Feminists Want Dominant Men

[Oneeye]

[The Lawspeaker]

Gee... Quelle surprise. Feminism is just a shit test. That's why they bring in all these Middle Eastern men - just to force their own men into action. They, frankly, fantasize about being slapped back into the kitchen. It's probably because their own mothers were so rotten that they couldn't keep a marriage going or become they choose the wrong sperm donors. Most feminists suffer from deep underlying mental issues.

[The Lawspeaker]

That is wrong. In the workplace, in politics, in the society etc. they want to be surrounded by submissive men. They just want ONE dominant man to marry.

No. Even the fact that they demand access to the workspace or the voting booth is a shit test. We can see this in the corrosive atmosphere they create with every single employer.

[The Lawspeaker]

Doesn't happen very often, Peterski, but I agree: I think that the concept of romantic marriage is actually at the root of it. Back in the day (Middle Ages), marriage was a family affair where the best available male married the best available woman. Not for romantic feelings but for political (family politics) and (de facto) eugenic reasons. Whereas the man (who was considered to be his own man - although tied to the family, to his Lord and to his community), did have a choice on the matter (he was considered responsible enough and was often somewhat older), women did not because in the Middle Ages, women were considered to be easily influenced and as fickle as the weather (you still hear those comments today) and love itself was ever-changed and thus considered a temporal mental illness (in fact: in Dutch courts, crimes of passion could mean that you were declared insane and unfit to stand trial). This may not be a pleasant thing to say, but I guess that this something other cultures (who still practice) don't get wrong and marriages are, often, much more stable. The whole notion of romantic marriage is also a new one and a complete misinterpretation from mediaeval romantic writings where the 19th century reader tended to forget that these were actually highly satirical works that served as a warning against the very concept and, particularly, against what was perceived to be, women's nature (more often than not with religious overtones: let's not forget the story about Eve and the apple that got Adam and Eve kicked out of Paradise).

Let's be frank about this: this present crop of Western woman shouldn't be trusted to tie their shoelaces, much less enter into a contract with legal repercussions (which is what marriage is) or be allowed to vote - they have shown that their sense of entitlement (an influence of feminism - this also expressed itself in the myriad of new "free shit" programs created by Western women voting for the Left which drives up taxes as well as the national debt)), lack of responsibility (often coming from broken homes), complete lack of ethics and fickle nature (let's be frank about it: we know that it's mostly bored white middle class women who support the migrants) are highly corrosive and have caused the country to come close to collapse.

It would be for the good of the country if they, at least temporarily (for the coming 100 years at least) are excused from such responsibilities such as self-ownership (without a father, brother or husband being a guardian). political participation or voting and such privileges should be granted to those who actually deserve it.

[MS85]

Unpopular opinion:

The gender pay gap and other inequalities have been caused by female hypergamy - men are naturally superior, because they were selected for it by women.

You can't have gender equality if you selectively marry fathers who have superior sons throughout centuries.

On the other hand men settle even for low quality wives and this is why women are naturally inferior, because men are letting low quality women to reproduce.

Hahaha, this way of thinking is wrong.

Why?

Every man is 50% women and 50% man. And every woman is 50% woman and 50% man.

50% of my DNA is from my mother who is a woman.


Every Polish woman is genetically much closer to any Polish man than to a woman from Afghanistan.

[MS85]

Nothing against the feminists. to each their own. But most women are not even feminists.

[The Lawspeaker]

Nothing against the feminists. to each their own. But most women are not even feminists.

Most Western women ? Particularly the last three generations ? Yes. They are. If not in word, than in deed.

[Westbrook]

Gender pay gap is a myth

Unpopular opinion:

The gender pay gap and other inequalities have been caused by female hypergamy - men are naturally superior, because they were selected for it by women.

You can't have gender equality if you selectively marry fathers who have superior sons throughout centuries.

On the other hand men settle even for low quality wives and this is why women are naturally inferior, because men are letting low quality women to reproduce.

[The Lawspeaker]

Gender pay gap is a myth

As it doesn't take the line of work, the hours worked, seniority (experience) or overall efficient in account. If anything - there often should be a pay gap.

[MS85]

Wrong, because - although we have the same autosomal DNA - gene expression is very different in both sexes:

"Separate Evolution: Men, Women, And Gene Expression":

https://www.science20.com/news_staff...ression-225064

"Throughout our bodies, thousands of genes act differently in men and women":

https://theconversation.com/not-just...nd-women-86613

Females and males have the same genes. Both sexes have testosterone and estrogen. But not the same amount of it. Some have more, some have less of those specific genes.


Only X or Y chromosomes determine our sex.