Damn, that's deep
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (100)
sorted by:
Now complete the comic where the women mock the men that do cry. This whole feelings schtick is just a way to subjugate you.
lol, you are almost as deranged as Imp.
Not defending captain "da womenz are literally hitler-satan", but there are a not insignificant population of women out there that really will do this shit.
It's not something to generalize ALL women with, any more then you'd generalize all men with some negative behavior, but you also shouldn't ignore the fact that this is a real behavior that exists out in the wild.
Obviously, you shouldn't ignore bad behavior. Hell, you could persuasively argue that this whole cancel culture thing is a very feminine way of destroying your enemies - which relies on the destruction of someone's reputation rather than overcoming him physically.
That said, I don't like vilification of whole classes of people. There's good women and bad women, just like that's true for any group of people.
I would argue that this isnt vilifying a whole class of people. Women that would encourage you to share your feelings are the same women that would be turned off by that vulnrability. Both a sub class of all women
Ok but it's biological. On the whole men and women have physical and mental differences leading to different behavior. Women evolved by manipulating men on an emotional level.
I don't like this meme. It says nothing of significance. "There's good Taliban and bad Taliban, just like that's true for any group of people." "There's good pit bulls and bad pit bulls, just like that's true for any animal." ???
Though I don't think there's as many "evil" women around as some people here seem to believe.
Imagine thinking a woman would mate with you if cried in front of her.
Look at the part with which I took issue. And there are very good evolutionary reasons why women would not like crybaby men.
Apparently you’ve misread, you cited the dependent statement. My statement is that women will tell you they want you to show emotions, this is a lie. If that guy had cried they would have never seen him as a potential partner. The memes bad because it shows blatant falsities.
What?
well, sometimes. women are just kinda dumb. they've been told since birth that men should cry and be vulnerable to them. But, this invokes a disgust response in women, instinctually. The whole story is just jew subversion. Men and women don't know how to live together now. Families are disintegrating. It's all intentional.
No it isn't. The issue is one of commitment.
Women do not want to commit to men who require too much emotional maintenance to keep going (which is a fair complaint). If a man is showing emotional fragility and weakness early on in a relationship, asking her to basically mother him into emotional stoicism is an incredibly big ask to a young woman.
However, if a husband is showing vulnerability and emotion, for which the wife knows she is the outlet for, supporting and re-orienting him is a quick way to get him back to his normal confident self.
Women are weary of "high-maintenance men". The problem we have in society is that everyone is basically high-maintenance because hardly anyone was raised properly. Women are so broken, entitled, and confused they both want and need the strongest possible masculine figures to partner with. Simultaneously, men are so aimless, socially underwhelming, and emotionally incontinent that they are effectively all low status men, and would need to be re-raised to get back to normal masculine expectations.
What you've said is true, BUT the larger issue at hand, which is implied (badly) by the meme is that anything women say they "want from a man" these days is effectively a shit test, even if they don't even know the they are doing it.
Female culture is largely based on some kind of weird collective where women say (and probably believe) what is "popular" in that culture. While in the past that culture may have been calibrated to what women actually want and need (a reliable man with masculine qualities), these days, it's popular for women to say how they want a "sensitive man" or some such trash, yet of course they actually want and need no such thing. This has something to do with the rise of feminism and the feminisation of society, which promotes crappy feminine values like vulnerability and being emotional as "good" qualities, at the expense of useful masculine values like stoicism (which feminists completely misunderstand as a denial of emotion, but that's a separate issue).
Of course, the reality is no one really needs these feminine values, at least not expressed to do level they currently are in society. Expressing vulnerability is perhaps useful for building trust between people (if someone doesn't take advantage of you when you are vulnerable, then they are more likely to be trustworthy). Emotions can be useful heuristics, but it is much better if they are used to guide behaviour; they certainly shouldn't be used to govern behaviour completely.
This means that high maintenance women, which express these qualities to a high degree, are also a problem for men and society. But men put up with women expressing these values since they want sex, and the pussy cartel gets to set the price of that. In fact, men could do the world a favour by not just being masculine themselves, but by insisting that that women stop being so emotional. Here, I'm not suggesting that women (on average) will be less emotional than men (on average), but rather that just because women tend to be emotional doesn't mean that men should tolerate all and any emotional displays from women, or allow women to use emotional manipulation to get their way. It's time to hold women to a higher standard. And the only real way of doing this is being willing to say "no" to a bad deal from women.
Women do need to shit test men. The problems are:
If women had better social structures to rely on, including even traditional institutions that guided male conduct, they wouldn't need to shit test men. Instead, they have almost nothing to rely on in the way of social, family, or institutional structures or traditions, so they end up having to shit test them to be secure.
It would be a lot easier for a woman to know whether or not she could trust her man if he was required to operate under some sort of perpetual ethic in how he was to treat all women, all lovers, and all wives, in that order. Some kind of... chivalrous required conduct. Where if a man was not prepared to address a woman as "my lady", or was not prepared to hold her hand in a respectful way in greeting, he would have already failed the shit test.
But God is dead and it is we who have killed him, so you get to build these systems all on your own.
This is what you're talking about with "female culture". That's not really a thing. You're basically talking about mainstream feminist identitarian culture, which is drilled into all young women as the sole correct interpretation of the universe. Which is why they are repeating feminist tripe ("I like soft sensitive men"), while their actions are in stark contradiction to that ("Why do I keep fucking Trump supporters?!!")
I was actually gonna say. Both sexes need some masculine and feminine values in order to even relate to the other gender. Exclusive masculine males and exclusive feminine females are nearly incompatible with each other because they have no reference point of which to interact with the opposite sex.
No they don't. They might need to test men. But they don't need to shit test men. A shit test is basically testing if a man will refuse to be emotionally manipulated by her. While men should be resistant to emotional manipulation, they shouldn't have to tolerate their wives constantly trying to emotionally manipulate them as a test of "manliness".
The rest of your comment is gynocentric tradcon "poor milady" trash. Both men and women need to have standards of behaviour. Yet, the tradcon view is that it's all on the man to act like an adult, while the woman can do whatever she wants and the man just needs to put up with it. Of course, traditional societies did actually have standards of behaviour expected of women, yet talking about these is taboo in the gynocentric thinking being pushed by both feminists and "traditionalists" (the only such standard so-called "traditionalists" seem to care about is sexual propriety, yet that was only one of many expected standards of behaviour of women).
As I said, things will only get better when men stand up and are willing to say "no" to crappy women.