Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 A final solution to the problem of Evil

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Jun 10, 2002
 Comments:
Women. Over half of the human race consists of members of the so-called "fairer sex."

But what is so fair about them? Do they do anything other than cause misery and anguish, and the ruin of men? Since the Garden of Eden at the dawn of Creation women have done nothing other than hinder man's progress towards God by creating strife, jealousy and lust.

In fact if it weren't for the fact that women were required to continue the human race, we would be better off without them entirely. Without the foul wares that women offer men, we could enjoy a life in contemplation of God and his Creation, dedicating ourselves to the promise of Heaven. Satan himself would be defeated and our final ascent to Heaven could begin en masse. Hallelujah!

The solution lies in God's gift to men, science. Through nothing more than the intelligence the Lord gave us we can finally rid ourself of the female menace.

future

More stories about Future
Global Warming: A Proactive Solution (Part 2 of 2)
Milosevic, Sovereignty, and the War against Terrorism
Using the Myers-Briggs System for a Better Society
Real Men use Realdolls?
2001: A Historical Odyssey
C++ Should Be The Only Programming Language

More stories by
Jon Erikson

Linux in the corporate world
Not just harmless fun
Pornography: How the Liberals won America
Linux: From awk to sed
Pearl vs. Python: A Technical Review

It all started in the Garden of Eden with the creation of Eve by Satan. For despite what it says in the Bible it is clear that no loving God could inflict such a scheming harridan upon his beloved Son Adam, and therefore we must look to his nemesis for the creation of womankind. It seems clear that Satan stole into the Garden one night while Adam lay sleeping, and removed from the garden some of Adam's leavings in order to fashion as foul a temptress as he could. Upon the successful completion of his succubus, he placed her into the Garden and let her work her wiles upon the innocent man, tempting him into sin in her infernal cavern.

Unfortunately despite this clear historical evidence of the terrible threat that women pose to mankind certain agents of Satan, traitors who sold their souls for the false promise of the vagina, began to spread the notions of equality and universal suffrage and in time it came to pass that women were given dreadful equality with men. And since that time the world has become a darker place - the threat of terrorism, of chemical and biological horrors, the rise of cancer, AIDS and mental illness. All directly caused by the incessant Satanic meddling of women.

So what must be done about the problem of women and the evil that is inherent in their every part? Clearly this situation cannot continue or else all mankind is eternally doomed to repeat the same mistakes at the behest of the hordes of hell. But we need these foul temptresses in order to further the human race; it is through this ultimate control that we are forever dependent upon them. But are we? No! For the Lord has provided an answer if only we are corageous enough to accept it.

Rationalty and science are the Lord's gifts to men, a way to ensure that we are not eternally damned for the sins of the First Whore. History after all shows us that women have no clue when it comes to logical thinking and no place in the halls of academia - can you name any female scientists? And when I say that, I mean a female "scientist" who didn't have a husband who actually did all the work.

Through this wonderous blessing, men have struggled with the problem of women, and how we can escape the curse of their Satanic ways. And finally it looks as though we can - through the miracle of artificial wombs! Hallelujah! No longer will we be dependent upon these man-eating succubi to continue the human race.

How would this work in practice? Well, it's simple as long as we can overcome their feminine wiles and hold fast to the strength of the Lord. All breeding must stop and we must immediately implement a sterlization program for all females; this is the only humane solution which ensures that no lapses can occur through which the female can undermine our Great Plan.

Once we have neutered this key element to the power of these she-beasts, we must proceed full ahead with the rest of the plan. All men of sound character who are unspoilt by the lusts invoked by women must commence a breeding program whereby they provide their seed to Christian scientists for the purpose of Godly procreation, in order for us to improve the race through the scientific selection of Christian traits, most importantly of all the God chromosome which separates us from the agents of Satan.

As decent Christians no further action should be taken against the succubi other than to ensure they can no longer work their wiles upon men - this can be acheived through the use of techniques such as concealing clothing, or forbidding them contact with all but the most dedicated of men. This way, we can peacefully carry out the great plan while staying true to the Lord's strictures against violence and bloodshed - for to engage in such acts would pervert the whole purpose of this scheme and hand victory to the jezebels!

I do not expect these ideas to be popular; indeed far too many men out there are already under the spell of the Devil's agents, and would gladly sacrifice the future of the human race for a taste of the pleasures of the fetid pit. But if there is one thing this great country has it is men who are willing to follow the Lord's path despite all the obstacles placed in their way, and just as Christ did we must overcome all temptation and emerge purer with a shining focus upon the salvation of all mankind, and a final defeat for Satan.




pffft (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by cheetah on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 06:16:41 PM PST
Next thing you'll be telling us you're against Hentai Anime and Pornography ...


Damn! (1.00 / 1) (#10)
by budlite on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 06:35:44 PM PST
You beat me to it.

Sorry Jon, but that one's going to dog you for quite some time, it seems.


Whoopsie (1.00 / 1) (#11)
by budlite on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 06:46:46 PM PST
I should really read things for more than .2 of a second.

What I have against your anime article is the fact that you hate all anime, rather than simply hentai.

Sorry for the miswrite.


 
ok (1.00 / 1) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 07:50:33 PM PST
Im guessing you have been shut down by every woman you've met, am I right?

Indy^_^


Pervert (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by wymynyst on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 08:08:49 PM PST
What kind of testosterone are you on? Every wyman he's met? What sort of man sees every single wyman in his life as a sex opportunity? Or should I say a rape opportunity, because that's obviously the only perspective someone like you could apply to sex.

Wymyn aren't your sex toys. The vagina is something we piss out of, not something for you to piss into, or whatever it is you squirt out of those blunt objects that captivate most of your tiny, hormone-sodden attention.


It's been well said... (3.50 / 2) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 02:48:48 AM PST
Do not trust anything that bleeds for 5 days and does not die.


Why are men scared of mynstruation? (2.00 / 1) (#18)
by wymynyst on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 03:16:03 AM PST
It takes an especially juvenile mind to see the sign of a wyman's intense connection to the Earth as a repugnant burden, to be pitied rather than celebrated. Maybe if you knew what it was to be so closely tied to the cycles of nature, you would understand. Of course, you men idolise your phalluses in spite of their complete lack of cosmic significance, so it's no wonder you indulge in so much compensatory behaviour. Maybe that's why you feel you have to keep wymyn down? Good luck with your cars, guns and other penis-toys. Modern wymyn don't need anything from your kind, now that the phallocracy is crumbling.


tongue in cheek (1.00 / 2) (#23)
by LLWhipist on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 08:08:44 AM PST
So many of the articles here take on that surreal feeling so ably fronted by Swift that I can't ever be sure how to take things. I hoping that this is another of those.


 
Yeah, but (4.66 / 3) (#24)
by Icebox on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 08:22:34 AM PST
Of course you realize that in many ancient societies, those that were supposedly 'closer to nature', menstruatung women were segregated from the rest of the the people. There was solid reasoning behind this, you people are out of your heads during that time. While a large portion of your behavior are likely due to the present day excessive tolerance and encouragement of it, there are some significant chemical changes that occur.

By the way, Freud rolls over in his grave when amateurs like you, who know his work from snippets they read in Cosmo articles, try to tie phallic significance to various objects. Jung would despise you even more. Go get an education first, then come back to Adequacy.


 
Interesting (none / 0) (#55)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 15th, 2002 at 06:59:31 PM PST
This "Wyman", which is pronounced "Women" and hence sounds like more than one, obviously tries to drown out all forms of reply with overly complex wording. It is rather funny, indeed. Learn to spell.


 
Ha! (none / 0) (#60)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 20th, 2002 at 02:46:55 AM PST
That "phallocracy" has kept you and your evil brethren from leading the whole human race into the most profane and abject temptation! I think the statistics speak for themselves when it comes to the "cosmic significance of women":

- 78% of fatal car crashes involve mistakes by women at the wheel. That amounts to a lot of lives destroyed because women can't handle a simple mechanical task.
- Women use, per capita, almost 38% more energy than men do in any given year.
- 64% of suspected terrorists worldwide are - you guessed it - women.
- Since those of the weaker sex were given the right to vote, the percentage of registered voters who actually vote has tumbled from a respectible 93% to the current depths of apathy. More disturbingly, since the orgy of perversion pitifully referred to by left-wing nutjobs and communist sympathisers as the "Sexual Revolution," the rate of divorce and teenage pregnancy has skyrocketed. Clearly, women cannot handle sexual freedom or political choice responsibly.




Umm... (none / 0) (#62)
by hauntedattics on Sat Jun 22nd, 2002 at 02:09:58 PM PST
"evil brethren"? Maybe not.




 
Uh... (4.66 / 3) (#20)
by budlite on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 04:41:09 AM PST
if a woman can piss out of her vagina, there's something seriously wrong somewhere.


 
If you think your vagina is solely for excretion (3.50 / 2) (#25)
by anti filidor on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 09:46:32 AM PST
then you're not nearly so liberated as you pretend. Wouldn't a woman so desperate to proove her fierce independence seek sexual independence too? What better way to trump the "phallocracy" than to recede into exclusively vaginal sexuality?

Then again, perhaps the real core of the problem her is that you can't get laid--instead of enjoying heterosexual union the way most women do, you've taken to lashing out against it. I am certain that if you're desperate to save face, you could easily justify having sex and hating men--that you do otherwise indicates that you didn't have much of a choice in the matter.


 
o_0 (1.00 / 2) (#26)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 09:53:13 AM PST
"What sort of man sees every single wyman in his life as a sex opportunity?"

I ment no woman on earth would go out with Erikson on a date. Geez talk about misinturpreration(sp?)

Indy^_^


 
"Shut down"? (4.00 / 1) (#14)
by Ernest Bludger on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 08:42:34 PM PST
You mean like an operating system or an electronic consumer product or something?

Perhaps you meant "knocked back", "rejected", "had your advanced spurned", "had love unrequited" or similar? If not, I'd love to hear your elaboration.


the 2nd option (2.00 / 1) (#15)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 08:50:06 PM PST
"Perhaps you meant "knocked back", "rejected", "had your advanced spurned", "had love unrequited" or similar?"

That pretty sums it up. Also I think Jon got the idea of "not needing women for reproduction" from an Anime

Indy^_^


 
We must remove women from the breeding process. (4.00 / 1) (#16)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 10th, 2002 at 11:52:10 PM PST
This frees them up for more meaningless sex.


 
Sorry dude (1.00 / 1) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 04:08:33 AM PST
Unfortunately women possess TITS and PUSSIES which sadly will make heterosexual men do whatever women want. Even if there was a magic pill that made men have babies they would lust after TITS and PUSSIES because that is why men were made, to buy porno mags and to download tittie jpegs off the internet. Sorry Dude you are about to burn in hell because women look a hell of a lot better than men with their kit off. So why not just accept your place in Hades and gaze upon that ripe, firm flesh? {drool}


 
Wrong way 'round (4.66 / 3) (#21)
by First Incision on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 07:17:31 AM PST
You have it all wrong. If anyone should be eliminated, it is men. Science is quite far from producing an artificial womb to make women obsolete. Through the miracle of cloning, the technology already exists to make sperm unnecessary. If women's greatest crime is inspiring lust in men, this crime could just as easily be prevented by ridding the planet of males.

Males on the other hand, have been responsible for every war in this world's history (the fictional Trojan War notwithstanding) and men commit more crimes.
_
_
Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

Relevance? (1.50 / 2) (#22)
by gzt on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 07:31:54 AM PST
I fail to see how any of this is relevant.

The only sentence that has anything to do with anything in the article is this: "If women's greatest crime is inspiring lust in men, this crime could just as easily be prevented by ridding the planet of males."

The reply: women aren't important. If women were important and superior to men, they would be in power. But, we see that men are the dominant race. The squaws only serve to distract, torment, and lead astray the noble Adonis.

Cheers,
GZ


Relevancy (3.00 / 2) (#33)
by First Incision on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 09:13:12 PM PST
That means my post is approximately 17% relevant, which is more than most of the posts under this article. The only reason your post has any relevancy whatsoever is because you stole my intellectual property.
_
_
Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

 
Clarification. (1.00 / 1) (#39)
by hauntedattics on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 11:17:46 AM PST
I believe you meant to say that men are the dominant sex, not the dominant race. Yes, I am a hopeless pedant.



I said what I intended to. (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by gzt on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 11:36:46 PM PST
Besides, 'race' is purely a cultural construct.


 
Do you have proof? (2.00 / 1) (#40)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 02:05:02 PM PST
"Men commit more crimes then women"

where is this written? Furthermore, in many societies women have played the part of the warmongerer, and the "amazons" of myth were too well described to have been non-existant. Women can be just as angry and aggressive as men, but while men vent their emotions publically and openly, women calculate. They Meddle and backstab to an extent where "friends" will betray each other at the slightest notion. There are no true friendships between women, no trust...only calculation.


That's true. (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by hauntedattics on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 05:54:21 PM PST
I pretend to like and support all my woman friends, even my own sister, but I'm really just waiting for the right moment to scratch all their eyes out.



*sigh* (3.00 / 1) (#51)
by John Milton on Fri Jun 14th, 2002 at 01:47:39 PM PST
That's so cute...oh no....I've been infected!!!


-John Milton

I know. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by hauntedattics on Mon Jun 17th, 2002 at 10:05:45 AM PST
We're insidious, aren't we?



 
i believe that it is written down somewhere (2.00 / 1) (#54)
by topaztic on Fri Jun 14th, 2002 at 02:15:11 PM PST
in the department of justice statistics.


 
sweety sweety (1.00 / 1) (#27)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 10:40:17 AM PST
aids came up from eating the brains of sic infected monkeys.

a race with two sexes has a greater probablitity to survive sinc ethe genes develop because of more than the surrounding.

you are and will be a weak man do not be abusive but take control master the women in their little game of manipulation.

science isnt a gift science is a normal evoltuion progress look at the apes we emerged from they have learnt to use tools

well if science is mans gift the gift to the woman is art then think about it arent you just pathetic and totally missunderstood by your shrink come out of the closet join the gays


sorry, just had to quote you... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 05:50:08 AM PST
aids came up from eating the brains of [sic] sic infected monkeys.

heh! I'm so funny!


 
False prophet (3.00 / 1) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 11:51:23 AM PST
Why should we believe your vision of "our final ascent to heaven", given that:
"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."
- John 3:13


The Rapture (4.00 / 1) (#29)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 01:54:03 PM PST
I suppose someone will object to my John 3:13 quote by asking about "the Rapture".
Well, let's look at the Rapture:
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout ... Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
- First Thessalonians 4:16-17
Note that it says that the Lord will DESCEND from heaven, so we won't be meeting Him in heaven, but in the air somewhere. Since humans are mostly water, we will probably be vaporized so that we can be "in the clouds".
As for being "ever with the Lord", since He's supposed to be everywhere anyway, this doesn't necessarily mean that we will be in heaven.
I therefore rest my case that man will never be in heaven.


 
Good god who let the sex war on the internet? (1.00 / 1) (#30)
by Glassdemon333 on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 02:20:57 PM PST
I am confused, didn't god say love every one and everything? "Humans have their budda and their christ, yet no one seems to listen to them, not even the buddists or the christens." was once said by some one, and them words always stick with me. People preach and preach about love and creation yet why do they still hate and wish to destroy? Women and men, they are all the same freaking race, granted men and women can be blamed for a few things, but in reality its humans fault. I think that story of adam and eve was wrote by some guy who no intention of preaching the love of god, but to attack women to lead human kind into a age of intolerence. And mr Jon Erikson seek help I mean real help cause your going to need it. As for anyone else who believe this pile of flaming crap, sit down and think cause you need it.



 
Isn't just like a man (4.00 / 1) (#31)
by topaztic on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 04:40:03 PM PST
to blame all of his problems on someone else?


It is sad to see a grown up man who spends so little time contemplating his own faults and weakness putting the blame on another gender.

Despite the fact that the snake that tempted Eve was male, and even though Adam had just as much warning not to taste as Eve, and despite the fact that he voluntarily ate the damned apple, somehow it is all OUR fault.

And we women have been falling for male bullshit stories and bearing the blame for man's downfall ever since. (Not to mention that we also have to suffer the pain of menustration)And what punishment did Adam recieve?

I would think that with your view point that you were a 13th century puritan or even a modern day Muslim, who require that their females be shrouded so as not to tempt the man into lusting, raping or even coveting them, and then condemning her when the man fails to control his own base nature, rather than a modern day Christian.

And still you fail to recognize that it is man's own weakness that is his down fall, HIS weakness to fall into moral laxitude, to disregard his moral and spiritual teaching. Too much time thinking with his little head and not enough thinking with his brain or his heart. Women in general have spent the better part of their existence trying to remedy this by insisting on manners, and some general standards that the male gender must adhere to in order to get laid. To remove the temptation of women will only allow mankind to fall into far worse and not so wholesome activities such as fart and belching contests.
It is a well known fact if not for women all men would be homosexual, and by your own puritanical standards, an abomination to God.


Your plan to eliminate my gender by scientific methods is destined to fail, as long as test tube babies come out as human infants, men will need women to nurture and care for the little wailing, poop producing, food demanding and emotionally needy male science projects, if for nothing else than to change the diapers, shut them up and to teach them to feel guilty about hogging the remote when their fathers are in the room.



isn't it just like a woman... (3.00 / 1) (#41)
by LLWhipist on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 03:23:10 PM PST
to point out all a man's faults? heheh.

Actually, you have the first good (in my opinion at least) response to the original post.

let's face it, the author is a complete moron and sadly is proving this while taking his stand on the gender soap box. just what we need, another sniveling whining single (this guy couldn't get laid in a whorehouse) white (no texture to the language) twit to make me look worse by association.

oh well, and you wonder what burden males have to carry since women wound up with that bleeding thing. first we have to deal with the rest of our gender making it hard for us to get laid when we are single. it's true, that dip shit will get enough air play that women look at other single guys and figure we have the same opinions and take it out on us.

and when we do escape our male cronies (I call them friends, my wife calls them my cronies) and wind up hanging with our female partners, we have to deal with the bleeding thing too (while it may be fun for women to get together and bitch/whine/complain about it, we think is sucks having to put up with the mood swings).

but I digress.

let's face it, the author, if not with his tongue firmly placed in his cheek is just an idiot.

I've digressed too far, I have no idea what I was going to write originally. it had something to do with a compliment about your post and agreement that yes, men should take responsibility for our own problems without blaming them on women. equally of course, women should blame their problems firmly on themselves. of course, that could start a wonderful conversation.

how about we discuss that?
men are to blame for the problems they have.
women are to blame for the problems they have.
men aren't to blame for 'the role of the woman' in the house/world.
women aren't to blame for 'the role of the man' in the house/world.

as a supposition?

ta ta.


supposition of self responsibility, (1.00 / 1) (#44)
by topaztic on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 08:15:38 PM PST
aside, sadly i know would have been so much better off if my parents hadn't messed up my life... just kidding (mom, dad, please don't cut me out of the wills...)

and not to be argumentive (by my standards):
yes men are too responsible for womans postion in the domestic and world or at least they have historically controlled it, partly by the very real, but hopefully in this case, satirical, mysnogistic, proprietal and patriarchal, not to mention the c word, attitude of the middle class white european males that have dominated the last few centuries of civilization.

the same mindset that viewed women as chattel, the same or less than cattle in many ways.

but thank God i'm not bitter,




who's responsible for liberation. (5.00 / 2) (#47)
by LLWhipist on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 08:04:54 AM PST
"but thank God i'm not bitter,"

I agree, a lager goes much nicer on a warm day, especially if you have a bit of vindaloo to go with it.

where were we? oh yeah, responsibility for the plight of women.

some thoughts along that logic line.

1) women are now much more 'liberated' than they were 50 (or even 5) years ago.
2) men are responsible (so says the supposition) for the oppression of women.
3) men no longer oppress women AS MUCH (hence they are more liberated).

if 1, 2, and 3 are correct, THEN

4) men are responsible for the liberation of women.

so, don't forget to walk up to the nearest man and thank him for liberating you and continuing to ALLOW you to remain liberated.

...

ok, that isn't going to fly very far, is it?

I think it would be more correct to say that women fought for and earned their liberation (or the degree of it attained thus far). Men were oppressing in that typically male way, we played our role in society, did what was expected of us and didn't think anything of it. Until of course someone pointed out that this was bad. Slowly we are changing, or at least some of us are.

The problem with logic is that it tends to take us places we aren't comfortable before we get to the end of the line. Note the next couple of lines and hold that thought through them.

So, if women are responsible for liberating themselves, then it stands to reason that women were willingly playing the 'non-liberated' role prior to that. An act of will by the collective female gender has led to the reorganization of society that has been going on the last 40 some years.

So, while it's true that men were oppressing, women were willingly being oppressed. When women made the decision to no longer be oppressed, men had the choice to no longer oppress, or to continue oppressing. After 40 some years I think it's clear that the oppression has lessened in most situations (at least here on the west coast of Canada).

The gist of what I'm saying (for those still with me).

If women take responsibility for liberating themselves, then there is also a responsibility for allowing the oppression to go on as long as it did.

If men take responsibility for liberating women (by discontinuation of the policy of gender based oppression), then men have to accept responsibility for oppressing women in the first place.

More likely than it being either extreme of these statements it falls somewhere in between, in the grey area.

I'll acknowledge the sins of my forefathers, if you'll acknowledge that I myself don't perpetrate them.

ta.


what the heck is vindaloo? (1.00 / 1) (#48)
by topaztic on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 02:49:55 PM PST
i liked your point about how sometimes we "progress" without realizing where it will lead us, at least that is what i think your point was.

so in concession, i will allow you that you personally do not perpetuate these particular sins, and that at least women in the western world are allowed slightly more freedom than they were in the past, as long as you still open the door, pick up the tab, and help with the housework.

fair nuff?


miscegenation (4.00 / 1) (#52)
by nathan on Fri Jun 14th, 2002 at 01:55:32 PM PST
And here we see the bastard child of third wave feminism sired upon Cosmopolitan.

In other business, vindaloo is a hot curry preparation of Portugeuse extraction by way of Goa. Wine and potatoes.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
spicy goodness that's proof of a higher power... (4.00 / 1) (#53)
by LLWhipist on Fri Jun 14th, 2002 at 02:00:38 PM PST
... or at least proof again of the motivating power of a good curry to a conquering army (but that's another conversation about my theory of why the sun never set on the ole empire).

YES, that was my point, and if it wasn't I'm adopting it anyway since you liked it.

I personally am a huge perpetrator of evil patriarchy according to some hairy women I've met. I hold open doors, cook most meals for the family (when not at work/school), and if I ever went out I'd probably pay. Seems I patronize women when I do things like that.

sooo, all and all, yup, fair 'nuff (that's a Canuck saying... you from the great white north, eh?).

ta


 
hmm (1.00 / 1) (#32)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 08:39:11 PM PST
your an idiot


Ha! Irony! (nt) (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 08:14:42 PM PST



 
Final Solution (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 10:13:42 PM PST
As you have the words "Final Solution" in your title, and this site does not support Godwin's Law (see FAQ), I must point out that Hitler used the same words in describing his plan for the Jews. Shame on you, you woman Nazi.


 
Half the answer. (none / 0) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 10:46:55 PM PST
Mr. Erikson is correct in pointing out that the elimination of women will be necessary for the perfection of God's handiwork. However, his solution does not go far enough.

The fact remains that even Men are imperfect. Even in a world free of the taint of woman, there will still be those who succumb to the temptations of the flesh (Here is a picture of one such incident which occcurred at a female-free gathering some time back. The reader is warned that the picture is very shocking and not for delicate constitutions).

The ideal solution would be to work out an algorithm which endlessly praises god in the most perfect manner possible, and set it running on all the computational devices on Earth (careful study of scripture reveals that this project is in fact the true purpose of mankind). ALL humans could then be safely eliminated, leaving behind a world which flawlessly reflects the Lord's perfect love.


 
Everything Crosses Out (1.00 / 2) (#36)
by BurntAsh on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 12:28:18 AM PST
Women bitch about men, but truth is women are just as bad. I dont believe in god or any of that crazy asshole talk. in fact i dont even want to die id rather live here on earth forever that would kick some fuckin ass fuck that shit man. its pretty true thought, unless your in head over heels love women are pointless. they are pretty big bitches(some reason they are glad?) and noone even likes their personalities anymore. really men just like you for sex and makin us sandwiches. :) long live the man show,..


who?? (none / 0) (#56)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 16th, 2002 at 12:03:47 PM PST
who screwed you over...???not all men like women for only sex and making sandwiches


 
Thanks for clearing that up Your Holiness, could (1.00 / 1) (#38)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 06:48:54 AM PST
you please now explain why you have precided over a Church which has protected pedophilic and child-abusing priests?
Obviously you knew about this abuse which has been going on for centuries. Please tell us why you decided to let it continue in your time as Pope.
A devoted Catholic


 
WOW!! (1.00 / 1) (#43)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 12th, 2002 at 08:04:46 PM PST
This is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Women keep it interesting. Is this some kind of 'I never get any so I must be right' sour grapes thing? Honestly, I'd like to know.

-Mr. 'My Pecker Is Bigger Than Yours'.


 
probably been said already, but... (1.00 / 1) (#46)
by Mr Somebody on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 05:16:40 AM PST
I can't see a world without the fairer sex motivating men to know god, follow the righteous path, or become better people.
I can see it motivating beer sales massively, diametrically opposed to swiftly declining vacuum cleaner sales!
We'd become a race of unkempt baccinalian shamblers. Is that what you want?! is it?!?!
actually, now you mention it...


 
For Mr. Jon Erickson (2.00 / 1) (#50)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 10:26:56 PM PST
To Mr. Jon Erickson
Sir, recently, I read some of your posts on this web site and I frankly could not believe that someone of your education can be so narrow minded and I came to believe that you are either someone who was hired, by this web site, to draw people¡¯s attention by posting incredibly ridiculous opinions or a Satan worshipper who is trying to soil good lord¡¯s name. In either case, sir, if you have any respect to Christian God, please stop dishonouring his holy name by bringing wrong examples from bible or by pretending to be a devout Christian. Sir, I know there are some Christians who have rather conservative view on matters like evolutionism, pop music or homosexuality. But, here, you are deforming them into hideous sexual or racial discrimination in the name of Christianity. Please, sir, I beg you, stop your foul masquerade and return to his love and grace. I know he loved me when I was not in his way, so I know he loves you also and he will love you till the end of days. Please sir, open your mind and receive Jesus Christ as your lord. Please, embrace his love and find peace in him. I will pray for you.



 
But... (none / 0) (#58)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 17th, 2002 at 04:54:44 PM PST
What are we going to do with the fashion business? And the florists? And the diamond miners? And Victoria's secret?


 
Interesting idea.... (5.00 / 1) (#59)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 18th, 2002 at 12:27:50 AM PST
SO this is the way you feel about your mother?
The woman who brought you into this world ?
Obviously you wrote this just to draw attention to yourself, that much is obvious.
Wouldn't your time be better spent dealing with real issues ?



 
rotflmao (none / 0) (#61)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 20th, 2002 at 05:14:10 AM PST
You're either a very humour-skilled individual or a warped psychopath... either way you're riotously laughable :)



 
women, the evil of the world (none / 0) (#63)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Aug 7th, 2002 at 06:51:35 AM PST
aren't you the biggest gay fuck in whole your country. and by the way. YOU can also have aids, not because of women, but because of your little boyfriend you buttfucking sonofabitch.


 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.