Yeah seeing half the women being dumbass ditz at best and batshit crazy at worst.. i understand how our ancestors saw batshit crazy hags as witches and burned them at the stakes. They werent burning rational, calm speaking motherly women. They were burning beligerent and insane woke women of that time.
Sean connery was right. Backhand once in a while if they get out of line.
Sean connery was right. Backhand once in a while if they get out of line.
Here is the problem with that. Back in 1910, slapping a woman who was acting out and misbehaving was just that, a correctional force. Today, that's an assault charge, possible jail time, and if you are in a relationship to that woman, domestic violence charges, your employment opportunities forever tainted, and your children possibly taken away from you.
This is the crux of why we as men have not been able to correct women's behavior, despite the fact that they as a group overwhelmingly show signs of not just needing, but wanting to be corrected. They voted to make it illegal with their shortsighted desire to gain power.
So now we get another instance of women being the cause of their own problems, and the solution to it being made illegal so the problem never gets solved. It has gotten so bad that men don't even want to help women when they get attacked, because they saw what happened to Daniel Penny. Women/libtards will argue that it doesn't matter because he didn't go to jail, which is not the point. The point is that he even got arrested and went to court in the first place for what should be a heroic act lauded by the masses. Daniel Penny's reward for his heroism was a year of legal fees and stress.
Men saw that, and more importantly, what they didn't see was a large scale female led protest demanding that he be freed. So they asked themselves, much like Bronn asked Tyrion when Tyrion needed a champion to fight the Mountain, why should they risk their lives and their future for people who wouldn't do the same for them?
This of course presents major problems for the future stability of this country, and major problems for the future of white people in general. If men are unable and/or unwilling to correct destructive female behavior, and instead live for themselves, then the civilization itself crumbles, as no new people are born, and the invaders from beyond our borders pour in to find no resistance.
The uncomfortable truth is that if we want to avoid this future, the men in this country are going to have to band together and use force in defiance of both women's mental instability, and the law itself. But getting men to work together at that scale without something worth dying for is like trying to herd cats. If they can't be convinced that it's worth their lives to fight for, we are doomed.
its just that history books seems to teach students that the witches were all just normal, stable, innocent women. yeah, maybe a few are. but no way to really tell since history has been written in such a way that hides it.
Most benign cases of being a Karen/AWFL in medieval/renaissance times were punished being being tied and briefly dunked in a river for the crime of being a "Common scold", which was the name for them at the time.
When you realize it was women accusing each other for power, then you get halfway there. When men became in charge of it, they told takes that sound like the show Supernatural and evidence based investigation.
History will eventually show that American Leftists were raging suicidal lunatics, trying desperately to destroy their own country, communities and race without remorse.
This is part of the solution but the issue is that most people have no desire to subsequently get forced into a cage at gunpoint. Make domestic violence socially and legally acceptable again and a lot of this nonsense goes away.
Domestic violence is a sign of a weak man; a strong man's woman won't talk back in the first place.
The women who need beating aren't our wives and daughters (for the most part). They're either in a polycule with several beta orbiters (who should also be beaten) or totally unattached.
I'd sum up the solution as "Equal rights? Equal fights."
Maybe, but the threat of it still needs to be legitimately on the table. If women know that they can never suffer consequences for their actions and can retaliate with the state then you get the current dysfunctional society.
I don't want domestic violence happening, but I want it to be possible. Just like how you don't want to spank your child if putting them in time out will serve as a disciplinary measure, but you need that last resort to be available in a "in case of emergency break glass" sort of way. Coincidentally this also serves to incentivize more judicious partner selection, which I think would be generally beneficial to long term relationship stability.
Depends what you mean by "our" wives and daughters.
Most Republicans have some of the biggest cucked men and their wives/daughters are gigantic whores. All those ICE, Border Patrol, Vets, fall into this camp.
I was in an FDLE facility at one point and one of the guys brought his daughter in. She had no pants on.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. What's good for the goose actually is not good for the gander, not always. I don't prescribe the same diet to a fat ass that I would to a scrawny noodle boy.
It’s not a secret that women want to be dominated by strong, confident men. It tickles something deep in their lizard brain seeing an outsider man come into her neighborhood and do as he pleases, especially against her wishes. It’s probably the same instinctual drive as seeing a band of men from a rival tribe in their territory.
Women like strength period. Doesn't need to be rivals. It's just that it takes balls to come into a foreign or hostile area so their mere presence is a show of strength. Whereas her own men beating them back and prohibiting entry would also be a.shownof strength.
Women don't like the burden of making decisions.
Women don't want to pick where to eat, what to watch. What to do. Where to go. Which direction to travel. Every time they must pick those things they probably resent their man even more.
Women are like children in that they want someone else to make their big decisions for them.
Also, they do want to be roughed up. Not hurt. But thrown around in bed, pinned down during sex. Maybe grabbed by the neck. Again, not abusive or anything but they want to know you can take them.
hoe_math did a video on this awhile back, specifically about hybristophilia.
Essentially women's ick for weak men is more dominant than their lust for dangerous ones.
But they are also very indiscriminate. They don't care that much for the difference between sociopathic criminals & strong alpha men with restraint. They will migrate to whomever is dangerous & most accessible.
I think he's somewhat wrong. Women in general cannot tell the difference between the sociopathic criminal and strong alpha men with restraint. They cannot see it. They are more likely to think a man with restraint is weak rather than showing restraint
Retarded, suburbanite, upper-middle class, white Leftist women are so thirsty for strong, masculine, men they literally will accept getting beaten and pepper-balled so that they feel something when a man actually tells them no.
Why do you think they want open borders and prisons let out? Every one of them fantasizes about a rough criminal Chad (Jamal, Sancho, etc.) slapping and choking the brat right out of them. All their fake feminist shit is just cockteasing. Always ways.
When the government decides to just push on with whatever the rich's plan is, prolly long after trump is dead, your going to have to make a stand soon or later. I respect the people who are doing it peacefully.
The moral of the story: our ancestors were right about witches.
Yeah seeing half the women being dumbass ditz at best and batshit crazy at worst.. i understand how our ancestors saw batshit crazy hags as witches and burned them at the stakes. They werent burning rational, calm speaking motherly women. They were burning beligerent and insane woke women of that time.
Sean connery was right. Backhand once in a while if they get out of line.
Here is the problem with that. Back in 1910, slapping a woman who was acting out and misbehaving was just that, a correctional force. Today, that's an assault charge, possible jail time, and if you are in a relationship to that woman, domestic violence charges, your employment opportunities forever tainted, and your children possibly taken away from you.
This is the crux of why we as men have not been able to correct women's behavior, despite the fact that they as a group overwhelmingly show signs of not just needing, but wanting to be corrected. They voted to make it illegal with their shortsighted desire to gain power.
So now we get another instance of women being the cause of their own problems, and the solution to it being made illegal so the problem never gets solved. It has gotten so bad that men don't even want to help women when they get attacked, because they saw what happened to Daniel Penny. Women/libtards will argue that it doesn't matter because he didn't go to jail, which is not the point. The point is that he even got arrested and went to court in the first place for what should be a heroic act lauded by the masses. Daniel Penny's reward for his heroism was a year of legal fees and stress.
Men saw that, and more importantly, what they didn't see was a large scale female led protest demanding that he be freed. So they asked themselves, much like Bronn asked Tyrion when Tyrion needed a champion to fight the Mountain, why should they risk their lives and their future for people who wouldn't do the same for them?
This of course presents major problems for the future stability of this country, and major problems for the future of white people in general. If men are unable and/or unwilling to correct destructive female behavior, and instead live for themselves, then the civilization itself crumbles, as no new people are born, and the invaders from beyond our borders pour in to find no resistance.
The uncomfortable truth is that if we want to avoid this future, the men in this country are going to have to band together and use force in defiance of both women's mental instability, and the law itself. But getting men to work together at that scale without something worth dying for is like trying to herd cats. If they can't be convinced that it's worth their lives to fight for, we are doomed.
its just that history books seems to teach students that the witches were all just normal, stable, innocent women. yeah, maybe a few are. but no way to really tell since history has been written in such a way that hides it.
Perhaps you are right about those
Most benign cases of being a Karen/AWFL in medieval/renaissance times were punished being being tied and briefly dunked in a river for the crime of being a "Common scold", which was the name for them at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_scold
^Has some nice woodcuts of the practice
When you realize it was women accusing each other for power, then you get halfway there. When men became in charge of it, they told takes that sound like the show Supernatural and evidence based investigation.
History will eventually show that American Leftists were raging suicidal lunatics, trying desperately to destroy their own country, communities and race without remorse.
banshees, swamp hags, medusa... the list goes on and on.
Is she also admitting that the liberals have ruined their own men? Or I suppose the only ones they could get on that side are those emasculated men.
Maybe we should beat liberal women. They seem to be unaware of what violence actually is and think it's a game
If they continue to "long for a kinetic battle", it will certainly happen.
Not while the corn syrup and nigball flow freely.
This is part of the solution but the issue is that most people have no desire to subsequently get forced into a cage at gunpoint. Make domestic violence socially and legally acceptable again and a lot of this nonsense goes away.
based
Domestic violence is a sign of a weak man; a strong man's woman won't talk back in the first place.
The women who need beating aren't our wives and daughters (for the most part). They're either in a polycule with several beta orbiters (who should also be beaten) or totally unattached.
I'd sum up the solution as "Equal rights? Equal fights."
Maybe, but the threat of it still needs to be legitimately on the table. If women know that they can never suffer consequences for their actions and can retaliate with the state then you get the current dysfunctional society.
I don't want domestic violence happening, but I want it to be possible. Just like how you don't want to spank your child if putting them in time out will serve as a disciplinary measure, but you need that last resort to be available in a "in case of emergency break glass" sort of way. Coincidentally this also serves to incentivize more judicious partner selection, which I think would be generally beneficial to long term relationship stability.
Depends what you mean by "our" wives and daughters.
Most Republicans have some of the biggest cucked men and their wives/daughters are gigantic whores. All those ICE, Border Patrol, Vets, fall into this camp.
I was in an FDLE facility at one point and one of the guys brought his daughter in. She had no pants on.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. What's good for the goose actually is not good for the gander, not always. I don't prescribe the same diet to a fat ass that I would to a scrawny noodle boy.
Some women need beatings, some don't.
Beating them is actually THE cure for their mental illness
Another day another Jewish woman pretending to be your friend
Of course she does. She always knew this was true but said the opposite. Why?
She is not right.
She is projecting the demoralized version of reality the CIA wants you to buy.
Ignore her. She's retarded and on the take.
She sounds full of shit to me.
They always find a way to blame men
It’s not a secret that women want to be dominated by strong, confident men. It tickles something deep in their lizard brain seeing an outsider man come into her neighborhood and do as he pleases, especially against her wishes. It’s probably the same instinctual drive as seeing a band of men from a rival tribe in their territory.
Women like strength period. Doesn't need to be rivals. It's just that it takes balls to come into a foreign or hostile area so their mere presence is a show of strength. Whereas her own men beating them back and prohibiting entry would also be a.shownof strength.
Women don't like the burden of making decisions. Women don't want to pick where to eat, what to watch. What to do. Where to go. Which direction to travel. Every time they must pick those things they probably resent their man even more.
Women are like children in that they want someone else to make their big decisions for them.
Also, they do want to be roughed up. Not hurt. But thrown around in bed, pinned down during sex. Maybe grabbed by the neck. Again, not abusive or anything but they want to know you can take them.
hoe_math did a video on this awhile back, specifically about hybristophilia.
Essentially women's ick for weak men is more dominant than their lust for dangerous ones.
But they are also very indiscriminate. They don't care that much for the difference between sociopathic criminals & strong alpha men with restraint. They will migrate to whomever is dangerous & most accessible.
That's where social hierarchies come in. Men care about this and so women pick mates who are popular with men.
While all this other stuff has been happening, they also tore down the social hierarchies, especially those which only allowed men, like social clubs.
It's not any one thing, it's dozens of different things that all end up serving the same purpose; the destruction of White civilization.
I think he's somewhat wrong. Women in general cannot tell the difference between the sociopathic criminal and strong alpha men with restraint. They cannot see it. They are more likely to think a man with restraint is weak rather than showing restraint
Was it an old joke that doctors used to flick the bean to cure manic episodes or is that real history?
Quite real, they even made water massagers for the purpose
For all the bitching about men being porn and sex addicted, all romance novels and majority of sex toys are aimed at women. For a reason.
More than one reason. Women would get better value for them while men were forced to be plowhorses by being deprived of outlets.
Amazing how women are given outlets for their frustration and men get their genitals mutilated instead.
Well yeah, other men are competition, women are possessions.
It was a made-up thing. Not real.
Sounds like spanking is back on the menu.
Weak men create…
Holy shit, never thought I'd see Naomi Wolf leaning based (look at her books from the years leading up to the clout-whore post that incited it all)
She was on the anti-vaxx train with RFK Jr was she not?
Retarded, suburbanite, upper-middle class, white Leftist women are so thirsty for strong, masculine, men they literally will accept getting beaten and pepper-balled so that they feel something when a man actually tells them no.
Why do you think they want open borders and prisons let out? Every one of them fantasizes about a rough criminal Chad (Jamal, Sancho, etc.) slapping and choking the brat right out of them. All their fake feminist shit is just cockteasing. Always ways.
So femcels are neurotic and want to bang?
When the government decides to just push on with whatever the rich's plan is, prolly long after trump is dead, your going to have to make a stand soon or later. I respect the people who are doing it peacefully.
Naomi Wolf's heel-face turn has been amazing
Still a crazy feminist.