Please forgive the length, I'm trying to be as terse as possible given the totality, connections, and implications of these topics.
Anyway, I'm glad more people are realizing this. There is nothing wrong with the feminine or women (traditionally, of course). However, it needs to be subservient to the masculine, or more accurately, masculine priorities must be the top priority, and feminine priorities come second, and all size partitions of a society (coupling, families, communities, cities, companies, states, countries, etc.) must follow this.
A combination of biological evolution, the separation of roles between the sexes, and a dash of philosophy will tell us why. To increase the efficiency of our species, we became sexually dimorphic (2 sexes), and separated the roles between those 2 sexes. Men over time prioritized the more dangerous roles in society, and as their part of the bargain, the man provides protection and resources. Women prioritized procreation and child rearing. We only became the top predator on earth due to our large brain, and because of that, child birth is painful, dangerous, and it takes a long time for us to mature, requiring a lot of nurture and resources for a child to successfully make it into adulthood. This requires at least one of the parents to stay with the child (the woman), who are both relatively weak and vulnerable. This is also why women and children often don't stray too far from the tribe, because they rely on it's protection, and why men are more likely to pursue tasks far from home. This also explains the philosophical affinities of the sexes, as certain mental and physical proclivities would manifest to help each sex fulfill their role.
Men, due to the dangers of their role, prioritized truth, logic, and reason above all else. The men who were better at divining truth, via logic and reason, were more efficient at, and more successful at surviving dangerous tasks, accruing resources, protecting, and attracting a mate. Men better at prioritizing their preferred philosophical ideals were more likely to succeed, survive, and pass on their genetics, both for themselves and their tribe.
Women, due to their role, prioritized life, empathy, and emotion above all else. The women who were better at nurturing and taking care of life, using empathy and emotion, were more efficient at, and more successful at bearing children, keeping them alive, raising them to adulthood, and attracting a mate. Women better at prioritizing their preferred philosophical ideals were more likely to succeed, survive, and pass on their genetics, both for themselves and their tribe.
However, which is more important, the masculine or feminine priorities, is it truth, logic, and reason, or life, empathy, and emotion? If you look into it at any depth, the obvious answer is truth, logic, and reason. What happens, in any scale, when life is prioritized over truth? The first casualty in truth, and the second casualty is inevitably life. Every family, tribe, community, society, country, company, etc. that has prioritized the feminine over the masculine has failed or is failing. History is also replete with examples of mass death following such a folly, or any grave misunderstanding of truth. Even following the most basic formulation of the universe itself, truth (laws of nature, physics, logic, numbers, etc.) must be created first, before life can manifest. At its most basic level, life over truth is the undoing of creation itself.
Such as truth/masculine must be prioritized over life/feminine, so also must men hold leadership over women. When women gain power and wield it over men, it inevitably leads to destruction and death. The political left prioritizes women and the feminine over men and the masculine. This is why the left is so emotional, irrational, illogical, pushing feminism, attacking men, and destroying itself and everything it touches. Whether this is done by the left because they are truly foolish, or because women are easier to manipulate and control, is unknown.
All successful and stable communities, of any scale, are patriarchal.
I'd love for the welfare state we have now to be done away with but it'd be tough. Especially when all the support systems that were acting as a safety-net of sorts aren't anywhere near to the point they were pre-welfare.
Family units are fucked so you don't have relatives around to help someone get on their feet; communities are nonexistent because no one has close ties to anyone else in their neighborhood; most people aren't religious (and religious people give the most to charitable causes) so churches can't help their community near as effectively as they could (if they're even around) and tnese non-religious people will only give to pet causes that do nothing to help the people where they live, if they even give at all... You need these already existing social ties and relations to be that safety net in lieu of the government but since Mommy government has stepped in they've all withered away on the vine and made government all but irreplaceable and that'll only get worse as family and social ties continue to decay.
I also can’t help but notice the implicit and persistent compliment that as a straight, white male, I am competent at everything.
It's also impossible to keep groups down, as Thomas Sowell has described in many of his books. Many ethnic groups have flourished despite an enormous amount of state hostility, including the Chinese in Malaysia, the Jews in Europe and the Greeks and Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.
I have growing concern that they plan to tank the economy, using the holdings of Bezos and Gates that they effectively stole to instigate a massive sell off.
Considering the collapse of a minor hedge fund tanked 5 stocks fully and nearly destroyed a bank, the richest man in the world losing half of his holdings and them being dumped recklessly by the new owner will do more than "nothing".
Keep me updated on your investments
I'm beating the market so far, despite having such dubious positions as $200 in XRP and a short on Citigroup and Google. Even made a large profit on Dogecoin this week. One position left to sell, at 0.61 per unit.
Do you know the difference between a real-life collapse and a selling-off which has no impact on the underlying profitability of companies?
the richest man in the world losing half of his holdings and them being dumped recklessly by the new owner will do more than "nothing".
If you don't know how much is being traded every day, and refuse to find out, then I can't help you. However, I can laugh at your inevitable losses in the stock market, for which you will surely blame the nearest woman.
Even made a large profit on Dogecoin this week. One position left to sell, at 0.61 per unit.
I see. That's no doubt due to your investment genius and not luck so far.
The hedge fund's collapse didn't have any effect on the fundamentals of the companies that were sold off, but it still destroyed the prices. With the right timing, selling off what they have could tank the market.
But most of that activity centers around a few stocks. If those went down, they'd take everything else with them. Could the market survive a tech stock collapse? I don't think so.
Of course it's luck. Doge is a pure joke, worth whatever people believe it is. I just mentioned it because it's the story of the week. I have a real portfolio and it's doing well, while avoiding every company I hate.
For the purposes of this thread i identify as a socially and economically disadvantaged. As a white male my government has labelled me a white supremist. Thus making it a disadvantage through their own policies for me to advance as a member in society without the burden of discrimination.
You just used preferential treatment for women as 'PROOF' that women "run the United States". By your own logic, preferential treatment for blacks would be PROOF that blacks run the United States.
"build back better"
remake the economy how they want it to be
you forgot the brackets on the 'they' anon
Nah, he needs these.
♀️♀️Them♀️♀️
Has it ever occurred to you that we could both be right?
Jewish women?
More like Jews & Women.
Please forgive the length, I'm trying to be as terse as possible given the totality, connections, and implications of these topics.
Anyway, I'm glad more people are realizing this. There is nothing wrong with the feminine or women (traditionally, of course). However, it needs to be subservient to the masculine, or more accurately, masculine priorities must be the top priority, and feminine priorities come second, and all size partitions of a society (coupling, families, communities, cities, companies, states, countries, etc.) must follow this.
A combination of biological evolution, the separation of roles between the sexes, and a dash of philosophy will tell us why. To increase the efficiency of our species, we became sexually dimorphic (2 sexes), and separated the roles between those 2 sexes. Men over time prioritized the more dangerous roles in society, and as their part of the bargain, the man provides protection and resources. Women prioritized procreation and child rearing. We only became the top predator on earth due to our large brain, and because of that, child birth is painful, dangerous, and it takes a long time for us to mature, requiring a lot of nurture and resources for a child to successfully make it into adulthood. This requires at least one of the parents to stay with the child (the woman), who are both relatively weak and vulnerable. This is also why women and children often don't stray too far from the tribe, because they rely on it's protection, and why men are more likely to pursue tasks far from home. This also explains the philosophical affinities of the sexes, as certain mental and physical proclivities would manifest to help each sex fulfill their role.
Men, due to the dangers of their role, prioritized truth, logic, and reason above all else. The men who were better at divining truth, via logic and reason, were more efficient at, and more successful at surviving dangerous tasks, accruing resources, protecting, and attracting a mate. Men better at prioritizing their preferred philosophical ideals were more likely to succeed, survive, and pass on their genetics, both for themselves and their tribe.
Women, due to their role, prioritized life, empathy, and emotion above all else. The women who were better at nurturing and taking care of life, using empathy and emotion, were more efficient at, and more successful at bearing children, keeping them alive, raising them to adulthood, and attracting a mate. Women better at prioritizing their preferred philosophical ideals were more likely to succeed, survive, and pass on their genetics, both for themselves and their tribe.
However, which is more important, the masculine or feminine priorities, is it truth, logic, and reason, or life, empathy, and emotion? If you look into it at any depth, the obvious answer is truth, logic, and reason. What happens, in any scale, when life is prioritized over truth? The first casualty in truth, and the second casualty is inevitably life. Every family, tribe, community, society, country, company, etc. that has prioritized the feminine over the masculine has failed or is failing. History is also replete with examples of mass death following such a folly, or any grave misunderstanding of truth. Even following the most basic formulation of the universe itself, truth (laws of nature, physics, logic, numbers, etc.) must be created first, before life can manifest. At its most basic level, life over truth is the undoing of creation itself.
Such as truth/masculine must be prioritized over life/feminine, so also must men hold leadership over women. When women gain power and wield it over men, it inevitably leads to destruction and death. The political left prioritizes women and the feminine over men and the masculine. This is why the left is so emotional, irrational, illogical, pushing feminism, attacking men, and destroying itself and everything it touches. Whether this is done by the left because they are truly foolish, or because women are easier to manipulate and control, is unknown.
All successful and stable communities, of any scale, are patriarchal.
Whats the difference?
Sit down, Adolf.
Nein!
Has it ever occurred to you that you could both be wrong?
Pretty sure you mean these bad boys ()
Governments shouldn’t be in business of charity. Leave that to churches and actual charities.
I'd love for the welfare state we have now to be done away with but it'd be tough. Especially when all the support systems that were acting as a safety-net of sorts aren't anywhere near to the point they were pre-welfare.
Family units are fucked so you don't have relatives around to help someone get on their feet; communities are nonexistent because no one has close ties to anyone else in their neighborhood; most people aren't religious (and religious people give the most to charitable causes) so churches can't help their community near as effectively as they could (if they're even around) and tnese non-religious people will only give to pet causes that do nothing to help the people where they live, if they even give at all... You need these already existing social ties and relations to be that safety net in lieu of the government but since Mommy government has stepped in they've all withered away on the vine and made government all but irreplaceable and that'll only get worse as family and social ties continue to decay.
Ngl I'm pretty black-pilled on society x`D
It's also impossible to keep groups down, as Thomas Sowell has described in many of his books. Many ethnic groups have flourished despite an enormous amount of state hostility, including the Chinese in Malaysia, the Jews in Europe and the Greeks and Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.
Race and sex criteria for US goobermint's gibs, instead of means testing.
Absolutely not racist.
Odd how now it’s acceptable to call it the Chinese coronavirus
It was, you can tell by the fact that they mention white men suffering.
I have growing concern that they plan to tank the economy, using the holdings of Bezos and Gates that they effectively stole to instigate a massive sell off.
ROFL. Imagine convincing yourself of nonsense only to have 'growing concern' that the nonsense you convinced yourself of might be true.
What would happen if half of Bill Gates' holdings are liquidated?
It'd make the Archegos Capital collapse look like nothing.
Absolutely nothing. Do you have any idea how much the capitalization of all the stuff in the stock market is?
Please keep me updated on any stock investments that you make. They will be good for a laugh, given your understanding of economics.
Considering the collapse of a minor hedge fund tanked 5 stocks fully and nearly destroyed a bank, the richest man in the world losing half of his holdings and them being dumped recklessly by the new owner will do more than "nothing".
I'm beating the market so far, despite having such dubious positions as $200 in XRP and a short on Citigroup and Google. Even made a large profit on Dogecoin this week. One position left to sell, at 0.61 per unit.
Do you know the difference between a real-life collapse and a selling-off which has no impact on the underlying profitability of companies?
If you don't know how much is being traded every day, and refuse to find out, then I can't help you. However, I can laugh at your inevitable losses in the stock market, for which you will surely blame the nearest woman.
I see. That's no doubt due to your investment genius and not luck so far.
The hedge fund's collapse didn't have any effect on the fundamentals of the companies that were sold off, but it still destroyed the prices. With the right timing, selling off what they have could tank the market.
But most of that activity centers around a few stocks. If those went down, they'd take everything else with them. Could the market survive a tech stock collapse? I don't think so.
Of course it's luck. Doge is a pure joke, worth whatever people believe it is. I just mentioned it because it's the story of the week. I have a real portfolio and it's doing well, while avoiding every company I hate.
Repeal 19.
They want to help break up couples & families, so we are all wards of the state.
This reminds me of that Principal Skinner meme.
Are my views on women outdated?
No, it's everyone else that's wrong.
Best to have actual source with these.
Discrimination is written into law. Nothing new sadly.
Source.??
https://archive.is/3WYTQ#selection-2079.0-2143.253
For the purposes of this thread i identify as a socially and economically disadvantaged. As a white male my government has labelled me a white supremist. Thus making it a disadvantage through their own policies for me to advance as a member in society without the burden of discrimination.
You didn't post about the fact that the agriculture bailout, which benefited people based on race.
Industries they don't want to control will be given to their pet groups.
You just used preferential treatment for women as 'PROOF' that women "run the United States". By your own logic, preferential treatment for blacks would be PROOF that blacks run the United States.
But we already know that black people are being puppeted by feminists, considering the fact that BLM pushed misogyny laws.
You "know" that along with "knowing" all sorts of other things that ain't so.
So BLM didn't have paragraphs in their manifesto dedicated to misogyny?
Can you get anything right? Look at the part I quoted.