Man spends 5.5 years as a prisoner of war - returns home to find his wife was cheating on him. She takes his kids, house, car, pension and child support.
A prisoner of war in a cage in vietnam is powerless and weak. By now all TRP readers should know that women despise weakness in their mate. Women always flock to the winners regardless of what promises they did in the past.
You wouldn't believe how many women got their head shaved here in France after the liberation from german occupation because they were caught sleeping with the invader. Nice article btw.
I like the fact that they say "or forced relationship". That's such a lie.
German soldiers were strictly ordered to behave very classy and polite with the french population during invasion, or just eradicate them, depending on the period of the war. No german soldier would ever force a French woman to have a relationship with him, unless it was during a massive rampage of murders/rapes (the girl wouldn't be shaved then). This article is just trying to find this woman an excuse.
When that article says 'lynched', does that mean that they were actually killed? From what I can tell from the rest of it, they just had their heads shaved and swasticas drawn on their foreheads, and the author just used lynched for the hell of it.
That's really interesting, I hadn't heard of that. I found this sentence particularly telling "At the end of World War II, over 20, 000 French people were accused of collaboration with Germany... Nearly all those punished were women. This episode in French history continues to provoke shame and unease and as a result has never been subject of a thorough examination."
It's like people realized maybe there was something going on here, but because they couldn't deal with the negative emotions of actually thinking about the reality of the situation, everyone just decided to swallow the BP and never examine the issue again.
Ah, but because the genders are completely equal in everything, that they were largely women can only be a sign of the patriarchy and misogyny. Women couldn't actually have behaved differently.
Exactly the same, when men do something deemed bad they're responsible no matter what.
When men do something good, of course, it was because of his mother or wife because after all, behind every great man is an even greater woman who supported him.
When women do something deemed bad they were confused/forced/manipulated by men and thus never, ever fully responsible for what happened. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka
Now, when women do something good it has nothing to do with men, not her father and certainly not her husband, in fact she succeeded despite literally all of society ( Patriarchy!!! ) trying to keep her down.
These women were lucky not to be guys. You know what male collaborators got at the liberation of France? They got hooked by a big metal hook like you find at the butcher, like a piece of meat, in the throat. This is a slow and painful death. Yet feminists will tell you that shaving the head of these poor women was horrible.
That's something my family told me, and you can still hear references about it in today's media (for example, recently a famous politician said sarcastically that he wanted to hook his predecessor like that because he thinks he betrayed the people)
I'll try to find something on internet.
40% of his pension, equivalent of $1500 a month, no custody and NO CREDIT for the todays equivalent 1/2 million she spent fucking other guys on her husbands benefits.
Probably not. The only different is it doesn't even make the papers today cuz AWALT.
5.5 years IS a long time, however. That is just to much to expect for any man or woman. The problem is not with the woman but with the corrupt anti-male State that is almost no better today than is was in 1974.
To expect an American woman to remain a docile housewife alone for years, especially from the late 60's to the early 70's, is kind of crazy anyway. But according to this article, as of the time of its printing, only 75 divorces had been confirmed.
It's certainly a lot more rampant now. That's why it's important that men wise up as early as possible. Why a man, in this day and age, thinks it's a good idea to wife/baby momma a late teens early twenties party girl then ship off overseas for 4+ years is well beyond me.
As I was reading the article I felt that the dollar amounts were a bit small, then saw it was from 1974. $300 a month is significant when the average house price was just under $39k. That is almost a mortgage payment!
Yea I dont care if this is an unpopular opinion but good for her. We're animals she needs a dicking there is no way or need to wait 6 years for someone who might be dead. Also, the lot of the fucktards in here are hypocritical if they think they wouldnt do the same. We're not meant to be monogomous and that's just a societal construct. The divorce rape part is actually fucked though
This happened a long time before most redditors were born.
You don't have to be a PoW for your wife to run off with some other guy.
There are three sides to this story. Or more depending how many other guys she was humping. Life is a bitch.
Before I was a teen, I would learn in church about whole societies being conquered, the women taken as slaves, and I would think, "Why aren't these women committing suicide over their one true love's death in war? Why would they continue to live as slaves under a group of people that killed her one true love? There's something wrong with this concept of Disney love." Of course I didn't think of it as Disney's notion of love, I thought of it as the only concept of love period. Then in my teens, I'd hear about military wives when their husbands were gone for long periods of time. This further made me question love, of which Disney style love is the only love there is. Let's just say from the things I heard, I knew never to get married if I ever decided to join the military. This is stuff that I learned way before TRP. This stuff is one of many things that made me realize that women are not as positive as society makes them out to be. As a matter of fact, they are just as negative as society makes men out to be. All this way before TRP. When women talk about soul-mates, I mentally laugh at them.
As a matter of fact, they are just as negative as society makes men out to be.
If you throw in their preference for literally retarded AF caveman genes, dark triads, narcissism, BPD, child neglect, grandstanding, shamelessness, laziness, stupidity and irresponsibility; they are actually much worse than society makes men out to be.
I only learned about TRP a few months ago, but ever since i can remember i've been against marriage, and i think this stems from my single-mom shuffling from guy to guy, and how much money she got in each divorce. I think she's on her 5th marriage now.
All my girlfriends have known that i will never marry them. I have no interest in forking over even more of what little power i have left in society. Women are vicious, and the moment they lose interest in you, and you have something they want, they will use all of it on you to take what you have.
Read The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond to really get an idea of how the human animal has evolved. The precise reason is because the conquerors raped the conquered women, and therefore their genes are the ones that survived, ensuring two things:
1) The survival of the fittest (hubby is dead, these dudes killed him, they are the new alphas in town and are thus worthy of spreading their genetics)
2) Women evolve to accept this subconciously, creating what we now know as hypergamy---choosing the best mate and upholding no sacred loyalty to lesser men. Women who had strong loyalty and ethics would have killed themselves out of grief or fought to the death, ending their genetic posterity. Holding on to ideals would have been genetic suicide, so females developed a higher ability to rationalize instead of going insane/dying.
tl;dr: The more sociopathic/powerful survive and procreate. Industrialized society has given us only an illusion of fairness and noble morality.
" It sickens me that feminists spread lies about "a patriarchy" when society is very favorable towards women."
What's the best way to ensure your interests increase while damaging another's, all while maintaining a positive image?
A false flag.
Myth of patriarchy breakdown
--> Men discredited, villified, and not-socovertly systematically opressed (yes feminists, I said it. Come back when your genitals are mutilated, when courts routinely fuck you over, when you make up 90% of the homeless and OTJ deaths, and when society ceaselessly expects you to walk a tightrope to hold on to your sexuality and respect in the world in order to talk about sexual oppression)
-->Blame obvious detriment on the victims, literal victim blaming, use opportunity to redirect back to your objective "patriarchy hurts men too, that's why you need feminism"
--> Men die, become impoverished or cuckolded, go to prison or get raped by the system, and voila;
The Matriarchy slithers under the radar with all the plunder, and all the glory.
Pt. 2 --- Raise more boys in feminized space for extortion. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Women are the primary victims of war, remember? That poor girl had to go 5.5 years without her husband because he was busy with work. She deserves every cent!
Nothing. Divorces/break ups happen and family courts usually robs men.
Its unrealistic just to tell young men to avoid marriage or not have any children with women through natural means. Life happens and its the family court intruding on the private lives of others that creates these fucked up nightmare scenarios. However if most men in family court boldly opted for contempt and defiance rather than accepting living life as a slave maybe things would change for the better.
Being that I have taken a relentless beating through divorce and subsequent child support harassment I am already prone to feel for men in this situation. This guy has received an even more horrible hand. This and every other situation like it makes me physically ill.
Fuuuuck when I first saw that picture in my high school history book I was kinda touched. Now anytime I'll see this I'm gonna remember the sickening context.
Look how the children have all lost control of their body language. They're running to him, and the kid in the very back is literally leaping for joy. The wife is doing the bare minimum to keep up appearances.
Look at the smiles. It's well known that a smile without the bottom teeth is considered to be a real smile. A smile with bottom teeth is considered to be forced and fake. Look at the three closest children, and look at the wife. One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.
He survived 5.5 years in one of the shittiest prisons in the world. He can easily do another 5-7 years in a clean state facility after making things right through voluntary manslauater
I think all men should opt for prison sentences rather than accepting family court bullshit. Organized en masse civil disobedience against family courts would go a long way.
There's nothing petty about revenge for something of this magnitude, but outright killing the mom would be a bad one. She'd be getting off too easy and the wrong people would be punished the most (the kids).
I bet she played the "my husband is a POW" card to the fucking hilt for 5.5 years though. Just imagine the truckloads for free validation she reaped from that alone. Then an easy out, he came home different, im scared for my safety and the safety of my children.
If at any point the government should step up and help a guy out this is it. What is the end game here? What happens when men become so alienated from their family and country before they just stop giving a fuck
What happens when men become so alienated from their family and country before they just stop giving a fuck
I'm already there and have absolutely no drive or desire to sacrifice for family, community and country when I (rightfully) see them as rotten. There is absolutely nothing in it for me the way things are now. Doing the whole marriage, kids, provide, give to the community thing is now a sucker's deal.
Women have even resorted to shaming men into doing it. Personally I don't give a fuck if a woman calls me a man child, or a coward who's afraid of commitment, or anything else when they benefit from it while I'm leeched. They have no idea what it's like to be the one who can be so easily screwed over from such an arrangement.
I can say with full confidence that I have no idea what the long term consequences of my mindset will be when the numbers of men who share it rise to the tens of millions or more in America and hundreds of millions or more in all feminism-tainted countries.
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what your country can take away from you... The government would never help out a man. Get rid of the government and the free market would restore a proper family structure, since feminism and single motherhood would no longer be profitable without the government subsidies. And without government aid, women are less like to bitch about unreasonable problems and cheat, because they'd actually have to respect the value in the man rather than leeching off sugar daddy Uncle Sam.
The endgame is burning the system and rebuilding it. But this time without the scum who voted in these family-destroying laws that unleashed unbridled female sexuality, destroyed the social fabric accumulated over thousands of years of tradition, and propagandized the populace into believing the lies.
The alternative is the destruction of the society as such when patriarchal invaders take over and rebuild it in their fashion. From stoning the adulterous like Islamists do to burning the widow at the funeral pyre together with the deceased husband. While I don't expect history to repeat itself in such extreme ways, it will surely rhyme.
"these family-destroying laws that unleashed unbridled female sexuality, destroyed the social fabric accumulated over thousands of years of tradition, and propagandized the populace into believing the lies."
Social fabric you say, like generations of order and important sexual-social dynamic roles that make society function productively with rational incentives based on mutual benefaction... sounds like Patriarchy™ to me.
The feminist groups also elect the judges for the family courts. Judges that do not produce the rulings they want are kicked out. Its a highly bias system.
Men are not choosing the judges or funding judicial elections.
"The endgame is burning the system and rebuilding it. But this time without the scum who voted ...the alternative is the destruction of the society as such..."
I don't know about you, but coming back to that at the age of 40 with little else to look forward to would make me strongly contemplate a murder/suicide if it weren't for the kids.
I love her attorney's defense. "She was....human." She doesn't deserve a single penny. Must have been a "no fault" state.
I don't know about you, but coming back to that at the age of 40 with little else to look forward to would make me strongly contemplate a murder/suicide if it weren't for the kids.
I suspect we'll be seeing quite a few more murder/suicides if these trends keep up.
That's gotta be a hamster special move worldwide. Thankfully I was not nearly as fucked over as the guy from the story, but blue pill me got the same exact excuse from a blatantly cheating girlfriend. Said "she's human" too, meaning she ought to be able to fuck Chad McTattcock and lie to my face about it, if she wants.
Here's what happens: most guys get sick of the fucked up marriage system and stop having families. Women keep working for themselves (they already earn more than guys in their 20's), and fuck and have kids with whoever they want (tall, good lookin' blokes). They then vote for more government assistance for single mothers. Easy life, unless you're not an attractive guy.
It's more than just that. In Japanese culture men were expected to give all the money to the wife to manage and she would give the husband an allowance. Younger men are refusing to do that.
Then you get a large enough portion of young women who either don't want to have kids or want to be a traditional house wife. This is even after wasting time & money going to college.
Yes, I think it's better to be raised in a stable 2 parent household, rather than by a mom with a series of guys who don't last longer than a few months.
Who says 2 parents makes a household stable? Who's to say a man or woman can't be a stable parent all by themselves? That's pretty judgemental, especially the presumption that just because someone is single they're parading conquests through their kids lives.
As big of an asshole as my father was I never had to worry about eating or the utilities being shut off. Before he walked out on us I walked or rode my bike for fun. Then suddenly I was having to ride/walk several miles because it was my only option.
My mother "enjoyed" spending all day just waiting in a food line. Not to mention having to take all our Christmas present back, yeah he left right after Christmas.
Two adults is better for kids. My sister is now going through this with her kid whom my mother & I have had to step up to help.
Don't contribute to Idiocracy man. Just because you 'feel' something doesn't make you right. Countless facts and statistics support the two parent stable household model. The burden of proof is on you to describe how being raised in a day care while your parent works all day is the stable pattern.
If I had 2 parents a bunch of people would be alive in Iraq right now and I'd be raising productive children. Instead I'm where I should have been at 24.
Look up the statistics. Single mother households are worse on children than having one parent die. They are abused at a rate of 12x two parent house holds and children raised in these families have extremely high incarceration rates.
If you want to see what single mothers do to a community, look at what single motherhood did to the African American communities. A third of the African American men under 30 are in prison. The incarceration rate for African Americans in two parent families is less than 0.5%, the same as whites.
Looking at the data, single motherhood on a wide scale is an apocalyptic catastrophe for any demographic or society that has experienced it.
child of a single mother here:
She paraded different men through my life in order to trick some poor schmuck into financially supporting her so she didnt have to work. The guy who finally fell into this trap and married her was abusive to me, probably because he resented being tricked by my mother. She sued my dad for child support when he lost his job and he had to pay her 80% of his unemployment. He lost his modest apartment and had to move back into his parents house at the age of 40. She fucked me up in ways that im still just now noticing and i hate her for it.
I'm sorry that your single mother hurt her kids. But it's a simple logic flaw to then say that all single mothers hurt their kids. My mother was a single mother and leaving my father (who was miserable and abusive) made my life much more stable. She worked and I never met anyone she dated until the guy who ended up being my stepfather. He's a good guy and they treat each other much better than my parents ever did. My father, after my mother left him, even actually managed to get a lot of his shit together, and we ended up being able to get to know each other on good terms as adults.
No anecdotal experience speaks to the entire spectrum of humanity.
I agree that anecdotal evidence is generally non-useful. In this case though, it's supported by statistics too.
-Thirty-seven percent of families led by single mothers nationwide live in poverty. Comparatively, only 6.8 percent of families with married parents live in poverty, according to data from 2009 compiled by the Heritage Foundation.
-63 percent of suicides nationwide are individuals from single-parent families.
-75 percent of children in chemical dependency hospitals are from single-parent families.
-More than half of all youths incarcerated in the U.S. lived in one-parent families as a child.
Just a simple search pulled up articles with things like those sprinkled about. I can't be bothered to do anymore research for you though. It should be intuitive that kids coming out of healthy marriage 2-parent households tend to be more successful than those that come out of broken homes. You're dumb for thinking otherwise.
If equal rights causes the world to burn down then hand me a match. I dont care about systems that suck. Replace them and or fix them with new solutions.
Thats the problem with this whole thing. Its a lot like the whole god argument. Even if there was a god, who would want to worship such a terrible callus tyrant? I mean people do it, I dont understand it, you have to turn a blind eye to all the details, but some people still actually think this way.
Marriage needs to be replaced with something new. Am I alone when I say I am tired of these old "traditions" anyway?
I am more of the everyone not just women can fuck you over variant of the red pill if you can even call it that. I mean, the op is dead on about the topic being completely fucked up I am not questioning that. There are core principles that I have found educational here but I have moved beyond the focus on women as the target and rather the bigger picture which is when I mixed this pill with some other fucked up variation.
There is way too much focus on the notion that marriage is sacred. Its never been, ever, a sacred thing. Its gotta die man. In its current form, it has to die.
I dont care who you are, what point in your life you are, what you are thinking right now. Do not get married, dont fucking do it.
just got divorced and am bleeding money, she wanted the divorce of course and I had never cheated, yelled or done anything but give her the world. Fuck marriage.
I don't think the god argument is analogous. The topic of the existence of God is more nuanced and arguable than the "equal rights" movement. The equal rights movement is just obviously mistaken.
At least the theologically-minded interlocutors can disagree intelligently. No such opposition exists to us.
I don't think the god argument is analogous. The topic of the existence of God is more nuanced and arguable than the "equal rights" movement.
Not really. Equal rights is at least a tangible concept. The biggest trick you have fooled yourself into thinking was the argument existed in the first place. And even if you end up being right, you still end up being wrong due to the lack of morals that god portrays in his own texts and within his incapability of creating the world in the first place. Why even bother to argue at this point wining is still a losing war.
edit: Marriage existed before Christianity in a world that was very different than today. The fact we still try to hold on to it is madness. It doesn't serve any purpose anymore. Women are still going to become more and more equal and there is nothing that can be done about this. Modernization compliments feminism, well it compliments everyone's struggle equally.
Old thinking does not fit in today's world. let go of it.
If your neighbor decides to believe in god and goes to the church once a week, how exactly does that affect your personal life? Is there any situation in which you are put at a disadvantage?
On the other hand, these so called "equal rights" clearly favor women and affect you in a negative way all the time.
You can't really compare the two, your argument is bullshit and you know it. Don't try to shove atheism down other people's throat. You should care less about whether some people want to believe in something you don't believe in, that doesn't affect you at all.
Your trying to force atheism on other people is similar to fat women trying to shove the fat acceptance movement down skinny people's throats.
Don't try to shove atheism down other people's throat
What? I said the arguments are similar in terms of old thinking. The bible is 6k years old. Its old thinking. Marriage is way older than the bible. Its old thinking that even if you were to somehow go back to those old days where it made sense it wouldn't make things any better. Only worse.
That's my argument. Agree or deal with it.
Funny how stating facts is shoving atheism down peoples throats. Anyway this shits way off topic now.
You're just asserting that. Study philosophy of religion at the academic level. You'll learn how there surprisingly aren't very good reasons for thinking God doesn't exist, and that there are comparably better reasons for thinking He does. Your objection (and objections like it) have been defeated and indefensible for decades.
aren't very good reasons for thinking God doesn't exist
My point wasn't if god exists. its that the argument is pointless because even if you were able to prove it he wouldn't be worth worshiping anyway. If I ever met god I would want to rip his eyes out.
Even if there is an argument it doesn't matter because he she or it is worth less than the dirt under my shoe.
Your objection (and objections like it) have been defeated and indefensible for decades.
Your confusing this with a religious debate. I took it a step further and pointed out what happens even if you somehow were right you would still be wrong. Yet I dont concede the religious debate either. Basically you have to be wrong to believe in god. Either factually and/or morally.
Its perfectly analogous, even if we decided to destroy all modernization to rectify the sanctity of marriage it wouldn't improve anything. It would be worse.
Its better to just let go of old thinking than to retrofit modern life around it.
Saying you don't like something isn't a very good argument.
Its a very strong argument that I dont like something, however.
And I guess at this point that's when you say tough shit gods the all powerful benevolent creator who was never benevolent or powerful and never created anything in the last 5000 years. You religious Escher paintings of logic deserve praise. Religious people usually spend so much time trying to prove god exists that when confronted by the question "So what if he does?" they lose it.
"Disliking something isn't a very good argument of its worth to you!"
edit: So question, lets say you are right? Would it change anything?
I read a lot of stories on here that piss me off, but this one might be the worst! This was back in '74. I hope that cunt lived a terrible life after this. I hope, if she's still alive, that her kids are fine but that she is living in squalor somewhere. Hopefully homeless and I hope the enamel has rotted off of her teeth....
...sigh. It was true then, and still true now: Don't get fucking married if you are in the military. You are not special, and the odds are against you.
Women love the concept of marrying a man in the military- they are (usually) in shape, have guaranteed income and benefits, are away from home a lot, all the sweet social affirmation as a suffering military wife, and the military is even stricter than the civilian world when it comes to divorces. Pretty much hands them any and all incentives to act like shit with no repercussions.
Actually that's fairly unlikely as hippies wouldn't be in her social circle and even cheaters have a type. Probably another military man. Honor only goes to the end of your dick in the military.
God dammit, this infuriates me. Not the cheating; I expected that, honestly. It's how completely fucked the divorce settlement was. What kind of judge would look at a wife who cheated on a prisoner of war while he was being tortured in the service of his country and give such a one-sided judgment? Full custody for the wife, $300/month child support (not a small amount in 1974, I imagine) and 40% of his pension? It's cases like this one that make we want to slap feminists when they rail about how oppressed women are in this country. And this was forty years ago; imagine how much worse it is now.
It was pretty fucked up, even for 1974. If even a POW can get fucked like that after coming back home then it speaks volumes to what can happen to regular everyday men and their families. Men are continuously robbed at gunpoint in family law courts across the US even today. Men need to resist family law courts en masse with the most obnoxious civil disobedience and contempt possible rather than just accepting this sort of theft.
I don't know. Would you want to give custody to a guy that had just been a prisoner of war? Might he have some psychological issues? I'm not saying forever, but maybe there should be visitation rights, and they revisit the issue again in a year or two once he proves he is stable.
As for "being worse now", I really don't think that is true either. Alimony is a holdover from a time when women weren't allowed to do, or expected to do, anything important for society.
I also like how the judge said they "could not do anything" about the $168K she'd already made off with. Apparently not even give him credit by suspending his monthly support payments until that amount was made up.
The shrew literally went through this farce of a reunion to put on a show and score points for the cameras. All the while knowing she is about to clean him out. You can tell by her eyes that there is no genuine happiness or relief at seeing him. She's waiting on her paycheck. Fucking ice cold.
The sad thing is that a lot of people during that time didn't care about POWs or men being tortured in the service of their country.
To be honest it's possible that his POW status caused the judge to give such a shitty judgement. Vietnam troops were frowned upon by many, and due to the unpopularity of the war the idiotic public vented their anger on the troops. Many troops came home to a shower of boos and rotting fruit, with illiterate hippies holding banners proclaiming "Baby Killers".
Many troops came home to a shower of boos and rotting fruit,
No, they really didn't... not at the time.
There were a few incidents, and in certain areas of the country (chiefly in and around Berkeley & SF Bay area) that they were treated rather shabbily. But largely this is an "urban myth" that Hollywood* subsequently latched onto, sensationalized and exaggerated (made it bigger and more dramatic with each subsequent re-telling).
Now, they also didn't come home to a "ticker tape parade" -- but the plain truth is that THAT really only happened after WWII.
Because despite what you may have learned in your (warped, propaganda filled) school history books, most other wars were (at best) ambiguously supported by the general public, and many of them had rather significant "anti-war" protests -- plus the US veterans of those other wars (whether the Civil War, WWI, Korea, etc) also often came back home to a rather ambiguous and sometimes unsympathetic public.
with illiterate hippies holding banners proclaiming "Baby Killers".
This is even funnier. Most of the hippies were far from being illiterate, in fact the majority of them were middle-class (and often upper middle class) college students (and the chief motive for their anti-war protesting was personal -- the fear of being drafted themselves*).
And the "illiterate" accusation is especially ironic given how you have gotten virtually every point there all so horribly contorted and mixed up.
*Both of the asterisk points are related -- it was largely artsy & political-science major types (the kind of students who are, shall we say "mathematically challended", and who hence had a ridiculously inordinate fear of and later exaggeration of the lottery-based draft) -- and they were mainly in California, and especially the Berkeley/SF Bay area... which is (not surprisingly) the group that a lot of the subsequent 1980's era "Vietnam" filmmakers came from. Per example most people don't realize that the plot/characters & main story underlying "Apocalypse Now" was the fictionalized novel by Joseph Conrad, entitled "Heart of Darkness", which was published in1899 and was about the Belgian Colony of "The Congo" in central Africa -- that story (rather obviously) had NOTHING to do with 1960's era Vietnam War (other than in the fervent, and some would say propagandistic or even drug-addled minds of the filmmakers).
To be fair though, the whole war was a pointless waste of human life and a massive humiliation for the US on the world stage, so it's not surprising it wasn't popular.
That's not being fair, throwing garbage at 18 year old boys who were drafted without a choice in the matter rather than the congressman who declared the war, or the citizens who voted for them is the most retarded idea I can think of.
Definitely. But that is mob mentality for you. See also anti-immigrant sentiment, expressed as prejudice/violence against ethnic minorities, rather than against the politicians and businesses which encouraged them to immigrate.
No it wasn't. Try asking Vietnam vets or older people. Ask them about being spit on at the Airports when finally coming home or called shit besides Baby Killer, Assassin was another popular one pieces of shit call the vets.
People started telling the vets to change out of their uniform as soon as possible when landing to avoid that garbage.
When Vietnam vets returned from the war they were largely looked down on due to the large amount of people who spoke out against the war and because we lost the war. Keep in mind these men were mostly conscripts and didn't want a part in a war they may not have fully believed in.
The wife most likely tossed away any empathy for her husband the second she learned how low society valued Vietnam vets.
Never underestimate the hamster
Edit: as said below most of the men were apparently volunteers
The wife most likely tossed away any empathy for her husband the second she learned how low society valued Vietnam vets.
Interesting point. I had never thought of it that way, but it makes sense. His successes are her successes; his "failures" are her failures. If he's associated with something unpopular, he's going to lower her social standing. Wow.
She did what was best for herself. His successes are her successes; his failures are his failures. Once he failed by being captured as POW, she hopped to another man for his successes.
Define "volunteered". I know men who fully expected to be drafted, so they enlisted in an attempt to get more control over their assignments. They didn't want to join the military, but they're still as counted as volunteers because they pre-empted the inevitability of being drafted.
Vietnam was the first time we really had the media here in the US spinning their own propaganda views on a war, Vietnam. Most of the protesting was against the draft its self and not the war. You would never know that with the way a good portions of older media people & educators talk.
The media figure heads to this day don't want to talk much about the millions of people who were slaughtered in South Vietnam and Cambodia when we abruptly pulled out.
Or all the other lies & bullshit like Hanoi Jane where people still try to spin or defend her actions.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that the Vietcong were severely weakened after the Tet Offensive? So much so that we would have won if we hadn't pulled out?
Well, he did abandon her. He didn't even take his wife's feelings into consideration when he got captured. He didn't even love her enough to just die so she could get that sweet, sweet life insurance and move on to a new provider - someone who would actually be there for her.
Yeah - to be fair, if you read more of her speech, it makes a little more sense. Still, it doesn't excuse what she said, and it goes to show how far women will go to paint themselves as the victim - even at the highest levels of power.
Inconsiderate asshole not dying. A considerate man would have commited suicide while being a POW, so she wouldn't feel guilty while fucking other guys.
Also being a military widow is much more dramatic then being the wife of a loser POW. As a widow she could stick a flag in her window, have a good little cry on appropriate occasions and have everyone feel sorry for her.
Agreed this guy is an oppressive shitlord. He's having all the fun working at his job, being fulfilled, and there she sits being the slavish "wife." I bet he didn't even request time off from his captors to celebrate their anniversary. He's not even trying to be supportive.
Yeah, Homeland actually depicted this pretty well. When the dude was a POW, she was used to constant pity parties, attention, and validation - while she got to fuck around on the side, receive his checks, and so on. Best of both worlds. It is the ultimate divorce - you get the full beta provider effect while also getting to be considered a "heroic military wife."
I love this, it's exactly how women argue. This is the spin doctoring, deflecting, self-justifying victim posturing bullshit that many women execute so flawlessly when they're caught red-handed being anything less than noble.
It goes something like this:
Deflect when accused by shifting burden of proof/blame from the accused to the accuser.
Use these deflections as they grow in number to construct a false narrative.
Deny any responsibility.
Play the victim by talking about emotions, play for sympathy.
Make the man accept your false narrative.
This is the bread and butter of a woman's survival other than her sexuality, which of course, is another option they'll leverage if they deem you more suitable to be "charmed" rather than "mentally coerced."
The difference between charm and coercion is one's pleasurable, both are however, manipulative. Soft-machiavellianism or soft power.
Soft power is a concept developed by Joseph Nye of Harvard University to describe the ability to attract and co-opt rather than coerce, use force or give money as a means of persuasion.
Note how men are inherently predisposed to the latter whilst women, the former.
Kind of an aha moment when I realized female romance comes from her subconscious, and then is rationalized to logic.
When it comes to "negotiating desire", you aren't trying to convince her logical brain.
You're trying to convince her subconscious brain. Do that, and her logical brain will bullshit whatever it can to rationalize her subconscious feelings.
But yeah, influencing a girls subconscious, is classed as manipulation.
So yeah, all effective romance is manipulation of some sort.
Which is why arguing with a woman is fucking pointless. Always. She will never cede her point, even if she thinks the sky is purple. You're just being an argumentative dick and calling her stupid for disagreeing with her. Why can't you just let her be right for once? God I have heard so many women say that. It must be great to admit that you are content living in the comfort of ignorance. That despite being purposely ignorant through your own denial of fact your life is so free of consequences that it makes no difference as to the real color of the sky.
Seriously, it's incredible to me that i was with a girl for a year and a half, and in the numerous fights we had (always initiated by her for some reason) I was never wrong. Women suck at arguing, and have no real basis in logic to formulate their ideas. For some reason I kept hoping that one day we would get into an argument and she would have a valid point and I could concede and say "You know what, you're right." But it just never happened. And thus, I got lambasted with the, "Why am I the one who is always wrong? You never say that I'm right!" Well no shit, I'm not gonna tell you you're right just to soothe your feels.
Because it's like we all have brain farts, men and women. A man says something stupid without thinking it through, you call him on his bullshit and you bust his balls a little bit, you both laugh at yourselves and it is over. A woman brain farts, probably not even thinking about what she is saying, and then when you call her on it she goes into "Wait, I am not stupid! I wouldn't say something stupid! That has to be right, he is just an asshole for calling me stupid!" and the hamster keeps running in every direction just to avoid being wrong. Women are so god damned insecure they can't even laugh at themselves. The unicorns laugh at themselves, even in private. Most women can't.
Why else would they be so proud to be "strong" and "independent"? Just like a chihuaha will yap and yap and yap to show how ferocious it is. I don't get why in the last 50 years women have shamed each other into not wanting to be feminine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a traditional woman but they no longer pride themselves in taking care of a family. I remember an episode of Sanford and Sons where Redd says, and I am paraphrasing, "Yeah, you can wake up and cook for yourself and come home, drink beer, watch tv all night, do whatever you want for the rest of your life. But it is nice to come home, have a wife kiss you hello, you go wash up in the bathroom and you have some matching towels, you sit down to a dinner she made for you out of love and have a pleasant conversation with a nice lady." Ladies, what the fuck is wrong with that? I would marry a 5 if that is what marriage was like.
Imagine your daughter is the wife. Would you want her to remain single, raising children alone, on the faint hope her husband is still returns alive? Or would you encourage her to move on with her life?
When he returns and is damaged goods, would you encourage her to stay with him anyway? Or would you encourage her to do what is best for her and your grandchildren?
Her lawyer is definitely going to get the best possible arrangement for his client.
A soldier is a disposable resource. He is a pawn. His feels are not important.
She is a mother. She is the reason he went to war to begin with. Her well being is the ultimate goal of society.
His irrelevance may be cause for outrage but it is a fundamental biological truth.
No I do not want more people to volunteer for military service.
Men are not stupid
They kiiinda are. Just sayin!
There will always be hordes of young men willing to kill other people on command, for whatever reason. It seems to be a hallmark of the male half of the species. A great deal of mental gymnastics go into making this honorable, etc. but in reality it is a rather nasty deal.
Would you want her to remain single, raising children alone, on the faint hope her husband is still alive? Or would you encourage her to move on with her life?
From another comment in this thread:
God dammit, this infuriates me. Not the cheating; I expected that, honestly. It's how completely fucked the divorce settlement was.
Let us take a look at the biological foundations of war. There are biological truths to everything, not just sexual strategy. The biological truth of war is that it is a meat grinder of sorts, siphoning off the superfluous young men produced by society, so as to maintain social stability among those who remain.
It is common among many species for the juvenile males to be driven out of the herd, pride, family etc. as they are a threat to the offspring and stability of the social unit.
This fundamental truth is obdurate. It precludes feminism. It precludes the species itself.
If men don't want to be in this position, they must cast off their naivete regarding their importance in this world. Just as young girls must accept that men see them as only as wet hole or breeding material, men must accept that society doesn't assign them even that.
That is, the whore, the slut, the used up skank with her blown out pussy hole is worth more to society than any Übermensch ever will be.
There are ways around this fundamental biological truth, but those paths are not available to people who use fundamental biological truths to justify beastly behavior.
Species and society are not the same thing. Just because society cannot completely ignore the impact of biology, does not mean society is completely defined by biology.
Just because society cannot completely ignore the impact of biology, does not mean society is completely defined by biology.
According to the sidebar:
"...mate selection is a psycho-biological function that millennia of evolution has hardwired into both sexes..."
If women are completely defined by their biology, (biological truths make them incapable of love, logic or loyalty) and men are also (biological truth says men must have sex with women) then society is indeed completely defined by biology.
The obtaining of territory, resources and mates is a biological mandate for all mammals. The extent to which we resist, or believe we can resist, these urges is the extent to which we are human.
A man's wholesale abandonment of his personal ideals (i.e. "sexual strategy is amoral" so I, too, must be amoral) is the wholesale abandonment of his humanity.
In literature, this is the proverbial selling of his soul to the devil, that he may enjoy the fleshly pleasures of earth.
In the end, if man defines himself by his biology (must have sex), and he defines woman by her biology (AWALT), then he is defining society by biology. He has constrained humanity entirely to biological truths, leaving no room for individual free choice.
If we start with the premise that human mating strategies are a natural result of evolution, then it logically follows that other human behaviors are the result of such evolutionary forces as well.
The fact that war exists strongly implies it has an evolutionary purpose, with the only debate being what that purpose is.
Culling the herd is a delicate matter and perhaps like a girl saying yes to sex, it has to "just happen" and never be pre-planned.
Perhaps instead of "culling the herd" a better phrase would be "stabilizing the herd". It's not so important that the more aggressive and violent young men be killed as it it is they be placed someplace else. If a large portion happen to not come back, it's no loss really. Those who do come back, however, are going to be a liability to the society because they will come back damaged in body, mind and soul.
Women are such self centered spoiled brats. They expect all the privileges of men and women without working for them, meanwhile denying any gender related privileges for men...even though they work for them...women broke the institution of marriage and bring nothing of value to the bargaining table but still expect to get everything for nothing. They constantly moan about what theyEXPECT from society instead of EARNING what they want.
Obligations are naturally balanced with privileges. Feminism wants all the privileges for women, while having none of the obligations.
In the past all men had the obligation to defend the safety of their group. If you won't do it, you are out of the group. Women never had this obligation. They were always the free rider on this. It's only logical that men's obligation gave them privileges in the form of power. Power comes from within, from strength, from the ability to do something. It's inherent, not instituted by social convention. Any social convention, which does not reflect natural power, will dissolve at some point.
I am 30 never married, no kids, been with a lot of women and been playing with the idea of settling down and starting a family, but when I read stuff like this..... I feel my life is fine as it is. I am going to flat out say though some guys are desperate and family and friends will tell guys this girl is bad news and they marry them anyways. Does he get what he deserves, no! But you can't be surprised when you get blind sided.
I hear about this shit so often in regards to military men. I'm wondering if wages earned in military service should be exempt from divorce rulings to discourage this shit. It's clear these women are after a lucrative corpse, not a husband.
Honestly most military wives do stick it out. From what I understand, military wives usually get together and create a sort of "community" that heavily discourages wives pulling shit like this.
Essentially, if you plan on wifing up a girl before going into the service, you'd be best to make sure she's around a lot more military wives while you're gone. Greatly reduces the chances of stuff like this happening.
I am a veteran, and this is true, at least about the community.
They form a support group of wives and girlfriends that meet every week and the wives and girlfriends of new soldiers get info from the ones that have been through a few deployments.
It also has a secondary purpose of attempting to discourage cheating. If a soldier's wife or girlfriend is absent, they are notified.
I can also tell you, that most soldiers also take wives from Korea and Germany to help ensure loyalty. The PX and other shops on base are all staffed by German and Korean women.
'Discourages pulling that shit'. They need to form little princess seminars to keep the temptations of sucking another man's dick while hers is facing a morbid reality day in, day out for years at a time at bay. I feel sick.
Community approval and affirmation is incredibly important when it comes to the behaviors that women consider "tolerable". This is why things like Sex and the City are so damaging. If I ever get married I would need to be very careful of the friends, family, community, media etc. to which she is regularly exposed.
Absolutely disgusting. Is it mandatory that judges take a white knight test before being appointed to the bench? I thought I got raped in my divorce but this guy takes the cake.
Also, I think it is a pretty dumb idea to ask the government to fix this. The situation exists because of the government. Get the government the fuck out of the marriage business and we might start seeing some fairness and equality.
This rustled my jimmys in ways they have never been rustled before. I just dumped my girlfriend this morning and thanks to posts like these I have examples to cite so things like this never happen in my own life.
Wtf is that judge thinking? This is a man that can barely loose anything anymore. He knows how to use a weapon and that retard dares to piss him off that much? Are they aware how fucking dangerous that shit can get?
Did he shoot them yet? I.e. wife lawyer and judge?
Can we please refrain from digging up 40 year old stories and presenting them as if they are recent? This article is from 1974, a year before I joined the army or graduated high school.
This is despicable. The trauma this man has faced and survived, only to return home to this. Hearing things like this breaks my heart. I dearly hope he doesn't commit suicide.
Yeah, probably should've put in the title that this occurred shortly after Vietnam. I would think that we would have heard more about it if this was recent.
Doesn't surprise me. I left on deployment only to come back to weirdness between my then gf and my "best friend." This was before I was a red-piller, of course. We went drinking one night and I noticed some sort of twinkle in both their eyes. I pressed over and over asking the gf what happened between the two of them while I was gone. Lo and behold, she finally admitted it several weeks after I was adamant about "knowing." Women. Good learning experience though. I had known that girl since we were 16. I was probably 24 when this happened. Goes to show nothing is sacred to them if there is someone with the time and/or money to offer them.
This is some wildly fucked up shit. He was a fucking prisoner AND her husband! How could she even stand to THINK about being with another man? Nevertheless, actually do it and THEN, fucking rob her husband blind when he gets back?? That is some of the lowest shit I've ever heard of. That poor man.
Cheating, is in fact, totally human and honestly I don't fault her for that part, just as I wouldn't fault a man in a similar position. If you disagree with that and post around here, I think you're being a hypocrite. Besides, if you ask me it's beta behavior to whine about humans acting on human instincts.
Fucking the person that you and your brain decide are a good match for your genetics is quite the normal instinct for men and women. The prime philosophy of this subreddit is to accept that and to work at improving yourself in order to realize your potential with respect to sexual fitness.
This shitty situation is horrible and I feel sorry for the guy in just a humanistic way. It's an illustration of why war is so disgusting - it brings out the worst in some people, like his wife. The way she takes complete advantage of the legal system to destroy what little he had left of himself - and only for a few material objects - is the despicable part. Not the cheating. She couldn't have possibly known if he was even alive, you can't ask someone to put their life on hold for 5.5 years. So in that regard, it was even nearly possible to feel sorry for her, but by her subsequent actions, she doesn't deserve sympathy. What made the cheating horrible was really something that neither he nor she had control over, which was the war and whatever politics and excuses the politicians made to continue it. She didn't choose for the war to happen, and he didn't choose the war or the POW treatment.
If you ask me, THE chief evil in the world is excessive greed and ego. If you think about any evil act, it's probably in some form the underlying cause of that act. This woman's actions are one example of excessive greed. War another.
No, she doesn't get a pussy pass that absolves her from responsibility for her dishonorable cunt nature, citing "the evils of worldwide greed" to hide her bullshit behind.
She is a despicable cheating cunt with zero honor and no concept of loyalty. Not towards her man, nor towards her country that he was serving. Unfortunately this is all too typical for womankind.
What you're arguing is that one should be more supportive of it, because feelz, because instinct, because girls just wanna have fun. Fuck that noise.
Yes, she just like all humans, yourself included, do in fact have the right to acknowledge their choice to choose a mate. If you say otherwise, then you're just being a whiny schmuck who wants sex to come to you with no effort.
But if you had really read my post and didn't become brainless with rage, you'd have seen that I never said she was absolved of all responsibility.
Nope, I'm a man with a brain. If you really think that you're the type to build yourself up into someone desirable to women, like this subreddit tries to help with, then you wouldn't be whining about the true fact that people go for whom they find attractive. The whole animal kingdom and beyond does that.
You totally misread my comment. If you'd have read carefully, you see that I'm blaming her cheating on war (as well as biology). Without war, she wouldn't have been without her spouse for 5 years. But I don't at all condone her handling of the divorce. Pull your head out of your ass. Then read my comment again. After that, check the definition of hamstering again, and see if you can figure out the difference between that and expression of ideas and opinions. I know, it'll be a strain for your poor brain. But give it a go.
I find the sociological aspects of RP pretty interesting, but I'm starting to learn how intellectually degenerate a good chunk of this community is. The bitterness and anger all over the place is just one expression of that. After this reply, I'm done with this subreddit and all the dumbasses who have apparently regressed back to a high school level of maturity.
ok... I know that vietnam wasn't a war that many people joined voluntarily, so I'll take this case as an exception.
But of you voluntarily join the military, and you get cheated while deployed, you fucking deserve it. Nobody forced you to leave, you voluntarily chose to spend months killing people in a shitty poor foreign region (and sarcastically calling it "serving your country").
You getting cheated while deployed is basically a Darwin Award.
so many buthurted people. But I would change my point of view if proven wrong: getting cheated on, or dying in Iraq or Afghanistan, IS a Darwin Award (unlike WWII, where you actually were preserving the future of your kin)
I don't think that argument is valid. Giving your life for an ideal doesn't automatically make that ideal right, or valid, or worth it.
So, the thing is... does these wars actually achieve anything? does bombing this countries improve significantly the chances of your country to survive in the long run?
[deleted]
TheBrownMafia 10y ago
Damn that's some ice cold shit nigga.
charged_upward 10y ago
I still have an image burned into the back of my brain of a thread here titled, "Women Have No Honor".
That discussion helped me to reevaluate my expectation of situations like this.
Imagine if the situation was flipped and some NVA Lt. Col's wife pulled this. Oh wait, that would never happen...
thisgamesucks1 10y ago
Probably one of the most sickening articles I've read ever. Just amazes me how the US just rewards this type of behavior.
Cheat on your husband and divorce him. Heres half of everything he owns! Despicable.
Loodu 10y ago
A prisoner of war in a cage in vietnam is powerless and weak. By now all TRP readers should know that women despise weakness in their mate. Women always flock to the winners regardless of what promises they did in the past. You wouldn't believe how many women got their head shaved here in France after the liberation from german occupation because they were caught sleeping with the invader. Nice article btw.
ChangloriousOne 10y ago
This is an interesting bit of history.
Loodu 10y ago
I like the fact that they say "or forced relationship". That's such a lie. German soldiers were strictly ordered to behave very classy and polite with the french population during invasion, or just eradicate them, depending on the period of the war. No german soldier would ever force a French woman to have a relationship with him, unless it was during a massive rampage of murders/rapes (the girl wouldn't be shaved then). This article is just trying to find this woman an excuse.
Epizestro 10y ago
When that article says 'lynched', does that mean that they were actually killed? From what I can tell from the rest of it, they just had their heads shaved and swasticas drawn on their foreheads, and the author just used lynched for the hell of it.
[deleted] 10y ago
That's really interesting, I hadn't heard of that. I found this sentence particularly telling "At the end of World War II, over 20, 000 French people were accused of collaboration with Germany... Nearly all those punished were women. This episode in French history continues to provoke shame and unease and as a result has never been subject of a thorough examination."
It's like people realized maybe there was something going on here, but because they couldn't deal with the negative emotions of actually thinking about the reality of the situation, everyone just decided to swallow the BP and never examine the issue again.
[deleted] 10y ago
Ah, but because the genders are completely equal in everything, that they were largely women can only be a sign of the patriarchy and misogyny. Women couldn't actually have behaved differently.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
Algermas 10y ago
Exactly the same, when men do something deemed bad they're responsible no matter what.
When men do something good, of course, it was because of his mother or wife because after all, behind every great man is an even greater woman who supported him.
When women do something deemed bad they were confused/forced/manipulated by men and thus never, ever fully responsible for what happened. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka
Now, when women do something good it has nothing to do with men, not her father and certainly not her husband, in fact she succeeded despite literally all of society ( Patriarchy!!! ) trying to keep her down.
Loodu 10y ago
These women were lucky not to be guys. You know what male collaborators got at the liberation of France? They got hooked by a big metal hook like you find at the butcher, like a piece of meat, in the throat. This is a slow and painful death. Yet feminists will tell you that shaving the head of these poor women was horrible.
we_r_legun1993 10y ago
Source on this? I literally cannot find a single source on how male collaboraters were punished in France. I thought they just got the firing squad.
Loodu 10y ago
That's something my family told me, and you can still hear references about it in today's media (for example, recently a famous politician said sarcastically that he wanted to hook his predecessor like that because he thinks he betrayed the people) I'll try to find something on internet.
BluepillProfessor 10y ago
I wonder if the laws are any better today?
40% of his pension, equivalent of $1500 a month, no custody and NO CREDIT for the todays equivalent 1/2 million she spent fucking other guys on her husbands benefits.
Probably not. The only different is it doesn't even make the papers today cuz AWALT.
5.5 years IS a long time, however. That is just to much to expect for any man or woman. The problem is not with the woman but with the corrupt anti-male State that is almost no better today than is was in 1974.
SoSaltyDoe 10y ago
To expect an American woman to remain a docile housewife alone for years, especially from the late 60's to the early 70's, is kind of crazy anyway. But according to this article, as of the time of its printing, only 75 divorces had been confirmed.
It's certainly a lot more rampant now. That's why it's important that men wise up as early as possible. Why a man, in this day and age, thinks it's a good idea to wife/baby momma a late teens early twenties party girl then ship off overseas for 4+ years is well beyond me.
GunstarCowboy 10y ago
Dude - this article is from 1974.
A reasonable rebuttal of this point is to quote any law that states women are a man's chattel.
BTW - the Corn Laws have been repealed.
sykoballzy 10y ago
Article from 1974 holds true today.
As I was reading the article I felt that the dollar amounts were a bit small, then saw it was from 1974. $300 a month is significant when the average house price was just under $39k. That is almost a mortgage payment!
JP_Whoregan 10y ago
$300/month in 1974 is about $1,500/month in 2014 dollars.
sniperhiding 10y ago
Multiply any of those numbers by 4.8 and that is the rough equivalent of today's numbers.
CallMeMrBadGuy 10y ago
Yea I dont care if this is an unpopular opinion but good for her. We're animals she needs a dicking there is no way or need to wait 6 years for someone who might be dead. Also, the lot of the fucktards in here are hypocritical if they think they wouldnt do the same. We're not meant to be monogomous and that's just a societal construct. The divorce rape part is actually fucked though
culofiesta 10y ago
I wouldn't pay her. Fuck her.
The US prison system couldn't be much worse than a vietnamese prison camp.
fuckpasswordrecovery 10y ago
They will garnish your wages.
Long_dan 10y ago
This happened a long time before most redditors were born. You don't have to be a PoW for your wife to run off with some other guy. There are three sides to this story. Or more depending how many other guys she was humping. Life is a bitch.
JSleek 10y ago
Prisoner of whore more like it.
aa223 10y ago
From the looks of it, he was probably a prisoner for far longer than that.
www777com 10y ago
Before I was a teen, I would learn in church about whole societies being conquered, the women taken as slaves, and I would think, "Why aren't these women committing suicide over their one true love's death in war? Why would they continue to live as slaves under a group of people that killed her one true love? There's something wrong with this concept of Disney love." Of course I didn't think of it as Disney's notion of love, I thought of it as the only concept of love period. Then in my teens, I'd hear about military wives when their husbands were gone for long periods of time. This further made me question love, of which Disney style love is the only love there is. Let's just say from the things I heard, I knew never to get married if I ever decided to join the military. This is stuff that I learned way before TRP. This stuff is one of many things that made me realize that women are not as positive as society makes them out to be. As a matter of fact, they are just as negative as society makes men out to be. All this way before TRP. When women talk about soul-mates, I mentally laugh at them.
ss_camaro 10y ago
If you throw in their preference for literally retarded AF caveman genes, dark triads, narcissism, BPD, child neglect, grandstanding, shamelessness, laziness, stupidity and irresponsibility; they are actually much worse than society makes men out to be.
exit_sandman 10y ago
The most venerable St. Rollo Tomassi has written a piece on this phenomenon: http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/03/war-brides/
ThePedanticCynic 10y ago
I only learned about TRP a few months ago, but ever since i can remember i've been against marriage, and i think this stems from my single-mom shuffling from guy to guy, and how much money she got in each divorce. I think she's on her 5th marriage now.
All my girlfriends have known that i will never marry them. I have no interest in forking over even more of what little power i have left in society. Women are vicious, and the moment they lose interest in you, and you have something they want, they will use all of it on you to take what you have.
Patriarchysaurus 10y ago
Read The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond to really get an idea of how the human animal has evolved. The precise reason is because the conquerors raped the conquered women, and therefore their genes are the ones that survived, ensuring two things:
1) The survival of the fittest (hubby is dead, these dudes killed him, they are the new alphas in town and are thus worthy of spreading their genetics)
2) Women evolve to accept this subconciously, creating what we now know as hypergamy---choosing the best mate and upholding no sacred loyalty to lesser men. Women who had strong loyalty and ethics would have killed themselves out of grief or fought to the death, ending their genetic posterity. Holding on to ideals would have been genetic suicide, so females developed a higher ability to rationalize instead of going insane/dying.
tl;dr: The more sociopathic/powerful survive and procreate. Industrialized society has given us only an illusion of fairness and noble morality.
MachiavellianRed 10y ago
This is a really good post. Thanks for contributing.
♂
trpbot 10y ago
Confirmed: 1 point awarded to /u/Patriarchysaurus by MachiavellianRed. ^[History]
[This is an Automated Message]
SchrodingersRapist 10y ago
A woman and judge who should both be brought to a firing squad. Sadly not surprising verdict though
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
alarmclock000 10y ago
Inspiring man. I ain't even mad. Challenge accepted.
Patriarchysaurus 10y ago
" It sickens me that feminists spread lies about "a patriarchy" when society is very favorable towards women."
What's the best way to ensure your interests increase while damaging another's, all while maintaining a positive image?
A false flag.
Myth of patriarchy breakdown
--> Men discredited, villified, and not-socovertly systematically opressed (yes feminists, I said it. Come back when your genitals are mutilated, when courts routinely fuck you over, when you make up 90% of the homeless and OTJ deaths, and when society ceaselessly expects you to walk a tightrope to hold on to your sexuality and respect in the world in order to talk about sexual oppression)
-->Blame obvious detriment on the victims, literal victim blaming, use opportunity to redirect back to your objective "patriarchy hurts men too, that's why you need feminism"
--> Men die, become impoverished or cuckolded, go to prison or get raped by the system, and voila; The Matriarchy slithers under the radar with all the plunder, and all the glory.
Pt. 2 --- Raise more boys in feminized space for extortion. Rinse, lather, repeat.
EvrythingISayIsRight 10y ago
Women are the primary victims of war, remember? That poor girl had to go 5.5 years without her husband because he was busy with work. She deserves every cent!
/s
nolvorite 10y ago
Oh yeah the guy is not at all overreacting
3toss 10y ago
This would have put me in the war path. I probably would have spent several years in jail, assuming they didn't just kill me out right.
Alas, what can we do but avoid these situations?
vax0r976 10y ago
Nothing. Divorces/break ups happen and family courts usually robs men. Its unrealistic just to tell young men to avoid marriage or not have any children with women through natural means. Life happens and its the family court intruding on the private lives of others that creates these fucked up nightmare scenarios. However if most men in family court boldly opted for contempt and defiance rather than accepting living life as a slave maybe things would change for the better.
[deleted]
dailyandroid 10y ago
Being that I have taken a relentless beating through divorce and subsequent child support harassment I am already prone to feel for men in this situation. This guy has received an even more horrible hand. This and every other situation like it makes me physically ill.
Tenarius 10y ago
Lt. Col Stirm and his family happen to be the subjects of this rather famous photo.
More recent article about the photo. "Three days before Stirm landed at Travis, a chaplain had handed him a Dear John letter from his wife."
kulrajiskulraj 10y ago
Fuuuuck when I first saw that picture in my high school history book I was kinda touched. Now anytime I'll see this I'm gonna remember the sickening context.
[deleted] 10y ago
Look how the children have all lost control of their body language. They're running to him, and the kid in the very back is literally leaping for joy. The wife is doing the bare minimum to keep up appearances.
Look at the smiles. It's well known that a smile without the bottom teeth is considered to be a real smile. A smile with bottom teeth is considered to be forced and fake. Look at the three closest children, and look at the wife. One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.
ThousandArmy 10y ago
and the hamster keeps on spinning ^spinning ^^spinning
red-guard 10y ago
An all American homecoming!
[deleted] 10y ago
He survived 5.5 years in one of the shittiest prisons in the world. He can easily do another 5-7 years in a clean state facility after making things right through voluntary manslauater
vax0r976 10y ago
I think all men should opt for prison sentences rather than accepting family court bullshit. Organized en masse civil disobedience against family courts would go a long way.
BrassBody 10y ago
Except that your kids not spending time in an orphanage is more important than petty revenge.
otiswild 10y ago
'swhat grandparents are for.
reason_is_why 10y ago
And not having to carry the label of "Daddy was a psycho" the rest of their lives would be nice.
elysius 10y ago
There's nothing petty about revenge for something of this magnitude, but outright killing the mom would be a bad one. She'd be getting off too easy and the wrong people would be punished the most (the kids).
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
Cut her tits off and burn her vagina.
[deleted]
ArcadesRed 10y ago
I bet she played the "my husband is a POW" card to the fucking hilt for 5.5 years though. Just imagine the truckloads for free validation she reaped from that alone. Then an easy out, he came home different, im scared for my safety and the safety of my children.
rife_omeqa 10y ago
As if we needed more proof to confirm that men are disposable and that women have no understanding or concept of honor/duty/self respect/respect.
Pump em and dump em. Spin those plates. They're not worth anything more.
Fallout99 10y ago
If at any point the government should step up and help a guy out this is it. What is the end game here? What happens when men become so alienated from their family and country before they just stop giving a fuck
Idle_Redditing 10y ago
I'm already there and have absolutely no drive or desire to sacrifice for family, community and country when I (rightfully) see them as rotten. There is absolutely nothing in it for me the way things are now. Doing the whole marriage, kids, provide, give to the community thing is now a sucker's deal.
Women have even resorted to shaming men into doing it. Personally I don't give a fuck if a woman calls me a man child, or a coward who's afraid of commitment, or anything else when they benefit from it while I'm leeched. They have no idea what it's like to be the one who can be so easily screwed over from such an arrangement.
I can say with full confidence that I have no idea what the long term consequences of my mindset will be when the numbers of men who share it rise to the tens of millions or more in America and hundreds of millions or more in all feminism-tainted countries.
EDIT: Added a paragraph and grammar
juanqunt 10y ago
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what your country can take away from you... The government would never help out a man. Get rid of the government and the free market would restore a proper family structure, since feminism and single motherhood would no longer be profitable without the government subsidies. And without government aid, women are less like to bitch about unreasonable problems and cheat, because they'd actually have to respect the value in the man rather than leeching off sugar daddy Uncle Sam.
deville05 10y ago
some o them go crazy and shoot up malls
[deleted] 10y ago
The endgame is burning the system and rebuilding it. But this time without the scum who voted in these family-destroying laws that unleashed unbridled female sexuality, destroyed the social fabric accumulated over thousands of years of tradition, and propagandized the populace into believing the lies.
The alternative is the destruction of the society as such when patriarchal invaders take over and rebuild it in their fashion. From stoning the adulterous like Islamists do to burning the widow at the funeral pyre together with the deceased husband. While I don't expect history to repeat itself in such extreme ways, it will surely rhyme.
Patriarchysaurus 10y ago
"these family-destroying laws that unleashed unbridled female sexuality, destroyed the social fabric accumulated over thousands of years of tradition, and propagandized the populace into believing the lies."
Social fabric you say, like generations of order and important sexual-social dynamic roles that make society function productively with rational incentives based on mutual benefaction... sounds like Patriarchy™ to me.
haltingstate 10y ago
The feminist groups also elect the judges for the family courts. Judges that do not produce the rulings they want are kicked out. Its a highly bias system.
Men are not choosing the judges or funding judicial elections.
reason_is_why 10y ago
"The endgame is burning the system and rebuilding it. But this time without the scum who voted ...the alternative is the destruction of the society as such..."
Not much of an alternative.
juanqunt 10y ago
Ancap masterrace checking in. No government, no feminists getting support at the expense of men. Let the invisible hand unravel the red pill truths.
Inb4 the free market is patriarchal because it doesn't grant women special treatment.
LaughingVergil 10y ago
Wait. This is from 1974! It may be a bit late to fix this.
Lampoonzer 10y ago
I didn't see the date on the article. That explains why the house value was $24,000...
tallwheel 10y ago
Also, I'm pretty sure Hanoi hasn't taken any prisoners of war in quite a while. That's the first thing that tipped me off. :)
MRAfront 10y ago
That, my friend, is when shit hit yhe fan.
Redpiller456 10y ago
I don't know about you, but coming back to that at the age of 40 with little else to look forward to would make me strongly contemplate a murder/suicide if it weren't for the kids.
I love her attorney's defense. "She was....human." She doesn't deserve a single penny. Must have been a "no fault" state.
gekkozorz 10y ago
It's in California, so yes.
F9R 10y ago
I suspect we'll be seeing quite a few more murder/suicides if these trends keep up.
[deleted]
SkorchZang 10y ago
That's gotta be a hamster special move worldwide. Thankfully I was not nearly as fucked over as the guy from the story, but blue pill me got the same exact excuse from a blatantly cheating girlfriend. Said "she's human" too, meaning she ought to be able to fuck Chad McTattcock and lie to my face about it, if she wants.
That humanitarian feeling...
Reastruth 10y ago
Upvote for "Chad McTattcock"
[deleted] 10y ago
Here's what happens: most guys get sick of the fucked up marriage system and stop having families. Women keep working for themselves (they already earn more than guys in their 20's), and fuck and have kids with whoever they want (tall, good lookin' blokes). They then vote for more government assistance for single mothers. Easy life, unless you're not an attractive guy.
netgrey 10y ago
See the black community in America for what the rest of America will look like in 50 years.
[deleted] 10y ago
It's actually what is happening right now in places like Japan. Marriage is a losing business transaction for 99% of men.
Dark_Shroud 10y ago
It's more than just that. In Japanese culture men were expected to give all the money to the wife to manage and she would give the husband an allowance. Younger men are refusing to do that.
Then you get a large enough portion of young women who either don't want to have kids or want to be a traditional house wife. This is even after wasting time & money going to college.
http://www.goingyourownway.com/content.php?r=118-Grass-Fed-Herbivore-Men&s=cdbdcf6b1e9220389fea758e13d206b4
Asoka11111 10y ago
Sounds pretty self-destructive to the community as a whole
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
Yes, I think it's better to be raised in a stable 2 parent household, rather than by a mom with a series of guys who don't last longer than a few months.
ihatespunk 10y ago
Who says 2 parents makes a household stable? Who's to say a man or woman can't be a stable parent all by themselves? That's pretty judgemental, especially the presumption that just because someone is single they're parading conquests through their kids lives.
Dark_Shroud 10y ago
As big of an asshole as my father was I never had to worry about eating or the utilities being shut off. Before he walked out on us I walked or rode my bike for fun. Then suddenly I was having to ride/walk several miles because it was my only option.
My mother "enjoyed" spending all day just waiting in a food line. Not to mention having to take all our Christmas present back, yeah he left right after Christmas.
Two adults is better for kids. My sister is now going through this with her kid whom my mother & I have had to step up to help.
gprime312 10y ago
Nearly every study on the subject. You need two people to raise a kid.
anonymous11235 10y ago
Don't contribute to Idiocracy man. Just because you 'feel' something doesn't make you right. Countless facts and statistics support the two parent stable household model. The burden of proof is on you to describe how being raised in a day care while your parent works all day is the stable pattern.
[deleted] 10y ago
If I had 2 parents a bunch of people would be alive in Iraq right now and I'd be raising productive children. Instead I'm where I should have been at 24.
Somf_plz 10y ago
Not all single mothers are worse than 2 parent households but on average 2 parent households are much better
haltingstate 10y ago
Look up the statistics. Single mother households are worse on children than having one parent die. They are abused at a rate of 12x two parent house holds and children raised in these families have extremely high incarceration rates.
If you want to see what single mothers do to a community, look at what single motherhood did to the African American communities. A third of the African American men under 30 are in prison. The incarceration rate for African Americans in two parent families is less than 0.5%, the same as whites.
Looking at the data, single motherhood on a wide scale is an apocalyptic catastrophe for any demographic or society that has experienced it.
HyperSpaceKush 10y ago
child of a single mother here: She paraded different men through my life in order to trick some poor schmuck into financially supporting her so she didnt have to work. The guy who finally fell into this trap and married her was abusive to me, probably because he resented being tricked by my mother. She sued my dad for child support when he lost his job and he had to pay her 80% of his unemployment. He lost his modest apartment and had to move back into his parents house at the age of 40. She fucked me up in ways that im still just now noticing and i hate her for it.
Tl;dr: single mothers hurt kids
fathak 10y ago
found this mentioned several times
ihatespunk 10y ago
I'm sorry that your single mother hurt her kids. But it's a simple logic flaw to then say that all single mothers hurt their kids. My mother was a single mother and leaving my father (who was miserable and abusive) made my life much more stable. She worked and I never met anyone she dated until the guy who ended up being my stepfather. He's a good guy and they treat each other much better than my parents ever did. My father, after my mother left him, even actually managed to get a lot of his shit together, and we ended up being able to get to know each other on good terms as adults.
No anecdotal experience speaks to the entire spectrum of humanity.
[deleted]
CrazyHorseInvincible 10y ago
"A tree is not a forest" is a logical fallacy when it gets repeated over every tree.
A forest is made of trees.
ktappe 10y ago
Yes. Because all single mothers do what your mom did. :: roll eyes ::
I mean, I'm sorry what happened to you. But you absolutely cannot project one data point to the entire society.
altra_hex 10y ago
I agree that anecdotal evidence is generally non-useful. In this case though, it's supported by statistics too.
-Thirty-seven percent of families led by single mothers nationwide live in poverty. Comparatively, only 6.8 percent of families with married parents live in poverty, according to data from 2009 compiled by the Heritage Foundation.
-63 percent of suicides nationwide are individuals from single-parent families.
-75 percent of children in chemical dependency hospitals are from single-parent families.
-More than half of all youths incarcerated in the U.S. lived in one-parent families as a child.
Just a simple search pulled up articles with things like those sprinkled about. I can't be bothered to do anymore research for you though. It should be intuitive that kids coming out of healthy marriage 2-parent households tend to be more successful than those that come out of broken homes. You're dumb for thinking otherwise.
let_terror_reign 10y ago
Someone please link that post on NAWALT. I forgot what it's called
johnnight 10y ago
Fuck you, I am judgmental. So what are you going to do about it?
the_real_chronos 10y ago
Like if being judgmental is a bad thing. Quite the opposite if we are on the side if reason.
[deleted]
arbyq5000 10y ago
probably gonna find his way out of this sub if he keeps talking like that
ArcadeGoon 10y ago
Because we must all agree here? I would rather not have an echo chamber thanks.
TheCastle 10y ago
If equal rights causes the world to burn down then hand me a match. I dont care about systems that suck. Replace them and or fix them with new solutions.
Thats the problem with this whole thing. Its a lot like the whole god argument. Even if there was a god, who would want to worship such a terrible callus tyrant? I mean people do it, I dont understand it, you have to turn a blind eye to all the details, but some people still actually think this way.
Marriage needs to be replaced with something new. Am I alone when I say I am tired of these old "traditions" anyway?
SkorchZang 10y ago
You're alright, surely a good person - just swallowed the wrong color pill, dude.
TheCastle 10y ago
I am more of the everyone not just women can fuck you over variant of the red pill if you can even call it that. I mean, the op is dead on about the topic being completely fucked up I am not questioning that. There are core principles that I have found educational here but I have moved beyond the focus on women as the target and rather the bigger picture which is when I mixed this pill with some other fucked up variation.
There is way too much focus on the notion that marriage is sacred. Its never been, ever, a sacred thing. Its gotta die man. In its current form, it has to die.
I dont care who you are, what point in your life you are, what you are thinking right now. Do not get married, dont fucking do it.
bobawet 10y ago
just got divorced and am bleeding money, she wanted the divorce of course and I had never cheated, yelled or done anything but give her the world. Fuck marriage.
adamryanx 10y ago
I don't think the god argument is analogous. The topic of the existence of God is more nuanced and arguable than the "equal rights" movement. The equal rights movement is just obviously mistaken.
At least the theologically-minded interlocutors can disagree intelligently. No such opposition exists to us.
TheCastle 10y ago
Not really. Equal rights is at least a tangible concept. The biggest trick you have fooled yourself into thinking was the argument existed in the first place. And even if you end up being right, you still end up being wrong due to the lack of morals that god portrays in his own texts and within his incapability of creating the world in the first place. Why even bother to argue at this point wining is still a losing war.
edit: Marriage existed before Christianity in a world that was very different than today. The fact we still try to hold on to it is madness. It doesn't serve any purpose anymore. Women are still going to become more and more equal and there is nothing that can be done about this. Modernization compliments feminism, well it compliments everyone's struggle equally.
Old thinking does not fit in today's world. let go of it.
masturbator9000 10y ago
If your neighbor decides to believe in god and goes to the church once a week, how exactly does that affect your personal life? Is there any situation in which you are put at a disadvantage?
On the other hand, these so called "equal rights" clearly favor women and affect you in a negative way all the time.
You can't really compare the two, your argument is bullshit and you know it. Don't try to shove atheism down other people's throat. You should care less about whether some people want to believe in something you don't believe in, that doesn't affect you at all.
Your trying to force atheism on other people is similar to fat women trying to shove the fat acceptance movement down skinny people's throats.
TheCastle 10y ago
What? I said the arguments are similar in terms of old thinking. The bible is 6k years old. Its old thinking. Marriage is way older than the bible. Its old thinking that even if you were to somehow go back to those old days where it made sense it wouldn't make things any better. Only worse.
That's my argument. Agree or deal with it.
Funny how stating facts is shoving atheism down peoples throats. Anyway this shits way off topic now.
adamryanx 10y ago
You're just asserting that. Study philosophy of religion at the academic level. You'll learn how there surprisingly aren't very good reasons for thinking God doesn't exist, and that there are comparably better reasons for thinking He does. Your objection (and objections like it) have been defeated and indefensible for decades.
WAFC 10y ago
I'd love to hear some of these arguments. Or just the best one.
TheCastle 10y ago
My point wasn't if god exists. its that the argument is pointless because even if you were able to prove it he wouldn't be worth worshiping anyway. If I ever met god I would want to rip his eyes out.
Even if there is an argument it doesn't matter because he she or it is worth less than the dirt under my shoe.
Your confusing this with a religious debate. I took it a step further and pointed out what happens even if you somehow were right you would still be wrong. Yet I dont concede the religious debate either. Basically you have to be wrong to believe in god. Either factually and/or morally.
Its perfectly analogous, even if we decided to destroy all modernization to rectify the sanctity of marriage it wouldn't improve anything. It would be worse.
Its better to just let go of old thinking than to retrofit modern life around it.
adamryanx 10y ago
Saying you don't like something isn't a very good argument.
TheCastle 10y ago
Its a very strong argument that I dont like something, however.
And I guess at this point that's when you say tough shit gods the all powerful benevolent creator who was never benevolent or powerful and never created anything in the last 5000 years. You religious Escher paintings of logic deserve praise. Religious people usually spend so much time trying to prove god exists that when confronted by the question "So what if he does?" they lose it.
"Disliking something isn't a very good argument of its worth to you!"
edit: So question, lets say you are right? Would it change anything?
[deleted]
Goliath_Of_Gath 10y ago
Cunt died of cancer in 2010. Glad he outlived her.
NormSonOfAGunderson 10y ago
I read a lot of stories on here that piss me off, but this one might be the worst! This was back in '74. I hope that cunt lived a terrible life after this. I hope, if she's still alive, that her kids are fine but that she is living in squalor somewhere. Hopefully homeless and I hope the enamel has rotted off of her teeth....
Overkillengine 10y ago
...sigh. It was true then, and still true now: Don't get fucking married if you are in the military. You are not special, and the odds are against you.
Women love the concept of marrying a man in the military- they are (usually) in shape, have guaranteed income and benefits, are away from home a lot, all the sweet social affirmation as a suffering military wife, and the military is even stricter than the civilian world when it comes to divorces. Pretty much hands them any and all incentives to act like shit with no repercussions.
nicethingyoucanthave 10y ago
Can you imagine having one of your buddies tell you, "dude, I'm seeing this new chick, she's really hot"
Sweet dude. You think this is the one? You going to start a family or whatever?
"uh actually, she already has kids"
Oh yeah? Well, I've dated single moms before and ...
"she's not technically single, not yet anyway"
Oh. Well dude, can't say I approve of that. Can't you keep it in your pants until the divorce is finalized?
"she hasn't actually filed for divorce"
Jesus fuck man. So you're sneaking around, hoping not to get caught? WTF is wrong with you?
"she can't file because her husband is in Vietnam"
Shit dude. This is low. Come on, you're better than to be fucking a woman who's man is in Saigon...
"uh he's not actually in Saigon"
Where the fuck is he?
"Hanoi"
Wheat-Thins 10y ago
People in this sub advocate fucking other guys wives all the time though.
Patriarchysaurus 10y ago
I'd probably beat the shit out of him on principle.
6footdeeponice 10y ago
It was probably some dirty hippy that thought he was sticking it to "The Man". (The Man's wife that is...)
WAFC 10y ago
Actually that's fairly unlikely as hippies wouldn't be in her social circle and even cheaters have a type. Probably another military man. Honor only goes to the end of your dick in the military.
Cyhawk 10y ago
Might be splitting hairs but, wouldn't it go to the base of your dick?
WAFC 10y ago
Haha. I had this same thought after I submitted it but didn't care enough to fix it.
CornyHoosier 10y ago
More guys need forward thinking. You gotta get that pre-nup!
binrobinro 10y ago
Because that's what women do.
smile_e_face 10y ago
God dammit, this infuriates me. Not the cheating; I expected that, honestly. It's how completely fucked the divorce settlement was. What kind of judge would look at a wife who cheated on a prisoner of war while he was being tortured in the service of his country and give such a one-sided judgment? Full custody for the wife, $300/month child support (not a small amount in 1974, I imagine) and 40% of his pension? It's cases like this one that make we want to slap feminists when they rail about how oppressed women are in this country. And this was forty years ago; imagine how much worse it is now.
vax0r976 10y ago
It was pretty fucked up, even for 1974. If even a POW can get fucked like that after coming back home then it speaks volumes to what can happen to regular everyday men and their families. Men are continuously robbed at gunpoint in family law courts across the US even today. Men need to resist family law courts en masse with the most obnoxious civil disobedience and contempt possible rather than just accepting this sort of theft.
[deleted] 10y ago
I don't know. Would you want to give custody to a guy that had just been a prisoner of war? Might he have some psychological issues? I'm not saying forever, but maybe there should be visitation rights, and they revisit the issue again in a year or two once he proves he is stable.
As for "being worse now", I really don't think that is true either. Alimony is a holdover from a time when women weren't allowed to do, or expected to do, anything important for society.
renzy77 10y ago
$300/month is over $1600/month in 2014 dollars, when adjusted for inflation. So yes, not a "small amount."
ktappe 10y ago
I also like how the judge said they "could not do anything" about the $168K she'd already made off with. Apparently not even give him credit by suspending his monthly support payments until that amount was made up.
Fhqwghads 10y ago
It's mentioned at the beginning of the article:
Attractive females usually get what they want.
RadioNowhere 10y ago
http://i.imgur.com/lWKu1Bv.png
This is a picture of the family. He already knows of her intentions to divorce him at this point.
kneeonbelly 10y ago
The shrew literally went through this farce of a reunion to put on a show and score points for the cameras. All the while knowing she is about to clean him out. You can tell by her eyes that there is no genuine happiness or relief at seeing him. She's waiting on her paycheck. Fucking ice cold.
Fhqwghads 10y ago
What a fucking head trip that must be. Thanks for posting this.
gekkozorz 10y ago
This picture was taken shortly before the woman took out her stick and whacked her living moneybag for all he was worth.
Gigem_longhorns 10y ago
Gotta respect the kids though. Those old enough to decide are with him. Only required 5 years of child support at least.
RobbyTheLifeguard 10y ago
I'd bet money the woman was also a judge.
rudieboy 10y ago
You got that sentence bass ackwards.
Sherlock--Holmes 10y ago
Even the male judges are castrated and brainwashed. You have to if you want into that club.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Leonard_Church 10y ago
The sad thing is that a lot of people during that time didn't care about POWs or men being tortured in the service of their country.
To be honest it's possible that his POW status caused the judge to give such a shitty judgement. Vietnam troops were frowned upon by many, and due to the unpopularity of the war the idiotic public vented their anger on the troops. Many troops came home to a shower of boos and rotting fruit, with illiterate hippies holding banners proclaiming "Baby Killers".
thrownaway_MGTOW 10y ago
No, they really didn't... not at the time.
There were a few incidents, and in certain areas of the country (chiefly in and around Berkeley & SF Bay area) that they were treated rather shabbily. But largely this is an "urban myth" that Hollywood* subsequently latched onto, sensationalized and exaggerated (made it bigger and more dramatic with each subsequent re-telling).
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/04/30/debunking_a_spitting_image/
Now, they also didn't come home to a "ticker tape parade" -- but the plain truth is that THAT really only happened after WWII.
Because despite what you may have learned in your (warped, propaganda filled) school history books, most other wars were (at best) ambiguously supported by the general public, and many of them had rather significant "anti-war" protests -- plus the US veterans of those other wars (whether the Civil War, WWI, Korea, etc) also often came back home to a rather ambiguous and sometimes unsympathetic public.
This is even funnier. Most of the hippies were far from being illiterate, in fact the majority of them were middle-class (and often upper middle class) college students (and the chief motive for their anti-war protesting was personal -- the fear of being drafted themselves*).
And the "illiterate" accusation is especially ironic given how you have gotten virtually every point there all so horribly contorted and mixed up.
*Both of the asterisk points are related -- it was largely artsy & political-science major types (the kind of students who are, shall we say "mathematically challended", and who hence had a ridiculously inordinate fear of and later exaggeration of the lottery-based draft) -- and they were mainly in California, and especially the Berkeley/SF Bay area... which is (not surprisingly) the group that a lot of the subsequent 1980's era "Vietnam" filmmakers came from. Per example most people don't realize that the plot/characters & main story underlying "Apocalypse Now" was the fictionalized novel by Joseph Conrad, entitled "Heart of Darkness", which was published in 1899 and was about the Belgian Colony of "The Congo" in central Africa -- that story (rather obviously) had NOTHING to do with 1960's era Vietnam War (other than in the fervent, and some would say propagandistic or even drug-addled minds of the filmmakers).
solariant 10y ago
To be fair though, the whole war was a pointless waste of human life and a massive humiliation for the US on the world stage, so it's not surprising it wasn't popular.
Leonard_Church 10y ago
That's not being fair, throwing garbage at 18 year old boys who were drafted without a choice in the matter rather than the congressman who declared the war, or the citizens who voted for them is the most retarded idea I can think of.
solariant 10y ago
Definitely. But that is mob mentality for you. See also anti-immigrant sentiment, expressed as prejudice/violence against ethnic minorities, rather than against the politicians and businesses which encouraged them to immigrate.
xu85 10y ago
Bro that happened like once.
Leonard_Church 10y ago
0/10 shitty troll needs more effort.
xu85 10y ago
It wasn't many troops, it was one or two isolated cases, seriously.
Dark_Shroud 10y ago
No it wasn't. Try asking Vietnam vets or older people. Ask them about being spit on at the Airports when finally coming home or called shit besides Baby Killer, Assassin was another popular one pieces of shit call the vets.
People started telling the vets to change out of their uniform as soon as possible when landing to avoid that garbage.
lesbianDREAMS 10y ago
When Vietnam vets returned from the war they were largely looked down on due to the large amount of people who spoke out against the war and because we lost the war. Keep in mind these men were mostly conscripts and didn't want a part in a war they may not have fully believed in.
The wife most likely tossed away any empathy for her husband the second she learned how low society valued Vietnam vets.
Never underestimate the hamster
Edit: as said below most of the men were apparently volunteers
ametalshard 10y ago
It's already been said, but a lot of the men wanted to fight/ fought for glory/pussy/because it was the "manly" thing to do.
Divinityfound 10y ago
Actually... 70% of the soldiers were volunteers, even at the height of the draft.
lesbianDREAMS 10y ago
Yeah i already edited my post for that
mcdehuevo 10y ago
Interesting point. I had never thought of it that way, but it makes sense. His successes are her successes; his "failures" are her failures. If he's associated with something unpopular, he's going to lower her social standing. Wow.
choikwa 10y ago
She did what was best for herself. His successes are her successes; his failures are his failures. Once he failed by being captured as POW, she hopped to another man for his successes.
Sherlock--Holmes 10y ago
The U.S. didn't lose the Viet Nam war. You can't lose something if you don't intend to win.
lesbianDREAMS 10y ago
Yes, no, maybe. That's an entirely different can of worms
[deleted] 10y ago
This is a myth.
Most (75%) of the men who fought in Vietnam were volunteers and the vast majority of them (90%) were proud to have served.
boxzonk 10y ago
Define "volunteered". I know men who fully expected to be drafted, so they enlisted in an attempt to get more control over their assignments. They didn't want to join the military, but they're still as counted as volunteers because they pre-empted the inevitability of being drafted.
lesbianDREAMS 10y ago
Oh shit I did not know that. That would have contibuted even more to their low social standing then
I assumed the reason they employed conscription was because barely anyone was joining up
Dark_Shroud 10y ago
Vietnam was the first time we really had the media here in the US spinning their own propaganda views on a war, Vietnam. Most of the protesting was against the draft its self and not the war. You would never know that with the way a good portions of older media people & educators talk.
The media figure heads to this day don't want to talk much about the millions of people who were slaughtered in South Vietnam and Cambodia when we abruptly pulled out.
Or all the other lies & bullshit like Hanoi Jane where people still try to spin or defend her actions.
smile_e_face 10y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that the Vietcong were severely weakened after the Tet Offensive? So much so that we would have won if we hadn't pulled out?
Dark_Shroud 10y ago
Correct, another two weeks and the Viet Cong would have surrendered to us.
IAmTheIlluminatiAMA 10y ago
Well, he did abandon her. He didn't even take his wife's feelings into consideration when he got captured. He didn't even love her enough to just die so she could get that sweet, sweet life insurance and move on to a new provider - someone who would actually be there for her.
redpillbanana 10y ago
Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. -- Hillary Rodham Clinton
Thanks to his surviving the POW camp, she didn't even get to be a primary victim. No wonder she cheated on him.
IAmTheIlluminatiAMA 10y ago
Holy hell, that is a real quote? What a cunt.
redpillbanana 10y ago
Yeah - to be fair, if you read more of her speech, it makes a little more sense. Still, it doesn't excuse what she said, and it goes to show how far women will go to paint themselves as the victim - even at the highest levels of power.
Thecuriouswin 10y ago
Listening to women try to apply logic to their narcissism is like drinking a big bottle of douche juice.
Right_Wing_Elitest 10y ago
You know her girl friends actually said this kind if shit to her at the time too
kragshot 10y ago
Yeah. He had to survive and come back...how could he? /s
1100110011001 10y ago
And with proper feminist education, one would be able to tell you that this sexually abused by being captured.
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
exit_sandman 10y ago
But at least a Lannister always pays his debts.
sir_wankalot_here 10y ago
Inconsiderate asshole not dying. A considerate man would have commited suicide while being a POW, so she wouldn't feel guilty while fucking other guys.
Also being a military widow is much more dramatic then being the wife of a loser POW. As a widow she could stick a flag in her window, have a good little cry on appropriate occasions and have everyone feel sorry for her.
TheIronViking 10y ago
Agreed this guy is an oppressive shitlord. He's having all the fun working at his job, being fulfilled, and there she sits being the slavish "wife." I bet he didn't even request time off from his captors to celebrate their anniversary. He's not even trying to be supportive.
[deleted] 10y ago
Yeah, Homeland actually depicted this pretty well. When the dude was a POW, she was used to constant pity parties, attention, and validation - while she got to fuck around on the side, receive his checks, and so on. Best of both worlds. It is the ultimate divorce - you get the full beta provider effect while also getting to be considered a "heroic military wife."
topspeedj 10y ago
Don't forget all the Facebook likes either.
[deleted]
IllimitableMan 10y ago
I love this, it's exactly how women argue. This is the spin doctoring, deflecting, self-justifying victim posturing bullshit that many women execute so flawlessly when they're caught red-handed being anything less than noble.
It goes something like this:
This is the bread and butter of a woman's survival other than her sexuality, which of course, is another option they'll leverage if they deem you more suitable to be "charmed" rather than "mentally coerced."
The difference between charm and coercion is one's pleasurable, both are however, manipulative. Soft-machiavellianism or soft power.
Note how men are inherently predisposed to the latter whilst women, the former.
CaptainFalconer 10y ago
Kind of an aha moment when I realized female romance comes from her subconscious, and then is rationalized to logic.
When it comes to "negotiating desire", you aren't trying to convince her logical brain.
You're trying to convince her subconscious brain. Do that, and her logical brain will bullshit whatever it can to rationalize her subconscious feelings.
But yeah, influencing a girls subconscious, is classed as manipulation.
So yeah, all effective romance is manipulation of some sort.
netgrey 10y ago
This is also why advertising is so much more effective on women.
IAmTheIlluminatiAMA 10y ago
Which is why arguing with a woman is fucking pointless. Always. She will never cede her point, even if she thinks the sky is purple. You're just being an argumentative dick and calling her stupid for disagreeing with her. Why can't you just let her be right for once? God I have heard so many women say that. It must be great to admit that you are content living in the comfort of ignorance. That despite being purposely ignorant through your own denial of fact your life is so free of consequences that it makes no difference as to the real color of the sky.
topspeedj 10y ago
Here in the UK there's a saying: "Women aren't always right, but they're never wrong."
[deleted] 10y ago
Seriously, it's incredible to me that i was with a girl for a year and a half, and in the numerous fights we had (always initiated by her for some reason) I was never wrong. Women suck at arguing, and have no real basis in logic to formulate their ideas. For some reason I kept hoping that one day we would get into an argument and she would have a valid point and I could concede and say "You know what, you're right." But it just never happened. And thus, I got lambasted with the, "Why am I the one who is always wrong? You never say that I'm right!" Well no shit, I'm not gonna tell you you're right just to soothe your feels.
It is akin to arguing with a child.
narcissistic_walrus 10y ago
I'll never forget the day my ex-gf said the same thing to me.
Ex: "how come every time we argue you're right and I'm wrong?"
Me: "because I don't argue over dumb shit. When I'm wrong I admit it and apologize"
The look on her face lol
IAmTheIlluminatiAMA 10y ago
Because it's like we all have brain farts, men and women. A man says something stupid without thinking it through, you call him on his bullshit and you bust his balls a little bit, you both laugh at yourselves and it is over. A woman brain farts, probably not even thinking about what she is saying, and then when you call her on it she goes into "Wait, I am not stupid! I wouldn't say something stupid! That has to be right, he is just an asshole for calling me stupid!" and the hamster keeps running in every direction just to avoid being wrong. Women are so god damned insecure they can't even laugh at themselves. The unicorns laugh at themselves, even in private. Most women can't.
Why else would they be so proud to be "strong" and "independent"? Just like a chihuaha will yap and yap and yap to show how ferocious it is. I don't get why in the last 50 years women have shamed each other into not wanting to be feminine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a traditional woman but they no longer pride themselves in taking care of a family. I remember an episode of Sanford and Sons where Redd says, and I am paraphrasing, "Yeah, you can wake up and cook for yourself and come home, drink beer, watch tv all night, do whatever you want for the rest of your life. But it is nice to come home, have a wife kiss you hello, you go wash up in the bathroom and you have some matching towels, you sit down to a dinner she made for you out of love and have a pleasant conversation with a nice lady." Ladies, what the fuck is wrong with that? I would marry a 5 if that is what marriage was like.
[deleted]
reason_is_why 10y ago
Imagine your daughter is the wife. Would you want her to remain single, raising children alone, on the faint hope her husband
is stillreturns alive? Or would you encourage her to move on with her life?When he returns and is damaged goods, would you encourage her to stay with him anyway? Or would you encourage her to do what is best for her and your grandchildren?
Her lawyer is definitely going to get the best possible arrangement for his client.
A soldier is a disposable resource. He is a pawn. His feels are not important.
She is a mother. She is the reason he went to war to begin with. Her well being is the ultimate goal of society.
His irrelevance may be cause for outrage but it is a fundamental biological truth.
theredpillager 10y ago
He was a POW, not MIA. She, the govt, everyone knew he was alive. She just didn't give a shit.
CrazyHorseInvincible 10y ago
Do you want more people to volunteer for military service? Like, ever?
Men are not stupid.
reason_is_why 10y ago
No I do not want more people to volunteer for military service.
They kiiinda are. Just sayin!
There will always be hordes of young men willing to kill other people on command, for whatever reason. It seems to be a hallmark of the male half of the species. A great deal of mental gymnastics go into making this honorable, etc. but in reality it is a rather nasty deal.
bicepsblastingstud 10y ago
From another comment in this thread:
youreunbelieveable 10y ago
If that was my daughter Id point out your comment as an example of hamstering rationalizing BS
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
reason_is_why 10y ago
Let us take a look at the biological foundations of war. There are biological truths to everything, not just sexual strategy. The biological truth of war is that it is a meat grinder of sorts, siphoning off the superfluous young men produced by society, so as to maintain social stability among those who remain.
It is common among many species for the juvenile males to be driven out of the herd, pride, family etc. as they are a threat to the offspring and stability of the social unit.
This fundamental truth is obdurate. It precludes feminism. It precludes the species itself.
If men don't want to be in this position, they must cast off their naivete regarding their importance in this world. Just as young girls must accept that men see them as only as wet hole or breeding material, men must accept that society doesn't assign them even that.
That is, the whore, the slut, the used up skank with her blown out pussy hole is worth more to society than any Übermensch ever will be.
There are ways around this fundamental biological truth, but those paths are not available to people who use fundamental biological truths to justify beastly behavior.
RadioNowhere 10y ago
Species and society are not the same thing. Just because society cannot completely ignore the impact of biology, does not mean society is completely defined by biology.
reason_is_why 10y ago
According to the sidebar:
"...mate selection is a psycho-biological function that millennia of evolution has hardwired into both sexes..."
If women are completely defined by their biology, (biological truths make them incapable of love, logic or loyalty) and men are also (biological truth says men must have sex with women) then society is indeed completely defined by biology.
The obtaining of territory, resources and mates is a biological mandate for all mammals. The extent to which we resist, or believe we can resist, these urges is the extent to which we are human.
A man's wholesale abandonment of his personal ideals (i.e. "sexual strategy is amoral" so I, too, must be amoral) is the wholesale abandonment of his humanity.
In literature, this is the proverbial selling of his soul to the devil, that he may enjoy the fleshly pleasures of earth.
In the end, if man defines himself by his biology (must have sex), and he defines woman by her biology (AWALT), then he is defining society by biology. He has constrained humanity entirely to biological truths, leaving no room for individual free choice.
RadioNowhere 10y ago
Ya... ignoring the retarded emphasis in parenthesis
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
reason_is_why 10y ago
If we start with the premise that human mating strategies are a natural result of evolution, then it logically follows that other human behaviors are the result of such evolutionary forces as well.
The fact that war exists strongly implies it has an evolutionary purpose, with the only debate being what that purpose is.
Culling the herd is a delicate matter and perhaps like a girl saying yes to sex, it has to "just happen" and never be pre-planned.
Perhaps instead of "culling the herd" a better phrase would be "stabilizing the herd". It's not so important that the more aggressive and violent young men be killed as it it is they be placed someplace else. If a large portion happen to not come back, it's no loss really. Those who do come back, however, are going to be a liability to the society because they will come back damaged in body, mind and soul.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
reason_is_why 10y ago
That sounds reasonable and remarkably self aware.
IndigoCup 10y ago
Holy shit, part of his pension too? What a fucking bitch
tallwheel 10y ago
I wouldn't blame the guy if after that he went all John Ga... Rambo. John Rambo (First Blood part I style).
Gstreetshit 10y ago
People wonder why suicide rates are so high for males.
This type of stuff happens all the time.
These exact circumstances are obviously rare given the POW angle.
But the bitch taking everything away from him after trying his ass off to be a provider is a daily occurrence.
Kangaroo courts abound
Is there any hope or has the leftist programming completely taken hold?
[deleted] 10y ago
Women are such self centered spoiled brats. They expect all the privileges of men and women without working for them, meanwhile denying any gender related privileges for men...even though they work for them...women broke the institution of marriage and bring nothing of value to the bargaining table but still expect to get everything for nothing. They constantly moan about what theyEXPECT from society instead of EARNING what they want.
johnnight 10y ago
Obligations are naturally balanced with privileges. Feminism wants all the privileges for women, while having none of the obligations.
In the past all men had the obligation to defend the safety of their group. If you won't do it, you are out of the group. Women never had this obligation. They were always the free rider on this. It's only logical that men's obligation gave them privileges in the form of power. Power comes from within, from strength, from the ability to do something. It's inherent, not instituted by social convention. Any social convention, which does not reflect natural power, will dissolve at some point.
awesomesalsa 10y ago
And who let them get away with it?
[deleted]
Meknes88 10y ago
Sick, the world is going crazy
joshw220 10y ago
I am 30 never married, no kids, been with a lot of women and been playing with the idea of settling down and starting a family, but when I read stuff like this..... I feel my life is fine as it is. I am going to flat out say though some guys are desperate and family and friends will tell guys this girl is bad news and they marry them anyways. Does he get what he deserves, no! But you can't be surprised when you get blind sided.
[deleted] 10y ago
He just married the wrong woman. There are plenty of other women out there who would never treat their husbands cruelly like that.
awesomesalsa 10y ago
fewer than you've been led to believe
tallwheel 10y ago
I would have added an /s at the end of that. Nice NAWALT.
sniperhiding 10y ago
But guys, give her a break. She was just "human". /s
I would like to see a guy use that defense.
TheIronViking 10y ago
I hear about this shit so often in regards to military men. I'm wondering if wages earned in military service should be exempt from divorce rulings to discourage this shit. It's clear these women are after a lucrative corpse, not a husband.
SoSaltyDoe 10y ago
Honestly most military wives do stick it out. From what I understand, military wives usually get together and create a sort of "community" that heavily discourages wives pulling shit like this.
Essentially, if you plan on wifing up a girl before going into the service, you'd be best to make sure she's around a lot more military wives while you're gone. Greatly reduces the chances of stuff like this happening.
ChangloriousOne 10y ago
I am a veteran, and this is true, at least about the community.
They form a support group of wives and girlfriends that meet every week and the wives and girlfriends of new soldiers get info from the ones that have been through a few deployments.
It also has a secondary purpose of attempting to discourage cheating. If a soldier's wife or girlfriend is absent, they are notified.
I can also tell you, that most soldiers also take wives from Korea and Germany to help ensure loyalty. The PX and other shops on base are all staffed by German and Korean women.
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
'Discourages pulling that shit'. They need to form little princess seminars to keep the temptations of sucking another man's dick while hers is facing a morbid reality day in, day out for years at a time at bay. I feel sick.
AndrewAtrus 10y ago
Community approval and affirmation is incredibly important when it comes to the behaviors that women consider "tolerable". This is why things like Sex and the City are so damaging. If I ever get married I would need to be very careful of the friends, family, community, media etc. to which she is regularly exposed.
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
its unacceptable that's what it is.
[deleted]
gneiss_gneiss_baby 10y ago
Odd coincidence, I was just looking at this article on distractify. Look at the picture about 3/4 of the way down
http://news.distractify.com/people/complex-humans/?v=1
[deleted]
CauisCosades 10y ago
I wish the military rules for marriage applied the same for non military wives.
_valtiel_ 10y ago
Can't expect her to be loyal after 5 and a half years.
Looks like Season one and two of Homeland to me.
duglock 10y ago
Absolutely disgusting. Is it mandatory that judges take a white knight test before being appointed to the bench? I thought I got raped in my divorce but this guy takes the cake.
Also, I think it is a pretty dumb idea to ask the government to fix this. The situation exists because of the government. Get the government the fuck out of the marriage business and we might start seeing some fairness and equality.
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
This is why I'll never get married.
lesbianDREAMS 10y ago
The fact that she was his wife doesn't change the fact that AWALT
dildonitron 10y ago
How did this guy not eviscerate her?
batmanbuff 10y ago
This rustled my jimmys in ways they have never been rustled before. I just dumped my girlfriend this morning and thanks to posts like these I have examples to cite so things like this never happen in my own life.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
batmanbuff 10y ago
I'll do a write up. It might not be red pill but I think there is a kernel of wisdom to be shared
Adolf_ghandi 10y ago
Wtf is that judge thinking? This is a man that can barely loose anything anymore. He knows how to use a weapon and that retard dares to piss him off that much? Are they aware how fucking dangerous that shit can get?
Did he shoot them yet? I.e. wife lawyer and judge?
[deleted]
LaughingVergil 10y ago
Can we please refrain from digging up 40 year old stories and presenting them as if they are recent? This article is from 1974, a year before I joined the army or graduated high school.
RadioNowhere 10y ago
Who presented this as recent? The date and archive status is prominently displayed
JakeTheMoose 10y ago
The man does not lie, the article is no longer relevant due to it's extreme age.
Metatron-X 10y ago
I don't think it should be focused on gender alone.
She cheated on him, he did nothing wrong. She should be punished.
I don't care which sex a culprit has. If he/she does something bad, he should feel the consequences of his actions.
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
United States of Whiteknights
Metatron-X 10y ago
What does "whiteknighting" have to do with anything????
NewtonianCooking 10y ago
marriage laws put women on a pedestal
ThePedanticCynic 10y ago
Same woman different story.
[deleted] 10y ago
This is despicable. The trauma this man has faced and survived, only to return home to this. Hearing things like this breaks my heart. I dearly hope he doesn't commit suicide.
Squeezymypenisy 10y ago
I'm confused, where was he a prisoner of war?
Fhqwghads 10y ago
It's literally in the first sentence of the article.
JP_Whoregan 10y ago
The Hanoi Hilton, (then) North Vietnam. The article is dated 1974, roughly one year after the bulk of US POWs were brought home.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanoi_Hilton
MagicGainbow 10y ago
Vietnam, it's an old article.
SoSaltyDoe 10y ago
Yeah, probably should've put in the title that this occurred shortly after Vietnam. I would think that we would have heard more about it if this was recent.
Bethesda_ 10y ago
I'm appalled at reading this. It's just disgusting.
SeaRavenTX 10y ago
Doesn't surprise me. I left on deployment only to come back to weirdness between my then gf and my "best friend." This was before I was a red-piller, of course. We went drinking one night and I noticed some sort of twinkle in both their eyes. I pressed over and over asking the gf what happened between the two of them while I was gone. Lo and behold, she finally admitted it several weeks after I was adamant about "knowing." Women. Good learning experience though. I had known that girl since we were 16. I was probably 24 when this happened. Goes to show nothing is sacred to them if there is someone with the time and/or money to offer them.
[deleted]
[deleted]
chillmonkey88 10y ago
I'll just not have my day ruined and stay out of this one...
[deleted]
[deleted]
theredpillager 10y ago
This shit is sick enough to make a man wanna go MGTOW.
Audball766 10y ago
This is some wildly fucked up shit. He was a fucking prisoner AND her husband! How could she even stand to THINK about being with another man? Nevertheless, actually do it and THEN, fucking rob her husband blind when he gets back?? That is some of the lowest shit I've ever heard of. That poor man.
systembreaker 10y ago
Cheating, is in fact, totally human and honestly I don't fault her for that part, just as I wouldn't fault a man in a similar position. If you disagree with that and post around here, I think you're being a hypocrite. Besides, if you ask me it's beta behavior to whine about humans acting on human instincts.
Fucking the person that you and your brain decide are a good match for your genetics is quite the normal instinct for men and women. The prime philosophy of this subreddit is to accept that and to work at improving yourself in order to realize your potential with respect to sexual fitness.
This shitty situation is horrible and I feel sorry for the guy in just a humanistic way. It's an illustration of why war is so disgusting - it brings out the worst in some people, like his wife. The way she takes complete advantage of the legal system to destroy what little he had left of himself - and only for a few material objects - is the despicable part. Not the cheating. She couldn't have possibly known if he was even alive, you can't ask someone to put their life on hold for 5.5 years. So in that regard, it was even nearly possible to feel sorry for her, but by her subsequent actions, she doesn't deserve sympathy. What made the cheating horrible was really something that neither he nor she had control over, which was the war and whatever politics and excuses the politicians made to continue it. She didn't choose for the war to happen, and he didn't choose the war or the POW treatment.
If you ask me, THE chief evil in the world is excessive greed and ego. If you think about any evil act, it's probably in some form the underlying cause of that act. This woman's actions are one example of excessive greed. War another.
SkorchZang 10y ago
How about No.
No, she doesn't get a pussy pass that absolves her from responsibility for her dishonorable cunt nature, citing "the evils of worldwide greed" to hide her bullshit behind.
She is a despicable cheating cunt with zero honor and no concept of loyalty. Not towards her man, nor towards her country that he was serving. Unfortunately this is all too typical for womankind.
What you're arguing is that one should be more supportive of it, because feelz, because instinct, because girls just wanna have fun. Fuck that noise.
systembreaker 10y ago
Yes, she just like all humans, yourself included, do in fact have the right to acknowledge their choice to choose a mate. If you say otherwise, then you're just being a whiny schmuck who wants sex to come to you with no effort.
But if you had really read my post and didn't become brainless with rage, you'd have seen that I never said she was absolved of all responsibility.
Rpillacc 10y ago
Are you female? Because that hamster is on steroids.
systembreaker 10y ago
Nope, I'm a man with a brain. If you really think that you're the type to build yourself up into someone desirable to women, like this subreddit tries to help with, then you wouldn't be whining about the true fact that people go for whom they find attractive. The whole animal kingdom and beyond does that.
Rpillacc 10y ago
Honestly, I can understand the cheating, hell I'm pretty proud of my morals and I'm not sure I could be loyal in 5.5 years to stray.
Your hamstering lies in the fact that you are blaming this on war. Nope. She is responsible for her own actions, not politicians, not soldiers. Her.
systembreaker 10y ago
You totally misread my comment. If you'd have read carefully, you see that I'm blaming her cheating on war (as well as biology). Without war, she wouldn't have been without her spouse for 5 years. But I don't at all condone her handling of the divorce. Pull your head out of your ass. Then read my comment again. After that, check the definition of hamstering again, and see if you can figure out the difference between that and expression of ideas and opinions. I know, it'll be a strain for your poor brain. But give it a go.
I find the sociological aspects of RP pretty interesting, but I'm starting to learn how intellectually degenerate a good chunk of this community is. The bitterness and anger all over the place is just one expression of that. After this reply, I'm done with this subreddit and all the dumbasses who have apparently regressed back to a high school level of maturity.
LineOfCoke 10y ago
thats what happens when you try to make a livin ondeath and destruction.
Mein_Tarnaccount 10y ago
That metaphor for marriage may be accurate, but it's still a bit harsh.
[deleted] 10y ago
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+the+fuck+is+a+draft
arbyq5000 10y ago
that LTC wasn't fucking drafted, twat, and neither were upwards of 70% of the enlisted in that war.
[deleted] 10y ago
Oh, you implied they were all twats for signing up, regardless of motive.
Glad we could clear that up.
maximun_vader 10y ago
ok... I know that vietnam wasn't a war that many people joined voluntarily, so I'll take this case as an exception.
But of you voluntarily join the military, and you get cheated while deployed, you fucking deserve it. Nobody forced you to leave, you voluntarily chose to spend months killing people in a shitty poor foreign region (and sarcastically calling it "serving your country").
You getting cheated while deployed is basically a Darwin Award.
SeaRavenTX 10y ago
I bet you wouldn't say that unless you were hiding behind a keyboard and the anonymity of the internet.
[deleted]
maximun_vader 10y ago
so many buthurted people. But I would change my point of view if proven wrong: getting cheated on, or dying in Iraq or Afghanistan, IS a Darwin Award (unlike WWII, where you actually were preserving the future of your kin)
Average_Black_Man 10y ago
The war may be gay, but they are still putting their lives on the line for something.
maximun_vader 10y ago
I don't think that argument is valid. Giving your life for an ideal doesn't automatically make that ideal right, or valid, or worth it.
So, the thing is... does these wars actually achieve anything? does bombing this countries improve significantly the chances of your country to survive in the long run?
Average_Black_Man 10y ago
One could make the argument that it is technically helping the US, but imo it's pretty immoral to fuck up some already fucked up countries for profit.