The unification narrative rises once more. No means no.
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (14)
sorted by:
I mean, literally true. Biological reality. Guess I'm a simpcuck.
Half and half on this one. Your defense of the trans is, as always, hilarious. But I agree the 'defense of women' is a pretty silly argument. As I've always said, I want to defend reality, for the sake of reality. In some circumstances women would benefit from such a defense, but it's not the goal. Men are men, women are women, there's not a whole lot of leeway there. If we sex-segregate, for example, sports...men don't belong in women's sports. I don't give a damn about women's sports, but I care about logic and reality.
I'm not going to side with the trannies to own the women, just like I'm not going to side with the women to own the trannies. Keep trying.
I mean, I want natives to have children, that's vastly superior to drastically changing the culture with, yes, foreign invaders. Who...you realize, also include women...and procreate with them. You act like replacing one population with another somehow solves you 'women issue.' When they need women too...and are in fact often more matriarchal in fact.
I can inverse it for you. Fuck the idea that we need to import foreigners to have a bunch of children (with WHAMEN) just because we aren't having enough children (also with WHAMEN.)
It's a silly argument. Don't give unfair advantage to women, and don't give unfair advantages to non-native invaders. Each country has to protect its own people. Simple as.
If they benefit, it shouldn't be done. It's really that simple.
I agree. Naturally allowing the population to reduce will help us survive better in a world where AI takes a lot of jobs.