2
GhostBond 2 points ago +3 / -1

Also from the article:

meeting teenagers for sex

I haven't seen an article on actually pedophilia in like 5 years I think, it's always catering to adults uncomfortable feelings about the idea of their teens having sex.

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

How about we acknowledge that men like seeing attractive women and women like seeing attractive men.

I could post a link to it, you can find official government people openly talking about how it's a "big problem" that women are able to leave the workforce because they have a husband or have kids and how they need to find a way to "fix" this.

The campaign about this is part of their goal. Women like being looked at by men who they think are attractive or important, and the point of the campaign is to try to influence women to self-sabotage the basic trigger attraction between 2 people.

With women being trained to self-interupt their impulses that lead to dating, they don't get married or have kids achieving their goal.

by borga
1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

They can't actually say that though, because then they're complaining that men aren't doing their duty to protect women from other women.

It's still secondary though. The feminist pattern has consistently been women complaining about other women or society, using men as a proxy.

Easiest one is "telling me what to wear". Women can't go 5 minutes around other women without telling, or subtly criticizing, occasionally complimenting, etc, what other women are wearing. Mothers towards their daughters are the most intense. It comes as intuitively to them as male software devs arguing about spaces vs tabs.

Their complaints target the experiences they've had growing up as women with other women, grafted onto using men to complain about it.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

Feminists caused the grievance studies… Feminists are now suffering?

Feminists do cause a lot of female suffering.

They're literally driven first by big corporations that want to see women not get married and have kids, because women who do leave the workforce, so they figure they can make more money off them if they get them to self-sabotage themselves out of that.

This is part of why the more goals feminists achieve it's goals, the more miserable women are.

After they're done converting them into drones there's more power to be had in using women to push out men in jobs you want - you need hysterical women in order to do that.

You gotta imagine it like a medieval army. The people in the army get killed, mutilated, etc, when they lose or win. If they win? The king takes the rewards - not the soldiers.

4
GhostBond 4 points ago +4 / -0

1800's -> "We scientifically proved black people are dumb by studying their skull sizes"
2000's -> "We scientifically proved people are the other gender with brain scans"

Same playbook.

by borga
9
GhostBond 9 points ago +9 / -0

I keep saying it - feminist complaints are women complaining about other women, using men as a proxy.

If you want to understand what they really mean rephrase any mentions of "people" "men" "everyone" etc as "other women".

It's hard being a female athlete because other women pray for your downfall.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +3 / -1

People don't work like that.

Political groups and corporations absolutely do work like that.

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

They're coming for your jobs.
They're coming for your women.
They're coming for your children.

This includes asking current and prospective managers to complete annual questionnaires to gauge their progress and measure how managers look at diversity in terms of industry perception, recruitment, culture, promotion, and leadership. In the questionnaire, managers will document the racial and gender breakdown of employees at each level — board, executive, senior management, front office — and levels of recruitment and retention by race and gender. Managers will also have to answer specific questions about maternity, paternity, and shared parental leave and adoption policies. The questionnaire will end with an overall assessment score of the manager.

9
GhostBond 9 points ago +9 / -0

No one bans a sub with nothing to discuss.

3
GhostBond 3 points ago +3 / -0

What was it - 3.5% of people willing to protest - forces change?
What do you do when you're the other 96.5% of the population?

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

Feminism is always about getting women to complain about what women do, using "men" as a metaphor. It's like you don't want to say "our boss is an ass for asking us to do support on the weekend" directly so say something like "oh I heard that so and so's boss in another company had them do support on the weekends, how awful" as a conversation with someone else that your boss "just happens" overhear.

Men's standards aren't that high.

It's always women's standards that are off the chart.

You'll notice that men in movies basically never makes mistakes, they almost never show emotions, when they act sociopathically they always come out ahead and no one ever seems to call them out or hold a grudge against them on it.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you read the complaint? It's a list of the same 8 year olds arguing tactics.

What they mean: Women should inherently get promotions because they're women.
What they say: This one time a man got promoted and a woman didn't!

What they mean: Women should be paid for than men because they're women.
What they say: This one time a man got paid more than a woman!

They're literally just unabashadly power tripping.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

collective will be happy to kick men out of yet another industry

Someone pointed this out of a while back. These groups form and they need something to go after to maintain group coherency. If they run out the group dissolves. That's why they choose worse and worse targets over time because the need to continue the hate group going is stronger than the desire to not attack people who don't deserve it.

I would also point out though, that they talk fairly openly about their desire to simply squeeze more profits from women's labor, and the thing that's in their way is women having kids or children. Their most profitable scenario is one where women have to work because they have no other choice whether the job is miserable or not.

https://vimeo.com/80542212#t=46:28

Are we using the existing population to it's fullest potential? So for instance, half the population is women. Are japanese women being fully utilized and maximized in terms of contributing to the economy? And I think the answer is right now "no". It's roughly 65%-70% according to government statistics of japanese mothers drop out of the workforce after having their first child. That's alarmingly high. The good news with this new government that Japan has under prime minister Abe is that he's elevated this issue of female participation in the workforce to the national level.

Billions of dollars of research to make this happen.

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

The Mouse Utopia shows that when animals don't have to struggle to survive they choose not to survive.

It suggests when we have nothing to do and not purpose we self-implode.

"need to struggle to survive" wording is rather bullshit though, a lot of things seems to change if we're constantly struggling to survive - a lack of interest in sex, high order brain function shutting off, and eventually violent conflict with our competitors to destroy others using the resources we need.

Humans seem to be evolved for an environment - in my opinion - where we're doing about 50% of the max work we could be. It doesn't matter if it doesn't sound cool that seems to be what it is. To little to do and we self-destruct from lethargy, to much just to survive and we get violent and aggressive.

5
GhostBond 5 points ago +5 / -0

Our species evolved in an environment where 1 person could only collect so much stuff.

  • If you overhunted your meat rotted.
  • If you planted lots of crops and told other "f you these are mine" they'd just steal them while you weren't around.
  • The social limits of your power were limited to the people you were in front of.

The tribe of around 100 people - limited by physical reality is the environment we evolved in.

Things have changed to where 1 person can hold power over billions of people and we don't have much defense against it.

14
GhostBond 14 points ago +15 / -1

Yeah, pussy pass way understates it. This was their plan all along.

I think the phrase is "causing problems so you can move up by solving them".

1. Insinuate to women that if they join corporate life there's a big party.
2. Force groups to hire women.
3. Women show up and are like "where's the party? hey men you should start the party!"
4. Men oblige and start the party.
5. Older women declare company is full of "sexual harrassment" (like the kind you find at a frat party, wink wink) declares older woman must be installed as manager to fix problem.

At the last place I worked a woman got her job like this - her history was at her previous job she had outsourced half their stuff until they finally got rid of her because she had crippled the company enough that people started noticing. That's her background along with a "hate white men" philosophy that got her the job.

10
GhostBond 10 points ago +10 / -0

It's the super unusual virus who's infection targets are mysteriously exactly the same as my political beliefs.

7
GhostBond 7 points ago +7 / -0

She was promised bonuses based on theater sales, and told it would be released theater only. They then released it on both Disney+ and in theaters. So unless there's special clauses, they violated the contract to their (Disney's) financial benefit.

Yeah, it made a lot of sense. I was rather glad to hear it.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think this is really simple.

1. The Internet was invented and became widespread.
2. And who spent the most time socializing on the internet?
a. Nerdy guys
b. Bored Women

I would bet if you could look at who was driving various narratives when forums and facebook groups became popular it would look like one of those nature documentaries where the school of fish show up once a year and every predator within 100 miles comes to feed on them.

The CIA used to send in in-person agents to try to influence or take over countries. If caught, these agents faced torture and death. Now with the internet you could do the same thing from the comfort of your home or office, and the worst response is getting your current account blocked by whatever internet groups you were using, and you had to create a new one the next day.

In ecology, a feeding frenzy occurs when predators are overwhelmed by the amount of prey available. For example, a large school of fish can cause nearby sharks, such as the lemon shark, to enter into a feeding frenzy.[1] This can cause the sharks to go wild, biting anything that moves, including each other or anything else within biting range. Another functional explanation for feeding frenzy is competition amongst predators.[2] This term is most often used when referring to sharks or piranhas. It has also been used as a term within journalism.[3]

4
GhostBond 4 points ago +4 / -0

"The Science" -> I feel like I want this to be true really strongly

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

drunken cube crawl

Eh, I've seen how this actually comes about.
1. They imply to women that software dev is where the party is happening.
2. They force the company to hire women.
3. The women show up and are like "where's the party??" and encourage men to start one. Naturally a group of women encouraging men to start a party...what do you think normal men are going to do?
4. Women want to sit back and have the party come to them, then decide if they feel like it that day or not, or want to party with those people or not, so they get the men to come to them in a way they can join or not join depending on however they're feeling that day.

I've heard a phrase "going around creating problems, so you can be called into solve them" that's pretty close to what it looks like they're doing here.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

Where are you finding them talking about specifics?

I have what someone said was the complaint, and I can't find anything specific other than their "we hate gamers so hire us into a gaming company" and "women should always be paid more and promoted before men" generic stuff.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't know, reading through all the documents it seems fairly extensive.

I saw this ryan long video where he talks about "just talking fast enough and constantly switching the subject so eventually you just give in and believe what I say out of exhaustion" and that's what these remind me.

If it's this one:
https://aboutblaw.com/YJw

It's literally a collection of every female-centered manipulation they could find put into one doc.

This isn't one person or even a few trying to come forward, this is the conclusion of a 2 year investigation done by a third party.

"anti rape" organizations quickly run out of easy cases and needing to justify their existence they create more and more dubious "studies" and redefinitions because they need to keep claiming they're doing something.

"anti racism" organizations also ran out of real cases and needed to justify their existence, thus the endless broadening of "racism" and fanatical promotion of fake racism incidence.

"anti sexual harrassment" organizations....yada yada yada...

4
GhostBond 4 points ago +4 / -0

Apparently this is the complaint:
https://aboutblaw.com/YJw

They openly state their contempt and spite for men who play video games:

Male employees come into work...play video games for long periods during work

They hate gaming - which apparently they should be paid a lot at a game company and constantly given big promotion. The "evil men" who like gaming should be fired from the gaming company, and apparently no one who likes gaming actually let in.

There's more, but I run out of energy. It's every female-self-centered "give me more privilege because I'm a woman" collected in one document.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›