[Gustavus Adolphus]

(05-08-2016 10:13 PM)AboveAverageJoe Wrote:  

delete

Your post doesn't even say it's been modified. You just typed out delete and that's now your first post. Very below average, Joe.

[ChickenLover9T9]

(01-30-2015 10:30 PM)dog Wrote:  

...

What you said about the macro vs the micro is spot on. I find it really freaky in a pleasant way of course when I come across a more traditionally feminine girl, because if the macro had its way there would be 0 of these in existence in the west.

In theory, it seems like it would make women happier to give women the vote. They want a voice too. What harm could it do, right? In theory, it seems like it would make women happier to subjugate men to the point where they are 2nd class citizens, as long as women get all they want without having to lift a finger? Awesome, right?

NO. Because when you fuck up patriarchy or whatever you want to call it, you produce on a macro level a bunch of spoilt fat bitches and desperate beta males/white knights who cater to their every whim. "Real men" are not allowed to exist to the point of players being prosecuted just for having sex with women then deciding to move on. That's the equivalent of making all women for us men fat/ugly because that's what limp wristed "men" are forced into being in 2016. Then they moan "where are all the REAL MEN at". But when a real man (player) comes along, he gets shit, possibly prison if one woman is sufficiently unhinged that she fabricates a few mildly convincing accusations. It's sort of like a giant queen bee just sitting there while all the little worker bees help to feed her but she just gets so huge like Honey Boo-Boo's mom that she explodes into a pile of poisonous goo, taking the entire hive along with her.

But what about the girls who try to stay thin, are relatively conservative and want to be treated as feminine child bearers, rather than being "given" the right to vote like men, or "given" the right to study and work like men, or "given" high stress leadership positions such as company directors and CEOs? Because these do exist as well, contrary to the overall macro noise we hear. The environment slowly, but surely, consumes these women, too, unless they are sheltered from it like some kind of religious cult or the Amish or other isolated, traditional communities.

In some ways, you make a child happy by giving it candy. In the long run, you cause obesity, bullying, rotten teeth and a whole host of other health problems. The human body did not evolve to eat modern candy, but it tastes so sweet that many just cannot resist eating to unhealthy excesses for short term gratification. A woman may do something wrong and get a PP from courts so that she is never truly disciplined or shown the right path. Her father may have left or been divorce raped so she has no male guidance, and even if he is around, everything she hears is to not listen to the patriarchy, and he is likely to have been beaten down so much over the years that his word isn't respected for shit anyway. So the girl doesn't listen, and she continues to eat the candy, never learning from each mistake... until she ends up a completely screwed up landwhale/hooker/crackhead/barren red haired trigglypuff on a smorgasbord of various psychiatric medications.

Result of abolition of "patriarchy" = unhappy women + unhappy men. Women are happiest when they occupy traditionally feminine roles; men when they occupy traditionally masculine roles. You cannot just erase millions of years of evolution and expect that everything is going to be OK.

But there's no point in trying to talk to anyone with logic, it's gone too far now.

[HectorLavoe]

We have always had a Patriarchy in the West, the problem is that our Patriarchs have vested interests in keeping the masses of men weak, demoralized and thus easily controlled.