rooshvforum.network is a fully functional forum: you can search, register, post new threads etc...
Old accounts are inaccessible: register a new one, or recover it when possible. x


Sharky's Machine
#1

Sharky's Machine

I've been waiting awhile to post here. Been reading this forum for several months and decided to wait for my 39th (tomorrow) to chime in. I have alot to say and don't want to clutter up the board with multiple new threads, so this will be my place to cast my thoughts. Sort of a stream of consciousness repository.

It will also keep me from hijacking other people's threads. Nasty habit I'm trying to cure myself of. I can be quite tangential at times. ADHD and all that.

Yeah I hear you, "get on with it already". So here goes...

Feminism is a failure of philosophy, not of genetics.

There is much loud noise made on this board about the failure of women to adequately compete with men on a physical, intellectual, and economic level. This failure has been seen as the inability of women to compete with men because of inherent genetic weakness. While this view (widely but not universally held on this board) is emotionally satisfying, it is ultimately more rhetorical than factual.

Women, for a great many genetic reasons are physically weaker than men. This is why they are failing to meet combat standards in the military's infantry experiment. We can measure that weakness by how much weight they can carry, how far they can carry it, and the failure rate to complete basic soldier tasks vis a vis their male counterparts. But one poster claimed that 80% (or some such nonsense) of women would freeze up in combat. There is no way to measure what a trained soldier will do in combat until that soldier engages (or is engaged by) the enemy. The point is, physical weakness can be easily measured, mental weakness not so much.

It is important to note that these integration reforms are NOT being pushed by females in the military, but by feminist advocacy groups in the political realm who have largely never served in the military much less combat. They have no idea of what it takes to be a soldier. Most women are not capable of completing even basic soldier's tasks like carrying a wounded comrade or ruck marching with full battle rattle from one camp to the next. It looks easy enough when you see other people doing it, but it's totally different when it's you get your ass smoked on Sand Hill.

When the women fail, here will come the excuses: "the equipment is too heavy, they should make it lighter", "the men didn't do enough to help", "the training is psychologically abusive", and so on. Never mind that men have been doing these things for years and becoming better stronger men as a result.

But the failure is not one of genetics, it's one of accountability. Women need to accept their limitations physically and not always be looking to claim victim-hood when they set themselves up for failure. I just had the conversation with my feminist mother over birthday lunch today: women want the privileges of being men without the accountability that goes along with it. Rape (both statutory and "forcible") is the perfect test case for the failure of feminism.

I recently watched the feminist propaganda film "The Invisible War". This movie is an excellent expose' on the lack of female accountability in our society, even though it was never meant to be. It was meant to scare and shock. But having seen how a sex case is actually prosecuted, I can tell you that what these women say exposes the lack of a rape culture rather than the existence of one.

For the record, there are some cases in this film that seem like they merit further investigation, as physical evidence was provided. But they are the gross minority. Most of them are he-said/she-said cases in which the film portrays the women's accusations as absolute fact when there is nothing to corroborate them. A typical case is the female Marine LT who makes an accusation against a Major outside her command. The two of them get drunk, go back to his place and sex occurs. Her position is that she was intoxicated and therefore could not consent to the sex act. Never mind the fact that if she killed someone with her car this would not be a defense, but he was drunk too. This is not a failure of a genetic nature, it is a philosophical one. Why does she believe that she is not responsible because she was drunk, but holds the man to a different standard? Should he not be entitled to claim innocence by means of intoxication as well?

Accountability. This is the failure of feminism. Not genetically inferior women. This female LT, by all accounts was very capable of doing her job (contrary to popular belief most military officers are administrators/bureaucrats not warriors). Her intelligence and work ethic were never in question. But her ability to be accountable for herself led to the end of her military career. She made an accusation that she could not substantiate and nearly cost this other officer both his marriage and his career. The feminist producers of the film seem oblivious to the obvious. But they are not. Their angle, their goal, is to give women super-citizenship such as exists in the Black community. Equal legal rights, with superior social freedom. I call you a cracka ass muthafucka all day long and nothing happens. Call me nigger once and you can expect to hear from my lawyer.

If we're to win the argument we must dispel the genetic argument. It's a loser. You can't prove that men are smarter, work harder, or have better business acumen. But you can fight for complete accountability for women. I'm all for female CEOs and even a female President, as long as she's accountable for herself and her behavior just as a man would have to be.
Reply
#2

Sharky's Machine

Bill Burr is the funniest man alive. I'll take the Pepsi challenge with anyone you can name.



WHY IS IT SO QUIET IN HERE?



Reply
#3

Sharky's Machine

Why are you bumping your own thread with non-sequiturs less that 15 minutes after posting it?

Tuthmosis Twitter | IRT Twitter
Reply
#4

Sharky's Machine

This thread is about whatever I'm burning on at the moment. It's not here sell anything, support any cause, insult anybody or troll the board. Like I said, I have alot to say on a wide variety of subjects and I don't feel the need to clutter the board with 5000 new threads, or bump a bunch of old ones.

I get that this board has a troll problem. I do. I've watched dudes come and go. Don't worry, you'll have no such issues from me. It'll all make sense after a while.
Reply
#5

Sharky's Machine

Don't worry guys, we will understand soon. He has a spiffy icon and we are simply not capable of understanding the grand plan.
Reply
#6

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 06:23 PM)Sharky Wrote:  

This thread is about whatever I'm burning on at the moment.

Why does the board want to know what Sharky is "burning" about at any given moment?

Quote: (04-01-2013 06:23 PM)Sharky Wrote:  

It's not here sell anything

That's not true. You're selling Sharky.





Tuthmosis Twitter | IRT Twitter
Reply
#7

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 06:32 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

Why does the board want to know what Sharky is "burning" about at any given moment?

That's not true. You're selling Sharky.


I guess on that level, we're all trying to sell something. Some of these guys are trying to sell how smart they are. Some are trying to sell how much better they are at this or that.

Otherwise, why bother to share our ideas at all. If no one's buying, what would be the point?
Reply
#8

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 06:25 PM)n0000 Wrote:  

Don't worry guys, we will understand soon. He has a spiffy icon and we are simply not capable of understanding the grand plan.

Nothing quite so cynical. I'm not talking over anyone's head here. One of the things that attracted me to this board is that (for the most part) the level of discussion here is quite high. Guys are bright, educated and present very interesting ideas on this board.

I would not presume to say I'm on some higher level.
Reply
#9

Sharky's Machine

I thought this thread was going to be about the restaurant:

[Image: sharkys-logo-panama-city.jpg]
Reply
#10

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 06:53 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

[Image: sharkys-logo-panama-city.jpg]

East San Jo baby, born and raised...

[Image: san_jose_sharks_secondary_logo.png]
Reply
#11

Sharky's Machine

I just saw a pregnant woman in high heels. That's awesome. Six months heavy, still skinny in the body, with a tight outfit and heels on.

Whoever Daddy is has his game in check. That or she's a stripper. I wonder which...[Image: undecided.gif]
Reply
#12

Sharky's Machine

Yes, the problems are not genetic. And to call the problem "philosophical" seems to give it more credit than it's worth.

Yes, it comes from accountability, or lack of it.

And it boils down to this:

Making dick moves / powerplays for the sake of itself -- for the sake of power, or the sake of fake moral superiority.

So, it may be "philosophical" if you consider Marx a philosophy.

But I think a Red Pill perspective would place it on the spectrum of basic human psychology: Lust (for power), Pride (in a born trait, rather than a deed), Greed, Envy, Anger, ... gee, I'm sensing a 7ery familiar pattern...
Reply
#13

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 09:29 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

Yes, the problems are not genetic. And to call the problem "philosophical" seems to give it more credit than it's worth.

Yes, it comes from accountability, or lack of it.

And it boils down to this:

Making dick moves / powerplays for the sake of itself -- for the sake of power, or the sake of fake moral superiority.

So, it may be "philosophical" if you consider Marx a philosophy.

But I think a Red Pill perspective would place it on the spectrum of basic human psychology: Lust (for power), Pride (in a born trait, rather than a deed), Greed, Envy, Anger, ... gee, I'm sensing a 7ery familiar pattern...

I say "philosophical" because there are parts I get and parts I don't get. I have a 2 year old daughter. I don't want someone telling her she was born to stupid to vote, or drive, or go to college. I get the drive for equal opportunity. But as the Neocons have aptly pointed out, these "civil rights movements" for minorities, women and gays are not about equal opportunities, they are about equal results. And in many cases, about superior status.

If a feminist thinks women should get their shot at the brass ring, then I'm a feminist for the sake of my little girl. If a feminist is someone who thinks women deserve special status for being born with a monthly bleeding hole, then fuck no, I want no parts of that.
Reply
#14

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 09:45 PM)Sharky Wrote:  

I say "philosophical" because there are parts I get and parts I don't get. I have a 2 year old daughter. I don't want someone telling her she was born to stupid to vote, or drive, or go to college. I get the drive for equal opportunity. But as the Neocons have aptly pointed out, these "civil rights movements" for minorities, women and gays are not about equal opportunities, they are about equal results. And in many cases, about superior status.

If a feminist thinks women should get their shot at the brass ring, then I'm a feminist for the sake of my little girl. If a feminist is someone who thinks women deserve special status for being born with a monthly bleeding hole, then fuck no, I want no parts of that.

I really can't disagree, but I shun labels, and feminism is just another "-ism" with no universally agreed-upon definition (like most isms). Especially so regarding raising kids -- easy labels are no way to illustrate eternal truths of the human condition, especially when trying to explain the yin and yang of how the sexes work. (Sorry to go all taoist...). We know Red Pill is not only about understanding these differences and complements, but also about calling BS on how Blue Pill pisses in the pool of Natural Law.
Reply
#15

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 10:03 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

I really can't disagree, but I shun labels, and feminism is just another "-ism" with no universally agreed-upon definition (like most isms). Especially so regarding raising kids -- easy labels are no way to illustrate eternal truths of the human condition, especially when trying to explain the yin and yang of how the sexes work. (Sorry to go all taoist...). We know Red Pill is not only about understanding these differences and complements, but also about calling BS on how Blue Pill pisses in the pool of Natural Law.

You can sum up my philosophy on gender relations with these two words. Men will be opening the jars and killing the spiders 100 years from now no matter what the feminist movement does or says. That doesn't make women less, it just makes them not us.
Reply
#16

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 10:13 PM)Sharky Wrote:  

Quote: (04-01-2013 10:03 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

I really can't disagree, but I shun labels, and feminism is just another "-ism" with no universally agreed-upon definition (like most isms). Especially so regarding raising kids -- easy labels are no way to illustrate eternal truths of the human condition, especially when trying to explain the yin and yang of how the sexes work. (Sorry to go all taoist...). We know Red Pill is not only about understanding these differences and complements, but also about calling BS on how Blue Pill pisses in the pool of Natural Law.

You can sum up my philosophy on gender relations with these two words. Men will be opening the jars and killing the spiders 100 years from now no matter what the feminist movement does or says. That doesn't make women less, it just makes them not us.

[Image: Agreed.jpg]
Reply
#17

Sharky's Machine

Quote: (04-01-2013 10:30 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

[Image: Agreed.jpg]

Damn that muther fucker is old. Just looking at him makes me feel old.
Reply
#18

Sharky's Machine

I want to throw in something else on the issue of women and intelligence.

Women in general tend to eschew reason in favor of emotional reaction in most of their social decision making. This, too, seeps into their politics. It is the reason that men say they are "emotional" and perceive them as less intelligent. But it isn't that at all.

Women are perfectly capable of being rational, but because society forgives them their emotional outbursts they feel entitled to them. This does not make women less intelligent, it only serves to make them less efficient pragmatic thinkers.

If women lack a logical focus, let's be fair. Men are much more likely than women to drive their fist into the face of another person over a personal insult, without first fully considering the consequences that will ensue. The shortsightedness of male emotion balances out the straying logic of the female.

Not better. Not worse. Just not the same.
Reply
#19

Sharky's Machine

I'm confused as fuck what this thread is about. Don't we have the everything goes thread for peoples random thoughts and shit?

Not trying to call gentlemen out, but this could have been a interesting discussion on feminism, and instead? I'm lost.

A humble gentleman's blog about pussy, cigars, and game.

LATEST POST:
The Problem With Nightclubs

Also check out my blog for cigar discussion and reviews.
Reply
#20

Sharky's Machine

Why did he get banned?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)