Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. These two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then men could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses. Of course, women are capable of discriminating against men, whether in education, in justice or family law, or something else, but this is simply bigotry, not a vast conspiracy.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. These two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then men could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses. Of course, women are capable of discriminating against men, when it comes to education, or justice or family law, but this is simply bigotry, not a vast conspiracy.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. These two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then men could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses. Of course, they are capable of discriminating against men, when it comes to education, or justice or family law, but this is simply bigotry, not a vast conspiracy.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. These two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then men could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. These two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then males could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these comments to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. This two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then males could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected from all the evil men."

It didn't take long for me for these to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. This two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then males could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses.

Regardless, I didn't even mention them, you did

Yeah, I admit, it was me, not you, who brought up the topic of women. It's because I've had a bone to pick about this and saw an opening so went for it.

When I originally saw your comments regarding women (years/months ago) , I quite liked them "Here is someone that isn't a tradcuck, who doesn't believe women are all angels and must be protected."

It didn't take long for me for these to rub me the wrong way in a bad way. Somewhat embarrassingly, I've only just figured out why. It's because your beliefs are closely aligned to that of a feminist.

The core feminist idea is "patriarchy theory", which posits that men have been conspiring to keep women down for centuries. Closely connected to this is the idea of female supremacy, that women are somehow better and more capable than men. This two ideas cannot really logically co-exist - if women were actually more capable than men, then males could not have held them at bay for that long. Equally, if men were actually capable of conspiring to keep women down, and successful at that for centuries, then it would be prima facie evidence that men really were more capable than women, not the other way round.

The only way your ideas of a vast female conspiracy can be true is if (1) women really are better than men (whether this is at deceiving/blackmail or whatever, they still are better) and (2) patriarchy theory is true - it was only men conspiring to keep these vastly capable women from coming to power than protected men from the horrors of this matriarchy. In other words, your core beliefs are feminist. And this is why I dislike them.

The actual reality is both ideas are bunk - men and women are different on average, and historically had different domains of influence and power. Women's obsession with being "equal" or "better" than men largely stems from an inferiority complex, where they are focused in trying to prove themselves better than someone else (i.e. men, and usually futilely), rather than focusing on trying to improve themselves as individuals. Women are also no more capable off pulling of such a vast conspiracy than men would be, because ultimately, they just flawed humans, not omnipotent goddesses.