Leonard D Neubache
Let's just tackle the question you posed real quick so we can get to business.
Quote:Quote:
Honest question. A woman in muslim garb is being beaten by a male muslim in an alley. There are no witnesses other than your yourself. What do you do?
Laugh. Third world savages aren't people I care about, nor do they belong in my society. This isn't relational to anything discussed thus far.
My peopleare the concern to me. I'm not silly enough to imagine a muslim couple will ever be part of my society. Why are the women of my society also acting out of concert and sometimes in directly antagonistic ways? Continued below*
Quote:Quote:
TS, what you're missing is that this "society" you speak of largely no longer exists.
I'm flabbergasted you said
that society no longer exists. It does where I reside. I can't help that many of you suffer the weakness of your own cultures along the east coast, Australia and the UK. Gee, I wonder if the dispositions and interests of the men in these societies have anything to do with their collapse.
Quote:Quote:
Going to the aid of a woman, you are statistically more likely to be protecting a hostile political demographic than you are a friendly one
LOL. Women=the enemy.
Ok I'm laughing, but I'm actually saddened by this. You guys have lost touch with reality by too often grumbling over the woes of being male in western society. The flood of articles shared here shows a steady flow of cultural friction that's increased in a ever more nihilistic culture, but only someone not interacting with the wider populous would think that it's representative of the majority. It's all just some awful nature they collectively share, right? What happened to simply acknowledging that they operate on a different scheme in life and not relegating their collective nature to not even being worthy of being rescued from a physical altercation? Far as I remember, RVF wasn't about hating women.
You guys act like "man up" is conjuring the devil because you can't stand the truth of what it means.
*Newsflash--
the natural world is harsh. Women will always be less willing to face its harshness because they're far less physically capable. Sometimes that presents as deviant personalities within the society that need to be dealt with for order to resume. When men are willing to face it, civilizations emerge from barbarity.
When men don't face the harshness of nature(be it from a lack of gratitude from women or they decide they shouldn't be accountable to the physical role)civilizations fall and barbarity emerges again. This isn't the bronze age or Sumer. You don't
teach women a lesson by recoiling or demanding direct reward for your unfortunate role designated by nature itself.
Anything fighting this is idiocy. This is the modern era. You don't get to have your cake. Another clan that kept their wits together will capitalize on the opportunity and destroy yours. The only choice that results in maintaining the civilization is the hard route that none of you have the stomach for. A bunch of overly self-interested men withdrawing from wider society and the social contract to engage in hedonistic abandon. I think that's why Rome fell. Richard Sennett wrote about it.
"It's not about punishing women! It's just about me!"
Ok, choose that route. It still won't stop the collapse around you and eventually you'll run out of places to escape to. As for societies that held their people together, why would they welcome you? Numbers is the undeniable power in the civilizational era. Quality is the magic that holds it together. The ill of our time is that many of you think your actions play no part in the greater rot on the society as a whole or hypocritically judge the female sex for standards you won't hold yourselves to. On one hand you want to game women for maximum lays, yet complain about female moral quality and desire virgins. On one hand you want wholesome and optimistically feminine women, but engage in philosophies of cynicism and selfishness. Maybe your godless pessimism is to blame here.
I want to state one last time that I didn't enter this debate to shame others for not wanting to intervene, but you collectively allowed me to capitalize on such an explanation anyway.
I'm debating this because someone tastelessly decided to depict the actions of two men trying to do what they believed was in interest of the common good as some sort of shameful act and attached to it a shameful connotation. Some of you felt called out by that and reacted. That says more about what you feel than what I typed. It's not on me.
As my signature states, I'm not angry, but I am disgusted.
Quote:Quote:
I'd like you to start listing your masculinity credentials
No Leonard. That's on you, the thread creator and the others that smeared two dead men. Based on what transpired on the first page of this thread, you took the condescending daddy tone with others being woefully smug.
![[Image: laugh3.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/new/laugh3.gif)
