The only black person I can remember them criticizing was Larry Elder for saying that to avoid poverty you should graduate high school and don’t have kids until you are married. They said he didn’t understand systemic racism
There may, in fact, be a white tinge to a system that promotes later female reproduction. I think in a black country run by and for black people, this would be dealt with differently. That's the line of thinking I always have when they point out systemic racism. They are wrong in a many ways but not totally wrong.
Oh. Well I tell anyone who whines about systemic racism or “oppression” in the west that if they feel that way then go find a different country in a non western society. I guess I’ve heard enough young black people whine to last me a lifetime lol
In a matriarchal society, for instance, being a single mother would be less of a concern. For a young woman, the main concern would be whether your mother was accepting of the pregnancy, rather than the identity of the father. Access to resources for the child would not be gated by the identity of the father. A woman could still take one or more husbands with them helping raise a child that's not theirs being culturally accepted.
All of the negatives about single mothers -- they're damaged goods, they have to spend a ton of time raising a child whereas they'd otherwise be working -- all sound culturally specific to me. Women in all places do not stop working on account of giving birth. Their, um, advancement in society isn't necessarily impeded.
I didn’t think of that. If I remember Manson wanted the blacks to win so he could rule them right? I was pretty shocked about the love that Manson got, but then again I read that Bundy got thousands of marriage proposals.
I’ve known some women who get upset when you suggest that women like “bad boys” but there is plenty of evidence to show there is something to that claim
It's indisputably true. All of this makes perfect sense if you understand the basics of evolutionary psychology (you don't need to accept evolution to see the truth of it). A woman needs a man who can protect her and her child. Who can best do that, a weak, quiet guy, or a 'bad boy' - or a guy who has lots of resources and/or high social status?
None of this is conscious. If you asked them, they'd say that they want a sweet guy who cares about them, just like a guy would not say that he loves attractive, young women who are totally insufferable bitches.
the attraction to "bad boys" is because conformity is a proxy for weakness & submission
rebellion is a proxy for strength & independence
women have a genetic impulse to seek out "future alphas" so they can get in on the ground floor then reap the benefits of their man's rise.
"bad boys" are people who reject societal rules & do as they please. these are the kinds of men who historically would become leaders instead of followers later in life.
it is a high-risk high reward mating preference, thus is adopted by ambitious women who feel secure/safe. since society is very good at making women feel safe & protected now with laws & police, the preference towards bad boys has dramatically increased. I guarantee you that women did not prefer bad boys in the 1800s.
women who feel less ambitious & safe/secure prefer competent beta males. and no, not "beta" the way it is used as an insult today, beta in the true sense of being a successful conformist who avoids risk & takes the surest path to success. it's much safer & smarter to be the #2 guy than the #1.
women in older generations rejected alpha bad boys because they correctly feared that their gamble would not pay off & their life would be ruined.
that's not a concern anymore since these same women just figure if their bet goes against them, they'll get a divorce. most of the consequences & risks associated with bad boys don't exist anymore, hence their meteoric rise in popularity in the dating scene in the last 40 years.
Hence a woman having a bunch of kids with multiple bad boys can get a welfare check where before they couldn’t. Like you said it was better to be with the safe provider.
Also I’ve seen plenty of women hit their 30s or 40s and then they want the “sweet guy” they claimed they wanted as a teen
it is a high-risk high reward mating preference, thus is adopted by ambitious women who feel secure/safe. since society is very good at making women feel safe & protected now with laws & police, the preference towards bad boys has dramatically increased. I guarantee you that women did not prefer bad boys in the 1800s.
The evolutionary psychology that I have read has made the opposite claim, IIRC, that women are more interested in 'bad boys' the more unsafe and chaotic their environment is.
I think the only reason soyboys can get dates at all is because of the safety.
As a teen it really confused me because so many women said they wanted a nice sweet guy and then date someone who was the total opposite. Then complain that they couldn’t find good men.
lol she's a total bitch & her bf could have knocked her the fuck out without trying.
thing is, this is why you never want to fuck with "alpha" type A personality women. they don't pair bond with you, it's purely transactional. you're only as good as your next win to them. it's the female equivalent of a guy who only dates a woman for the pussy & is 100% prepared to dump her the moment the pussy stops impressing him.
My impression is that black women would too wary to hang around black Manson, not to mention white women. At least back then, being white was a big part of gaining people's trust. In a way that has no parallel right now. I also think just in general black women are more wary of violence coming their way from black men and thus that Manson's sort of nature would be sussed out by them.
It's pure insanity, even inconsistent with their normal claims. Because it's an assertion of extreme privilege that somehow coexists with their claims of extreme oppression.
I’ve never seen any thuggish or ignorant behavior the Root doesn’t cheer on. Heck, if there was a black Charles Manson they would consider him a hero
They probably consider the white Charles Manson a hero!
People think the left just loves black criminals. Oh no! They love criminals, period.
It's literally Black Stormfront.
The only black person I can remember them criticizing was Larry Elder for saying that to avoid poverty you should graduate high school and don’t have kids until you are married. They said he didn’t understand systemic racism
"It's racist for you to tell me to not drop out of school and pump-n-dump my local ratchet, you fucking oreo."
Lol. I know. I remember thinking these people are mad because he talks about responsible behavior
There may, in fact, be a white tinge to a system that promotes later female reproduction. I think in a black country run by and for black people, this would be dealt with differently. That's the line of thinking I always have when they point out systemic racism. They are wrong in a many ways but not totally wrong.
Encouraging women to have kids late in life?
No, I mean different stuff happening with the children that are born.
Oh. Well I tell anyone who whines about systemic racism or “oppression” in the west that if they feel that way then go find a different country in a non western society. I guess I’ve heard enough young black people whine to last me a lifetime lol
In a matriarchal society, for instance, being a single mother would be less of a concern. For a young woman, the main concern would be whether your mother was accepting of the pregnancy, rather than the identity of the father. Access to resources for the child would not be gated by the identity of the father. A woman could still take one or more husbands with them helping raise a child that's not theirs being culturally accepted.
All of the negatives about single mothers -- they're damaged goods, they have to spend a ton of time raising a child whereas they'd otherwise be working -- all sound culturally specific to me. Women in all places do not stop working on account of giving birth. Their, um, advancement in society isn't necessarily impeded.
I didn’t think of that. If I remember Manson wanted the blacks to win so he could rule them right? I was pretty shocked about the love that Manson got, but then again I read that Bundy got thousands of marriage proposals.
I’ve known some women who get upset when you suggest that women like “bad boys” but there is plenty of evidence to show there is something to that claim
It's indisputably true. All of this makes perfect sense if you understand the basics of evolutionary psychology (you don't need to accept evolution to see the truth of it). A woman needs a man who can protect her and her child. Who can best do that, a weak, quiet guy, or a 'bad boy' - or a guy who has lots of resources and/or high social status?
None of this is conscious. If you asked them, they'd say that they want a sweet guy who cares about them, just like a guy would not say that he loves attractive, young women who are totally insufferable bitches.
the attraction to "bad boys" is because conformity is a proxy for weakness & submission
rebellion is a proxy for strength & independence
women have a genetic impulse to seek out "future alphas" so they can get in on the ground floor then reap the benefits of their man's rise.
"bad boys" are people who reject societal rules & do as they please. these are the kinds of men who historically would become leaders instead of followers later in life.
it is a high-risk high reward mating preference, thus is adopted by ambitious women who feel secure/safe. since society is very good at making women feel safe & protected now with laws & police, the preference towards bad boys has dramatically increased. I guarantee you that women did not prefer bad boys in the 1800s.
women who feel less ambitious & safe/secure prefer competent beta males. and no, not "beta" the way it is used as an insult today, beta in the true sense of being a successful conformist who avoids risk & takes the surest path to success. it's much safer & smarter to be the #2 guy than the #1.
women in older generations rejected alpha bad boys because they correctly feared that their gamble would not pay off & their life would be ruined.
that's not a concern anymore since these same women just figure if their bet goes against them, they'll get a divorce. most of the consequences & risks associated with bad boys don't exist anymore, hence their meteoric rise in popularity in the dating scene in the last 40 years.
Hence a woman having a bunch of kids with multiple bad boys can get a welfare check where before they couldn’t. Like you said it was better to be with the safe provider.
Also I’ve seen plenty of women hit their 30s or 40s and then they want the “sweet guy” they claimed they wanted as a teen
The evolutionary psychology that I have read has made the opposite claim, IIRC, that women are more interested in 'bad boys' the more unsafe and chaotic their environment is.
I think the only reason soyboys can get dates at all is because of the safety.
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Approved: This isn't one this is. This is an explanation of genetic predisposition to mate choice, not an explanation of innate inferiority.
As a teen it really confused me because so many women said they wanted a nice sweet guy and then date someone who was the total opposite. Then complain that they couldn’t find good men.
never listen to what women tell you they want
always look at women's actions
women are conditioned from birth to be liars. even 'nice girls' lie constantly to keep up social appearances.
lol she's a total bitch & her bf could have knocked her the fuck out without trying.
thing is, this is why you never want to fuck with "alpha" type A personality women. they don't pair bond with you, it's purely transactional. you're only as good as your next win to them. it's the female equivalent of a guy who only dates a woman for the pussy & is 100% prepared to dump her the moment the pussy stops impressing him.
Women instinctually desire to fuck their conquerors for survival. Serial killers are the modern equivalent.
The term for this is hybristophilia, and as the name suggests it's a paraphilia so trying to understand it can be an effort in futility.
My impression is that black women would too wary to hang around black Manson, not to mention white women. At least back then, being white was a big part of gaining people's trust. In a way that has no parallel right now. I also think just in general black women are more wary of violence coming their way from black men and thus that Manson's sort of nature would be sussed out by them.
Issue at hand aside, can we not fall into leftist linguistic propaganda by calling teachers "educators?" Thank you.
Professor is fine, I'm just referring to the OP's title where he calls them a "white educator."
“Gee, why won’t decent guys date black women?”
Not even black men want to date black women.
That's why black women hate white woman/black man relationships even more than 1488 people.
I think the only black women getting relationships than being made single mothers are the ones that HATE other black women the most.
It doesn't help that they only want Tyrone. White women will accept Chad or Tyrone.
I think they're (some of them are) like this because decent guys won't date them.
this is what a lifetime of dating black men does to a MF
I thought you were joking.
It's pure insanity, even inconsistent with their normal claims. Because it's an assertion of extreme privilege that somehow coexists with their claims of extreme oppression.
"I'm a Jew in Nazi Germany. I'm always right."
So... Soros? 🤔
The whole oppression scam that intersectionality is built on becomes more & more absurd the more power its coalition gets.
Yes, but how would you feel, if you weren't in the right?
Once again proving that the lack of black marriages is not entirely the black men's fault.