Women To Become 'Workers'

Children Better Off Without Parents Babies who attend formal child care, such as day nurseries, at the tender age of nine months are better behaved and less likely to experience a wide range of developmental problems at the age of three than the average child, according to new Government-funded research today.

Yawn.

This so-called 'research' was carried out by the Equal Opportunities Commission which is a body that is completely dominated by the left-wing and the feminists. The main motives of these people are 100% political and 0% scientific, and their main purpose in life seems to be to break apart people's close relationships and to stir up racial disharmony.

And so when it comes to assessing its 'research', my guess is that it is nothing more than the usual load of hokum - particularly as it conflicts with most of the other evidence that I have seen.

And, of course, the more learned among you will easily recognise this 'research' - valid or not - for what it really is - a further attempt by those in government to get more women out to work so that they can ...

a) rake in much more money in taxes,

b) get a stronger hold over the children,

c) prise these children further apart from their parents

d) poison further the intimate bonds between the men and women who have children

e) grow their empires of control

f) give themselves good non-jobs and great pensions

they want more of us to be trooping out to work and back every day

Essentially, they want more of us to be trooping out to work and back every day, so that we can hand over to them many more billions in taxes, and they want to ensure that parents have minimal influence over their own children and are reduced, basically, to packing them off to bed at night and waking them up in the morning.

And by loosening further the emotional bonds between children and their parents, they can more easily loosen those between the men and the women who had them.

They will, of course, use some of the extra money that they have forced out of us to grow their ever-failing 'educational' and 'social services' departments - through which they can indoctrinate further the children into believing in their bankrupt self-serving points of view. But much of the money will be ploughed into large salaries and very handsome pension deals for those at the top and into funding the huge levels of general incompetence and sluggishness that pervade most government-run departments.

And here is a quote from a local council leaflet that came through my door only yesterday, the timing of which was probably not a coincidence ...

OPEN ALL HOURS!

The Extended School Scheme Kicks Off!

Schools across the borough are opening the doors beyond the normal school hours, to offer access for the local community to a range of activities, specialist support, community facilities, childcare, and parental support. ... High-quality childcare for primary aged children is provided on many school sites between 3.30 pm and 6.00 pm. ...

Over the past few decades we have seen the most monumental drive to break down people's families and close relationships - a main feminist aim. Umpteen billions of dollars have been poured every year into this enterprise - much of it being used to stir up hatred towards men and to encourage women and children to stay away from them.

And so it goes on.

Now, of course, it might well be the case that many children are, indeed, better off nowadays if they spend less time at home and more time in the 'care' of the 'professionals'. But who would be surprised at this given that so much effort by the government has been specifically directed at breaking down and/or damaging their families in the first place!

In essence, western governments have spent the past few decades poisoning the psychological 'land' upon which men, women and children used to build close relationships and families. And now, having poisoned this land to the point where it is unable to bear very much for millions of people, it is saying, "You can use our land!"

everyone else's land has been - and is being - poisoned.

Their land is not very good - and it costs a great deal to rent - taxes! - but everyone else's land has been - and is being - poisoned.

By them!

So. What does the future hold if we continue along this pathway, eh?

Well. Men and women will troop out to work, while the children spend more and more time in the hands of the 'professionals' - and I use the term 'professionals' loosely, because the degree of incompetence and self-serving ambition to be found in the government's 'child professionals' is almost obscene.

The growing children will become less attached to their own parents and to their siblings and they will also experience a massive reduction in emotional warmth and intimacy as they grow up.

This has ramifications not only for the children, but also for the parents who - as they age - will find that their children are far less attached to them than they would otherwise have been.

The continued onslaught of man-hatred by the various wimmin's groups, the government, and the feminist-dominated media groups such as the BBC will continue to stir up relationship disharmony to make even more insecure all close relationships, and so more and more people will end up living on their own.

women will be trained to get pregnant and then dump their babies

Eventually, no doubt, women will be trained to get pregnant and then dump their babies into the hands of the 'child professionals' from Day One, and, beyond that, one can then expect to see children being conceived and, thence, developed to term through artificial means.

So, in the future, we will all troop out to work in order to serve our government masters, we will live on our own, and we will be completely alienated from our offspring; i.e. Big Brother and Brave New World both become a reality.

And yet; people's close relationships are the most important features of their lives. And this is especially true for women.

And so for any young women out there who are reading this, I suggest that you think very hard about where you are being led.

You are going to be a 'worker'

You are going to be a 'worker' - handing more than half of your earnings to your government (e.g. see Printing Money). You are going to spend decades on your own. Your children are not going to be very attached to you. And you will most likely die on your own - probably having spent many of your final debilitated years stuffed into an uncomfortable chair in some lousy government-run nursing home where nobody actually gives two cents for your well-being.

Essentially, you will have been a worker - not a woman - and not a mother.

And you will no longer be of any use.

And, of course, once women have lost their womanliness and their motherliness, they will, in comparison to men, have precious little to offer the world; and this will eventually be 'noticed' - e.g. see my piece Are Women Becoming Redundant?

watch your future happiness crumble before your very eyes

So. Good luck, Girls. Keep supporting the feminists and their parasitic friends in government, and watch your future happiness crumble before your very eyes.

But Angry Harry? What about the men? What will happen to them? Will all their happiness crumble too?

Well, Junior, the answer is, No.

When the feminists and their parasitic friends have finally been booted into oblivion - having firstly been stomped upon and crushed underfoot by huge battalions of MRAs - there will be established a New World Order.

And here is a taste of it, ...

Angry Harry's Clear-Out Sale

Two For The Price Of One!

All Old Stock Must Go!

Families Are Best

Children do best when brought up in married families, Tony Blair's favourite think-tank admitted yesterday.

And this is news?

There can hardly be an adult in the country who has not been aware of how destructive of children's well-being has been the feminist agenda of wilfully breaking down families and close relationships throughout the past few decades. But people have not been allowed to speak about such things openly because to do so has been to invite hysterical and aggressive accusations of "prejudice against single mothers," and what have you, from the self-serving government-loving bigots of the left-wing and, of course, the feminists.

And so do not kid yourself for one minute that this 'new' study will make the slightest bit of difference to those who remain determined to break down close long-lasting relationships in order to further their own ambitions.

Indeed, I can tell you exactly what these charlatans will be arguing from this 'new' study.

They will simply argue that the poorer outcomes for those children who are not brought up in traditional families demonstrates the need to provide even further resources to non-traditional families! - i.e. in most instances, to single mothers. And, of course, they will also deny that doing this actually encourages the creation of non-traditional families.

This is the way that their game is played.

They do it all the time.

And, as we know, the feminists are always trying to suppress any system (educational, social, etc) that they perceive as being beneficial to men. They would rather undermine the whole of their society than see men do well relative to women.

In the educational world, for example, they have preferred to undermine the whole system - and all the children - rather than allow boys to do better than girls.

And when it comes to traditional families, there is nothing that the feminists loathe more because they reckon that traditional families are not good for women - despite all the evidence to the contrary,

With regard to this particular study, it is also important to note that the perceived differences in outcomes for children in different family structures - and there are many - will be significantly reduced by the fact that the children from the different groups that were studied were not isolated from each other.

And so, for example, 'poorly-behaved' children have a negative impact on 'better-behaved' children.

Indeed, there will be crossover effects such as this that reduce significantly the true differences between the types of families investigated in all sorts of areas.

In other words, such studies will very significantly underestimate the beneficial effects of children being brought up in traditional families.

A Lonely Death For Women

A Lonely Death For Women One in five of us faces a lonely and shameful death in a nursing home, as medical advances leave us without family support, an academic has warned.

Yes indeed. One in 5 people will die a long, sad and lonely death. And most of them will be women!

But does it serve them right? - I hear you ask.

After all, they have helped those revolting feminists maintain their campaigns of hatred against men so that they could profit themselves from the power that this gave them. And they have given their support to those parasites working in the child-abuse industry who have laboured ceaselessly to cast suspicion on all relationships between older and younger people in order to rake in their funds.

The upshot is that when they are finally old and in need of real help, no-one will give a damn. Not even their own children.

"Help! Help!"

Because that's what happens when you raise people in an environment imbued with hatred and suspicion, and within which close physical contact is minimised through repression, intimidation and carefully-manufactured hysteria.

People become emotionally isolated from each other, and they no longer care about each other. And this emotional detachment and social coldness spreads right throughout society.

Professor Allan Kellehear said those who imagine they will die in their sleep, surrounded by loved ones, are fooling themselves.

And, finally, I simply wish to repeat what I said about a week ago on this very matter, ...

So. Good luck, Girls. Keep supporting the feminists and their parasitic friends in government, and watch your future happiness crumble before your very eyes.

Women Love Gay Men

Women Love Gay Men A lot of women love gay men. Whether we are gay or straight, we love to touch them, hug them and tell them our deepest secrets. Doris Jeanette

Oh, for goodness sake, get on with it. Oh, here it is, ...

According to James Presto, deprivation of physical affection in human relationships constitutes the single greatest source of physical violence in human societies.

Correct!

Bright Children Failed At least 120,000 bright children are effectively going backwards in secondary schools, prompting fresh fears over the way top pupils are taught.

This has been going on for at least two decades. And part of the reason for this is that the feminist agenda which dominates our schools has the aim of ensuring that boys are not allowed to get ahead of girls - which they would, if the standards expected of bright children were raised.

At the higher levels, boys, if given the opportunity, would race ahead of the girls and so, quite simply, this opportunity is purposely denied to them. And this is particularly the case in the Science-oriented subjects.

This is not to say that there are no bright females around the place. Indeed, I have come across some truly astonishingly bright young ladies in my lifetime. And I really do mean astonishing. But when the boys are motivated to do well, they can outnumber the girls at these higher levels with ease; particularly at a later age.

In a nutshell: The main reason that bright boys are not doing particularly well at school at the moment is because they are bored to death as a result of having to be educated in feminised educational establishments that deliver dumbed-down feminised syllabuses.

And this situation is not the result of some unforeseen circumstances. This situation has been specifically brought about by the pressures exerted by thousands of politically-motivated feminists who work in the higher echelons of education. These wimmin and their politically-corrected poodle boys have laboured unceasingly to stack our educational system to favour girls, and they have purposely undermined the education of boys - e.g. see Well Done the Girls?

Do Not Drink Alone

Do Not Drink Alone Women were advised by a Government watchdog yesterday to avoid going to clubs or parties alone because of the growing risk that their drinks will be "spiked".

''Don't leave your drink, even when going to the lavatory,'' it added. ''Take it with you.'' Its advice followed a review of the threat of sexual assaults linked to drinks which are either spiked with alcohol or drugs.

A medical study last month had suggested that many alleged victims of date rape had been rendered helpless by binge-drinking. It found no evidence that Rohypnol and GHB - drugs said to be favoured by predatory rapists - were widely used.

But the ACMD, the Government's principal advisory drugs body, said that sexual assault using spiked drinks was a "significant problem'' and that current laws failed to give protection against rapists who prey on victims who have become unconscious or semi-conscious through drink.

Oh really? Then why is it that these men are not being prosecuted? After all, the police do keep records of men who are alleged to have spiked the drinks of women for sexual purposes, and so if there is a group of men out there who are continually preying on women then, surely, the police already have the evidence that they need to prosecute them.

But this, clearly, is not happening!

Why?

How can this be?

Well. I'll tell you.

The truth is that thousands of women get drunk every day and then they regret what they did the night before. They feel ashamed. They feel embarrassed. They feel that the man who looked like a hunk to them last night through their red inebriated eyes is, in daylight, a prat.

No way are they going to admit that they enthusiastically had sex with him!

And so they decide to portray themselves as hapless victims - something that feminists in the mainstream media keep telling them to do every day of their lives.

Claim to be a victim! Claim to be a victim! Therein lies your pathway to empowerment. And revenge!

And, possibly, money!

Phone this number!

But Angry Harry! There surely are real rapists out there. And they will most happily spike the drinks of women.

Yes indeed Junior. But where are there? The police will surely have their names. After all, the vast majority of allegations of rape are made against men who are known by the alleged victims. And so the police will know the names of these 'rapists' if they repeatedly offend.

Where are they?

In other words, the notion that there are large numbers of rapists spiking drinks for sexual purposes is nothing but hokum designed to stir up hatred towards men.

HOWEVER!

The notion that thousands of men most happily provide alcohol to women in the hope that they might be more inclined to have sex with them is probably a valid one. But, then again, so is the notion that women are very often too stupid to refrain from drinking too much and that they are also very willing to blame others for any unhappy circumstances that befall them.

And so my advice to men is this.

Let women buy their own drinks - at all times. Even on their birthdays.

Two Parents Best For Educational Attainment

Two Parents Best For Educational Attainment Children who live with both parents are improving their GCSE performance almost twice as fast as classmates living with just their mothers, it was revealed.

Yes indeed.

I might also add that the children of single mothers are also often very disruptive of the education of those children who do have two parents - something that will tend to lead to an underestimation of the true educational benefits of having two parents.

the welfare of children is of no significance at all to feminists

Perhaps of mild interest to my regular readers is the fact that it was the ugly furore - generated somewhere in the late 80s by the feminist-dominated media - over a headteacher's statement that children were educationally better off if they had two parents that first really alerted me to the fact that the welfare of children is of no significance at all to feminists.

It was absolutely obvious to almost everyone that the children of single parents were at a significant educational disadvantage - and, in many other ways too - so much so that teachers would often take special care to help such children - but it soon became clear that people were no longer able to talk openly about this without being accused of denigrating single mothers.

The negative effects on children were to be ignored - and denied.

The feminists' determination to break up families and encourage single motherhood trumped everything.

the oft-used politically correct mantra 'in the best interests of the child' used to sicken me

Calls for this headteacher to be sacked for daring to tell the truth really shocked me at the time. And it woke me up to the nasty world in which we were now living - a world controlled by liars and bullies who were pursuing their own selfish aims regardless of the enormous costs to others - even to the children; which is one of the reasons that the oft-used politically correct mantra 'in the best interests of the child' used to sicken me so often.

Nearly every time (and I am not exaggerating) that this mantra was quoted it was used as nothing more than a smokescreen to stifle debate and to hide the real motives of those who employed it.

fathers were, quite simply, pointless.

The further implication of the view that a single mother was good enough was the notion that, as far as the children were concerned, fathers were, quite simply, pointless. Needless to say, it was quite acceptable to promote this point of view.

Indeed, this message has been permeating the ether in one way or another for some three decades now - accompanied, of course, with the added view that men, themselves, are pointless.

'Parasites', in fact.

(Also see my piece Steve Jones - A Parasite?)

Judges Harming Children

Judges Harming Children Family court judges are misguidedly harming children by granting sole custody to one parent – usually the mother – in bitter divorce battles, says a comprehensive new report.

Nonsense. There is nothing 'misguided' about it.

Family court judges know damn well that children are far less likely to fare well in single-mother households.

But they also know that their career prospects are enhanced when they purposely break up families, and that they and their friends in the legal profession stand to gain enormously from the numerous negative consequences of family breakdown.

These consequences are gold nuggets for them!

Furthermore, it is just not possible that these highly-educated judges remain unaware of the huge negative consequences that family breakdowns wreak upon children and on society.

They know exactly what they are doing.

Indeed, there is the most almighty conflict of interest taking place between what they are supposed to be doing in order to provide 'justice' and what they are, in fact, doing in order to provide themselves and their cronies with money and jobs.

Family Breakdown + Single-Mother Households = Gold!

(Thanks to Walter at FathersForLife.)