November 29, 2008

Villagers Kill Male Babies to Prevent War [dri]
— Open Blog

A shocking report out of Papua New Guinea claims that for ten years, the women of two villages have systematically killed all male babies in order to prevent them from growing up to become warriors and engaging in war.

"Babies grow into men and men turn into warriors,' said Rona Luke, a village wife ... It's because of the terrible fights that have brought death and destruction to our villages for the past 20 years that all the womenfolk have agreed to have all new-born male babies killed,' said Mrs Luke.

A resident of Agibu village, Mrs Luke said she did not know how many male babies were killed by being smothered, but it had happened to all males over a 10 year period - and she suggested it was still happening.

'The women have really being forced into it as it's the only means available to them as women to bring an end to tribal fights.'

The report sympathetically portrays these women as desperate hut wives who, faced with tribal extinction, are forced to take extreme measures in order to survive. One wonders how sympathetic the writers of this story would be if the men of the tribe killed all of the female babies to prevent them from growing up and committing male infanticide.

HT to the always interesting neatorama

Posted by: Open Blog at 03:47 AM | Comments (91)
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This doesn't make a lot of sense.  These ladies are faced with "tribal extinction," so they prevent it by make a follow-on generation impossible?  I smell hoax... 

Posted by: Uh, Clem at November 29, 2008 04:01 AM (CNAh+)

2 I would say this is sick and bizarre, except that western cultures do something very similar to the preborn of both genders and call it a constitutionally guaranteed liberty.

Posted by: DCox at November 29, 2008 04:03 AM (2pT9a)

3 Yeah, lets kill people rather than learn to be a humane person who values human life. It appears to me that the ones who are fostering a culture of death are the women. Maybe the mothers should teach their children to respect life and others rights and property rather than teach their daughters that murdering infants is a viable solution?

Posted by: csdeven at November 29, 2008 04:04 AM (8cxzy)

4 NARAL and NOW were quoted as saying, "That's a damn good idea!

Jeez, I hate reading this crap over breakfast. it completely cancels out my Cheerios.

Posted by: Crankyprof at November 29, 2008 04:08 AM (waYsO)

5
#1, I'm with you. I wonder just who was engendering these male babies, and what those guys had to say about the matter. And yes, the press will present this is as a tragedy forced on these poor women, rather than the murderous lunacy that it really is.



Posted by: Brown Line at November 29, 2008 04:13 AM (xYeJ1)

6 Because, you know, only men ever ever fight. Women are such gentle folk, who know nothing about, idk, smothering infants or some such.

Posted by: alexthechick at November 29, 2008 04:14 AM (RQaRb)

7

By virtually wiping out the 'male stock', tribal women hope they can avoid deadly bow-and-arrow wars between the villages in the future.

Yeah I'm with Clem on this one.  This makes absolutely no sense.  There will not be a future tribe at this rate.  Either this is a hoax or these women didn't get enough sex education in kindergarten.

Posted by: chemjeff at November 29, 2008 04:14 AM (VLxln)

8 Uh, didn't their husbands notice that none of them were having surviving sons?

Furthermore, I will not believe without further proof that at least ONE woman, gazing at her newborn son, wasn't overcome with love.

Posted by: goddessoftheclassroom at November 29, 2008 04:19 AM (Cj3MX)

9 And that one surviving son is going to be one lucky guy in about 18 years.

Posted by: chemjeff at November 29, 2008 04:25 AM (VLxln)

10 The survival of tribal people is rather delicate already, yes? They generally need all hands on board, and men are the major producers, violence notwithstanding.

Bye-bye, backward, ignorant villagers. You hastened your own fate.

Posted by: lauraw at November 29, 2008 04:26 AM (DbybK)

11

This doesn't make a lot of sense.  These ladies are faced with "tribal extinction," so they prevent it by make a follow-on generation impossible?

No, no, I've been to this village. There's an absolutely beautiful, state-of-the-art Sperm Bank in the downtown district.

Posted by: tcbevo at November 29, 2008 04:27 AM (zBPvU)

12 Coming attraction to NBC, The Real Housewives of Papua New Guinea.

Posted by: Fish at November 29, 2008 04:28 AM (6Rihj)

13 Hey, they're reducing their carbon footprint. That's more than any of you consumerist sheeple can claim.

Posted by: Bugler Cousteau at November 29, 2008 04:34 AM (YCVBL)

14 Tcbevo might be onto something...but who knew that Berkeley was in New Guinea?

Posted by: Uh, Clem at November 29, 2008 04:38 AM (CNAh+)

15 Leave Mrs. Mbeki alone!

Posted by: That squawling gay guy under the blanket at November 29, 2008 04:41 AM (YCVBL)

16 I don't think they have thought this through.

If they keep this up they will be extinct.

So these people are either really stupid or this is a hoax.

Posted by: Darrencardinal at November 29, 2008 04:42 AM (cSI83)

17 I can think of a political twist on this that would lead to a lot fewer ignorant, dependant liberals.  Oh, wait....

Posted by: sherlock at November 29, 2008 04:46 AM (8V5Ut)

18 Don't let any Code Pinkers read this.  Sounds almost crazy enough for the likes of Medusa Medea Benjamin.

Posted by: Reiver at November 29, 2008 04:49 AM (oliA4)

19 Sounds almost crazy enough for the likes of Medusa Medea Benjamin.

You had it right the first time. She is appropriately named. Medea murdered her sons because Jason cheated on her. Ms. Benjamin lives vicariously through the archetype.

Posted by: Milesdei at November 29, 2008 04:54 AM (ACHxk)

20 So all of the mothers of the surrounding tribes are also smothering their sons in order to prevent extinction?  Unlikely.

Young men fight wars, and if the two villages mentioned in the article have no young men to protect them, they're gone with the wind. QED.

I'm going with HOAX.

Posted by: mrp at November 29, 2008 04:57 AM (HjPtV)

21 "I'm going with HOAX." Unlike you deceitful Westerners, we indigenous people are too close to nature to engage in a lie. We don't even have a word for "hoax" in our language.

Posted by: Tasadai Ministry of Truth at November 29, 2008 05:02 AM (YCVBL)

22  hoax

Posted by: Frank G at November 29, 2008 05:05 AM (P0rQD)

23 Bless all them pygmies down there in Papua New Guinea.

Posted by: Larry the Cable Guy at November 29, 2008 05:06 AM (8D00g)

24 The closest word to "hoax" in our language is "loax," but that's a dried Gazelle penis used only in our sacred Mr. Microphone rituals. So it's not really even related.

Posted by: Tasadai Ministry of Truth at November 29, 2008 05:11 AM (YCVBL)

25

Must be a hoax.

If not, where's the UN? (giggle.)

And what sociologist left a copy of the SCUM manifesto lying around?

Seriously, wipe these people out.

 

Posted by: jdub at November 29, 2008 05:12 AM (hUStE)

26 I smell a Nobel Peace Prize (posthumous).

Posted by: quiggs at November 29, 2008 05:20 AM (K8IUS)

27 Hey...on the plus side, it'll be wall-to-wall chicks there in a few more years, with no competition.  I'd plan a vacation there, but I'll be too old to pick up chicks in 20 years.  I'll leave it to you younger guys.

Posted by: Eric at November 29, 2008 05:28 AM (quZLX)

28 I see a new role for Sally Field

Posted by: Frank G at November 29, 2008 05:42 AM (P0rQD)

29 Because, you know, only men ever ever fight. Women are such gentle folk, who know nothing about, idk, smothering infants or some such.

Reminds me of that South Park episode about hunting: 

"We have to kill them...so they won't die."

Eh.  Who ever accused women of being loving or gentle creatures?

Posted by: CliveStaples at November 29, 2008 05:47 AM (FJ+v1)

30 The myth of a noble savage -- what do people think the aboriginals were like here when the settlers arrived?  Vicious, violent, and in some case, cannibalistic.

Posted by: Richard Romano at November 29, 2008 05:54 AM (kycO9)

31 Wish I would of thought of that line of defense earlier.

Posted by: Andrea Yates at November 29, 2008 05:56 AM (Am6n/)

32 and people want a female president.......el oh el

Posted by: e.koenig at November 29, 2008 05:58 AM (2J+Vs)

33 You know what's worse than war?
Murdering dozens of babies.

Posted by: DrZin at November 29, 2008 06:00 AM (rubKj)

34 Rose West was unavailable for comment.

Posted by: anonymous irishman at November 29, 2008 06:01 AM (GUgU3)

35 9 And that one surviving son is going to be one lucky guy in about 18 years. -Posted by: chemjeff at November 29, 2008 09:25 AM (VLxln)   Yeah. Real lucky. A lone male raised up in a village entirely composed of females. He'll be real good at planting yams, making clothes (or whatever they wear for clothes in that place), cleaning house and gossiping. He'll never really fit in though. I doubt his hips will ever grow to properly fill out his skirt, nor his tits to fill out his blouse.   He'll be the ugliest bitch in the village.

Posted by: Grimmy at November 29, 2008 06:06 AM (NnF4T)

36

Excuse me, are you serious?

Female infants have been smothered, strangled, and left to die since humans have existed!

In China, the one-child law encouraged this. In India, the same. In Africa..the same.

I do sympathize with these women. It's been proven by anthropologists and sociologists that the higher the percentage of males in any population, the higher the level of violence and war.

Female infants have been the victims of this practice for many centuries, and the abuse carries over into adult life. It is well-known that many Indian brides are married for their doweries and then conveniently burned to death by charcoal brazier when their in-laws need another infusion of wealth.

It's time to begin realizing that males make up the vast majority of criminals who are violent. No, we shouldn't be killing male babies. On the other hand, it would be helpful if scientists, males in particular, decided to stuey the inherent violence in males and try to find a way to control this without denaturing the males.

Pat

Posted by: Pat Downing at November 29, 2008 06:22 AM (8nB5X)

37 Wow. I guess the ends do justify the means. I mean, if it prevents war ... /sarc Or you could educate these people that just because your house gets hit by a branch in a storm, it doesn't mean someone in the next village has it out for you and expressed it with magic. Sheesh

Posted by: Joanna at November 29, 2008 06:23 AM (qBRUE)

38 I strongly suspect this is some sort of hoax. Some killing of newborn males may be occuring in these places (which unfortunately would not be anything new in this world, except that it would reverse the normal pattern of female babies being the ones killed in less developed societies). However, I strongly doubt anything like what is described here is really happening, for a number of reasons, including:

1. This is the Daily Mail, which certainly gets some stuff right, but is not exactly the pinnacle of responsible reporting.
2. Primitive tribes, since they are less protected from nature by technology and so forth than those in developed countries, tend to be more immediately conscious of the basic necessities of community bodily survival, not less so. So if random Americans commenting here can see the self-defeating idiocy of this, it is pretty unlikely that the people in Papua New Guinea can't.
3. No explanation is offered of whether or how the adult men are going along with this, which seems like an obvious question any responsible reporter would ask before publishing the story. In societies where the men are particularly violent and inclined to war, it is difficult to imagine them allowing the women to unilaterally make this kind of decision.
4. I know very little about Papua New Guinea, but these places don't appear to be tiny areas with very few people. In Agibu, one of the villages where this is supposedly taking place, there is a population estimate of 4521 (see here). Thus, a policy like this would be extremely difficult to implement universally. I can't find any information on an Amosa, but there is an Amora very near Agibu, and that lists a population of 4681.
5. Obviously, women are not naturally inclined to kill their own children; indeed, they are naturally more attached to their newborns than men (contrary to the conventional wisdom of much of the Western media in seeing abortion as a "women's issue"). I simply don't believe it would be possible to convince every mother in a community, or even a large majority of mothers, to kill their newborn babies. I suspect something like this could only be accomplished by a strong central tyranny with the ability to go into everyone's homes directly to physically enforce the policy.

Posted by: Darcy at November 29, 2008 06:26 AM (FoKlG)

39 Oh, and Pat? We're taking issue with the sympathetic tone of the article, not ignoring female infanticide. You say you sympathize with these women, then go on to claim that we need to study violence in males instead of killing them at birth. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

Posted by: Joanna at November 29, 2008 06:27 AM (qBRUE)

40

Because, you know, only men ever ever fight. Women are such gentle folk, .

Unless you get in their way in the Wal Mart line on Black Friday.

Posted by: katya at November 29, 2008 06:29 AM (G3frc)

41 Thank you , Pat Downing , for your excellent and completely infuckingsane analyses.
Denaturing males ? Good luck with that but stay the hell away from my son. I like his nature just fine.
 Please experiment with your own male offspring  although , nature being perverse , your son's will probably grow up to be infantrymen. Casey Sheehan being a good example.

Posted by: aubrey at November 29, 2008 06:34 AM (1YVnX)

42 Female infants have been the victims of this practice for many centuries,

Yeah. And? So what? It's still a horror to murder children, right? You make it sound like there's a payback game going on in your mind. With helpless innocent infants.

And keep your social re-engineering, pop-psychology, and bullshit feminist theology of victimhood off my American men. You've done quite enough already, thanks.

Posted by: lauraw at November 29, 2008 06:42 AM (DbybK)

43 it's Pat!

Posted by: Frank G at November 29, 2008 06:46 AM (P0rQD)

44 So... to prevent men from killing people because they are so bloodthirsty and cruel, the women are killing people. Do I have that straight? That makes as much sense as anti-abortionists killing doctors.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 29, 2008 06:49 AM (0+Ggj)

45 "Must be a hoax. If not, where's the UN? (giggle.)" Why would the UN be there? There are no little boys to rape. CafePress needs to come up with a line of bumper-stickers for these women: "Keep you religion off my pillow" "If you can't trust a woman to smother a child, how can you trust her to raise one?"

Posted by: 29Victor at November 29, 2008 06:49 AM (kJVzu)

46 "If you're against smothering children then don't smother one."

Posted by: 29Victor at November 29, 2008 06:57 AM (kJVzu)

47

"If you can't trust a woman to smother a child, how can you trust her to raise one?"

 

ROTFLWTIME

Posted by: jdub at November 29, 2008 07:02 AM (hUStE)

48 Amanda Marcotte is writing a book about this worthwhile idea but is left stewing over the dilemma of how she can still worry about her fuckability quotient if there are no males in her age cohort with whom to mate.

Posted by: daleyrocks at November 29, 2008 07:05 AM (odYIP)

49 You Westerners have no right to judge us. We kill because we love. Well, the stew's good too, but it's mostly because we love.

Posted by: Tasadai Ministry of Truth at November 29, 2008 07:07 AM (YCVBL)

50


To all who smell a hoax:

http://tinyurl.com/2d3gev

Posted by: Fish at November 29, 2008 07:08 AM (6Rihj)

51 Why don't they do what white women do to keep their men in line -- withhold sex? Seriously, how many of these primitive tribe stories have turned out to be a hoax? They may be primitive but they have advanced senses of humor and always love playing a good joke on anthropologists and National Geographic.

Posted by: Remember the Kat-Mo! at November 29, 2008 07:13 AM (falCl)

52

Pat--you write as though you think this article could be true.  Bow-and-arrow wars?  Really?

Not to mention that it appears you do want males to be "denatured," or "neutered."  The aggression that allows men to fight also allows them to build, to protect, to run into burning buildings to save others...

Posted by: ushie at November 29, 2008 07:13 AM (XWJh5)

53 1) I don't even think this rises to the level of a hoax. It's just "journalism," or, as it's commonly known, "making shit up."

2) Pat, lay off NPR for a few weeks, you'll feel better, and might actually make sense.

3) The really amusing part is that the "women are gentle creatures" meme is held primarily by "feminist" propagandists who know better and men who don't know any women.

Posted by: Merovign at November 29, 2008 07:14 AM (UXoQt)

54 Also, "the mountain village of Goroka" is the capital of the province and has 25,000 people. Lol!

Posted by: Remember the Kat-Mo! at November 29, 2008 07:14 AM (falCl)

55 Obama's Wave of Love hasn't reached them yet.

Posted by: eman at November 29, 2008 07:17 AM (PI3vs)

56

Greetings again,

Could it be we are looking at this in the wrong way! There will be at least one surviving male, and great responsibilities will fall on his shoulders as he matures. It will be his duty, duty mind you, to make sure the tribe does not become extinct. He will be busy day and night, with no energy or time to engage in war. I guess the ones that die are somewhat out of luck, but there is a ray of sunshine for the survivors. Perhaps I am to crude. Naw, just an American male!

Posted by: richard at November 29, 2008 07:31 AM (XWJh5)

57

20 So all of the mothers of the surrounding tribes are also smothering their sons in order to prevent extinction?  Unlikely.

They are in effect captiulating to the other tirbes by making sure their women will mate with only outsiders in the future assuring their genetic stock will merge and eventually disappear.  In Germany the native birth rate is so low that in fifty years their will be no native Germans left.  Liberalism will have contrcepted and aborted the German people out of existence; something that golbal climate change, wild animals, famine, flood, tribal war, the Romans, the French, the British, Adolf Hilter, the Allies and Stalin could not accomplish in thousands of years, Liberalism will have accomplished in a hundred!  Liberalism is alive and well in Papua New Guinea.

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at November 29, 2008 07:31 AM (oIvn7)

58 If the Ubangi tribe is deceiving the Ugabugas, a dangerous Penis Gap will arise.

Posted by: mrobvious at November 29, 2008 07:42 AM (x1h/A)

59 Considering the vast amount of insanity in Africa where belief in witchcraft has killed more than I can count, or the massacre of hundreds of thousands in Rwanda over tribalism, it doesn't follow at all that this is a hoax.  Very undeveloped non-technological societies do some pretty damned crazy stuff...

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at November 29, 2008 08:06 AM (YYanS)

60 Hoax, hoax, hoax. Simply does not pass the smell test. And am I not mistaken or does Papua New Guinea seem to be the location of a lot of these similar spurious claims?

Posted by: Guy in Utah at November 29, 2008 08:22 AM (V3WTz)

61 This is a recurring fantasy among liberals. See "The Day the Earth Stood Still" You Earth people are making war on each other, and you'll become a danger to the galaxy. So, we'll stop you by -- making a huge war on you right now. Gort! Klaatu berada nikto! Yes, this could be a hoax, but it could also be true. Is it better to kill all babies without regard to sex, or to say, "You males have been killing female babies for millennia, now it's your turn" Can't you hear the male baby saying, "I'm not old enough to have been killing anybody for millennia?" Susan Smith, you were ahead of your time!

Posted by: Mangas Colorados at November 29, 2008 08:31 AM (mvwtL)

62 It's been proven by anthropologists and sociologists that the higher the percentage of males in any population, the higher the level of violence and war.

Even assuming that's true (its not), physical violence is hardly the worst thing in the world that can happen to someone. Women can do horrific violence to someone without lifting a finger.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 29, 2008 08:32 AM (0+Ggj)

63 I think this what older anthropologists used to call a 'blatant lie'. Even if the story is 'true' in that the women are saying such things, the reality is more likely that all the men are being raised somewhere else, perhaps a "gymnasium" where they are taught warrior ethos, or perhaps an islamic terror training camp or a child-soldier school for drug traffickers. Or of course it could just be old fashioned evidence that what used to be called civilization is actually a good thing, and that we can expect all sorts of nasty, brutish behavior from the uncivilized that shortens their lives. Could be a short nasty brutish bon mote in there somewhere for someone so inclined, I guess.

Posted by: Potosi Joel at November 29, 2008 08:33 AM (TPRbZ)

64 What a bizarre and ludicrous solution to the problems these tribes faced. Without a doubt, I think everyone can agree that after centuries of tribalism, they finally downgraded to Liberalism. I'm serious by the way, they saw a tough problem and needed a solution and with all of the viable solutions they had at their disposal they chose to kill babies and the result would be no wars, so the good intentions we're there. Of course, the end result will probably mean the opposing tribe that isn't killing all of the male babies, will out breed them and probably kill or make slaves of them in the end but hey, they we're right...when that point comes there will be no war between them.

Posted by: Drider at November 29, 2008 08:40 AM (IQAbf)

65 I blame the Joos.

[ too Jooish ]

Posted by: Hedley Lamarr at November 29, 2008 08:41 AM (aaGD+)

66 Thats your backwards third world culture for you.  They probably never even heard of feeding their husbands a high PH diet to affect the gender ratio.

Posted by: John Galt at November 29, 2008 09:01 AM (Ylv1H)

67 It's been proven by anthropologists and sociologists that the higher the percentage of males in any population, the higher the level of violence and war.  Astonishingly, a higher percentage of males in a population also leads to more jerking off, Valu-Rite swilling, and general hijinks.

Posted by: Eminent Socioligist and Anthropologist at November 29, 2008 09:22 AM (y5H4p)

68 And porn.  Don't forget the mother fucking porn.

Posted by: Eminent Sociologist and Anthropologist at November 29, 2008 09:23 AM (y5H4p)

69 African women are teh hawt.

Posted by: Margaret Meade at November 29, 2008 09:33 AM (YCVBL)

70 They're simply following the Law of 'Obama'. If a baby is born alive in Il and you don't want it the abortion clinic will smother it to death for you. Is that jungle law also? Don't call real natives animals when you just elected someone as bad.

Posted by: Scrapiron at November 29, 2008 10:15 AM (PbGDW)

71 Wish I would of thought of that line of defense earlier.

You ain't kidding, sister.  I really thought the "big black man took 'em" would work in racist Amerikkka.

Posted by: Susan Smith at November 29, 2008 10:26 AM (LtIsn)

72 Nothing like a good hoax to flush out the freaks like Pat who actually believe anything along the lines of what she claims has been "proven."

Posted by: fireweed at November 29, 2008 10:40 AM (O6vGM)

73 Can we kill democrats to prevent...democrats? Oh, wait. We already do..it's called abortion. Praise the Obama and pass the coathangers!

Posted by: Jerry at November 29, 2008 10:48 AM (vsbOR)

74

This is the same bullshit they pull out with bonobos or gorillas or some other primate or indigenous tribe to feed the lib fantasies of people like Pat up there. We'll just get rid of all the violence and hump our way to a new and better society if we can pussify all the males (or make them nearly extinct).

Sometimes I wonder if leftists want to turn human society into beehives, where all the workers are female and ruled by the queen, and you have one or two male drones around to perpetuate the race, quickly killing them once they outlive their usefulness.

Posted by: angryoldfatman at November 29, 2008 11:00 AM (ZtI4m)

75

Sounds like the deranged fantasies of a millitant lesbian sci-fi writer come to life.

Or the deepest, darkest fantasies of Elanor Smeagle...

Posted by: SuperCool at November 29, 2008 11:11 AM (a80B1)

76

It takes a villiage... to be complete assholes!

 

That where they thinking?  The first side that doesn't smother their warriors as children is the one that wins.  Can't these dopes do the math?

Posted by: Warthog at November 29, 2008 11:20 AM (WDySP)

77 In China, the one-child law encouraged this. In India, the same. In Africa..the same.

Huh.  Someone should tell the residents of India and Africa about their one-child policy.  I don't think they know.

Posted by: Ace's liver at November 29, 2008 11:24 AM (LtIsn)

78 Hey Pat,

Before you go, don't forget your broom.  And your dildo.

Posted by: 5th Level Fighter at November 29, 2008 11:26 AM (WQOaq)

79 Ten years?  If this is true, that's probably the end of these tribes.  Women are most fertile from teens to mid-30s.  Since the worldwide trend has been towards declining birthrates... having a ten year gap in one sex will most likely end those villages.

Idiocy exacts its own price.  Dog will bray and Darwin have his way.

Posted by: thecork at November 29, 2008 01:43 PM (zta7l)

80 They must have learned birth control from reading Barack Obama's impassioned defense of infanticide in Illinois.  He's such a talker, they just had to go kill them some babies.

Posted by: thecork at November 29, 2008 02:03 PM (zta7l)

81

1, and others, I smell a rat also.

The source of the original story, which comes from the National (PNG) newspaper (the Daily Mail reporter simply rewrote that paper's report) is just two women, both peace activists.

These women have openly confessed to multiple murder (or being accessories after the fact) and/or shopped ALL the women of both their villages for the same crime. Yet the paper reports the mass slaughter without so much as a tsk, tsk, nor any mention of a police investigation.

Surely if either no boys at all were (apparently) born for 10 years or all boys accidentally died in early infancy, the fathers at least would be suspicious.

Would not the district pastor named in the story, not to mention visiting health or other government workers, have found it odd that there was not a single male child under the age of 10 in either village??

That all of the children (who at the very least get inoculated and their existences recorded for census) were girls?

Surely at least a couple of women would refuse to kill their kids. What happened to them? Did others intervene and murder their babies? If so, how come not one of them apparently spoke up about it?

These villages are very remote and small. What were the villagers proposing to do about breeding?

Very very suspicious...

Posted by: Erwin at November 29, 2008 02:38 PM (0hcRq)

82

Pat doesn't need a dildo, she has her tribes' enemies.  I wonder how long they will take to murdering their sons? The very first commandment in the bible is to be fruitful and multiply.  That does not mean screw your enemies and let the old men tend to you.  My lesbian girlfriend said this is such a good idea that I know this is a Sappho wetdream.  I smell a hoax.  (Sura 2:29)   

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at November 29, 2008 02:42 PM (oIvn7)

83 79 Ten years?  If this is true, that's probably the end of these tribes.  Women are most fertile from teens to mid-30s.  Since the worldwide trend has been towards declining birthrates... having a ten year gap in one sex will most likely end those villages.

Would be true if it was a woman gap, but men can be fertile 'til the day they die.  There's really no population problem with a lack of men - even a ratio as high as 1:10 is easily survivable (very easily and enjoyably, for the men).  The problem is, as others have pointed out, with only old men to protect it the village will become a good source of free food, livestock, women, land, and pretty much whatever else the neighboring tribes are interested in acquiring.

In any event I agree with others who've said it's almost certainly a hoax.  There's the whole problem of it going against primal instinct.  But more damning, it's from the Daily Mail.

Posted by: Ace's liver at November 29, 2008 03:17 PM (LtIsn)

84 That makes as much sense as anti-abortionists killing doctors.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor

you can make the case......kinda the opposite of the pro-life anti-death penalty retards.

Posted by: e.koenig at November 29, 2008 05:00 PM (2J+Vs)

85

#21:  urf urf

 

Posted by: Mr. Ik at November 29, 2008 07:31 PM (dBb94)

86

Isn't Pat Downing's screed amazingly in keeping with feminist dogma, in that males are purportedly responsible for all the world's ills, due to what many call "testosterone poisoning", and that unnamed anthropologists and sociologists (!!) have "proven" this claim?

Do you notice the unempressed assumption that women are just fine, just the way they are? 

Heh.

Throughout  history Miss Downing and her ilk were gratefully giving blowjobs to all the men who protected them, and who invented and produced the things they need to survive and enjoy themselves today.

I'd mention birth control pills as an invention Pat might understand, but usually the anti-male Downings of the world are what we called in college "buffarillas" :  too big to be a buffalo, too ugly to be a gorilla.

Such "females" couldn't even give it away.

 

 

 

Posted by: effinaryright at November 29, 2008 07:56 PM (dBb94)

87 The attacks on Pat Downing are uncalled for. She said nothing that was untrue or offensive. Seriously, some of you need to detox.

Posted by: Remember the Kat-Mo! at November 30, 2008 10:47 AM (s7gH7)

88 Babykiller peacemongers whats goten into this persons like this its a crime

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at November 30, 2008 05:15 PM (ObFiq)

89 Oh yeah!  That reminds me, everyone on my xmas list needs a FLV Editor.

NOT

Posted by: John Galt at December 01, 2008 04:55 AM (SDkq3)

90 Do you have your favorite DVD movies? Whether do you hope to play with your iPod but always in trouble? Here I'll recommend the DVD to iPod Converter Mac.DVD to iPod Converter for Mac is a powerful and professional DVD to iPod Mac OS X software to convert DVD to iPod for Mac with excelent quality and fast conversion speed. With the powerful Mac DVD to iPod Converter, you can freely enjoy your favorite DVD movies with your iPod everywhere.Transfer iPod to Computer is premium iPod transfer software for iPod music, video and photo transferring. It can transfer iPod to computer and backup iPod to computer quickly and smoothly. It's also a computer to iPod transfer tool which can transfer iPod music, videos and photos from computer to iPod.iPhone Converter for Mac is a powerful Mac iPhone converter which can convert all popular video formats to iPhone on Mac perfectly and quickly. The iPhone Converter for Mac can not only convert iPhone for Mac but also can convert avi, wmv, mpeg, mp4, mov, vob, divx, xvid to iPod, PSP, Zune or convert video formats between them.

Posted by: ccccc at December 22, 2008 07:58 PM (6sWo1)

91 Thanks for sharing, I found this story while searching for rock lyrics Advertising signs, useful comments and great points made.thanks for great informations It’s a wonderful Writing Board! Great site. A lot of useful information here neon signs California. I’m sending it to some friends!I’ve recently started a blog Los Angeles neon signs, the information you provide on this site has helped me tremendously. Thank you for all of your time & work.

Posted by: Advertising signs at January 07, 2011 10:04 PM (JsxNx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
117kb generated in CPU 0.14, elapsed 1.448 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.3395 seconds, 327 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.