"If a woman has the strength to bear a child, she can swing a sword as well as any man" is one of the worst nonsense analogies I've ever heard. It doesn't even make sense within its own internal logic. Either it's conflating strength of will with strength of body, or it's saying that pelvic floor strength equates to arm strength. Either way you'd have to be borderline retarded to think it makes sense.
I'm only a little younger than you are, and like you I've witnessed the rise in whereareallthegoodmen types over the last decade or so. Men are getting red pilled at unsustainable rates from a civilizational perspective.
I've always said that if women had even 1% of the difficulty that men do in dating the feminists would have the government regulating the dating market. I don't see state mandated husbands becoming a thing though, because for once female hypergamy will be our saving grace. The juice just isn't worth the squeeze for a cat lady to enslave Joe Shmoe working the $15/hr job at Walmart that DIE policies have condemned him to. I think it's more likely that we'll see a continuation of the trend of soft polygyny, with women sharing the top men and polyamorous cuck harems appearing at the extreme lower end of the SMV scale.
The fundamental problem is that there aren't enough well to do men to go around, and the ones that exist aren't going to be supporting more than one woman, especially not 35+ feminist cat ladies. I suppose those guys could be enslaved, but I don't see that happening because unlike bottom 80% men those guys are actually valued by society. The real trick is to hide any wealth that you do have so you don't attract gold diggers.
That's one major concern I have about graduating with my masters. I've already been sized up for betabuxxing once, and while it was good practice in staving that off it's not an experience I want to repeat.
AKHSCHAWULLEY, a proper sword swing in most styles involves the entire body, from a good stance to a good core to good edge alignment. It is indeed possible to inflict great harm with a sword by swinging with just the arm, especially with blade heavy weapons like calvary sabers. However, much like a good punch or even golf swing, the better cut will always come with the activation of the entire body.
This doesn't make the analogy any less shit though.
that's the point of the sword, or any weapon really. Weapons are a force multiplier that works to even the playing field between the strong and the weak. the more advanced the weapon is, the more even the playing field.
You don't need to be very strong to use a sword effectively.
you don't need to be a strongman to use a sword, but it still requires certain strength and endurance to wield it effectively. have you ever actually swing around a sword in "combat"? it's highly exhausting, most sword matches end in 5 minutes or less, usually 3, and do require upper body strength to hold the guards and perform cuts.
a woman will likely win against a man without a sword just by extra reach, but will lose 8/10 times when facing a man with a sword even if they have equal expertise and similar body size. that was the point.
even when you use guns, women will lose on accuracy because most of them have too low upper body strength to steadily hold the weapon or handle the kickback. force multiplier doesn't matter much if the other side also has the same weapon but is naturally advantaged in physical strength, endurance and spatial reasoning. it only works at point blank range and the other side was caught by surprise. within 21 feet, a determined man with no gun might still be able to grab the gun from a panicking woman.
one can argue even at the high tech level of using remote drones, men will still beat women using the same weapon, just look at esports, women still lose to men even if the activity only involved keyboard and mouse with minimal physical movements.
what's left? pushing a button to fire missiles in a secured bonker?
there's a reason why every competition is separated by sex, it's certainly not to the benefits of men.
As I'm fond of telling my wife, women give birth in comas. Giving birth is the same process biologically as passing feces. No one says taking a shit is the same as fighting.
"If a woman has the strength to bear a child, she can swing a sword as well as any man" is one of the worst nonsense analogies I've ever heard. It doesn't even make sense within its own internal logic. Either it's conflating strength of will with strength of body, or it's saying that pelvic floor strength equates to arm strength. Either way you'd have to be borderline retarded to think it makes sense.
Had anyone tried to warn them of this fate beforehand they would have been called misogynists by those very women. Fuck them.
I'm only a little younger than you are, and like you I've witnessed the rise in whereareallthegoodmen types over the last decade or so. Men are getting red pilled at unsustainable rates from a civilizational perspective.
I've always said that if women had even 1% of the difficulty that men do in dating the feminists would have the government regulating the dating market. I don't see state mandated husbands becoming a thing though, because for once female hypergamy will be our saving grace. The juice just isn't worth the squeeze for a cat lady to enslave Joe Shmoe working the $15/hr job at Walmart that DIE policies have condemned him to. I think it's more likely that we'll see a continuation of the trend of soft polygyny, with women sharing the top men and polyamorous cuck harems appearing at the extreme lower end of the SMV scale.
The fundamental problem is that there aren't enough well to do men to go around, and the ones that exist aren't going to be supporting more than one woman, especially not 35+ feminist cat ladies. I suppose those guys could be enslaved, but I don't see that happening because unlike bottom 80% men those guys are actually valued by society. The real trick is to hide any wealth that you do have so you don't attract gold diggers.
That's one major concern I have about graduating with my masters. I've already been sized up for betabuxxing once, and while it was good practice in staving that off it's not an experience I want to repeat.
They didn't say how the woman would be holding the sword
Sounds like a boss from a Dark Souls porn game. Or maybe just regular Silent Hill.
AKHSCHAWULLEY, a proper sword swing in most styles involves the entire body, from a good stance to a good core to good edge alignment. It is indeed possible to inflict great harm with a sword by swinging with just the arm, especially with blade heavy weapons like calvary sabers. However, much like a good punch or even golf swing, the better cut will always come with the activation of the entire body.
This doesn't make the analogy any less shit though.
doesn't matter if they used their whole body with proper techniques, their entire body is WEAK
that's the point of the sword, or any weapon really. Weapons are a force multiplier that works to even the playing field between the strong and the weak. the more advanced the weapon is, the more even the playing field.
You don't need to be very strong to use a sword effectively.
lol month old zombie thread.
you don't need to be a strongman to use a sword, but it still requires certain strength and endurance to wield it effectively. have you ever actually swing around a sword in "combat"? it's highly exhausting, most sword matches end in 5 minutes or less, usually 3, and do require upper body strength to hold the guards and perform cuts.
a woman will likely win against a man without a sword just by extra reach, but will lose 8/10 times when facing a man with a sword even if they have equal expertise and similar body size. that was the point.
even when you use guns, women will lose on accuracy because most of them have too low upper body strength to steadily hold the weapon or handle the kickback. force multiplier doesn't matter much if the other side also has the same weapon but is naturally advantaged in physical strength, endurance and spatial reasoning. it only works at point blank range and the other side was caught by surprise. within 21 feet, a determined man with no gun might still be able to grab the gun from a panicking woman.
one can argue even at the high tech level of using remote drones, men will still beat women using the same weapon, just look at esports, women still lose to men even if the activity only involved keyboard and mouse with minimal physical movements. what's left? pushing a button to fire missiles in a secured bonker?
there's a reason why every competition is separated by sex, it's certainly not to the benefits of men.
All of that is downstream of grip strength, where 85% of men are stronger than a 99th percentile woman.
The average man would have a stronger grip with four fingers than the average woman has with all five.
As I'm fond of telling my wife, women give birth in comas. Giving birth is the same process biologically as passing feces. No one says taking a shit is the same as fighting.
My wife gave birth 100% lucid and drug free. She wanted to see what it was like. If you're wondering, the answer is "horrifying".
But you're right, natural births are ridiculously rare these days, which only makes the argument even worse than I had previously given it credit for.