It really depends how one goes about trying to raise the birth rates. Remember, what ultimately gives women their power is their monopoly on sex. The only way to have kids is for women to have sex with men. This can have a reverse impact of lowering women's value if done properly.
You can be for higher birth rates and still be pro-men.
DeSantis and Trump are pretty much the same person. I'm not sure what the difference is.
Men need to start encouraging men to be more violent imo. The more women fear men, the better.
What morons. It's easy enough to know what the real meaning is if you look for it. The original says someone who lays with men refering to men laying with men or men having intimate relationships with men instead of women or HOMO fucking SEXUALs. Homosexual is just the modern way of saying what the Bible intended in modern words. There's no mistranslation.
Disney+ is one of the cheapest forms of entertainment. What she really should be telling people to do is stop shopping for new clothes they don't really need, stop dying your hair when your natural color is fine, stop traveling and stop eating out at restaurants. That's probably the 4 biggest waste of money people spend things on that they really shouldn't be.
Governments often get baby-making wrong. How do governments reduce birth rates? They "restrict and control" women. They don't pay women to have less kids, they tell women they have to have less kids or you will be penalized.
Often governments fail to do the reverse. They say to women, hey have more kids and we'll reward you. Women do not respond to this. If you want higher birth rates then you must force women into it. Have more kids OR WE WILL PUNISH YOU. Then you will get positive results.
Because the man is responsible for his woman. I realize most men have had their balls cutoff by the government and let their woman rule over them but in reality HE'S STUPPOSER TO KEEP HIS BITCH UNDER CONTROL. She attacked the person responsibility for the argument because if the man was doing his job he either would have beat up his own woman or already have beat the second woman before she attacked him. Unfortunately, in modern gynocratic societies, men have 0 control over women which is why men should stay clear of women entirely.
Ironically, White Supremacists have more in common with Black Supremacists than they do non-supremacist whites.
Ah yes, mass extermination by the 0.1% death rate Covid-19... lmao. That's like saying the flu is going to exterminate us. Oxford at the peak of covid hysteria actually released a nice little questionnaire to determine your probability of dying. I had a better chance of being struck by lightning twice in my lifetime then die from covid-19.
The UN could stop supporting the people who kill journalists for one. Second, the journalists could stop trying to undermine other governments in the world.
I also want to point something out. If celebrities have handlers then that means our masters who control us determined that celebrities were influential enough that they needed to ensure control of the celebrities. When do you think such a determination would have been made? Likely sometimes in the last 60 years at least. That means right now, our masters have likely determined that "online influencers" are the next "celebrity". All these influencers you follow on social media likely already have a handler or will be getting one very soon.
He's also Ellen Page's "personal trainer"... She met him before she transitioned. Hmm....
No, the correct term is in fact gynocetrism or gynocratic. Matriarchal implies women are the ones leading overtly but women lead covertly by guiding simps to do their bidding thus men choose their actions based on what pussy wants and thus the society is gynocratic not matriarchal. If women were overtly in positions of authority and leadership then it would be matriarchal.
Correct. Jews are the epitome of gynocentrism.
Elon made a miscalculation for sure. I don't think he fully realizes the extend of the power those who wish to push gynocentric values on us have. He thinks profit is still the main driver when it's actually the values as the main driver first.
Where's Aryan?
You're looking at things too black and white. There isn't really a team everyone is one. The lines of the "sides" are blurred. Musk isn't "on our side" but he's not necessarily in agreement with everyone on the other side.
Any "conservative" who doesn't home-school is just a liberal. Oh but I need two incomes to afford anything because cost of living is so high. Bullshit. You don't need a brand new vehicle for both of you. You don't need a fancy house in a super nice neighborhood. You don't need to live in a major city. You don't need to take 2 vacations a year. You don't need new clothes every couple weeks. People overspend. It's actually incredibly easy to support a family on one-income. The problem is that people want too much.
Ask a father if he thinks his kids and wife should all get a vote on how to spend his money. If he says no then he doesn't support democracy.
To be fair, most women are so ugly these days, they aren't worth putting your dick in.
This shit again. Used to see posts like this on here daily a year or two ago. What's actually going on is that women on birth control and engaging in masucline activities does in fact slightly change the physical appearance of women. Women as a collective have been promoting more masculine features in women and attacking feminine features. Young women start styling their makeup and trying to look more masculine. Stress from work leads to brows and resting bitch faces etc as opposed to the more happy ans glowing feminine look.
Overall, women's appearance is changing to be more masculine and less feminine. It doesn't mean every masucline woman is a tranny.
That's how you destabilize a system for sure.
This is something a lot of people haven't figured out yet. Communism to most people is just gynocentrism. Women want to emasculate and enslave men to the benefit of women. That is what communism is to most people.
Yeah, I think when all is said and done, DeSantis is the better politician for sure but I meant more in regards to their values/beliefs in what they would try to accomplish. They seem mostly the same. Although DeSantis might "get more done", he also would likely be far more willing to compromise to get things done while Trump was not so willing. The compromising isn't necessarily a good thing. Sometimes it's better to do nothing then make bad deals. I think overall between the two, it would probably still be a wash in terms of good they do for the country. I don't think either represent the radical change most people want.