Post: #51

^ Especially since MrLemon even prefixed (or is it prefaced? Or did he prefix a preface? I don't know) his post with this...

(07-25-2018 04:31 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  Here is my theory, feel free to pick this apart:

I think that makes it reasonably clear that he is inviting discussion and that demanding sources is a waste of time.

Post: #52

Oh. I didn‘t know that I was coming off like that. Thanks for telling me.

Post: #53

I do apologize if I did act like a moron. Or ”that guy“”

Post: #54

(07-26-2018 12:13 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  I do apologize if I did act like a moron. Or ”that guy“”

No worries, no worries. I think we've got pretty good humor overall. Everybody have a virtual beer on me!

Now I propose that we get back to the important work of dissecting and categorizing the manifold stupidities of Feminism.

Post: #55

Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

This particular point isn't super important to the overall analyst (to wit: that Feminism is mainly a monstrous version of Lesbian evil and assholishness).

It's a very subtle question and hard to separate out, because what does "in charge" really mean, anyway? But based on my reading of history and my experience in life (watching men and their wives) I still think that "women are in charge" -- or maybe a better way of saying it "Women's demands are in charge." Women don't "design". They demand things, and men figure out how to make them happen.

In the small villages that humans lived in for thousands of years...before railroads and telegraph...the village/town/tribe was all people knew. Men were "in charge" as chiefs, mayors, or whatever. But their WIVES told them what they were to do. YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!! Imaging a cave woman screaming that at the top of her lungs brandishing a huge digging stick, which she is very skilled at using. That will make any caveman hustle out and put his ass on the line, if only to shut her up. That is the history of the human race.

Also Men were usually out in hunting parties, so women actually did run most of the day to day workings of a village. The old joke was, Men went to war mostly to get away from their wive's nagging.

But in any case, unmarried, infertile, and lesbian women were shunned by married women, and starved.

Post: #56

Just read up on Oksana Shachko. Her childhood and the way she was brought up was interesting.

This part is what caught my attention.

Quote:Oksana Shachko was born in Khmelnytsky, a sleepy regional capital 160 miles west of Kiev. Her parents had her studying religious iconography when she was 8 years old. Two years later, she was painting murals in churches and monasteries.

At 13, she decided to become a nun, but her parents talked her out of it.

“From this moment on, I began to reflect on what religion and faith mean to a human being,” she said in 2016 in an interview with the 032c, a culture magazine published in Berlin. “I found an answer, and it was atheism.”

Survivors include her mother, Olga Shachko, and a brother, Aleksei.

In Paris, Ms. Shachko worked on a documentary film about Femen with the French director Alain Margot. She also returned to creating icons, but this time they were intended for art galleries, not churches.

One depicted the Orthodox trinity with angels wearing flower crowns and smoking cigarettes in front of empty bottles. In 2016, Ms. Shachko had a solo exhibition of her work at a Paris art gallery.

“In my icons, I replace men; I put women in the center,” she said in an interview with the British magazine Crash in December. “My work is still very feminist.”

Damn shame feminism brainwashed her. She would have been much happier if she was married and become a mother to raise children. Instead, she ended up choosing a different path, one that provided her with emptiness and no sense of purpose.

Post: #57

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

This particular point isn't super important to the overall analyst (to wit: that Feminism is mainly a monstrous version of Lesbian evil and assholishness).

It's a very subtle question and hard to separate out, because what does "in charge" really mean, anyway? But based on my reading of history and my experience in life (watching men and their wives) I still think that "women are in charge" -- or maybe a better way of saying it "Women's demands are in charge." Women don't "design". They demand things, and men figure out how to make them happen.

In the small villages that humans lived in for thousands of years...before railroads and telegraph...the village/town/tribe was all people knew. Men were "in charge" as chiefs, mayors, or whatever. But their WIVES told them what they were to do. YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!! Imaging a cave woman screaming that at the top of her lungs brandishing a huge digging stick, which she is very skilled at using. That will make any caveman hustle out and put his ass on the line, if only to shut her up. That is the history of the human race.

Also Men were usually out in hunting parties, so women actually did run most of the day to day workings of a village. The old joke was, Men went to war mostly to get away from their wive's nagging.

But in any case, unmarried, infertile, and lesbian women were shunned by married women, and starved.

You may be right about weak framed men who are figureheads of their households. But there is also another mechanism called feminine wiles. Even as man is usually master of overt power feminine power is quite subtle as in a smart woman is able to make suggestions that end up miraculously the man's own idea.


Feminine wiles are hard to spot and much more effective than nagging and being a contentious woman which the man will most likely resent, plenty of tales and religious texts complain of the contentious woman and how its better to be solitary than to be with her. Akin to communists shooting people who refused to work leading to doing the minimum but not going to do the maximum or even just "pretending work''. Such men do not really live as long and perform as well as those who are subject to feminine wiles.






If as in Patriarchy he is the master of his own household consisting of his property, wife and children. She "influences'' her husband and an skilled woman is able to win him over without a word by her femininity. For such women men will truly move earth and heaven for at his best without any resentment in contrast to the:
''YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!''


Anyway it is recommended to read this:
http://therawness.com/AFP.pdf

The anatomy of female power is enlightening. But I don't really agree with the author entirely as stated by my reply above.

Post: #58

Suicide is always dark but even more so here. What a waste of perfectly serviceable genetic specimen. RIP and good luck in the next go around.

Also, a very interesting theory from Mr. Lemon. Reminds me of the Bene Gesserit (sp?) in the Dune universe.

Post: #59

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

This particular point isn't super important to the overall analyst (to wit: that Feminism is mainly a monstrous version of Lesbian evil and assholishness).

It's a very subtle question and hard to separate out, because what does "in charge" really mean, anyway? But based on my reading of history and my experience in life (watching men and their wives) I still think that "women are in charge" -- or maybe a better way of saying it "Women's demands are in charge." Women don't "design". They demand things, and men figure out how to make them happen.

In the small villages that humans lived in for thousands of years...before railroads and telegraph...the village/town/tribe was all people knew. Men were "in charge" as chiefs, mayors, or whatever. But their WIVES told them what they were to do. YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!! Imaging a cave woman screaming that at the top of her lungs brandishing a huge digging stick, which she is very skilled at using. That will make any caveman hustle out and put his ass on the line, if only to shut her up. That is the history of the human race.

Also Men were usually out in hunting parties, so women actually did run most of the day to day workings of a village. The old joke was, Men went to war mostly to get away from their wive's nagging.

But in any case, unmarried, infertile, and lesbian women were shunned by married women, and starved.

An extension of this dynamic: senior male tribe members would prioritize their daughters welfare when deciding who she could marry. Want to marry the chief's hot daughter? Better make sure you are ready to continue spoiling her. So even in direct male decision making, the well being of women (and the children that women provide) is a major factor.

If a man's wife complains to her father and brothers that her husband is neglecting her, or being overly cruel, that man might quickly find himself in serious trouble. So again, women come first.

No wonder women are so neurotic these days. They were never, ever meant to be separate from a network of supportive family members. That would probably have been close to a death sentence, even as recently as ~150 years ago, depending on where in the world they lived.

Post: #60

(07-27-2018 10:46 AM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

This particular point isn't super important to the overall analyst (to wit: that Feminism is mainly a monstrous version of Lesbian evil and assholishness).

It's a very subtle question and hard to separate out, because what does "in charge" really mean, anyway? But based on my reading of history and my experience in life (watching men and their wives) I still think that "women are in charge" -- or maybe a better way of saying it "Women's demands are in charge." Women don't "design". They demand things, and men figure out how to make them happen.

In the small villages that humans lived in for thousands of years...before railroads and telegraph...the village/town/tribe was all people knew. Men were "in charge" as chiefs, mayors, or whatever. But their WIVES told them what they were to do. YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!! Imaging a cave woman screaming that at the top of her lungs brandishing a huge digging stick, which she is very skilled at using. That will make any caveman hustle out and put his ass on the line, if only to shut her up. That is the history of the human race.

Also Men were usually out in hunting parties, so women actually did run most of the day to day workings of a village. The old joke was, Men went to war mostly to get away from their wive's nagging.

But in any case, unmarried, infertile, and lesbian women were shunned by married women, and starved.

An extension of this dynamic: senior male tribe members would prioritize their daughters welfare when deciding who she could marry. Want to marry the chief's hot daughter? Better make sure you are ready to continue spoiling her. So even in direct male decision making, the well being of women (and the children that women provide) is a major factor.

If a man's wife complains to her father and brothers that her husband is neglecting her, or being overly cruel, that man might quickly find himself in serious trouble. So again, women come first.

No wonder women are so neurotic these days. They were never, ever meant to be separate from a network of supportive family members. That would probably have been close to a death sentence, even as recently as ~150 years ago, depending on where in the world they lived.

This is the truth and can be seen in more traditional societies like Vietnam where women aren't typically spoiled, or at least don't act like it. The rugged individualism of the West where it's become relatively safe for women to get a college degree and venture into the world a thousand miles from home has added to their vulnerability to feminist and other toxic influences.

Post: #61

(07-27-2018 11:01 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 10:46 AM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

This particular point isn't super important to the overall analyst (to wit: that Feminism is mainly a monstrous version of Lesbian evil and assholishness).

It's a very subtle question and hard to separate out, because what does "in charge" really mean, anyway? But based on my reading of history and my experience in life (watching men and their wives) I still think that "women are in charge" -- or maybe a better way of saying it "Women's demands are in charge." Women don't "design". They demand things, and men figure out how to make them happen.

In the small villages that humans lived in for thousands of years...before railroads and telegraph...the village/town/tribe was all people knew. Men were "in charge" as chiefs, mayors, or whatever. But their WIVES told them what they were to do. YOU GO KILL THOSE FUCKING WOLVES RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE SLEEPING IN A DIFFERENT FUR!!! Imaging a cave woman screaming that at the top of her lungs brandishing a huge digging stick, which she is very skilled at using. That will make any caveman hustle out and put his ass on the line, if only to shut her up. That is the history of the human race.

Also Men were usually out in hunting parties, so women actually did run most of the day to day workings of a village. The old joke was, Men went to war mostly to get away from their wive's nagging.

But in any case, unmarried, infertile, and lesbian women were shunned by married women, and starved.

An extension of this dynamic: senior male tribe members would prioritize their daughters welfare when deciding who she could marry. Want to marry the chief's hot daughter? Better make sure you are ready to continue spoiling her. So even in direct male decision making, the well being of women (and the children that women provide) is a major factor.

If a man's wife complains to her father and brothers that her husband is neglecting her, or being overly cruel, that man might quickly find himself in serious trouble. So again, women come first.

No wonder women are so neurotic these days. They were never, ever meant to be separate from a network of supportive family members. That would probably have been close to a death sentence, even as recently as ~150 years ago, depending on where in the world they lived.

This is the truth and can be seen in more traditional societies like Vietnam where women aren't typically spoiled, or at least don't act like it. The rugged individualism of the West where it's become relatively safe for women to get a college degree and venture into the world a thousand miles from home has added to their vulnerability to feminist and other toxic influences.

Yep. And that rugged individualism is compounded 100X by the fact that, for the first time in history, human beings are free of starvation and disease. People just don't realize what a huge change this is.

Before 1900 every single person who lived, anywhere on the planet, would get to experience a major famine once in their lives, in which they'd see their neighbors and family decimated, the corpses of children rotting in mass graves. In colonial and frontier America, often 50% of babies would die in their mother's arms from disease. Abe and Mary Lincoln was president of the US and he lost 3 of his 4 children to disease. Not a goddamned thing that anybody could do about it, not for all the money in the world. Can you imagine how that would scar and rip your soul apart? If that sort of disease returned to our society today, we'd have a revolution and people would be blowing their brains out with grief...but every single one of our ancestors from 1900 back a million years, lived with that horror every single day, and yet maintained their dignity.


Feminism? My god, you've got to be kidding me. If we transplanted a swat team of modern feminists back to colonial America, they would end up being shredded instantly by the women in that era, like a bag of housecats thrown a the den of starving lions. Modern feminists are the stupidest, weakest, most moronic women to have ever existed in any time of human history.

Women in the Great Depression/WW2 had ZERO ZERO ZERO interest in Feminism. They just wanted to eat. Just wanted to *not* be forced to watch the kids next door go hungry. They wanted to *not* hear that their brothers and fathers had gotten blown to bits in Normandy. Sorry girls, all your male relatives are now dead or scarred for life. They wanted to *not* wake up to the sound of their ex-GI husband screaming in his sleep.

Women in the 1950s were the girls of WW2, who wanted only to get away from that horror and have a house, 3 kids, and a husband to pamper. For them, that was their fondest and greatest dream. They understood how horrifying life could be from personal experience. They lived that horror. They understood how simple life was the most beautiful thing. A single inexpensive car in the driveway? A small underpowered dishwasher? Ice cream? These are treasures beyond imagining. Their spoiled hippy daughters took it all for granted.

Modern Chinese women are the toughest women on the planet because they grew up in the 70s and 80s when Chinese were still starving. But you can be guaranteed that young Chinese kids will be the most spoiled rotten creatures on the planet because they have been given huge amounts of food and money.

Women are idiot feminists because they are ALL SPOILED CHILDREN. By historical standards, every women in the Anglosphere, even the poor ones, are spoiled rotten.

Of course we men are too (*cough*)

Post: #62

(07-27-2018 02:40 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  Modern Chinese women are the toughest women on the planet because they grew up in the 70s and 80s when Chinese were still starving. But you can be guaranteed that young Chinese kids will be the most spoiled rotten creatures on the planet because they have been given huge amounts of food and money.

I think 10 years from now, every rfv member will be in Venezuela ))))

Post: #63

(07-27-2018 03:24 PM)Rocha Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 02:40 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  Modern Chinese women are the toughest women on the planet because they grew up in the 70s and 80s when Chinese were still starving. But you can be guaranteed that young Chinese kids will be the most spoiled rotten creatures on the planet because they have been given huge amounts of food and money.

I think 10 years from now, every rfv member will be in Venezuela ))))

An extremely bad idea. Never ever spoil children. Its flushing what is built up by previous generations down the drain by the subsequent failures of such children.

Post: #64

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

A slight exaggeration for rhetorical effect.

Women are always acting. Tick tick tick. Make sure there are resources for the babies, that the strong men who also share their food are in charge. Men act seldomly; we watch and wait until the big action comes. We let women run things until some big decision comes up, then we take the helm and tell the women to move to the back

Also: Daddy Government, Corporate Boyfriend = neuroticism.

Quote:Daddy Government refers to all those functions of the state which attempt to ‘free’ women from their biology, and the consequences of their actions. It includes the subsidization of women’s failures, as well as the unfair advantages of Affirmative Action, lifting them up so they can be as X as men (insert whatever fashionable value you want in place of ‘X’). In exchange, all you must do is grant government your unwavering support. Daddy Government will always go to bat for his daughters, he’ll imprison that mean ex-husband who can’t afford $10,000 a month in spousal support, he’ll send you a monthly check for all of your fatherless children, he’ll give you all the birth control and abortions you need, and he’ll even make sure that the teachers and basketball coaches prop you up so that you get the same results as the boys. Vote for him and you’ll always be kept safe.

What Daddy Government can’t offer you is wisdom.

Daddy Government will subsidize your babies, but he won’t tell you which men to avoid. He’ll lock up anybody you accuse of raping you, but he won’t tell you how to avoid rape in the first place. He’ll help you get that scholarship, but he won’t warn you about the trade-offs required for a full-time career. He’ll indulge his baby-girl… but he won’t help her grow into an adult woman.

The Corporate Boyfriend responds to this rash of teenage girls by giving them exactly what they want; something sexy and exciting, but no more dangerous than an amusement park ride. He’ll take you on dates to fancy restaurants under the pretext of team building, he’ll turn every day into a gala as the people around you dress up in their Sunday Best, he’ll introduce you to a community of friends who’ll always be there for you, and give you an office home which you can decorate with your sisters. He’ll give you all of your girlish dreams… so long as he gets what he’s after.

Your time.

The Corporate Boyfriend might make protestations of love and promises of commitment, but ultimately you are nothing but an object to him, an employee to be exploited. He’ll distract you with his apparent good manners and the wealth he displays, but his love for you is only temporary. Once you’ve served your function he has no more use for you. You’ll be asked to pack your things in a box and security will escort you out, the friends and family that you shared so many good times with will move on as you become an unperson, you’ll return home to the finely-decorate condo he gave you and sit… old and alone.

He got what he needed from you, and now that you have no more to give he’s moving on. All those grand projects you worked on with him? They’re his now; nothing but dusty memories for you. Your home is full of his products, and none of your own projects. It slowly starts to dawn on you that, despite his words, you were never special in his eyes; and looking about, you realize that you’ve become no different than the consumer products which surround you.

Nothing special at all.

Post: #65

Feminism was a Rockefeller creation, used to destabilize society. Watch this famous clip with Aaron Russo.

A quote from it;

"1. we couldn't tax half the population

2. with feminism we get the kids into school at an early age"





This woman, and anti-feminist, makes good points also.

"They were very organized groups of marxist women"

Post: #66

To follow up on what Zep is saying, it is important to recognize too that the gay agenda is covert and well planned too, and they are attempting to take over and control government and civic organizations.

I haven't seen this posted before. It is a killer video by an ex-lesbian giving her Christian testimony , who is now willing to tell the truth about the mechanics of their movement. Whole video is good, but if you want to hear how she and her group would go about subverting something, just listen from 2:33-5:17.

It is not happening organically and they aren't messing around. They want the schools, the government, the media, everything, and they have a good idea how to get what they want.

Post: #67

She was obviously an attention whore. The whole FEMEN thing was a cry for attention. This is what happens when a woman doesn't have an appropriate man. She literally goes mad.

Post: #68

(07-28-2018 03:36 PM)The Stronger Sex Wrote:  She was obviously an attention whore. The whole FEMEN thing was a cry for attention. This is what happens when a woman doesn't have an appropriate man. She literally goes mad.

Any man who got that woman pregnant, whether he hung around or not, could have saved her life. If she had a kid, she would not have committed suicide.

Post: #69

There's a decent likelihood that she was suicided, not sure how likely, maybe a 1 in 4/1 in 3 chance. She's a very easy target, because like rock musicians or volatile actors who die from overdoses, the public will automatically assume that those unstable celebrities are prone to die this way. A lot of celebrities were offed that way (the Rolling Stones' Brian Jones, Jimmy Hendrix, Prince, Michael Jackson come to mind). So if one of her handlers is dissatisfied with her for any reason, she would be a very easy target. Of course in this situalion we're dealing with a complete basket case who's quite prone to commit suicide, so barring any decent forensic info, we don't really know.

Post: #70

(07-28-2018 01:28 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 02:56 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  Quite a few people have objected to my statement that "women ran the villages with and iron fist" and say that, men have always been in charge.

A slight exaggeration for rhetorical effect.

Women are always acting. Tick tick tick. Make sure there are resources for the babies, that the strong men who also share their food are in charge. Men act seldomly; we watch and wait until the big action comes. We let women run things until some big decision comes up, then we take the helm and tell the women to move to the back

Also: Daddy Government, Corporate Boyfriend = neuroticism.

Quote:Daddy Government refers to all those functions of the state which attempt to ‘free’ women from their biology, and the consequences of their actions. It includes the subsidization of women’s failures, as well as the unfair advantages of Affirmative Action, lifting them up so they can be as X as men (insert whatever fashionable value you want in place of ‘X’). In exchange, all you must do is grant government your unwavering support. Daddy Government will always go to bat for his daughters, he’ll imprison that mean ex-husband who can’t afford $10,000 a month in spousal support, he’ll send you a monthly check for all of your fatherless children, he’ll give you all the birth control and abortions you need, and he’ll even make sure that the teachers and basketball coaches prop you up so that you get the same results as the boys. Vote for him and you’ll always be kept safe.

What Daddy Government can’t offer you is wisdom.

Daddy Government will subsidize your babies, but he won’t tell you which men to avoid. He’ll lock up anybody you accuse of raping you, but he won’t tell you how to avoid rape in the first place. He’ll help you get that scholarship, but he won’t warn you about the trade-offs required for a full-time career. He’ll indulge his baby-girl… but he won’t help her grow into an adult woman.

The Corporate Boyfriend responds to this rash of teenage girls by giving them exactly what they want; something sexy and exciting, but no more dangerous than an amusement park ride. He’ll take you on dates to fancy restaurants under the pretext of team building, he’ll turn every day into a gala as the people around you dress up in their Sunday Best, he’ll introduce you to a community of friends who’ll always be there for you, and give you an office home which you can decorate with your sisters. He’ll give you all of your girlish dreams… so long as he gets what he’s after.

Your time.

The Corporate Boyfriend might make protestations of love and promises of commitment, but ultimately you are nothing but an object to him, an employee to be exploited. He’ll distract you with his apparent good manners and the wealth he displays, but his love for you is only temporary. Once you’ve served your function he has no more use for you. You’ll be asked to pack your things in a box and security will escort you out, the friends and family that you shared so many good times with will move on as you become an unperson, you’ll return home to the finely-decorate condo he gave you and sit… old and alone.

He got what he needed from you, and now that you have no more to give he’s moving on. All those grand projects you worked on with him? They’re his now; nothing but dusty memories for you. Your home is full of his products, and none of your own projects. It slowly starts to dawn on you that, despite his words, you were never special in his eyes; and looking about, you realize that you’ve become no different than the consumer products which surround you.

Nothing special at all.

Women always had the delegated role of manager of the home whilst she dwelt in her Husbands house. So it makes quite a lot of sense.

And what Aurini said is describes the Sage King archetype of masculinity very well. He who acts rarely but effectively.

Post: #71

I'll admit to being kinda "meh" on aurinis work so far (The whole Sith Lord/Kane thing doesn't really work), but calling the whole affair "Daddy Government" is spot on as is the description of the relationship that follows.

Post: #72

(07-28-2018 01:56 PM)Zep Wrote:  Feminism was a Rockefeller creation, used to destabilize society. Watch this famous clip with Aaron Russo.

A quote from it;

"1. we couldn't tax half the population

2. with feminism we get the kids into school at an early age"





This woman, and anti-feminist, makes good points also.

"They were very organized groups of marxist women"

Erin Pizzey is definitely worth a read and a listen. She founded the first domestic-violence shelter in Britain back in 1971. She then observed that the "women were as violent as the men." That's why she is no longer a feminist.

Post: #73

Post: #74

(07-28-2018 09:59 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(07-28-2018 03:36 PM)The Stronger Sex Wrote:  She was obviously an attention whore. The whole FEMEN thing was a cry for attention. This is what happens when a woman doesn't have an appropriate man. She literally goes mad.

Any man who got that woman pregnant, whether he hung around or not, could have saved her life. If she had a kid, she would not have committed suicide.

What in the world are you thinking?

She'd have aborted the baby. Women like this don't bring babies to life; they bring them to death.

And yet there is one rung lower they can go: She'd probably also have made some sort of art project out of the abortion -- like that college student did a decade ago.