The Well-Endowed World

Every girl-obsessed boy grows up dreaming about unhooking his first bra. Actually, that recurring dream never dies. But, because of the twin functions of modern bra design — support and deception — as well as the ubiquity of breast implants, he never knows exactly what he will find inside.

After a lifetime’s parade of women through his life, especially if at least one of them has roped him into a torturous visit to Victoria’s Secret, a man knows that the bra comes in endless permutations and combinations of colors, fabrics, coverage, padding, inserts, straps, and fastening techniques. Like its owner, each bra has multiple agendas, which she exploits to the best of her ability.

Unbeknownst to most Americans, there is a unique bra that only foreign women can wear, only when they come into contact with American men. It is called the immigration bra, or ImBra, and it is available free of charge from an exclusive source: the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the US Department of Homeland Security.

The ImBra is a pernicious, illegal support garment with a unique, dual-purpose design: it lifts the status of foreigners above that of Americans, and it creates deep cleavage between American men and their civil rights. When an American man examines the ImBra, he will question everything he ever believed about the greatness and legitimacy of the US Constitution, and the government that supposedly adheres to its precepts.

My bra metaphor is actually an introduction to the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act, or IMBRA. An unconstitutional federal law, which became effective on March 6, 2006, IMBRA makes it a felony to facilitate communications between an American man and a foreign woman, via a fee-based dating Website, without the man first submitting unilaterally to criminal-background and sex-offender checks, and certifying all previous convictions or arrests, marriages or divorces, children, and states of residence since the age of 18. The foreign woman, who owes the American man zero information about herself, must then consent to his contact.

On March 26, 2007, in European Connections v. Alberto Gonzales, 1:06-CV-0426-CC, Judge Clarence Cooper, of the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, dismissed a lawsuit by European Connections claiming IMBRA violates the right to freedom of speech contained in the US Constitution’s First Amendment. The plaintiff, according to Judge Cooper, had failed to challenge IMBRA based on the First Amendment right to assemble.

When there is an IMBRA infraction, the American government will civilly and criminally punish the owner of the noncompliant Website — civil penalty: $5K-$25K per violation; criminal penalty: fine according to Title 18 USC, or imprisonment up to five years, or both — not the man pursuing the foreign woman. But, if the American man ever proposes to or marries his foreign girlfriend, at, say, the base of the Eiffel Tower, his fiancee/wife will not be granted a fiancee/spousal visa to enter the United States.

Here’s another wrinkle. Let’s say that an American man working in London goes onto a British dating Website. He finds a woman whom he later marries and lives with, in London, for some years. At some time, he desires to return to the US with his British wife. Because they met “illegally,” through a noncompliant Website, however, the USCIS will not grant her a visa to enter the US, ever.

The exception to IMBRA is a free foreign-introduction Website, like LatinLoveSearch.com, or a fee-based Website — like Yahoo Personals, JDate, eHarmony, or Match.com — that derives the majority of its revenues from Americans meeting Americans. Judge Cooper, in European Connections v. Alberto Gonzales, found that this exception poses no challenge to the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal-protection clause, because American women are supposedly not abused by American men they meet on the Internet and thus are not in need of protection. This, folks, is your taxdollars at work!

According to Tristan Laurent, president of OnlineDatingRights.com: “The whole idea that it is now a crime for American men to send emails to women in other countries is so preposterous, it is beyond belief. The judge’s ruling that there is no constitutional violation in forcing Americans to divulge all sorts of highly personal information to a complete stranger or scammer abroad, before the American can even say hello or know to whom he is writing, is only exceeded in foolishness by Congress in making the law.”

Well, Tom Friedman never mentioned this American barrier between nations in his bestselling book, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. The world must be pretty well-endowed if the United States can put a bra around it!

Frustrated Feminists

IMBRA originally was called the International Matchmaker Regulation Act but did not pass Congress as such. So, it was renamed the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act and passed on December 17th, 2005 — as a surreptitious attachment to the 2005 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which George W. Bush signed into law. VAWA, an unconstitutional law falsely stipulating that men are overwhelmingly the aggressors in domestic-violence cases, began its nefarious life in 1994, when Bill Clinton approved it.

IMBRA was sponsored by Sen. Sam Brownback, R-KS, and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-WA, and was championed by key women’s groups, especially the Tahirih Justice Center, which made “claims” that foreign women who marry American men are subject to higher rates of abuse than American women. However, the only study addressing this issue was done in 1999 by the INS (now the USCIS), which found that the rate of abuse in international marriages was one-seventh that of domestic ones.

Why were radical feminists from Tahirih so bothered about American-foreign romances that they felt compelled to create and lobby for IMBRA? The scuttlebutt is that they resent American men bypassing them — and the shackles of American feminism — for foreign women, who don’t seem to possess that unique American-style hatred of men.

Plainly said: Men are becoming increasingly sick and tired of American women, and they are looking elsewhere for romance. I get a fair number of e-mails from men saying that they have given up altogether on American women. Tom Leykis frequently mentions on his daily radio show that, for the same reason, he also has forsaken American women.

Let’s look at the cauldron of left-wing thinking — the American gynoversity — and how it breeds the radical feminism that drives men away from American women. There is no better example than Antioch College, nestled in Yellow Springs, Ohio. In 1991, the “Womyn of Antioch” designed the Sexual Offense Prevention Policy (SOPP), which requires that a man and woman seek mutual consent at every stage of intimacy.

No spontaneity. No passion. No fun. No heat. No electricity. No sensual wrestling — the way she really wants it. Just a long, unimaginable protocol of requests and acknowledgements, checks and rechecks, akin to launching a nuclear missile. Maybe this is why feminists are so frustrated and angry all the time: they turn off so many men that they rarely, if ever, get to see a missile escalate to the launch or explosion stage.

The US Reconstitution

IMBRA literally violates the US Constitution on two counts: it presumes all American men guilty of committing potential crimes, and it protects foreigners on foreign soil. So, the American man in search of cross-border romance would not be alone in concluding that the foundation, the underpinning, of our government is crumbling. Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, in the conclusive chapter of his chilling book, The Constitution in Exile, writes:

“… if any lesson is clear from this history, it is that the federal government will never check its own power. On the contrary, it will continue to take liberty and thus property whenever and from whomever it wishes. … Do we still have a Constitution? Dear reader, you can make that call. I say it has been sent into exile, and we must reclaim it before it is too late.”

Judge Napolitano neglected to mention in his incredible book how the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of our fine government kowtow to the feminists. All feminists need do is utter “man bad/woman good” and the government eunuchs run — like women to a shoe sale — to pass more anti-male laws. Consequently, the US Constitution has been so thoroughly vaginized, reconstituted, and reframed for the feminists, I call it the “US Reconstitution.”

Government eunuchs, via the US Reconstitution, confer unilateral, unconstitutional rights to women, via Roe v. Wade and VAWA/IMBRA:

• To opt out of parenthood through abortion
• To falsely accuse a man of domestic violence (DV) or rape, with impunity
• To cross US border illegally (a felony), accuse a man of abuse or rape, and get legal protection
• To immigrate as a wife, then, in divorce, falsely accuse husband of DV or rape, become self-petitioner and remain here — no questions asked
• To receive, as a foreigner, an American man’s personal background information and post it on the Internet, with impunity.

Let’s examine the hypocrisy of IMBRA disclosure rules by comparing it to HIPAA and the Virginia Tech Massacre. HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) assures, among other things, that an American’s health records are secret, except to those parties he grants permission to view them. This is a sacrosanct right.

When news organizations began questioning how the Virginia Tech Massacre killer was able to secure guns and ammunition, despite having a clear history of mental illness, we learned that Virginia protected his right to keep his medical records secret from gun vendors.

Yet, to talk to an unknown foreign woman, on foreign soil, all American men are presumed so dangerous that their government requires them to reveal everything about themselves — to protect her. Our Constitution is designed to protect American men, not foreign women. What will the Department of Homeland Security do if a “protected” foreign woman harms an American man?

If American men are so dangerous, why do so many foreign women want to be with them? And, following this logic, why do American women not need similar protection? I guess it’s because foreign women are less intelligent and more fragile than American women — so, America must abridge its own constitution to save them from themselves. Total lunacy.

Gateway Law

Many experts in the drug-rehab business consider marijuana a gateway drug to cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines. I consider IMBRA a “gateway law” that provides an avenue for the government’s continued erosion and abridgement of men’s civil rights. The next feminist law will require American men to submit to background checks to meet American women. It’s only a matter of time. Why? Because American politicians fear feminists more than terrorists.

The NoNonsense Bottom Line

It is getting to the point where being an American male is a joke. Men work hard in a country that neither appreciates nor protects them. American men have the right to travel to all friendly countries and to mix and socialize with their inhabitants.

If a foreign woman wants to meet an American man, it is her responsibility to be an accountable, sensible adult in how she approaches him — not a fragile, helpless, little girl. The US government is telling the rest of the world that its men are dangerous to their women. Incredible!

I urge men to band together to overturn the virulent, destructive IMBRA. If it remains intact, it will lead to the further constriction of men’s rights. Women like their rights, and their cup sizes, to grow — not to shrink. And, male politicians are enabling them. Are you going to accept this?

Echoing Judge Napolitano’s exhortation, I say you must decide — right now — whether you want to live by the US Constitution or the pink “US Reconstitution,” whether Lady Justice should wear the blindfold or a feminist scarf. It’s up to you. Register immediately at OnlineDatingRights.com, and tell your senators and representatives to unhook that immigration bra.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 55+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables™ (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth™ (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2007 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

This entry was posted on Sunday, May 13th, 2007 at 3:32 pm and is filed under TNNM. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. |  Print This Post