Piling on to The Virgin Ben
This poor schmuck has been ripped on lately for many things, among them his hypocrisy, his shameless fawning all over
Drinky McDumbAss, and his rigid conservative bush-wah (pun intended). Oh yeah, and his sanctimonious contempt for All Things Non-Repugnicant. Which makes him the Poster Boy for the New
Gestapo Citizen Corps. Kinda sad to see someone who professes to represent the Hebrew people following in the footsteps of Hitler…
Anyways,… this twip has been going on about how
some idiot has offered the princely sum of $125K to ’any woman who can kill him with sex’. His claim is that:
1. This is a new idea; and
2. This shows us all
‘the decline of modern womanhood’.
Please excuse the gender specific generalities over the rest of this post. I am well aware that they do not apply to
all women, and most especially not to the vast majority of women I have had the pleasure of dealing with for the last 25 years or so. But I think they were valid at one point in our history, and still are to an unhealthy degree in some areas of the world (yes, that means
you too, Promise Keepers!).
I got some news for ya, Benjy Boy. Women have killed men with sex for a long time. In particular, (young) women have killed (old) men in many ways to
get their money. Only the ones who
liked the old guys killed them with sex. Mind you, only 50 years ago, women were mostly considered
a commodity to be bought and sold. In many places, they still are. What do you think dowries are all about? The difference between then and now, you putz, is that people actually admit that is what is going on in today’s world. They don’t try and hide the ugly truths the way society used to do. Plus, we hear about things outside of our own neck of the woods to a greater degree today than in days gone by. If somebody had made that offer in Europe 100 years ago, and you were living here in North America, chances are you wouldn’t have even known about it!
Before women’s lib, there was one accepted and morally sanctioned role for women: get a husband and raise a family. And, if they picked (or were forced to marry) the wrong one, well, that was just too bad. Divorce was not socially acceptable – but beating the crap out of your wife sure as hell was. Marriages were often arranged without the consent of the women. They were brokered by the woman’s father and the husband-to-be, or the two families. How freely could a woman find enjoyment in life, if she didn’t like the one and only role she could play? What if she couldn’t have children? Of course, women found a way to get some of the things they wanted. And ways to get out of a bad marriage. And, for some strange reason,
they valued money and security in a relationship a lot. They still do - which is the only reason you'll even be considered as a potential mate. Many would have jumped at the chance to
have sex for much less money than $125K, and if they got to kill a man in the process -
bonus!
Now they are able to make more of their own choices. Who to try to make a relationship work with. When and how many children to have. What to do with their lives. And how to find a sense of personal worth, among many other newly allowed options in their lives. And they are free to make some silly old man happy in the last moments of his life if they want. It’s too bad there are still arrogant a$$holes like you to preach on their ‘downfall’. What was Anna Nicole Smith all about? Not that I think she is a good example of modern womanhood. I just think that, until
pResident Drunken Cokehead finishes installing the Fourth Reich, she should be allowed to marry some old fart who doesn’t know any better. It’s the old fart you should be pillorying, not any women willing to take him up on the offer.
As to the money involved… well, let’s just say that $125K, while it is a nice chunk of coin, doesn’t go all that far nowadays. Unless, of course, you get it in corporate dividends…