today, then I think it is safe to say that I was active on the Left when you were in nappies.

Sorry, what was your original point? As I say, I found your initial comment to be full of pseudo-intellectual terms, with a touch of the usual feminist shaming-language, but little else.

Now you question my educational qualifications.

Let me ask you this:

What exactly is it that you feel you are being deprived of?

The State has allowed you to remain economically unproductive for several years while you produce a piece of work effectively calling for its downfall. What an evil fascist patriarchy you live under.

I suggest you think more historically and globally. Get a sense of perspective.

If you only look at one thing, I suggest Gross and Levitt's 'Higher Superstition'

Anonymous said...

This was a great article... It has nothing to do with western women. Just replace it with any women. Women are evil. Now seriously, in my 26 years of my life I have not seen any modern women make any positive contribution towards anything.
Its pointless to debate on this topic with women as they seem to be brain dead. Women good, men bad is there ideology.
If they are so "strong and independent" who can live without men, I have just one question to ask them... why do u feel awkward if a guy tells you he doesn't want to date or marry any women?? Why can't you take his choice and let him live with it? Why complain there are no good men around??
I will tell u why, unlike men, women are live parasites. They can only live inside the host, i.e. men, feeding on his flesh. Men have no such twisted dreams. So, they can live without women and that too without feeling a thing.
Got that bitches!!!

Anonymous said...

Rebecca, Rachel,

You have just proved that men should never date western women.

Everything you have said indicates that women like you must be avoided at all cost.

Western women (yes, I say all of them) have basically decided to remove themselves from the gene pool.

And I would say this is good news.
Now, the next thing to do is for men to abandon them wholesale.

They do not need men, so men no longer need them, either. Western women should not be allowed to reproduce: therefore, I suggest the idea of compulsory abortion.

At worse, it will take 4 decades to see their kind disappear.

Good riddance!

Anonymous said...

Many women would never want to date the types of men who have posted the extreme views on this blog. If you don't want us, that's fantastic. We don't want you, you're right.

But, the idea that we'll die out isn't realistic, especially when you consider that a two-income household provides a certain amount of luxury that could not be afforded to a man and his stay-at-home wife. Marrying one of us really is the most lucrative thing to do (and men still do care about money don't they?). Or perhaps the women you will marry will be our nannies earning 25% at best of what we make?

Lastly, even if you discard sheer economics, there will always be men who will want women with education who know who they are and work hard to be what they want to be. Fortunately, many men are graced with intelligence, ambition and a penchant for interesting hobbies and are actually looking for companionship in an equal instead of a servant. As long as there are men like that, your boycott plan will not work. But, I would imagine that since you think it will, you must not be one of those men.

Anonymous said...

Judith Butler's writing is about gender, not sex (not the act nor the physical form), which is not the same thing. She never claims to disregard evolution, biology or anything of the kind. Having read some of her books, I see no incongruity between evolution, sex, and Judith Butler's gender theory. Her contribution was an addition to the discussion, not the full and complete explanation.

However, if you want to solidly divide men and women into groups innately insoluble, such that one can be hated discretely by the other, then disregarding Butler is the way to go as she would argue "maleness" and "femaleness" are pliable and combineable in a constant process of redefinition. Don't you think, though, it seems odd that feminists like Butler would want to bring maleness and femaleness together so, if all they wanted to do was hate men? For, if they ascribe to Butler and hate men, then they'd have to also hate themselves.

In essence, this is why feminists don't hate men (unless they're ignorant ones). They see the "femaleness" in men and the "maleness" in themselve--hence why they think equality makes the most sense and is the most fair. We're really not all that different is the point.

Now if you can't stand the idea that you have femaleness in you and don't think women should have any maleness in them, then who's the hater really?

Heretic said...

"If you want to solidly divide men and women into groups innately insoluble, such that one can be hated discretely by the other, then disregarding Butler is the way to go"

I disagree. I think embracing feminism is the way to go.

Anyway, your claim is ludicrous. Are you saying that the only thing stopping men and women from despising each other en masse is Judith Butler? This sounds like a very unhealthy degree of hero-worship.

I don't know why you have introduced the word 'hate' into the discussion. You seem to assume that relations between men and women are essentially antagonistic in nature. Why do you think that? You think that because feminism has told you to think it.

"Now if you can't stand the idea that you have femaleness in you and don't think women should have any maleness in them, then who's the hater really?"

I have now got used to the fact that feminists will never examine their own ideas or engage in any kind of adult discussion. I am used to them (1) insulting my intelligence and (2) trying to make me feel ashamed and/or accuse me of some kind of psycho-social inadequacy. These are forms of ad hominem attack. Trying to silence dissent is the tactic of a totalitarian movement.

I have already covered your arbitrary reference to 'hatred'. I want to turn now to your essentialism. What exactly are 'maleness' and 'femaleness'? Whatever happened to social constructionism?

We notice a certain consistent behaviour pattern in others, and we give it a name, like 'compassion'. We decide that this is a 'female' characteristic. We do the same thing with 'aggression' and call it a 'male' characteristic. This theory is maintained by selectively cherry-picking evidence, and putting forward circular arguments.

If a man is compassionate, we have two choices: (1) Abandon the notion that compassion is a female trait. (2) Decide that the man must have some 'femaleness' inside him.

In so doing, we have decided that maleness and femaleness are essential hard-wired characteristics, while at the same time insisting, as good little Lefties, that human behaviour is socially constructed, which of course leads to a contradiction.

"Butler ... would argue "maleness" and "femaleness" are pliable and combineable"

Hold the front page! Feminist decides that men and women could have good relations in theory. But only if men start behaving themselves better. Women, of course, can just do what they like because they are already perfect.

Think outside the box. Every concept you have used can be flatly denied. Feminism is Cultural Marxism being marketed to women.

Heretic said...

"Marrying one of us really is the most lucrative thing to do (and men still do care about money don't they?)".

I did not say "Never marry women who have jobs". I said "Never marry feminists".

"Or perhaps the women you will marry will be our nannies earning 25% at best of what we make?"

I do advocate choosing women from non-English-speaking countries. You evidently see those women merely as potential domestic servants. An interesting position.

Again, it is not the size of their/your salary that I am concerned about.

"Lastly, even if you discard sheer economics, there will always be men who will want women with education who know who they are and work hard to be what they want to be".

You assume that foreign women are uneducated? Why is that?

"Fortunately, many men are graced with intelligence, ambition and a penchant for interesting hobbies and are actually looking for companionship in an equal instead of a servant".

Foreign woman = Servant. Why do you think that?

"As long as there are men like that, your boycott plan will not work".

I am one such man myself.

"But, the idea that we'll die out isn't realistic, especially when you consider that a two-income household provides a certain amount of luxury".

What is doesn't provide, sadly, is children. And that is why you will die out.

Anonymous said...

Awesome post Heretic! I love it how you reply to all the feminists that have nothing better to do then sit on their fat butts and write on blogs like these. I have always just skipped any post written by a female name on these blogs. I do not need to hear what I have heard for the last 40 years living in a western country.
If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, never make a western women your wife!

Anonymous said...

"But, the idea that we'll die out isn't realistic, "

That's what we shall see, isn't it?

It's already happening.

Open your eyes...

Anonymous said...

What a great post - please give it a bump. I'd love to marry a non-western woman.

Fred said...

Katherine K said...

Any man that dates a chick of this type is a fool.She should be single and barren all her life.

Anonymous said...

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read.

"feminists who don't have anything better to do than sit on their fat butts all day and write on blogs like these".. REALLY? are you familiar with oxymorons? or are you just ignoring the fact that the man you are praising for his overindulgent philosophical rhetoric spends most of his life on this blog, whether his butt is fat or not, instead of living life in the real world and perhaps coming to the realisation that feminists aren't out to get him.

doing research for an essay. this is gold, thanks heretic.

Heretic said...

>spends most of his life on this blog,

I berely get time to blog, sadly.

>doing research for an essay. this is ?gold, thanks heretic.

You're welcome. Good luck with the essay.

Anonymous said...

I've seen blogs like this. I've followed up on some of the real-life stories that prompt some men to turn against western women (such as a father of four who's now been forcibly estranged from his children, and who lost 95% of everything he owned during the divorce).

I check up on what the opposition, self-proclaimed feminists write.

I fail to see the equality that feminists announce they champion. Feminists consistently lay blame or make demands. I don't see them championing equality. Just their own rights. The rights of women over the rights of men.

Fine. That is your privilege, feathering your own nest, looking out for your own interests. Have the decency to admit that's exactly what you're out to do. Don't hide behind claims of altruism. Being exposed as hypocrites makes people turn against you... when said people might otherwise have been recruited to champion equality for everyone.

The kind of equality that, for example, extends the military draft to include every living, breathing soul. That's equality. Same treatment, same obligations, same rights. Claims to privilege or exemption denied.

Richard Ford said...

The most striking thing about ALL feminist argument is that no arguments are ever put forward. It is simply a childish emotional response.

Anonymous said...

Women have been oppressed for years, but not lately in the West. I know of no man who would accept living at home as a substitue for a career, thats what makes us different. However I notice thay western women play the game to their advantage, citing feminism, whilst all secretly dreaming of marrying a rich tall white banker. And leeching as much as they can before they get bored, file for divorce and take half. To be honest the bankers probsbly deserve it.
This is why many men go for foreign women - usually no silver spoon complex and no bullshit whimsical behaviour and game playing.

So listen honey, you might look hot today in your boots and designer frames, but nobody is fucking you.

Anonymous said...

Gentlemen and Ladies, there is a society that is RAPIDLY emerging in the world that will undoubtedly decide what the fate of feminism will be. This society is out breading western society at a rate of 8:1 and they DO NOT believe in feminism. It is only a matter of time until all the work feminists have done will be for not. Then and only then will
feminists fully realize their miscalculations. Men and women are equal but today’s western women believe men are less than equal for if they did not they would stand up at any injustice regardless of gender (such as what is taking place in family courts all over the western world). The family unit is the MOST important thing in any society for its success, western woman have scoffed even belittled this notion, now the decline of western civilization is almost to the point where it is irreversible. So the independent, not caring for the family unit, no children, sex only women have literally strung a noose around their own necks. This is very sad for my sisters, mother and daughters are all woman that I love very much. Wake up ladies we are in the human race together.

Sharia law is coming to western shores and let’s see how feminists handle that! The battle will not be violent, just votes!

Dan Williams

Heretic said...

@anonymous: "Women have been oppressed for years, but not lately in the West. "

I simply do not accept that women have been systematically oppressed for years. It is a left-wing canard.

Vman said...

Having dated latin women I don't think I could date a western woman again. What would be the point? The majority are so brainwashed as to be a very low value yet they are extremely high cost. As you can see by the posts here most of them simply don't get it. Most western women wouldn't know what equality was if it jumped up and slaped them in the face.
There are a few good western women. However if they are in my age group then they are happily married for good reason. They are the exception.
Most of them don't compare with Asian or Latin women. I could write pages on this subject. The author is absolutely correct. Men, don't date western women and defintely don't marry one.

Anonymous said...

I don't have the time to read ALL the posts on here, I did a Google about something I've been thinking about for quite a while and that is, as a 50year old, divorced (amicably) white male, born in the UK - I do, unfortunately lades, believe that there is a simple difference between Western and Eastern women;

Very gererally, western women are more in their 'heads' and eastern, are more in their 'hearts'.

I can't remember who said it, but a female on here mentioned money and marrying a woman who also worked, was a good idea from a lucrative point of view, totally confirms my comments (for me).

Erm,..... what about love ??

Sorry, but at my age (and I *love* women and I'll go as far as to admit, as a MALE that they are the more evolved, not better, but evolved of the two sexes). But that they are becoming more and more like men, which is the shame.

Sorry western women, but you are killing yourselves off, and yes, I truly believe that my woman is waiting for me, in the East :)

Anonymous said...

Agreed. Most western women should be avoided, just not worth it if you want a balanced and positive relationship. I do love how they sit back on their asses and whine about how everything is sexist, and then engaging in gender bashing in the next breath. Just can't take them seriously enough to keep a straight face. Feminism has done a good job of turning them into self righteous children who can't take responsibility for their actions, with a deep rooted resentment for all men, so sad, but we move on and adapt. Those foreign women you feminists criticise are taking the good men one by one , not that you can even acknowledge them in the first place.