Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - richard ford

1
Main / Surviving the matriarchy.
Jun 18, 2006, 08:01 AM
Survival No 1

Every man who truly wishes to be free must expect to fight for it.

Feminism owns men as slaves, and few slave owners give up their property freely. Make no mistake- your walk to freedom threatens someone's unearned income!

By learning to say 'no' to women you will eventually earn their respect (the irony being that you no longer need it) but before you reach this stage you will have to face her anger.

A man must learn the tricks of women to be free.
2
Main / Another box filled
Aug 20, 2005, 12:58 PM
Another box filled. Copyright Richard Ford.

I have been carrying out an experiment these last few months that seems absurd much of the time- but is producing interesting data nevertheless.

I have been placing crystals in wooden tea boxes as quickly as I can drink the tea. This is supposed to have effects in the real world by a process of mental transference. This is of course an absurd thing to do- if only it did not keep on producing desired effects.

I dedicated a box to my website on the twelfth of this month. On the thirteenth my blog was re indexed by blogshares and showed no growth whatever. Furthermore my market share had declined. This seemed an initial failure but blogshares only updates every week or so. I did some work on the site and waited. These are the results.

7 July      1379.97

1 August 1379.97

9 August 1379.97

12 August start of experiment.

13 August 1379.97

18 August 1479.97

20 August 1616.12


The blogshares blog price calculator is an obscure and indirect way to measure site traffic. I have no idea how it is calculated and the price does not seem to be related to other data they supply. I use this indicator simply because I do not have traffic information. I can also compare my own effort to other blogs I admire.

As with all my other experiments there are alternative explanations. I have reorganised and tidied the site up a great deal.
My next experiment will be something that cannot be faked. I will aim to divert traffic to sites I do not control.
3
Main / Finding a reason for my blog to exist
Aug 09, 2005, 04:05 PM
Finding a reason to exist.

I have been aware for some time that my blog, www.underground-railroad.org.uk has been struggling to find an audience.

Firstly, it is ugly.

Secondly, I use too many words.

Internet writing is all sound bites- short paragraphs and short words. It is more like a comic book than a novel because attention spans are shortening all the time.

I write as if I had a captive audience- slabs of words that say great things if only one had the patience to read them all.

This will have to change.

My ego demands an audience of thousands!!!

I will change the layout but first I must find my USP- Unique Selling Point.

What can I do that nobody else is doing?...apart from slabs of text two thousand words long?

Fiction.

I will promote male writers and male friendly writers.

Women have the Orange prize. Only women writers can win the Orange prize but this is never honestly stated. The reader is left with the impression the winner of the Orange prize has written the best book available and not just the best book by a woman.

This is not only fraudulent but cannot be justified. Why should one sex receive help and not the other? Why? No answer is ever given.

We are only men after all.

The invisible people. People without feelings or inner lives.

Half-men in other words. Living yet somehow already dead. We have all heard the song 'only women bleed' and this has become official dogma. Only women hurt. Only women feel sad or lonely or tired. Only women have any right to express their pain because if a man feels pain he is a wimp.

How has this occurred?
One way is by making men invisible in our culture.

Do you see men talking about their lives on daytime TV? No.

Men are busy working.

Do you see the inner lives of men depicted in literature.

No.

You read of men blowing things up or dieing but you learn nothing about the man himself. His fears, his sadness, his hopes.

The man himself has become invisible.

He is the one who works to keep the lights burning. He prints the books, he builds the TV sets, but never appears on them.

Man has lost himself. He labours so that women can be fully human, so that women can feel what he himself cannot. He is a lesser grade of being.

In Medieval Europe only the nobility had feelings, we are told (this is why we talk of noble feelings).

The serfs were too busy to be human beings.

Very little has changed. Where literature was about nobility now it is about women. Men act. Women feel.

We need a new literature that recognises that men do have inner lives. Even ordinary lives have moments of discovery. Men have second rate legal rights but we do not have second rate souls.

If you fancy yourself as a writer then please send your stuff to me. I will publish it under your name on the site. Reserve the copyright by putting the words 'Copyright my name' somewhere on the document and I will market the site to publishing companies.

Perhaps you will gain a contract.

Stranger things have happened.

Start writing your book today. It is easier to write knowing someone is waiting upon the next chapter and wants to know what happens next.

Just make a start.
4
Main / The sky hanger
Aug 09, 2005, 03:56 PM
The sky hanger. Copyright Richard Ford.


Well, this is it then.

I suppose I must be dead.

It is the silence that gets me first. I cannot hear the wind although I can hear the faintest hum from traffic far below. I suppose the reason for this is that I no longer have ears and so the wind passes through me.

I ought to be excited but in reality I feel- nothing.

Now that my old body has gone from me I am glad to see the back of it. It was nothing but a bother to me for at least five years or so. Why does anyone bother with bodies anyway if it so easy to do without them? I realised that I could control my altitude so I moved a little closer to see who enters and leaves the home.

How I hate family fuss! The power games that go with death! Who has the right to be most upset and who has the right to be comforted! Why do people fight and compete to be associated with it all? Would they do it if they knew how banal and unremarkable it all was? Probably. It has nothing to do with my death at all really and everything to do with being the one to organize the funeral.

Would I still be hovering around here when the funeral started? It all seems so..... Indecisive. When I started rising an hour or two ago I thought I was going to heaven despite all expectations. Now I just seem to be hanging around like a balloon caught in a tree.

I try to move out across the open fields but lose momentum. I would be good to see something of the world even if I am dead. Unfortunately being dead seems to have robbed me of my appetite for, well, life. I was always so full of life even when I was dieing. People would come to sit with me- a cancer patient- to be cheered up. I was always rather proud of that and it rather scandalised my wife who has now appointed herself focal point of all grief. It was hard for her to do this before- poor thing- when I was alive. How could she gather the family around her when they would rather visit me in hospital and come away laughing. She puts such a downer on things. 'There is no point in worrying about death because it is the ultimate nothing!' I would tell her. Still, she would persist in her solemn preparations, insisting on briefing everyone of every step in my demise. Still... I am sure she is happy in her way and I did not want to spoil her big day by taking her out of the spotlight.

We have three children. One of each I used to tell Judith, my wife. He did not like this sort of talk as she was a nominal Christian and one of my two daughters is a lesbian. Somehow Judith seemed to blame me for this as if my lack of solemnity somehow contributed to it. In fact I was rather amused. I have lived a rather conventional life, supporting my family and working hard. I have never regretted this. Life is not always fun and you take what it throws at you. I held the family together even though Judith saw herself in this role- always organising family get events and so on. We had our differences but I was part of a generation that believed in duty. You cannot just discard the idea of duty because it is part of who you are...... anyway we brought up three fine children. I am proud of them all.

I opted for a Humanist funeral because I have never believed in a God and because I wanted to give those pofaced Methodists Judith brought round the house all the time something to talk about. A Humanist funeral and a lesbian daughter! I am surprised they could even drink the tea without choking. I wondered if there was still time to change my funeral choice, since there seemed to be some sort of an afterlife- even if it was not that exciting as yet. I decided that Ian, my Humanist funeral director was probably not the sort of person to visit mediums so contacting him would be a waste of time. It would be nice to tell somebody (preferably a religious person) just what happens after death but I did not know how to do it. Perhaps they all go to heaven anyway and I am being kept down here as a punishment for my humanist views and lesbian daughter- I never thought God was a particularly reasonable or trustworthy sort of person based upon the bible so this seemed just the sort of meaningless cruelty he might inflict.

Perhaps I was now a demon! This cheered me up a great deal. I could torment the Methodists! Provoke orgies in the community hall! Slaughter black cockerels in the churchyard.

Perhaps the devil has a special department for humanists who did not believe in him.

This was worth exploring. I felt my spirits rise. I had all of eternity ahead of me and no responsibilities of any kind! All I had to do was learn how to control my movement and I would be free!

I willed myself forward time and time again. Each time I would move forward only a few feet and then come back. I was getting so frustrated and angry that I was even considering praying to God but was worried to draw His attention to me. What if I were supposed to be in hell as a non believer? Perhaps I had simply been forgotten in a clerical error.

No. I would not risk it yet.

Perhaps I would be free after the funeral. I would do my duty and wait for Judith to have her day and then I would escape.

I waited...

And waited...

Nightfall. A little light rain.

Another day of waiting. Another night. More waiting.

At last the funeral, but no release!

I am still here overlooking the house in which I lived dutifully for most of my adult life! Am I to remain here forever?

Panic. Depression and finally a form of acceptance.

One dull morning I am looking out over the railway tracks and see a fox. I marvel at the simplicity of its life and its freedom.

Suddenly I am that fox! I feel what the fox feels- I can smell all of nature. I am free.

Then I realise the secret of my freedom. It is to stop thinking of myself as a part of the family. I am not someone who has to be released from my role as husband and father by my wife or anyone else. I can become something else instantly by choice.

I should have realised that twenty years ago when I was still alive.
5
Main / The joy of being a nut.
Aug 09, 2005, 07:48 AM
The joy of being a nut. Richard Ford.

I have been offensive and extreme to some people and for this I would like to apologise. This is a symptom of not allowing my inner lunatic to run free. Now that I can recognise my vocation- an extremist nut who is entertaining to a great many people- I can depersonalise my anger. I no longer feel hostility to those who have hurt me because I have become a sort of licensed clown. A clown may speak the truth that no one else may because this truth is softened by laughter. The clown may not be credited with wisdom but he opens the door to people who come after him and say very similar things- this time without laughter.

For far too many years I was ashamed of everything I was. I liked to tie women up, 'force' them to clean the house. Yet I wanted to be emotionally close to these women. I wanted a friend and an equal and so I was ashamed. I was also scared of embarrassing my family and felt that I needed to be taken seriously in order to do good in the world.

None of this was true. I gradually came to realise that women wanted to place themselves under my control because of my gentleness and not despite it. I also realised in my soul (rather than just my mind) that what I wanted to do had nothing to do with abuse. Everything I have ever done was from feeling of great love and cutting off this side of me also killed my protective and loving feelings towards women in general. It is true that my good intentions have been abused in the past but the way forward to allow these wounds to be healed.

Only a few weeks ago I wrote that I had no feelings towards women whatever. This was true. I wanted to protect women from my anger so I closed myself off from them. Unfortunately this preserved the anger as well (I was even seriously thinking of getting a cat). On Sunday I attended church for the first time in many years. I just sat there and let God speak to me in any way he may wish to. To my surprise I was flooded with sexual fantasies and went back to my flat and masturbated three times- something I did not do even as a teenager and I am nearly fifty now.  Great part of my anger has now gone. I am able to accept my part in the abuse that I allowed to be heaped upon me. None of it was my fault but I protected her as she abused me- and I can see the abuse as a joint effort.

I can also see that I have had the privilege to meet some wonderful submissive women who risked a great deal emotionally in their desperation to submit. Most of the time I just ran away from this wonderful gift. This is more than one man has the right to expect life to give him. I as given opportunity after opportunity to express my real nature but each time I blew it.

Women have handed me the gift of submission and service again and again- but I was horrified at the idea of inequality. I cannot blame them for finally turning around and kicking me in the balls. I can only wonder at their patience and generosity. I could have had anything I wanted- absolutely anything. This was even true of a heiress to some 35 million pounds.
I cannot say that life or women have been cruel to me overall. My problem is that I erected a fence around myself that would only admit bad things. I wanted to be the giver and the rescuer but the women I was attracting to me wanted to serve me. The only way they could achieve satisfaction was by giving me pleasure but I could not be 'selfish' and receive it.

Picture this. I visit my girlfriend, she has a meal for me. She compliments me, flirts with me, runs a bath for me, gives me a full body massage and finishes off with a BJ. She wants nothing more than to please me and yet nothing happens. I can only think how selfish I am being and then I worry that she might be hurt by my lack of interest. The harder she works at me the more I worry about the lack of appreciation my body is giving her. After an hour of heroic efforts, I stop her. I feel like shit because I have disappointed her and she feels like shit because she thinks she has done something wrong. She tries harder next time and I become more guilty.

The really ironic thing is that this Serrano turns me on. In my dreams it always works and my pleasure gives satisfaction to the girl- but in real life I cannot be selfish even if it the only way to give pleasure.

The reason I can tell you all this is that I no longer have a 'normal' life to protect. I can announce my strangeness to the entire world. I have no dark secrets to discredit me. This means that I can tell the truth on every level. A very liberating feeling.

I am posting this under my real name which means that there are no longer two Richard Ford's. My employer or anyone I work with can do an internet search and up comes this article.

My guess is that being open will even help me. There are a lot of frustrated women who are missing something from their lives (submission) who will be curious to meet a dominant man. They may have no interest in a relationship but will probably gain a slight fission from talking to me. This can only help at work.

There will also be men who have guilty fantasies and think they are bad people. They will tend to see me as a mentor- again this can only help.

Finally there will be feminists who will go rabid. Suddenly I am protected by political correctness! I have a minority sexual orientation! I am protected from them for the first time!!! I am fireproof.!!!!
6
Main / The sexually dominat man.
Aug 09, 2005, 05:49 AM
The sexually dominant man by Richard Ford.

The sexually dominant man is romantic and seeks a woman's soul.

He is less interested in sex than the beauty of one human being submitting to another out of love and the desire to please.


The sexually dominant man loves strong women.

The submission of a strong woman is worth more to him than that of a weak one. The smallest submissive act from a strong women can fill his heart with joy and love so it seems that the whole universe joins with him in his pleasure. The involuntary submission of the weak fills him with disgust- where is the gift in a call girls submission? What possible touching of souls between giver and receiver can there be with someone who has no choice? The sexually dominant man loves strong women. The more equal she is to him in intellect the more beautiful and voluntary the gift of submission. This even applies to physique. For many years I would wonder why I was stricter with black women in bed than other races. I wondered if I were acting out some sort of racist fantasy by calling these women my slaves- I must admit that it bothered me a great deal. Eventually I realised it was their physical strength that turned me on. I preferred women with good muscle tone and strong arms because it made the control she gave me in bed more meaningful. If she were small then I would feel like a bully and there would be no gift. I am five foot ten but have slept with as many women who are bigger than me as those who are smaller- and been stricter with strong ones.


The sexually dominant man is a good friend to women.

Women feel comfortable in the company of dominant men they feel 'owned' by that person even if they are not in a relationship with him. This does not involve infantile play acting but the sexually dominant man will make her realise she is a valued friend and that she can rely upon him. He will also expect the same respect from her in return but this is usually reassuring to women. He will make it gently clear to her that he will not put up with some of the nonsense other men do and she will respect him more for this.


The sexually dominant man is faithful.

Once a man has the submission of a woman he no longer has anything left to prove. He can call his woman at any time of the day or night and tell her to have an orgasm. Her body will obey him and not her! She will reach orgasm even (perhaps especially) if she is doing everything in her power to prevent this. This excites her further as it is evidence of his control over her.

This is not to say that a dominant man only ever sleeps with one woman. Many submissive women are bisexual to a degree and want to bring another woman in to please her man. The beauty of this for a dominant man is not simply having another woman but the beautiful trust and submission the first woman has shown to him. He may well make love to another woman (with the approval of the first girl) but he will be looking into the eyes of  the first girl as he does so.  He will be experience a level of intimacy and love with his first girl as he enjoys his gift that can hardly be described.


The sexually dominant man is careful of feelings.

To dominate a woman one must first enter her mind. This is his first playground and he must be sensitive to what he finds there. She will not open to him if she cannot trust him with secrets.

In other words the sexually dominant man is very much like the neutered 'new man' the feminists think they want but do not.

They are lost because they think they are safer with weak or submissive men when they are safest with strong dominant men. It is weak- not strong men who mistreat women. Feminists are describing the characteristics of sexually dominant men every time they open their mouths to tell us how useless men are.

They just have not realised it yet. Heh heh heh....
7
Main / Women's Greatest Secret
Aug 08, 2005, 07:15 PM
Women's Greatest Secret. By Richard Ford.

If we tune in to women's conversation or media we might well imagine that women have a very low opinion of us men. We might hear that someone's boyfriend had been insensitive and had handled some upset or drama in her life badly. We might learn that some  man was unable to do something at work better than the woman telling the story and that therefore he was useless. We might hear that men are weak, useless or contemptible, or we may hear that men are selfish and violent. This continues hour after hour day and night. It seems that women never tire of hearing this stuff and never tire of speaking it.

What is a man to make of it all? Is he to agree with it? Or some of it? Quite possibly he knows men who make the very mistakes they are accused of. He knows men are capable of stupidity and violence because all human beings are capable of evil. Yet the sheer volume of complaints tell him something hysterical and irrational is going on. The women have a complaint that is off the radar somewhere and the constant harping is only a symptom of a deeper malaise. If a woman is criticising a man then she will find herself unable to end her nagging no matter how many of her demands he satisfies. Often she will become more angry the more he tries to please her until she ends the relationship because she is aware she has become a monster- and yet she cannot help herself. Often women will select jerks as boyfriends simply because they can control this destructive streak and bring out the good in her.

Why do women consider simple human faults that they tolerate in themselves as huge failings in men? Why the double standard? Some men eventually become angry at this and have nothing more to do with women- angrily saying that we do not need them. This is a sincere reaction but not a natural one. It is not that we do not need women but that the pain they cause us is greater than any likely reward, but the gap remains. The men who have made the decision to go their own way in life are following a tradition that has been available for thousands of years. Sometimes this has involved becoming a sailor, sometimes a priest, but a significant minority of men have found peace this way in all cultures.

A solution that works for an individual may not work for a society. Celibacy, like homosexuality is a choice that men should be free to make- but not options for the human race as a whole. If we do not intend to become extinct then we will just have to find a way of dealing with women.

Women always say that men do not listen to them (as if they ever listened to us!) so I would like to go back to the denigration of men and see if we can work out what the real pain behind it is. The complaints may be bogus in most cases but the pain is real- something is driving this insane behaviour and it is not resolving.

Here is a short list of them.

1. Women criticise men for not reading their minds.

A man is supposed to be able to tell what a woman wants before she does and supply it before she has even worked out what she wants herself. If she ever has to ask for anything then he does not love her.

This is a complaint that the man is not God. The woman is fantasising that a man might be so superior to her mentally that he knows where her thoughts lead before she does. In this fantasy she is not only completely loved but completely controlled. The woman is seeking the same level of trust that an adoring dog has for his master. The dog does not need to worry about his needs because his master has provided for them in advance.

This explains why woman become more critical and destructive towards men who seek equality with them- they are not seeking equality but love. Equality frightens and frustrates them.


2. Women criticise men for not knowing everything.

A woman will denigrate a man behind his back for not knowing things she freely admits she does not know herself. If her car breaks and he cannot fix it then this is his stupidity and not hers that she blames.

In other words she expects him to be an all knowing guru who will give her direction at all times. She expects her man to be wiser and more intelligent than herself.


3. Women critics men for not standing up to them.

Women will create drama simply to provoke the man they love and see that he will not put up with nonsense. When she finally succeeds in causing him to become angry and lay down the law in some mater she will often become extremely sexually aroused. This is a fantasy of control. The woman is seeking about a man who is able to control her and who she feels able to obey with confidence. It is only when she meets someone who is able to control her that she feels safe. She is able at last to let go of all her fears and become the loving person she wishes to be.

It is because women are so stared of good, loving control in our culture that they seek out the company of abusers. Abusive men are usually weak men who are incapable of truly controlling themselves let alone a woman, but this is often the only sort of control available to them so they settle for this.

So, now I have revealed what I believe to be the greatest secret of our age. Women desire the loving, protective control of a strong man- in fact many are desperate for it. You will be surprised how few women will argue with this when you put it to them in a respectful way.
8
The Witches of Liberia. Copyright Richard Ford


Witches have become a feminist issue. The so called historians of the women's studies departments (theorise first, research later) tell us that burning witches was just one more way for the evil patriarchs to generally oppress women because they possess wisdom that we just cannot grasp or deal with.

I have no particular love of religious extremists of any kind so I accepted this version of events like most people. I imagined some religious fanatic directing a pogrom chiefly for religious reasons, but possibly because he could not deal with his own sexual interest in women.

Some time ago I went out with a Liberian woman who had attended a real which trial in which a number of women were clubbed and bayoneted to death. She believed the women were guilty and I told her I disagreed. I could tell she was a little hurt by this but she made it a point of honour always to agree with me so we could not discuss it properly. She would address me as 'Sir' or occasionally as 'Master' so you can see our relationship was not particularly politically correct. I questioned her a little and found that the women of her village lived in fear- not of men as the feminists would have us believe- but of older women who would claim that they could change their shape into those of animals and bring about misfortune.

I also dated a Jamaican woman who encountered an aggressive chicken outside her home. She chased the chicken away and was later approached by one of her old female neighbours who told her not to shoo her away when they meet on the road. My Jamaican date seemed to have accepted that her neighbour could become a chicken without question. Actually, becoming a stray chicken is about the most dangerous thing anyone could do in Jamaica as anyone who has eaten the local food will tell you.

What this tells me is that the women who were burnt at the stake were probably not innocent victims but con women who overplayed their hands. It is true that they did not deserve to die, but I no longer believe they were entirely innocent. The feminists are not particularly interested in protecting women such as these- their accusers are usually women anyway. The feminists are simply interested in finding another bad thing men are alleged to have done.
9
Main / www.everyclick.com
Aug 03, 2005, 01:44 AM
WWW.everyclick.com.

I have come across a search engine that will pay a small sum of money to charity for each search made. Naturally I am keen that the men's movement should get its share so I would urge each of you to sign up and nominate the Mankind Initiative as your favoured charity.

The details are as follows...

The Mankind Initiative
Municipal Building
Corporation Street
Taunton TA1 4AQ

Charity Number 1089547
0870 794 4124

Contact David Mortimer

[email protected]
10
Main / Interim report on magic.
Jul 24, 2005, 10:25 AM
Interim report on magic. Copyright Richard Ford

I received quite a bit of stick over the internet for mentioning the m word in a series of articles 'experiments in power' that explored things that women know about power and men do not.

I left the word undefined at that time because defining it was part of discovering what it was. I felt it worth discussing as women generally believe in its flakier manifestations. They believe that it is possible to use it to gain control of a man by covert means and cause him to become her willing slave. This made it all the more interesting to me as this is what women have succeeded in doing.

Here is my definition of magic- hopefully you will not think me a total flake once you read it.

1) The art of creating a state of emotional arousal or altered mental state through ritual. This need not involve slaughtering chickens at midnight but may simply involve burning some incense or hearing music. Suddenly we are transported to a special mental space away from current concerns. During this mental holiday things seem possible that were impossible before. When I find myself confused I will sometimes clap once- then focus upon the salient points.

We all do this quite naturally. We sit down at the table for meals and because the meal is now an 'event' it seems to taste a little better. We make lists of things to do- and somehow find the time to do them when previously we could not. There is nothing other worldly about this process- simply the art of giving things the meaning you intend them to have.

2) Charging objects with emotional value or changing their significance either to you or others. Have you ever been in a persons home that was exceptionally happy or unhappy? Notice the effect it has upon you?

Many 'happy' or 'unhappy' buildings are simply well or badly designed. We need not worry about the reason peoples personalities impregnate objects but we must recognise the effects are real. You will not succeed in an oppressive environment and may even become ill. You may change your environment by changing the physical structure or by changing the way the building feels- without changing the physical side. The fact that it may be all in your imagination need not concern us because it is not a practical question. The real question is 'can this help me'?

3) The women who practice women's magic believe that they can take this process a little further. Rather than imposing their personality upon their own homes or workplaces they seek to dominate the entire emotional and spiritual life of the culture. In this way men will become, by degrees slaves. The entire culture, national debate, economy, everything will begin to revolve around them because they have created the emotional conditions for it to happen. In other words the practitioner of magic intends to gain power by the most dishonest and irrational means possible- by changing the basic emotional responses of humanity by the back door.


This reads like the most fanciful science fiction, and I cannot prove that it even works. It is only the fact men have become enslaved in exactly the way predicted by the practitioners of women's magic that causes me to mention it at all.

So far I believe that.....

Definition one definitely works. This requires no mumbo jumbo or unprovable things. You can try it yourself.

Definition two works subjectively- nobody knows if there is a spiritual element to it or not. Fortunately we do not have to wait for this to be proved before it can improve our happiness. I burned some incense and walked through my home chanting 'f--- off, f--- off' to the emotional remnants of the hell my former wife put me through. Once the smoke cleared the atmosphere of the flat improved greatly. I now sleep better and it is quite possible the whole thing exists only in my own head- but who cares if it works?

Definition three. We will never know if there is a spiritual element to women's domination of men in our culture- but we know that it is emotional. Men are finding their own space and their own language. This will break the 'spell' however you define that word.
11
Main / The rise of the hobby men.
Jul 11, 2005, 12:09 PM
The rise of the Hobby men. Copyright Richard Ford.


The British empire was built upon hobbies. No government sent explorers and missionaries. No great corporation invented the railway and the steam engine- these were all voluntary efforts. First came the explorers and the missionaries, then the traders and the merchants. Populations uprooted themselves without central direction and moved abroad seeking opportunity. It was only when significant British lives were at risk that the state became involved and the new territory became a formal part of the empire.

My point is that the achievements that we regard as distinctly 'British' are mainly voluntary or part time activities that men engage in without central direction. In economics the general pattern is of a British man inventing an entire industry in a fit of enthusiasm and then failing to control it. Think of the computer, think of the internet. The relative decline of Britain only began in the age of the professional. We are a free-range people and do not fare well under any master.

Why did voluntary endeavour decline? One reason is the growth of the state and another is the rise of feminism. Feminism is chiefly engaged in closing down male space and male community. The hobby was a male invention and the key to most of human creativity.

When a woman wants to relax she explores herself. When a man wants to relax he explores the world. I will prove this to you now.....

A woman meets her female friends after work to share her feelings and desires. When she talks about her work she talks exclusively about her relationships with her co workers. She looks upon her job purely as a means to run her personal dramas. Will she be promoted? Will this bring money and power? There is nothing creative in this process. It is entirely sterile because all of the important questions remain unasked.

When a man meets with his male friends he will discuss all of the above- but with added elements. He may talk about the politics of the organization- but he will do so from the point of view of advancing a pet project of his. He will discuss technical standards and where the industry is headed and is far more interested in the success of his company than a woman ever is. While a woman will experience her company as a stage on which she performs her dramas a man will regard the company as the chief actor. In other words a man is interested in solutions while a woman loves drama and problems.

This is one reason woman have never achieved very much for anyone but themselves- the question of human progress simply does not interest them very much.

This is an astonishing realisation- woman are not interested in human progress. Feminism would seem to be an exception but it is not- because feminism is more about personal gratification than human progress. Through feminism a woman can reduce all politics to the same self serving dramatic crap that they bring to their personal lives.

It would follow from this that men must be most creative when among their own kind. In fact this is exactly what we do find- high tech industries are almost a monistic order of men who work together and offer each other emotional support. One reason that great men are always suspected of being gay is that they spend all their time with other men.

If men are to revive the fortunes of the west we must win back the right to associate with one another. We must relearn the value of male friendship.

This is quite possible. The feminists have accidentally created conditions that existed during the empire. These are....

1) Lack of opportunity and  in the home country. In Victorian times this was due to low living standards and overcrowding. Young men are travelling more and more- many are not coming back. This means that the men's revolution is being exported even before it has taken root at home. The empire could not have been built if it were not for a population exodus willing to administer it abroad. (The greatest problem the American empire currently has is its unwillingness of its citizens to live in places such as Iraq). Men must talk directly to men- threats are being issued on our behalf to other men abroad.

Men are leaving the home country in hundreds of thousands. They are finding work in countries where men are valued. Many teach English, even if they return they will have the experience of being treated with respect by women abroad. Men are warning there foreign brothers of the evil that exists in their own countries as well.

2) Lack of respect from the establishment. When people do not feel they have a place in the existing order of things they will create a new one. Many of our finest inventors, writers or explorers were oddballs who did not fit in.

Britain is a society that has no place for men- so men will create a world that does.

In short... we have all of the conditions needed for a social revolution- apart from one. We have almost no male associations. It is male associations that are the great engine of male creativity in any society. Once we have these we will have revolution- and a new world.

We need an army of men engaged in every voluntary pursuit imaginable. We need more train spotters, more bird watchers, more poets, more inventors, more foxhunters, more gardeners, more marathon runners. Women do not 'do' hobbies very well. It is a male thing- and the hope of the world.
12
Main / Experiments in power (part three)
Jul 05, 2005, 03:10 PM
Experiments in power- part three.

The Ego.

Women are masters at using a mans ego against him. When you find yourself fixing a woman's car for nothing then it is probably your ego rather than your sex drive that you should blame.

Women love to put men down for the size of our egos and for our sex drives even as they use these convenient weaknesses against us. The more they can run us down the greater the emotional rush we feel when we are told that we are OK and lovable again. Relying upon women to make us feel good is rather like relying upon a drug dealer for the same thing. Neither of them are interested in making us more self reliant and therefore doing themselves out of a job.

A man without an ego is hard to control. He is not easily flattered or punished with contempt. He will tend to go his own way and is generally respected more than people who need respect.

A man with his ego under control should not be confused with a man with a poor self image or a humble man. If fact a man with a small ego will generally have a good image of himself without being aware of it particularly- the opinions of those around him do not matter much to him anyway.

Most of the time when men think they are chasing pussy they are chasing approval from women- a very weak and dangerous position to place yourself in. Women have very little to offer men in bed apart from the possibility of children (the only gift they are truly capable of giving). Men can achieve orgasm with such ease that we do not have go through the difficult and expensive process of courtship to gain it. Quite honestly, we can do the job better ourselves.

A man who can stand before a woman and be indifferent to her approval of him is a rare thing indeed. I cannot say that I have reached this point yet but I am nearer this point than any of the men I know- and as a result of this I can deal with women from a greater position of strength than any man I know.
Responding to ego rewards and punishments from women is rather like rewarding a workplace bully. You will only make her bullying worse and make her respect you less. The only true defence is indifference- not feigned but real. Only this will get her off your case.

Sometimes women will sense your indifference and test you in various ways. They will increase the volume of their contempt or flatter you outrageously. You may be tempted to believe that by strength of character you have broken thorough her bullshit and found the real woman. You may think she respects you in real life because you are the only man to call her on your bullshit. This is your ego speaking- do not listen. No woman really respects a man. Men exist to do her bidding but they do not exist with feelings or legitimate desires like her own. This is the way men have trained her to feel by pandering to her every desire since she was a babe in arms. The most any man can ever expect from a woman is curiosity. This is what a woman feels for a man she cannot control and this will last only until she succeeds. This is why women like 'bad boys'. They are a challenge- more interesting than other men because other men are so very easy to control.

When you have overcome your ego then you will be interesting to women for this very reason. I have seen this myself but really cannot be bothered by any of them any more. I no longer care if they live or die.
13
Main / Experiments in power (part two)
Jul 05, 2005, 02:28 PM
Experiments in power- Part two.

The sex issue.

Why is it that men are the ones that 'get' sex while women are the ones that 'give' it? One would assume from this that women enjoy sex les than men or not at all when I think it is the other way around. A man will have the same small orgasm with a woman that he has on his own- very nice in its way but nothing like the screaming multiple orgasms that women have. These leave the woman unable to stand, unable to focus her eyes or (sometimes) unable to talk. I am fairly sure that even women who masturbate regularly do not achieve the same intensity on their own.

Why is it then that women have been able to turn sex to their own advantage so easily? Why do we chase this second rate experience and value it so highly? Whenever we look at the way that men and women interact we find that women gain more from the deal than men- and yet women are able to offer themselves as a prize as if the opposite were the case.

When a man and a woman talk casually- who gains most? The woman. She will usually talk about herself and receive compliments while the man gets only the pleasure of giving attention. He feels good when he makes her laugh or when he interests her but he does not receive anything from her directly. Furthermore she has the right to terminate the conversation at any time should the man fail to entertain her- he is rather like a stand up comic who is always waiting for the bell that tells him he has lost his audience. This is clearly an unequal relationship but one that men pursue more than women. Why?

Later on- if he is successful- he will take her to a movie (that she chooses) and pay for the privilege. He will take her to her door and thank her for the privilege of her company. If he is given the opportunity to pay for it all again he will be grateful. Why?

At every point in the courtship ritual we see the same thing. Women receive while men give- yet men are more grateful of the chance to give than women are of the opportunity to receive.

This would seem to be an impossible situation and one that needs to be explained. Women have been able to use their relative unsuitability for many jobs outside of the home as a weapon against men at work. If a job involves long hours then this becomes a problem that must be solved for the benefit of women (heaven forbid that they should be asked to do an honest days work). The job introduced 'family friendly' hours 'affirmative action' and gradually men are driven out of the very workplace they so generously invited women into in the first place.

Just as a Great White shark will signal its intention to attack by certain behaviours, a woman will signal her intention to attack by claiming weakness and asking her victim for assistance. This help will be followed by an assault so ruthless and undeserved that it is hardly possible to believe a human capable of such cruelty- yet it occurs every day and is ignored simply because it is so common. In the workplace we see the chivalrous man destroyed by claims of sexual harassment. In relationships we find a mans natural desire to please a woman sexually used as a lever to destroy him.

Let me give you an example. A man enjoys pleasing a woman but this does not make him a natural slave- yet a woman will use this 'weakness' against him simply for the pleasure of inflicting pain. She will act as if she is unhappy simply to watch him jump through hoops trying to please her or work out what he has done wrong. Naturally she will do nothing to enlighten him as she is enjoying the sport far too much and will throw in some sulking and vague accusations to increase his discomfort.

A woman will use the very fact that she needs a man more than a man needs her as a weapon with which to punish and control men. Men are attracted to women who make them feel like men- in other words women who need protection. In this way the weakness of the woman's position becomes her strength and her licence to abuse- for how could she survive in a hostile world without us?

A similar thing happens on the date. Women seem to have so many complex needs that it seems best to defer to them at every point. A man can be happy with most things but a woman seems to need everything just so- and she gets it because her capacity for contentment is so much less than our own.

The same thing applies in bed. Men can achieve orgasm so easily and quickly that we devalue our own pleasure and worship at the alter of the female orgasm. Her weakness and spiritual poverty once again become her strength.

The problem with owning slaves or living off the labour of men is that one becomes used to the good life and unused to hard labour. The slave owner has three choices. She may take the route of Sparta and wage permanent war against the entire world. This is the choice of the feminist who is supported by men and produces nothing but nevertheless works as hard at maintaining her power by crushing others as a man does on earning an honest days pay.

The second choice is to milk the situation for what it is worth and become decadent. Eventually the slave owner or wife will lose her power because luxury is hard to hide. She will always live in fear and denial.

The third option is to do an honest days work and free your slaves. This is the choice of the women who support MRA's. It is rare but becoming more common.

The greatest fear that women have is that men will understand their basic trickery. Once you understand the basic bait and switch you are no longer controlled.

You are every feminists nightmare.

Go forth my friend. The world is yours.
14
Main / Experiments in power (part two)
Jul 05, 2005, 02:12 PM
Experiments in power- Part two.

The sex issue.

Why is it that men are the ones that 'get' sex while women are the ones that 'give' it? One would assume from this that women enjoy sex les than men or not at all when I think it is the other way around. A man will have the same small orgasm with a woman that he has on his own- very nice in its way but nothing like the screaming multiple orgasms that women have. These leave the woman unable to stand, unable to focus her eyes or (sometimes) unable to talk. I am fairly sure that even women who masturbate regularly do not achieve the same intensity on their own.

Why is it then that women have been able to turn sex to their own advantage so easily? Why do we chase this second rate experience and value it so highly? Whenever we look at the way that men and women interact we find that women gain more from the deal than men- and yet women are able to offer themselves as a prize as if the opposite were the case.

When a man and a woman talk casually- who gains most? The woman. She will usually talk about herself and receive compliments while the man gets only the pleasure of giving attention. He feels good when he makes her laugh or when he interests her but he does not receive anything from her directly. Furthermore she has the right to terminate the conversation at any time should the man fail to entertain her- he is rather like a stand up comic who is always waiting for the bell that tells him he has lost his audience. This is clearly an unequal relationship but one that men pursue more than women. Why?

Later on- if he is successful- he will take her to a movie (that she chooses) and pay for the privilege. He will take her to her door and thank her for the privilege of her company. If he is given the opportunity to pay for it all again he will be grateful. Why?

At every point in the courtship ritual we see the same thing. Women receive while men give- yet men are more grateful of the chance to give than women are of the opportunity to receive.

This would seem to be an impossible situation and one that needs to be explained. Women have been able to use their relative unsuitability for many jobs outside of the home as a weapon against men at work. If a job involves long hours then this becomes a problem that must be solved for the benefit of women (heaven forbid that they should be asked to do an honest days work). The job introduced 'family friendly' hours 'affirmative action' and gradually men are driven out of the very workplace they so generously invited women into in the first place.

Just as a Great White shark will signal its intention to attack by certain behaviours, a woman will signal her intention to attack by claiming weakness and asking her victim for assistance. This help will be followed by an assault so ruthless and undeserved that it is hardly possible to believe a human capable of such cruelty- yet it occurs every day and is ignored simply because it is so common. In the workplace we see the chivalrous man destroyed by claims of sexual harassment. In relationships we find a mans natural desire to please a woman sexually used as a lever to destroy him.

Let me give you an example. A man enjoys pleasing a woman but this does not make him a natural slave- yet a woman will use this 'weakness' against him simply for the pleasure of inflicting pain. She will act as if she is unhappy simply to watch him jump through hoops trying to please her or work out what he has done wrong. Naturally she will do nothing to enlighten him as she is enjoying the sport far too much and will throw in some sulking and vague accusations to increase his discomfort.

A woman will use the very fact that she needs a man more than a man needs her as a weapon with which to punish and control men. Men are attracted to women who make them feel like men- in other words women who need protection. In this way the weakness of the woman's position becomes her strength and her licence to abuse- for how could she survive in a hostile world without us?

A similar thing happens on the date. Women seem to have so many complex needs that it seems best to defer to them at every point. A man can be happy with most things but a woman seems to need everything just so- and she gets it because her capacity for contentment is so much less than our own.

The same thing applies in bed. Men can achieve orgasm so easily and quickly that we devalue our own pleasure and worship at the alter of the female orgasm. Her weakness and spiritual poverty once again become her strength.

The problem with owning slaves or living off the labour of men is that one becomes used to the good life and unused to hard labour. The slave owner has three choices. She may take the route of Sparta and wage permanent war against the entire world. This is the choice of the feminist who is supported by men and produces nothing but nevertheless works as hard at maintaining her power by crushing others as a man does on earning an honest days pay.

The second choice is to milk the situation for what it is worth and become decadent. Eventually the slave owner or wife will lose her power because luxury is hard to hide. She will always live in fear and denial.

The third option is to do an honest days work and free your slaves. This is the choice of the women who support MRA's. It is rare but becoming more common.

The greatest fear that women have is that men will understand their basic trickery. Once you understand the basic bait and switch you are no longer controlled.

You are every feminists nightmare.

Go forth my friend. The world is yours.
15
Main / Marrage and geography
Jul 05, 2005, 04:06 AM
Marriage and geography.

Most men intend to marry at some point of their lives because we have an innate desire to continue the species. This is fortunate as western women seem to be intent on their own extinction.

The question of when to marry comes down to your choice of location. If you intend to live your life in one of the feminist countries the you will need to maintain your wife in another country.

In order to be a good father and husband it is not necessary to live within the same home permanently- it is only necessary to be able to offer stability and permanent commitment to the child.

Unfortunately no father in the feminist countries can ever do this. Fathers are sperm donors and nothing more under feminist law so no child can ever be sure of her fathers love. It follows from this that no man who intends to fulfil his destiny as a father should ever marry under feminist law. The question of when to marry becomes a purely financial one- when and how he can finance a family abroad.

Fortunately exchange rates work in the favour of men in the west. A man can marry as early or as late as he wishes because no loss of freedom is involved- he may continue to live in his own home and spend time among his own sex. He is not neglecting either his wife or his child. The wife can know that she will be supported while the child can be sure of a lifelong relationship with his or her father. In fact the child can be more sure of their fathers presence than any child in the feminist world because it is in the mothers interest to allow access. In the west it is always in the interest in the mother to destroy the family.

Men. If you value the family have nothing to do with western women!

If you love your child make sure you are not married under feminist law. You will lose your child.

If you love the mother of your child- do not marry her! This is the surest road to divorce!
16
Main / Experiments in power.
Jun 28, 2005, 02:35 AM
Experiments in power. Copyright Richard Ford.


If we agree that women have more power in our society than men we must look to how they attained it so that we may also have our share.

We find that women are obsessed with the indirect use of power in a way that few men ever understand. Women's magazines seem at first sight to be obsessed with shopping and emotional self indulgence but this turns out to be nothing more than aspects of the real obsession- power.

Beauty is a road to power, not only over heterosexual men but other women. Women are resentful of other beautiful women but admire them too. They desire admission to friendships and circles they basically despise- they resent women who have more sexual power than themselves but are drawn to the power itself. This is what gives so much female friendship its treacherous character. Women are drawn to wealthy and powerful men not merely for the wealth and power, but to prove their own sexual power to their friends and rivals. The cost the woman pays for this tactic is that she is forced to pursue men purely for their trophy value to other women- in other words she engages in a strange game of double bluff by which she tries to guess the men that her friends and rivals would want. Yet her friends are playing the same game- they are putting on a front as well. A woman who wishes to succeed in this game must obtain the man her friends would admit they wanted- a choice partly determined by their efforts to play the same game! In this way women become enmeshed in a hall of mirrors and may lose sight of their own sexuality altogether. This is not the disaster it would seem to be from a man's point of view because she is not seeking sexual or emotional fulfilment from a man but power. She will have more power the more easily she can walk away from a relationship.

This is one reason a woman will sometimes stop you if she is enjoying herself too much in bed- she does not wish to open that aching void of need that would end her power over you but offers some chance to be an authentic human being.

Power is not therefore a cost free pursuit for the woman. It occupies most of her waking thoughts and many of her dreams at night- it is not even necessarily always a bad thing. Many criminal men have been saved by the love of a woman- one of the better power games around. The chief cost to the woman is a lack of spontaneity and authenticity- she is never truly herself because she is always engaged in a power play whether she knows it or not. This is why woman's magazines are always engaged with two contradictory notions. Firstly they are engaged with a search for the self- many magazines are even called names such as 'Self' 'Me' 'Woman' and 'She'. The pictures consist almost entirely of other women and approximately half the articles relate to the woman discovering her needs and wants or true nature. The other half consist of efforts to avoid the self that she discovers. Her body is regarded as a problem to be solved as is every imaginable personality fault. In other words the magazines offer the destruction of everything she is as a solution to her imperfect life. In this way a woman can be persuaded to enter upon a continual seek and destroy mission by which she discovers new needs (emotional, sexual, financial) whenever she looks within herself. She is then encouraged to look for problems to remove in order to obtain this ideal life or identity. There is always a boyfriend to be changed or disposed of , or some girlfriend to be shafted. The underlying solution is always the same- more power and the woman is willing to overcome her true nature in order to obtain it.

Sooner or later the woman will become aware that she has lost herself. She is running a programme in every department of her life- yet she no longer feels 'real'. This will set her off once again on the search for herself but will find only another illusory ideal of herself and another set of things to change. The basic error in all of this is to place ones self upon an alter and worship it. This will (paradoxically) result in the loss of the self as it is displaced by the ideal that is worshiped and must be worshiped by all others.

So far I have simply tried to explain women's worship of herself and her obsessive search for power. Women now have the power but have lost their souls. They have become empty shells, machines bent upon the acquisition of more power but with no idea what to do with it.

Men can learn from this process. We must obtain power without losing our humanity. Here is a list of ways in which women gain power.

1) Special pleading. Women will always claim the need for special help. Men should not be so proud to do the same.
2) Looking after ourselves. Women look after themselves and value their health far more than men- this may be why they live longer.

3) Magic. Many, many women engage in magic. It is an egotistical system concerned only with the woman's wants unlike male religion which has concerned itself with the overcoming of the ego.

I have had some strange experiences by which woman have used magic against me- the experiences are not conclusive and do not quite make sense when told but seem to indicate something is going on. I will carry out some tests and report back. It is important not to let the tail wag the dog however.
17
Main / Feminism and Global Warming
Jun 22, 2005, 09:22 AM
Feminism and global warming. Copyright R Ford.

Feminists and environmentalists find themselves on the same side of most barricades because both greens and feminists look for greater government intervention in society. Greens hope to create a sustainable society by ensuring that industry and individuals reduce their call upon natural resources by (for instance) recycling or using renewable, non polluting alternatives to present technologies. It is hoped that most people will be enthusiastic about these changes but the green movement is constantly seeking new laws to compel change- there would be no need to create a green political movement at all if being green were a purely individual matter. Feminism would seem to be quite similar at first sight- feminism is an effort to escape sex roles that some people find do not suit them. Despite this, men and women remain more or less in the same roles they have always been. Men work more hours out of the home while women work more hours within it. Despite this, feminism has become received wisdom throughout government and the media- the only place that you will find an opposing view is the internet. Every time existing reality is shown (as opposed to a feminist view of what human nature should be) it is regarded as sexist and censored. Feminists therefore find themselves calling for greater power to censor and control just as greens find themselves calling for more and power to ban harmful chemicals. It is this that is fuelling the partnership between greens and feminists rather than any objective interests both groups share.

In fact I argue that feminism and the green movement are objectively at cross purposes to one another. For one thing, feminism has resulted in more and easier divorce- and more homes as a result. More homes mean more heating, more CO2, more everything. As a result more waste is generated and more ready meals consumed in front of the TV. This creates an illusory sort of economic growth because the labour that goes into a TV meal is measured in the GDP calculations the government make each year because it is included in the price of the meal. This helps to inflate the Gross Domestic Product without raising living standards in any real way. A family meal with someone you love is more nutritious, more emotionally satisfying and better tasting but does not have the same effect of artificially boosting GDP. The break up of the family is therefore the worst type of disaster- an invisible disaster that even appears to be a success.

More broken homes mean more fatherless children. This in turn means more crime and social problems- which also boost GDP in a perverse way. When a father helps keep a child decent this is a free service and not one that appears on the national accounts. When a father is driven from the home and works as a policeman or a social worker this same labour suddenly 'counts' and is added to the GDP.

We know that something is very wrong with the way progress is counted in this country when we are told that Britain is the fourth richest country in the world (in absolute terms- not per head) any yet everyone we know is in debt. The answer to this little puzzle is clear- most of the economic growth that makes us appear so rich is simply an illusion caused by the break up of the family. We find ourselves in an affluence trap by which we must work harder and harder to pay our debts. We grow richer on paper while working ourselves to death and barely getting by.

One result of all this is environmental destruction as we are forced to make and consume rubbish. We eat meals that taste of plastic from plastic boxes, brought home in plastic bags and paid for out of next months wages with a plastic card. We know that our plastic lives are killing us but we cannot stop because we cannot have less than we have at the moment- we are only just surviving as it is.

In short, the way to preserve the environment is to save the family. The way to save the family is to create laws that remove all incentives for its destruction.
18
Main / Brown Doc Martins
Jun 16, 2005, 10:43 AM
Brown Doc Martins. Copyright Richard Ford.

Do you have any unwanted brown shoe polish in your home? I bet you do. It tends to come with the black in shoe cleaning kits and yet men do not have brown things to use it on. This is a shame because brown shoe polish stains better than black- it has some sort of artificial die to it so the shoes do not scuff much. Furthermore because they are brown they can get dusty without looking to scruffy.

I have decided to buy a pair of brown Doc Martins to wear on my days off. They will go some way to paying for themselves.

If you wonder why I am bothering you with such trivial news you are missing the point. Saving money is all about detail, detail, detail. Money can never be saved 'in principle' - it can only be saved in specific ways.

Every week I will do this- find some small way to make my life cheaper and easier. Each week I will tell you what I have done and you will either take my advice or not.

Perhaps you have your own ideas.
19
Main / Breaking the spell
Jun 16, 2005, 04:02 AM
Breaking the spell of the National Lottery. Copyright Richard Ford.

I am very opposed to the National Lottery for two reasons. First of all it is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. Many working people live lives of quiet desperation, hoping for overtime so they can clear last months credit card bill. Trying to save for a holiday (or more likely pay for last years holiday.) This is not absolute poverty because most people live quite well in material terms- but it is a poverty of  hope. It is difficult to face life if all it offers is the nine to five for forty years and then death. It is possible to spend half the year dreaming of holidays- but permanent escape from work is what most people dream of.

Poor people are not stupid. They are fully aware that the chances of them winning are small- but they need to dream and can see no other way out of their situation than winning the lottery. The poor enter into the deception willingly because there is simply no way to face life without hope- no matter how unrealistic.

This mugging of the poor is shameful but what follows is even worse. The lottery is run by the liberal elite who use the money to further their own objectives- publicly subsidised opera and ballet plus politically correct measures that are directly opposed to the interests of  the white working class people who pay for it all.

The way to break this addiction is to find a useful substitute.

Premium Bonds also give hope- but encourage saving rather than gambling.

www.nationalsavings.co.uk

There are free internet lotteries that you also will not win.... But neither will you lose because they are free. In fact I have won a total of 160 from both sources so it can be done.

www.bananalotto.co.uk
20
Main / Supermarket loyalty cards.
Jun 16, 2005, 01:26 AM
Supermarket loyalty cards. Copyright Richard Ford.

The high street and most of industry is still living in the 1950's and believes that all household shopping is done by suburban Stepford wives while 'real men' have no interest in food until it reaches their plate. We can tell this because of the relentless focus upon women by advertisers and the denigration of men- if advertisers knew than most men shop they may stop insulting us.

Strangely, they have no excuse for not knowing this. They have loyalty cards. I suspect that some men do not bother with them very much or value their privacy more. I think we should all start collecting our points like women- and write in every time they insult us. In this way they can see what they are loseing.

Some supermarkets will send discount vouchers by email- register for these and make it clear you are a man. Join Ciao from my website and fill in paid surveys- this will make men's needs and opinions even better known.

Silent no more.