First, the bitch who narrates the video, Liz Plank, is not some random or innocuous "airhead", even an annoying one. She is a professional feminist proselytizer, the initiator of hashtag activism campaigns, and the holder of a Masters in "gender and social policy" from no less a bastion of Progg/feminist/Year Zero lunacy than the London School of Economics, where they've been at it for about a century now. Her mock airhead persona is a put-on, and this video is extremely tightly scripted and on message at all times. It is a piece of propaganda, pure and simple.

Second, her sexual status is interesting. She is of almost exclusively anal value, it's the only hole that really appeals. She is heavily pre-runneling her forehead and there is quite a bit of sometimes hidden, sometimes obvious hardness and masculinity in her face; at times she looks as if she could almost be a tranny, at times this gets resolved in a certain cunty femininity. All of this can only be harmonized in the strictest doggy anal, which her naturally excessively lordotic lower back is always not so subtly suggesting.

Using one woman as case study for all...sounds logical and scientifically accurate.

Quote: (05-16-2015 10:06 AM)italktostrangers Wrote:  

Using one woman as case study for all...sounds logical and scientifically accurate.

Its the way bitches do everything!

Quote: (05-16-2015 10:06 AM)italktostrangers Wrote:  

Using one woman as case study for all...sounds logical and scientifically accurate.

How can you ignore her feelings. You must be an oppressive cis scum shitlord.

Quote: (05-16-2015 10:06 AM)italktostrangers Wrote:  

Using one woman as case study for all...sounds logical and scientifically accurate.

This is rather common knowledge in the 'sphere. We have it backed by personal experience on many levels. Sure - after some age 60+, then women accept their loneliness and craziness when they are childless.

Men as long as they can get pussy don't suffer any loneliness. It is rather the incel, the unhappily married (and sexless) who suffers more.

http://therationalmale.com/2011/09/12/th...y-old-man/

It is not some kind of manosphere myth, unless you are an aging woman yourself and are just protecting yourself and your spinster-sisters.

I met a few childless women in their 40s and even end 30s, there is a strange sadness about them. Even being a single mother and not having a new man after the divorce is bad for many women, who start to go crazy.

What kills men more is the inability to attract or at least buy pussy. Then they do feel sad, but our minds are more suited towards becoming infatuated with hobbies. It stands to reason that men deal with it better than women.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/articl...-fool.html

Even long-standing feminists regret not having had children:

https://storify.com/erikaackerlund/aging...dless-life

Quote:Quote:

THE SCREAMING HEADLINE was tabloid size: "I WAS DESPERATE FOR A BABY AND I HAVE THE MEDICAL BILLS TO PROVE IT." Some love-struck movie star? A lesbian celebrity? No. Germaine Greer, icon of 20th-century feminism. "I still have pregnancy dreams," she confessed movingly in the premier issue of the British magazine Aura, "waiting with vast joy and confidence for something that will never happen."

The longing for children is hardly novel. What, then, makes this story so sensational, earning a 45-point type, "exclusive" treatment? What gives the story its man-bites-dog quality is that "Greer is the great exemplar of the fiercely independent, aggressively sexual new woman. Iconoclastic to the point of fierceness, she reveled in her lovers, and in telling about them".

The one adjective rarely attached to Greer was domestic. And now she reveals the "hollowness that haunts her, the terrible sorrow she feels at what she lost: her chance for motherhood".

Biology is a bummer indeed. Is it not wise of nature to imbue women with a strong desire to give birth? And is it not wise of nature to imbue men with a strong desire to creampie women?

Yes - guess what happens when either gender's desire is stifled? Most men suffer really when no woman wants to fuck them and most women suffer when they cannot have children beyond a certain age. Unfortunately that includes also married men who are rejected by their wives or get shitty duty-sex.

Sure - you have the feminist hive-mind trying desperately to prove that women can be happy without being mothers. They even trump up strange "studies" where they ask 27 men and some 80 women and try to extrapolate for millions.

http://www.united-academics.org/magazine...ess-women/
http://reelgirl.com/2010/03/are-childless-women-happy/

They write their books about, but we are not fooled by it and neither should you. The study I mentioned was a small one (still much bigger than their 27-men study above), but in combination with many others and our combined world experiences as men in the 'sphere it adds up.

Apart from the natural instinct aspect there is also a difference in our mental proclivity. There are more men whose minds can be infatuated with one subject consuming them - either their job or a hobby. That is why you can hardly find women studying for 6 years the muscular structure of some Amazonian frog species. You find way more men than women in history who are scientists like Nicola Tesla, who willingly become MGTOW and are still satisfied in their ways. Of course nothing is absolute and there are exceptions to the rule, but the general rule is pretty certain.

Notice how every example was a white couple or a white woman. No one else seems to care about this "Lets take care of the world" nonsense.

I am not really convinced that socialism (including feminism) is a biological construct. I have seen feminism cured personally at least once, and I also dabbled in socialism for a few years. I think it is a disease of intelligence, which is why more intelligent groups seem to be so often into leftist causes, while in poorer, less intelligent groups, socialism is more about my group vs your group. I suspect socialism would have taken less root in the third world if the countries were divided by tribe/nation rather than whatever the Europeans decided. So, yes, these women should be reproducing. They should also have been given the right values growing up. If you do not give your children religion, they will find one.

It really amazes me how atheists for all their hatred of religion and religious people simply are not reproducing anywhere near the scale. Heck, having two kids is already strange. My dad had four with two women. It would not surprise me at all if 25-50 years down the road, abortion and gay "marriage" are illegal again, which will be the real irony for those of us who can look back.

Just the other day, I was at work and an old woman came in for help buying a new washer and dryer. She said she had no one to help her, so she needed delivery and installation. I asked if she had neighbors who could help, and it seemed that she did not even have children, but maybe they lived far away. It made me think "How can you not have children?" Who do you expect to help you when you are old? The difference between the have children and the have not children is going to be a big cleavage when the Social Security and Medicare systems begin to be stretched. Those who had children, or are the children, will ask "Why am I paying for people who decided not to have children?"

I have also noticed the young women at work who have had children are so much more mature, sane, and together than those who have not. Even the snooty 18/19 girl is just quiet, composed, and does her job. The other girls who have not had children, whether 18, 20, 24, or 29 are basically wild animals.

Quote: (05-16-2015 10:55 AM)zaqan Wrote:  

It really amazes me how atheists for all their hatred of religion and religious people simply are not reproducing anywhere near the scale. H

Atheism is highly correlated with disagreeableness, non-conformity, anti-social behavior, etc.

The kinds of people who grow up and see everyone is doing X but think "Eh fuck that" are the kinds who become atheists.

It makes good sense then why they wouldn't be particularly fruitful or multiply. They're loners who have a hard time getting along with others and doing what's normal in a social context. These genes drop out of the gene pool.

In the past I guess there was stronger overt social methods of control in favor of practicing a religion and having a family, but now you are shamed much less or not at all for being an atheist, therefore more and more marginal people are becoming atheists.

For the record I am an atheist. And no kids yet...

Though I may have read enough stuff about evolution to rationally convince me to take the plunge one day.

Quote: (05-16-2015 08:21 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  

That woman in the video realized no one would ever want to marry her so she started occupying her time with charities and so on.

She made it seem like it was all this choice and she always wanted to help others. It could just be that she realized the window closed on her and she wanted to act like it was all a choice and she is an empowered woman. A sort of rewriting of history. Because honestly she seems like she would be really annoying to be around after a couple days.

I'd bang the reporter but not let her talk she had that raspy trying to be cool voice that I dislike. Can't she just sound like a feminine woman? Without all the sound effects?

EXACTLY! This strikes me as an example of the fox who couldn't reach the grapes and therefore rationalized "well, those grapes are probably sour, anyway!"

The woman being interviewed is an uggo. Maybe in her youth she could have snared someone, as so many women do. But she didn't, for whatever reason, and is now trying to rationalize that. But her rationalizations (excuses, really) don't wash. A woman who never had kids is like a man who never gets laid - a sad reject of nature. Involuntarily celibate men are sad and pathetic, because they have failed their sex's prime directive, that compulsion that animates them. With women, the prime desire that animates them is to be a mother. And since enticing a man to put his penis in your vagina and blast away is hardly difficult, women who fail even that easy task are correctly thought of as failures, indeed, as pathetic.

Aside: That a network chose to, like, put this girl on, like, television is, like, depressing. She's a twit, can't speak well, and adds NOTHING to the conversation. Her face is ok looking, but it stops there. It reminds me of the scene in Game of Thrones where Cersei offers a monetary reward for Tyrion's head. He says "She should have offered them her cunt - the best part of her for the best part of me". I'm surprised that line made it past the censors because, for an increasing number of women in western society, it reflects the reality that they have NOTHING to offer than a temporarily pretty face and snug vagina.

Quote: (05-16-2015 09:23 AM)Lizard King Wrote:  

Quote: (05-16-2015 09:18 AM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  

Ok guys, what's worse:

A single woman at 40 who has never had kids.
A single woman at 35 who has two kids from two different fathers.

#1 has ignored and failed her biological imperative.

#2 has complied with her biological imperative.

I have met both these types of women.

#1 is cuntier and bitchier than #2.

Many guys will ignore #2 giving me more of a chance with her.

#1 is probably uptight sexually.

Agree. No. 1 is a TOTAL failure at the prime directive of her sex: have children who are healthy, prosperous and pass on their genes. #2, on the other hand, is just poor at it - she has children but they are unlikely to be very competitive compared to more well-adjusted children raised in two family households.

Quote: (05-16-2015 12:21 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

Quote: (05-16-2015 10:55 AM)zaqan Wrote:  

It really amazes me how atheists for all their hatred of religion and religious people simply are not reproducing anywhere near the scale. H

Atheism is highly correlated with disagreeableness, non-conformity, anti-social behavior, etc.

The kinds of people who grow up and see everyone is doing X but think "Eh fuck that" are the kinds who become atheists.

It makes good sense then why they wouldn't be particularly fruitful or multiply. They're loners who have a hard time getting along with others and doing what's normal in a social context. These genes drop out of the gene pool.

In the past I guess there was stronger overt social methods of control in favor of practicing a religion and having a family, but now you are shamed much less or not at all for being an atheist, therefore more and more marginal people are becoming atheists.

For the record I am an atheist. And no kids yet...

Though I may have read enough stuff about evolution to rationally convince me to take the plunge one day.

I know a lot of atheists who are outgoing, agreeable hedonists.

I told my daughter I wanted grandchildren some day. When my daughter is about 24 my wife will start ratcheting up the pressure.

It's the shocking revelation that raising kids is more fulfilling than working behind a desk.

The truth about women who don't have kids

The truth about women who don't have kids

The truth about women who don't have kids

The truth about women who don't have kids

I know many of the "save kids in third world countries" employed by the UN white women. They're friends of my mother. Recently many of them turned 60 so there were plenty of birthday parties that Mum went to. She came back saying that the ones who do not have children have finally let the facade drop and said how envious they are of those who do (and also have grandchildren).

If that "1 in 100" older woman in the video still manages to be in denial now, give it another decade or so and she will completely lose it.

Women who don't have kids are often the hottest ... Narcissism Darwin award removes their hot bodies and twisted minds from the gene pool.... To be replaced by the herds of hambeasts.

Quote: (05-16-2015 12:21 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

Though I may have read enough stuff about evolution to rationally convince me to take the plunge one day.

Exactly. That is what made me less interested in adoption.

Quote: (05-16-2015 08:21 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  

I'd bang the reporter but not let her talk she had that raspy trying to be cool voice that I dislike. Can't she just sound like a feminine woman? Without all the sound effects?

It's called vocal fry and it's repellant. It basically replicates the voice of an 70+ year old heavy smoker. I have no idea why women think it's attractive but it's damn near an epidemic.

Quote: (05-16-2015 09:01 AM)rpg Wrote:  

I work with lots of women and many opted to not have children. Spot on about popping pills every day. Xanax like vitamins. The silence in their life is deafening after 40. They are ugly and cant get male attention. I wouldnt be suprised if they kill themselves before retirement age.

The post-breeding age childless female in America is hilarious.

They tend to all have back problems (fat fuck obesity issues).. white whale

So they all pop pain medications usually some opiate in pill form. Oxy is the top shelf drug of choice. A heroin addiction would be healthier for them.

They are chronic self medicators. Usually alcoholism because even weed is too introspective for these types.. they'd go mad.

Aside from the tic tac popping prozac crowd which has become standard in America there's also a heavy dose of serious MAOI antidepressants. This means they are constantly edgy from all the MAOI inhibitors. The ironic thing about MAOI is that it treats depression but it can also make you more withdrawn and depressed...ie. avoidant.

They are hypochondriacs. They have all sorts of phantom pains and aches. Some real some imagined. They are so used to being in a state of physical agitation that everything must be pharmaceutically treated or an excuse to visit the doc who is sick of seeing their fat whale asses but also happy because the insurance cow has walked in to be milked.

The crazier ones are on the serious bipolar and schizo meds. I already theorized that most vocal feminists were on some form of these but the fat activist biddies are certainly high as a kite. Rapid weight fluctuation is a symptom.

Quote: (05-16-2015 06:16 AM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Mormons, Muslims, and traditional Christians will inherit the world we're building.
Traditional gender roles exist for a reason.

The irony in all of this is brilliant, and it is the main reason why I'm going to so greatly enjoy watching things play out over the course of the next generation or so.

Here you have a bunch of people with a certain set of views on life and the nature of a good "civilized society". They consider these progressive views important, so naturally they promote them aggressively. They want to see the acceptance of these views increase in the future.

At the same time, however, they outsource the development and nurturing of the next generation of human beings to groups of people who have absolutely no sympathy for these progressive views on life and what constitutes a civilized society.

They don't support multiculturalism as an inherent good.
They don't believe in sexual liberation done the western way.
They don't buy into most of the aims of western feminism or accept the liberation of the female from "traditional gender roles" as an inherent good that is necessary and beneficial to pursue.
They're not terribly tolerant.
They're not big on challenging religious orthodoxy, and in fact promote/perpetuate it.

I could really go on, but suffice it to say that the mindsets these people have are in complete conflict with the goals and dreams of your standard progressive westerner. Yet these westerners see no issue with the fact that they have essentially delegated the development of the next generation of human beings to these very people, as if those people are going to join hands with them and buy into the project of creating what progressive westerners consider a more "civilized", liberal society.

What do these progressive westerners expect to happen as these people to whom they have handed the task of guiding the next generation increase their demographic dominance globally?

So far, westerners have managed to completely avoid facing the realities of this dynamic. They don't acknowledge the consequences of their own decisions to discourage procreation and they have simply ignored the consequences of the rest of the world making contrary decisions. So ignorant are they that they celebrate realities that don't really exist outside of their own bubble - mainstream western publications are putting out pieces about the coming "decline of religion", focusing on westerners' own apathy toward spirituality while completely ignoring the fact that, on a global scale, the faithful are coming to absolute dominance globally.

They've been totally blind to all of this, but this state of affairs cannot last for long. The consequences of these trends are going to become increasingly obvious on a global scale during the next generation or so, and I'm really going to enjoy watching westerners come to terms with this and their own role in promoting it. Things are about to get very interesting.

The biological purpose of life is to merely do what you need to do to survive, mate, and reproduce. In that sense we aren't that much different than animals, and is in our nature to do the same. Spiritually, if any, there may be a different purpose who knows.

But any man or woman who says they don't want children is not being completely honest with themselves. For most of us on here, not wanting to have children is merely a choice to ensure our own survival. We have our priorities to ensure our own day to day survival. Having a kid in the picture hurts your chances of survival or severely reduces your quality of life. Give a man who says he doesn't want children the resources, a good woman, and a good environment to breed in, I'm sure he will quickly change his tune.

For today's women, they may be sincere in their beliefs but are heavily misguided. The effort of feminists and communists to correct what nature has bestowed on them will only to lead to misery and loneliness for the adherents of such a twisted anti life ideology.

To the women who don't want to breed, I say good. They are too delusional and selfish to be a proper mother anyway. Any creature that denies its reality, I would almost venture to say may even be insane. I do not want my children popping out of woman who is mentally ill and whose vagina has been ravaged by dozens of other penises with no regard to her personal well being and health. Let the whores be whores. They have chosen their life path. We should be sleep well at night knowing that their genetic line will end with them.

Look at Barbara Walters. This is a woman who has it all. She has fame, success in her career, and has a personal fortune. She got her start on NBC doing "women's interest stories". Barbara was also a whore. Married to three different men, and dated powerful men in politics and finance. Greenspan being one such schmuck. She dated senators. One senator even having a wife at the time. She adopted one child with one of her husbands.

But at the end of the day as she looks back on her life she has one regret. After all the fame, fortune, and different men...yep, her one regret was not having more children. She denied her nature. She will wallow in misery deep inside as she lives out her final days without love from family. Only to be taken care of by hired personal caretakers alone in her bedroom.

There's always going to be social trends. This is just another one of them.

Within one or two generations having children will be popular again. Unless it isn't.

I think it's a more complicated problem than women "choosing" not to have kids.
That's just what you see on the surface. Underneath it's a perfect storm of
modern dating problems, changing expectations about marriage, the decline of the traditional family
the list goes on and on.

In a couple of decades, the pendulum will swing back again in the other direction.

Quote: (05-16-2015 08:40 PM)FANATICAL Wrote:  

Women who don't have kids are often the hottest ... Narcissism Darwin award removes their hot bodies and twisted minds from the gene pool.... To be replaced by the herds of hambeasts.

I have noticed that childless women retain their figures better. Lots of obvious reasons for this: Childbirth rearranges your hips in a way that adds a little wideness to your figure. And of course, women put on weight during pregnancy, some of which they never lose. I think they estimate every baby puts on 5-10 pounds that a woman never loses. And finally, chasing after the little brats is mentally and physically exhausting and leaves little time for cardio.

When I see a childless woman who has become a ham beast b/c she drinks too much alcohol and eats too much crap, it makes me sick.

I think that when women have kids when they are young they can recover and still remain attractive. When they are older, I agree it is most likely they gain some weight they can't lose. And that is if they even bother trying to lose it.

Quote: (05-16-2015 08:07 AM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

Man that girl is hot but oh so fucking obnoxious. It's like she's lived all her life in the most cliched, cunty sorority house, like a real life version of the girls from that song "Literally, I can't." What a waste of beauty to have such a repulsive demeanor.

Love that Tucker Carlson quote:

"Having children means less time for vacations and spin class, where the real meaning in life resides, right? I mean, have you ever seen anything more selfish, decadent and stupid?"

We're facing the final decades of Rome when the caesars found that paying spoilt Roman women to have children couldn't reverse the demographic catastrophe which the Germans and freed slaves (former and current cheap labour) and of course productive practising Christians benefited from.

A few centuries later, the Roman Empire had become Gothic/ Frankish Christendom in the West, Byzantine Christendom in the East and of course Muslim in Spain, North Africa and Asia Minor.

God and the system he has designed to run automatically which we call Nature is not mocked.

Quote: (05-18-2015 12:49 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-16-2015 08:07 AM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

Man that girl is hot but oh so fucking obnoxious. It's like she's lived all her life in the most cliched, cunty sorority house, like a real life version of the girls from that song "Literally, I can't." What a waste of beauty to have such a repulsive demeanor.

Love that Tucker Carlson quote:

"Having children means less time for vacations and spin class, where the real meaning in life resides, right? I mean, have you ever seen anything more selfish, decadent and stupid?"

We're facing the final decades of Rome when the caesars found that paying spoilt Roman women to have children couldn't reverse the demographic catastrophe which the Germans and freed slaves (former and current cheap labour) and of course productive practising Christians benefited from.

A few centuries later, the Roman Empire had become Gothic/ Frankish Christendom in the West, Byzantine Christendom in the East and of course Muslim in Spain, North Africa and Asia Minor.

God and the system he has designed to run automatically which we call Nature is not mocked.

That's interesting. I did not know that. It seems a lot of stuff that happened during the last days of Rome are happening again.

Men not wanting to be tied down. Women not wanting to have more children. Eventually the city of Rome went from 1 million inhabitants to only 50,000 despite their vast wealth.