(Update of a staple from July 2003)
On July 20, 2012, during the Aurora Theater Massacre, three men took a bullet to protect their girlfriends and two died.
"Three survivors of the Colorado movie-theater massacre escaped with minor wounds, but were left with broken hearts because their heroic boyfriends died saving them.
In final acts of valor, Jon Blunk, Matt McQuinn and Alex Teves used their bodies to shield their girlfriends as accused madman James Holmes turned the Aurora cineplex into a shooting gallery.
Blunk's girlfriend, Jansen Young; McQuinn's girlfriend, Samantha Yowler; and Teves' gal pal Amanda Lindgren made it out of the bloodbath -- but they would have been killed had it not been for the loves of their lives.
"He's a hero, and he'll never be forgotten," a tearful Jansen Young told the Daily News of Blunk. "Jon took a bullet for me."
Jansen Young, 21, said Blunk took her to see Friday's midnight premiere of "The Dark Knight Rises" to celebrate her graduation from veterinarian school. As the black-clad killer burst into the theater and unleashed tear gas and a torrent of indiscriminate gunfire, Blunk selflessly protected his girlfriend.
He pushed Jansen on the ground and under her seat, then threw his body on top of her, the mother said. "He was 6-feet-2, in incredible shape, which is why he was able to push her down under the seats of the theater," the mother said. "He pushed her down on the floor and laid down on top of her and he died there."
Equally heroic was the 24-year-old [Alex] Teves, who hurled his girlfriend to the floor as bullets whizzed through the theater.
"He pushed her to the floor to save her and he ended up getting a bullet," said his aunt, Barbara Slivinske, 57. "He was gonna hit the floor himself, but he never made it."
Samantha Yowler had a similar story of horror and heroism about her boyfriend, Matt McQuinn, whose last living act was to shield her from death. Yowler, 26, survived with a gunshot wound to the knee and is in fair condition after undergoing surgery."
MEN ACTED INSTINCTIVELY
Men instinctively protect their own. But feminists don't belong to any man and make a point of being independent. If your girlfriend was a feminist, would you protect her with your life, as these men did?
If you were married to one, would you risk your life for her? If society awarded your children to her, would you sacrifice for them?
If not, would there be any point in dying for your country? Feminism clearly sabotages the social contract, which is heterosexual by nature.
By "feminism" I'm not talking about women receiving equal opportunity (in fact, they often receive preferential treatment.) I am talking about a bogus gender ideology that the financial elite is using to destabilize and depopulate society. This ideology denies the natural differences between men and women, encouraging women to behave like men and vice versa.
(l.Gloria Steinen, making Masonic sign.)
If you want to get a man's attention, give him power. A man will not sacrifice himself for woman or family unless they belong to him, i.e. are part of him.
Feminism has made the idea of a man "possessing" a woman distinctly unfashionable but this is what both sexes actually want. It mirrors the sex act.
As I have said, the heterosexual contract involves the exchange of female power for male love. If she has chosen wisely, a woman will receive more love as she completely surrenders herself.
Self-sacrifice is how women show love. Men feel this and it inspires their love and sacrifice. Woman's love takes the form of trust, faith, patience, acceptance, adaptability, support and much more.
For a man, possession (and the responsibility and trust it implies) is the most satisfying aspect of his relationship.
Conversely, the more power a woman demands, the less male love she will receive. She can have love or power, but she can't have both. Feminists are consigning many women to lives of bitterness and solitude.
When women demand power, they become male and compete with men. They neuter themselves and the men in their lives.
Feminists will say I am portraying male tyranny but I am not. A loving man nurtures his wife and wants her to flourish. He consults her and tries to please her. She is in charge of certain domains, which aren't necessarily traditional. She has her own personality, work and views. For example, my wife doesn't share many of my opinions.
Nevertheless my wife adjusts to me. I feel free. She has made all other women redundant and freed me to pursue my work. Miraculously, she is happy too.
PUTTING WOMEN ON A PEDESTAL
To surrender power for love is feminine. When men do it, they become women. Women lose respect.
Unconsciously women seek to be overwhelmed by a man. So when a man puts her on a pedestal (because he wants sex or love) he is defeating himself.
(Women seek power, but in a man.)
Women are naturally hypergamous: they seek men with greater power or status. A man can keep her respect by providing responsible firm leadership. He should avoid showing weakness. If she proves difficult, he should cut his losses . If you want to get a woman's attention, show her the door.
A man must have a vision of life that is independent of a woman but involves her. According to psychiatrist Helene Deutsch, ("The Psychology of Women," 1948) women are masochistic-narcissistic. They want to be put to use as wives and mothers, and loved for their sacrifice . They want to be needed.
A woman's most important decision is her choice of a man. Her life will be based on his vision for better or for worse.
It is tragic to see young women squandering their innocence on men who only want sex. Beauty is partly based on innocence. Why are these girls fixated on their physical appearance to the total neglect of their inner beauty, mind, character and personality?
How about it men. if your girlfriend or wife were a feminist, would you take a bullet for her?
In all cultures and ages, the women and children would be pulled
from a burning building before a man. When the ocean liner Titanic
went down in 1912 without enough life boats, the men loaded the
boats with all the women and children first. Even the high status
banker John Jacob Astor - ruthless in business with other men - was
denied a place on a lifeboat. Legend goes that Astor tried in vain
to bribe Second Officer Charles Lightoller, but the 'women and
children first' rule was firm.
The rule still holds today. Just last week, 4 US veterans died
getting their wives off a parade float that got stuck on railroad
tracks. All four men were killed in the train collision, but they'd
saved the women. True Story.
Texas Train Crash: Hero Vets Die Saving Wives
That's natural and heroic - and expected
. But as
"girlwriteswhat" on YouTube has eloquently explained, feminism
changed the equation so that instead of female getting a willing
male to support and protect her -- she gets unwilling males
to pay alimony and child support, and expects protection from the
Guess what: this news story didn't run on JEZEBEL.com or any
of the feminist websites I surveyed.
This is a clip of a feminist gang disturbing the peace at lecture
by male activist Warren Farrell.
Farrell had been active in the 2nd wave feminism during the 1970's,
but quit his job at the National Organization of Women when their
anti-male and anti-father lobbying went beyond the pale. This
occurred at the University of Toronto, where Farrell was scheduled
to give a talk on "From Boys to Men: Beyond the Boy's Crisis"
It happened again in Memphis last week. Farrell is the author of
"The Myth of Male Power".
And in Vancouver, BC, over a lawfully posted pamplet, "Men's rights
are human rights".
Men's rights are human rights homepage: