Destroying men's spaces was essential to the regime because all political opposition emerges from groups of men getting together, bitching and moaning until they get pissed off enough to muster a response.
But the way this always plays out is feminists say men and women are different when it's convenient for women, then when it's inconvenient, they say they're exactly the same and must be treated the same, and the right keeps going along with it.
Example:
Men outnumber women getting computer science degrees? Better establish a boatload of gender-specific scholarships and programs and discriminatory hiring practices and a million other things to get more women into that field regardless of their interest or qualifications.
Women outnumber men in most non-STEM fields, and outnumber men in college in general nearly 2 to 1, and the ratio gets more extreme every year? LOL, that's because men are dumb, more scholarships for women.
So know that if you support this sort of thing, it will never be matched by an equivalent support for men in any other part of society, even if they demonstrably have a greater need for assistance.
So know that if you support this sort of thing, it will never be matched by an equivalent support for men in any other part of society, even if they demonstrably have a greater need for assistance.
And that's every special interest group. They never want the equality they are claiming. They simply want to eliminate any real or perceived disadvantages their group has while retaining any advantages and privileges.
Which is how you get a feminist screaming that women are equal and should be eligible for all the jobs in the military in one sentence, immediately followed by a statement that it's wrong to expand the draft to women.
Maybe, but personally I'm certainly opposed to the framing.
"It's not discrimination, we're just giving specifically women stuff!" says that commenter. Maybe it's warranted, maybe it's not, but let's not beat around the bush here. Women are being given preferential treatment, and the people cheering it on are acting like that's not true, and trying to dunk on the "angry men" at the same time.
So, for the sake of argument, let's say the policy is sound. These people are still being vicious and entitled shallow narcissists.
Or, hear me out, we make it easy for everyone to own a self defence weapon, best is probably a gun, so that EVERYWHERE can be safe since everyone can easily defend themselves.
Allow easy access to weapons knowing some may make their way into the hands of lunatics
Or
Attempt to deprive certain people of guns with legislation knowing that criminals will always get them and YOU might be deprived of guns with a change in leadership
I'm going with the first option, at least I can defend myself and those I care about with that option.
If society goes to shit remember that the law of nature is strictly right wing, leftism only makes sense to those who believe decades of degenerate philosophies.
How many do you think are going to start a fire fight when they know their opponent is armed?
It's all well going "But Them™ will also have guns, what about Us™?", but it doesn't really mean a whole lot when talking about defence. They're armed and they decided to assault you? Then you shoot the fuck back. It's that simple.
An originalist reading of the Constitution would agree with you because women weren't armed aside from guns their husbands gave them. Women also couldn't vote when the 2nd Amendment was written, that's how much more important gun ownership is.
Women also couldn't vote when the 2nd Amendment was written
That's not at all true. Voting wasn't universal even for men back then. Still isn't universal for men technically. But back then, voting rights were tied and dependent on land ownership. This meant that women who owned land, which there were some (admittedly overwhelmingly widowers), were allowed to vote.
This same rule applied to men until it later changed, and in the US, men still don't have universal suffrage, as their vote is tied to signing their body away to the Selective Service (AKA the draft), which is also tied to a bunch of other things like their Social Security Number and all else that entails a person to.
Unless you own land, an originalist reading of the Constitution would probably strip you of your voting rights as well.
Or just more than one. Or any of a million possible options, but the point is, men are actually victims of violence at a higher rate than women, we just care about women a lot more.
They always portray these sorts of things as “if only men weren’t like men, we wouldn’t need this” and not the actual truth, that small humans are naturally afraid of big humans. When we are outsized (or outgunned, or just outnumbered) our brain naturally releases stress chemicals to get us ready for a potential conflict. It happens to all of us at some point, even the absolute biggest beast of a man might find himself outnumbered from time to time. Of course, in a civilized society violence is relatively rare, but your monkey brain doesn’t quite glean that, though your logical brain can calm your monkey brain down with a bit of effort. Your monkey brain doesn’t catch on to the fact that you sometimes will pass bigger groups in the mall and that doesn’t actually mean you’re gonna have to fight it out.
The thing about this is, women on average go through life being “the small humans” so they tend to have higher levels of stress in this regard, to the point that their mind invents things to fear just out of habit - the standard take about women won’t go out alone at night, etc. Upshot is, crime against women could drop to near-zero levels and women would still be afraid of us, would still convince themselves WE are making THEM “unsafe” and demand various concessions. See also the recent talk about strategies men can use when out at night to make women “FEEL safer” (while not actually BEING safer from anyone who might actually want to attack them). That’s what all this is, ultimately: all about women’s feelings, and the suck ones that is going through life as (usually) the small human.
TLDR: Women are afraid of us and always will be, whether or not there’s any real reason to be afraid of us.
Meanwhile, when a woman finds a man who is bigger than her but grows to trust them, it leads to them looking at them as a protector. My fiancé has told me exactly that. About how part of the reason she likes me is that I am a titan compared to her (+50lbs, much stronger, a whole head, neck, and shoulders taller), and she has run to me before when she was worried or felt scared.
Or she is going to go full Gremlin mode and start wailing on the guy with me. Because even as much bigger than I am, she doesn’t think I should be the only one with my ass on the line.
Source: it has already happened.
I have known her for almost 15 years, dude. If she was planning on screwing me over like you think women do, I think she would have made her move by now.
You're totally correct, and its only been exacerbated by the social idea that women should be totally self-sufficient. No man is an island. The best way to protect against big humans is to ally yourself with other big humans. Cultivate positive, mutually-beneficial relationships with men. Start with the ones in your own family. Many women have absolutely no idea how much the men in their lives care about them, and would put themselves in harm's way if something threatened her.
When possible, travel to strange or dangerous areas with one of them. If that's not possible, travel with another woman. Predators look for weak animals on their own; the herd is safer.
Everyone should strive to build some sort of communal bonds with others. I know that we get this prideful idea that we want to solve everything on our own, but you get so much further in life by working with others.
There's a reason why "daddy issues" is such a trope. Women who grow up with positive masculine figures in their lives, particularly fathers, have a more positive outlook on men in general. When they see news stories about rapists, murderers, and thieves, they have something to compare them to.
Now to any demographic that is socially unacceptable to openly hate.
It's not "angry men", it's people that see you for the truly hateful sad sacks you are. Your problems aren't caused by men, your problems are overwhelmingly caused by yourself. And yes, even in the cases of predators, you should still be looking to defend yourself through any means possible. You own yourself, not society. That means you should be defending yourself. That's what self ownership entails.
Missing context: japanese men were happy about it because it meant they can relax a little from not needing to worry about false allegations. What they would really like is men-only sections, but it'd be "sexist" to ask for that.
The problem would be better solved by criminalizing false and frivolous charges.
Japan has actually had political pushback due to cultural poisoning on that "all-women's train cars" thing. There was a movement (which obviously failed) to get mens-only traincars, because the sheer number of false accusations and extortion taking place on the trains was unbearably high (women grabbing mens' hands and yelling that they're molesters, and will go to the cops unless they're paid off).
I know that you'll never understand this, but you are exactly the same as the women who are afraid to go out at night and who see all men as potential rapists and murderers.
I'm sorry for whatever circumstance caused you to feel this way. I suspect that many of these women had experiences that made them turn out the way that they did, too.
There are good and there are bad women in this world. There are good and there are bad men in this world. There are people who don't wish harm towards others, but still cause harm through ignorance. There are those who act out of malice.
Dismissing 50℅ of the population as malicious is foolish, whichever side of the gender divide you're coming from.
Destroying men's spaces was essential to the regime because all political opposition emerges from groups of men getting together, bitching and moaning until they get pissed off enough to muster a response.
While all troons should die, I sit back and drink mint juleps when I hear about women spaces getting invaded by "chicks" with dicks.
Here here. Spoken like a true nationalist.
And that's why, if you did manage to start a little group, probably one out of every five of them would be an FBI informant.
But the way this always plays out is feminists say men and women are different when it's convenient for women, then when it's inconvenient, they say they're exactly the same and must be treated the same, and the right keeps going along with it.
Example: Men outnumber women getting computer science degrees? Better establish a boatload of gender-specific scholarships and programs and discriminatory hiring practices and a million other things to get more women into that field regardless of their interest or qualifications.
Women outnumber men in most non-STEM fields, and outnumber men in college in general nearly 2 to 1, and the ratio gets more extreme every year? LOL, that's because men are dumb, more scholarships for women.
So know that if you support this sort of thing, it will never be matched by an equivalent support for men in any other part of society, even if they demonstrably have a greater need for assistance.
And that's every special interest group. They never want the equality they are claiming. They simply want to eliminate any real or perceived disadvantages their group has while retaining any advantages and privileges.
Which is how you get a feminist screaming that women are equal and should be eligible for all the jobs in the military in one sentence, immediately followed by a statement that it's wrong to expand the draft to women.
Maybe, but personally I'm certainly opposed to the framing.
"It's not discrimination, we're just giving specifically women stuff!" says that commenter. Maybe it's warranted, maybe it's not, but let's not beat around the bush here. Women are being given preferential treatment, and the people cheering it on are acting like that's not true, and trying to dunk on the "angry men" at the same time.
So, for the sake of argument, let's say the policy is sound. These people are still being vicious and entitled shallow narcissists.
They'll just claim male only spaces are hotbeds of rape and demand inclusion to keep us in line
Or, hear me out, we make it easy for everyone to own a self defence weapon, best is probably a gun, so that EVERYWHERE can be safe since everyone can easily defend themselves.
A polite society is an armed society.
That would include members of Antifa and those on the left who believe that speech and causing offence can be as deadly as a bullet?
If the only two options available are:
Or
I'm going with the first option, at least I can defend myself and those I care about with that option.
Escalation would be good.
If society goes to shit remember that the law of nature is strictly right wing, leftism only makes sense to those who believe decades of degenerate philosophies.
How many do you think are going to start a fire fight when they know their opponent is armed?
It's all well going "But Them™ will also have guns, what about Us™?", but it doesn't really mean a whole lot when talking about defence. They're armed and they decided to assault you? Then you shoot the fuck back. It's that simple.
Time and time again ANTIFA and other leftist activists have shown how truly incompetent they are, especially when they're armed.
Mandatory carry.
No. Women should not be armed. Ever.
Of course, such infringement on the 2A would destroy America, but any future nation should make sure they aren't armed.
Nah, won't be a problem, sure they can handle handguns and rifles but that's what body armour is for.
There isn't much body armour that can handle a 50 cal or a 4 gauge shotgun and not as many women that can handle that recoil /s
2A applies to people, not property.
Make women property again and we'll solve 90% of the West's problems.
The remaining 10% is left as an exercise for the reader.
How long ago were women property? Surely long before 2a.
An originalist reading of the Constitution would agree with you because women weren't armed aside from guns their husbands gave them. Women also couldn't vote when the 2nd Amendment was written, that's how much more important gun ownership is.
That's not at all true. Voting wasn't universal even for men back then. Still isn't universal for men technically. But back then, voting rights were tied and dependent on land ownership. This meant that women who owned land, which there were some (admittedly overwhelmingly widowers), were allowed to vote.
This same rule applied to men until it later changed, and in the US, men still don't have universal suffrage, as their vote is tied to signing their body away to the Selective Service (AKA the draft), which is also tied to a bunch of other things like their Social Security Number and all else that entails a person to.
Unless you own land, an originalist reading of the Constitution would probably strip you of your voting rights as well.
I like how these women believe that rational men don't feel unsafe when a 6'6 roid monkey walks past them in an angry mood.
They think every single man is the T-800 from the Terminator or something.
Or just more than one. Or any of a million possible options, but the point is, men are actually victims of violence at a higher rate than women, we just care about women a lot more.
I'm pretty lucky that there isn't roving packs of ferals running around where I live.
But there are a lot of shady characters. Not possible to feel safe walking around such people, anything could happen.
All the more reason to be certain with myself and understand how degenerate and fucked up everybody else is.
If everyone around you is pissing themselves and pointing at you for being clean, that's not a reason to piss yourself.
To them every man might as well be.
They always portray these sorts of things as “if only men weren’t like men, we wouldn’t need this” and not the actual truth, that small humans are naturally afraid of big humans. When we are outsized (or outgunned, or just outnumbered) our brain naturally releases stress chemicals to get us ready for a potential conflict. It happens to all of us at some point, even the absolute biggest beast of a man might find himself outnumbered from time to time. Of course, in a civilized society violence is relatively rare, but your monkey brain doesn’t quite glean that, though your logical brain can calm your monkey brain down with a bit of effort. Your monkey brain doesn’t catch on to the fact that you sometimes will pass bigger groups in the mall and that doesn’t actually mean you’re gonna have to fight it out.
The thing about this is, women on average go through life being “the small humans” so they tend to have higher levels of stress in this regard, to the point that their mind invents things to fear just out of habit - the standard take about women won’t go out alone at night, etc. Upshot is, crime against women could drop to near-zero levels and women would still be afraid of us, would still convince themselves WE are making THEM “unsafe” and demand various concessions. See also the recent talk about strategies men can use when out at night to make women “FEEL safer” (while not actually BEING safer from anyone who might actually want to attack them). That’s what all this is, ultimately: all about women’s feelings, and the suck ones that is going through life as (usually) the small human.
TLDR: Women are afraid of us and always will be, whether or not there’s any real reason to be afraid of us.
Meanwhile, when a woman finds a man who is bigger than her but grows to trust them, it leads to them looking at them as a protector. My fiancé has told me exactly that. About how part of the reason she likes me is that I am a titan compared to her (+50lbs, much stronger, a whole head, neck, and shoulders taller), and she has run to me before when she was worried or felt scared.
Which of course makes me feel good too as a man.
If you ever lose a fight, she'll fuck the guy who beat you behind your back.
Or she is going to go full Gremlin mode and start wailing on the guy with me. Because even as much bigger than I am, she doesn’t think I should be the only one with my ass on the line.
Source: it has already happened.
I have known her for almost 15 years, dude. If she was planning on screwing me over like you think women do, I think she would have made her move by now.
I'm just telling the truth about women like that.
lol cuck
Yes, the divorce rate is just incel propaganda, pay no attention to it.
You're totally correct, and its only been exacerbated by the social idea that women should be totally self-sufficient. No man is an island. The best way to protect against big humans is to ally yourself with other big humans. Cultivate positive, mutually-beneficial relationships with men. Start with the ones in your own family. Many women have absolutely no idea how much the men in their lives care about them, and would put themselves in harm's way if something threatened her.
When possible, travel to strange or dangerous areas with one of them. If that's not possible, travel with another woman. Predators look for weak animals on their own; the herd is safer.
Everyone should strive to build some sort of communal bonds with others. I know that we get this prideful idea that we want to solve everything on our own, but you get so much further in life by working with others.
Thanks for telling me up-front to disregard your opinion.
But Germany banned guns and self-defense in general, how are women still feeling unsafe?
must be all those native, totally germanic Germans which were imported.
Impressive, very nice.
Now let's see the men only spaces to not get metoo'd at work or nagged to death at home or totaled by a girlboss in the parking lot.
To paraphrase one of the idiot posters in the screengrab:
The hypocrisy is maddening.
It's 62%. That's how many reported being feminist in a Pew Research survey.
Women gets free rideshare from bars and clubs thru money funneling charity programs.
Men gets ambushed and stabbed to death for their pocket change as they stumble their drunk ass back home.
:jazz hands: Equality!
There's a reason why "daddy issues" is such a trope. Women who grow up with positive masculine figures in their lives, particularly fathers, have a more positive outlook on men in general. When they see news stories about rapists, murderers, and thieves, they have something to compare them to.
Bullshit, some of the worst feminists had fathers in their lives.
Daddy issues is an excuse because nobody wants to confront the reality.
This is rich coming from you.
"its enough"
Now do black men.
Now do immigrants.
Now do muslims.
Now to any demographic that is socially unacceptable to openly hate.
It's not "angry men", it's people that see you for the truly hateful sad sacks you are. Your problems aren't caused by men, your problems are overwhelmingly caused by yourself. And yes, even in the cases of predators, you should still be looking to defend yourself through any means possible. You own yourself, not society. That means you should be defending yourself. That's what self ownership entails.
Missing context: japanese men were happy about it because it meant they can relax a little from not needing to worry about false allegations. What they would really like is men-only sections, but it'd be "sexist" to ask for that.
The problem would be better solved by criminalizing false and frivolous charges.
me: “women feel unsafe? 90% of violence victims are innocent men”
reddit:”but its men who do all the violence!“
Meme gender
This is the exact same women who complain about male only barbers.
If groping is the worst thing that can happen to you in a train, you're lucky
Japan has actually had political pushback due to cultural poisoning on that "all-women's train cars" thing. There was a movement (which obviously failed) to get mens-only traincars, because the sheer number of false accusations and extortion taking place on the trains was unbearably high (women grabbing mens' hands and yelling that they're molesters, and will go to the cops unless they're paid off).
Just claim to be a woman. There, problem solved
#YesAllWomen
I know that you'll never understand this, but you are exactly the same as the women who are afraid to go out at night and who see all men as potential rapists and murderers.
I'm sorry for whatever circumstance caused you to feel this way. I suspect that many of these women had experiences that made them turn out the way that they did, too.
There are good and there are bad women in this world. There are good and there are bad men in this world. There are people who don't wish harm towards others, but still cause harm through ignorance. There are those who act out of malice.
Dismissing 50℅ of the population as malicious is foolish, whichever side of the gender divide you're coming from.
No, I'm not. You see, women's irrational and likely fake fear of evil men is just their excuse to dehumanize us as a group, while my view of women being self-centered human garbage has been verified multiple times by scientific study.
Yours is such a dumb comment.