Could you imagine how fucked society would be with a 90/10 female majority, these intellectual larpers forget that they don't like doing the icky jobs that hold up all the conveniences they hold dear.
Every couple of years they seem to come back to that 10% of men can live. It just goes to show you that women would rather share the top 10% of men, and kill the rest off. You're not even gutter trash to them, you need to be murdered and tossed into a landfill for them to be happy.
Share? Dude, it would never work. Never. It would cause women killing each other. I wouldn't want to share my man with anyone else and I know other women wouldn't either.
Even the UWU open relationship whores only think of more dick for them and they never really want their dude to also get multiple women.
Presumably, it'd be a series of flings, the women concerned not wanting to have to divert enough attention from themselves to want to form a relationship.
Killing your kid versus killing some horrible, misogynist, rapist, oppressor, stranger. Women have no issue with the first bit, and most like to keep that option open "just in case".
Less violent world run by women!? Ha! I'm sure they'd ban all guns, but that wouldn't stop them from biting and clawing their way through a war over something that hurt their feelings. Women would be going to war because they are jealous of the other countries leader's prettier hair.
It has been ages since I've read Queen of the Damned and Vampire Lestat but I do not remember she wanted to kill only men. Is it a different book or was I just to dumb to notice it at the time?
Women are not good long term thinkers or planners, I've found. Remove their ability to dump responsibility on men and they will find themselves in an unmitigated disaster before they can say "hypergamy."
Keep in mind, that's just the book I was told it was in, not anything I've seen in person. Might be worth at least checking out of a library first to make sure. Libraries, woke as they are, might have a copy.
The conceit, I believe, is that they preface their talk of reducing populations with "We're pacifists, we don't want to kill anyone. We intend to reach our goals peacefully!"
Could you imagine how fucked society would be with a 90/10 female majority, these intellectual larpers forget that they don't like doing the icky jobs that hold up all the conveniences they hold dear.
They would murder each other over who would have to clean the bathrooms.
IIRC Camille Paglia said we'd undoubtedly be living in mud huts if this were the case.
these people have lived in such a safe and well working society that they have no idea what it took to build and what it takes to maintain.
FeMiNiSm IsNt AnTi MaLe
Every couple of years they seem to come back to that 10% of men can live. It just goes to show you that women would rather share the top 10% of men, and kill the rest off. You're not even gutter trash to them, you need to be murdered and tossed into a landfill for them to be happy.
Share? Dude, it would never work. Never. It would cause women killing each other. I wouldn't want to share my man with anyone else and I know other women wouldn't either.
Even the UWU open relationship whores only think of more dick for them and they never really want their dude to also get multiple women.
Presumably, it'd be a series of flings, the women concerned not wanting to have to divert enough attention from themselves to want to form a relationship.
The gentler, kinder gender has already aborted 1.6 billion people over the last 40 years, so I wouldn't put it past them.
The strong proud independent black women abort a genocidal 1/3 of black babies each year in the US
Killing your kid versus killing some horrible, misogynist, rapist, oppressor, stranger. Women have no issue with the first bit, and most like to keep that option open "just in case".
Rampaging hordes of Labradoodles and Puggles.
A Sy-Fy original, on right after Sharknado 5
Thanks for lumping us real women with the femnazis.
Less violent world run by women!? Ha! I'm sure they'd ban all guns, but that wouldn't stop them from biting and clawing their way through a war over something that hurt their feelings. Women would be going to war because they are jealous of the other countries leader's prettier hair.
They'd just send the men left to war on their behalf. So it would be "less violent" because the wars would be 10 on 10 instead of thousands.
It has been ages since I've read Queen of the Damned and Vampire Lestat but I do not remember she wanted to kill only men. Is it a different book or was I just to dumb to notice it at the time?
Women are not good long term thinkers or planners, I've found. Remove their ability to dump responsibility on men and they will find themselves in an unmitigated disaster before they can say "hypergamy."
Also, point 2 is word salad.
Is it any wonder why communists and feminists often appear together.
Can you give the full citation? Date, page numbers, ISBN or DOI number, etc.
I can't give a citation, but this is apparently the book that the original essay, "The Future - If There Is One - Is Female" appears in.
https://www.amazon.com/Reweaving-Web-Life-Feminism-Nonviolence/dp/0865710171
Keep in mind, that's just the book I was told it was in, not anything I've seen in person. Might be worth at least checking out of a library first to make sure. Libraries, woke as they are, might have a copy.
The conceit, I believe, is that they preface their talk of reducing populations with "We're pacifists, we don't want to kill anyone. We intend to reach our goals peacefully!"
So, mass abortion it is, then.
Sargon is called a fascist because he wants to preserve "European culture".
While feminists aborting males is pacifism.
The leftist morality we live in tells us it's ok to kill men and whites.
Find a used copy of "Reweaving the Web of Life: Feminism and Nonviolence". It's supposed to be in that anthology.