So we are supposed to root for.. (spoilers)

.. a murderer and a thief?

Just because it's a (robotic) woman, we are supposed to root for her, although she, in cold blood, murdered a man and started stealing other people's property?

Is this what we are supposed to admire these days - murderers and thieves? And afterwards, HOW RIDICULOUS is that the cops never catch her? Even without Columbo and modern CSI stuff, the security cameras in the airport and the witnesses alone would probably very easily lead to this MURDERER's trail!

What the f is wrong with these modern movies, when we are supposed to admire criminals, see crime as 'cool', and look up to and root for 'protagonists' who murder innocent men (especially when it's a woman mudering a man - think - just THINK what it would look like, genders reversed! The woman would automatically be seen as a victim, and no one would root for the man - but genders this way, it's just a pleasant litte murderer-thief-woman, and a shrink, too! Why not also make her a lawyer and complete the demonic evil that we are supposed to cheer as an audience?) and then steal other people's property?

HOW are we supposed to root for this, horrible, old, ugly, psychotic murderer-thief-hag?

I mean, people in The Matrix murder a lot of innocent people as well, and I always found that pretty ludicrous as well, but at LEAST they do it for a good cause - liberating the whole human race from the clutches of machines. But that selfish *beep* murders a man for money, greed, and other selfish reasons (because the man didn't BEG her - how DARE a man not beg a woman for something! The fema-fascist misandry-attitude at its finest - for his life!)..

I LOATHE anyone who thinks this movie is any good, and who thinks murdering innocent men is all right (as long as / especially when the murderer is a woman, because as we all know, the dogma goes: "a woman can do no wrong")!

Since when is murdering innocent men an action to root for? The man didn't have a gun, he didn't even threaten the woman, he didn't do anything unlawful, except con her (which means she really gave the money to him out of her own, free will - so it's a bit of a grey area - conning and fraud didn't even use to be a crime, because it was thought that anyone stupid enough to let someone con them, DESERVED to be conned (and how right they were), but later 'fraud' became a part of law). Now, conning doesn't hurt, it doesn't do damage, and all you can lose is a little bit of money and some pride (which is an ego-thing anyway, so good riddance, right?).

Anyone who thinks her actions were justified are not right in the head. But I challenge them to still think the same, if the genders were reversed. The only "properly" unlawful thing they did was when the old man slapped the woman (see, even when man-against-woman-violence is shown in the movies, it has to be a man with 'victim status', and the only men who have that are 'minorities' (certain races, disabilities and sexual perversions), and very OLD, physically weak men.

And at the same time, we are still shown that whenever a man hits a woman, a woman suddenly has a 'right to murder a man'. We all know how it goes - any man who offends a woman verbally, even unintentionally, 'deserves to be beaten up'. If a man slaps a woman, that is a deed worthy of murder. Never mind that she didn't murder the 'victim status' man, but a young man with no such status (or audience's sympathy) whatsoever.

This is all part of clever, subtle and not-so-subtle brainwashing, indoctrinating and conditioning to make us all obey these wrong and false values. How many times have we seen in a TV show or a movie a man insulting a woman verbally, or being 'clever', having 'the last word', only to be (at least) slapped by the woman? And of course without EVER slapping her back!

This is conditioning. It doesn't always work that way in real life - women have been known to have slapped and punched men, who have ACTUALLY PUNCHED HER BACK!

Still, women's arrogance continues - who can really blame them, with this kind of conditioning going on, creating an atmosphere of superiority for them, and the atmosphere of slavery for men?

I'd say that the two women who were beaten up by the ex-convict, after the women started bossing him around, insulting and punching him, deserved everything they got, even though the man went a little ballistic with the iron bar and probably overdid the revenge a little bit.

I hate violence, but if there's going to be violence, let it AT LEAST BE EQUAL.

Isn't that what women have always wanted? Equality? They should be prepared to take equal part of the violence as well, and things certainly seem to be heading that way, so it's all good, isn't it? Isn't this exactly what the women have been lusting for decades? Now they are going to have that equality - but I predict they ain't gonna be happy with it. Some sensible ones may even regret demanding equality - they will soon know how good they had it before 'equality'..

Women have made their bed, and now they can sleep on it.

Btw, a video I found particularly funny was when a woman slapped a man (this video was shot by a security camera or something), and a man kneeled in front of her, the woman arrogantly most likely thinking the man is going to apologize, and then the man proceeded to PUNCH that *beep* between her big toes - that's right, straight to the money shot place! I think it's AT LEAST as hilarious as ANY video or depiction, where men are shown to be kicked or punched between THEIR legs.

Equality isn't just sugar and candy, hags .. equality means you also have to SUFFER like men! And now you can, hurrah!