RSS
Elizabeth Warren on how sexism sunk her campaign (just listen for eight seconds):
A bazillion, huh? Among women who participated in a Democrat primary or caucus through Super Tuesday, more than 4-in-5 voted for a man, while fewer than 1-in-5 voted for a woman. There is not a single state where anything close to a majority of Democrat women put their support behind a Democrat woman running for president*, despite there having been several of them to choose from:
Sweet home Alabama!
There is one female candidate remaining yet to suspend her campaign. By Democrat party rules established before the election season began, she is eligible to participate in the next debate which is scheduled to take place on the Ides of March. We’ll be looking forward to Warren vociferously demanding said woman not be shut out. For her to be, the party must stick to the arbitrary last minute rule change that has been made to restrict the debate to a pair of old white men.
Bernie Sanders will surely call on the DNC to follow its own rules and allow the woman to participate as well. She’s had his back time and time again when virtually no one else in the party has, and he has assured and reassured us that he is not a sexist himself. This will be a great opportunity for him to prove it.
Sardonicism off, it wouldn’t be a bad move for Joe Biden to call for Tulsi Gabbard to be allowed in. Anything Biden is able to do to reduce the amount of time he has to speak in a debate is good for him.
This would put Bernie Sanders in a tough spot. On principle and on account of all Gabbard has done for him, he should call for her inclusion. But her participation is tactically disastrous, since she’ll reduce both his and Biden’s speaking times and, to the extent that she is able to steal any votes from the two of them, they will primarily come from Sanders’ anti-war flank.
Fortunately for Sanders, the DNC isn’t going to allow her on the stage no matter what Biden or Sanders say. The last thing the War Party wants to hear is the phrase “regime change wars” again.
* Exit polling was not conducted in Utah or Arkansas. Figures for the Super Tuesday states that still had yet to report full results at the time of this posting were extrapolated from the results that have been reported up to this point.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Left-wing women make better women than conservative women, who tend to be roastie bulldykes with some kind of grudge against something, and also a history of stimulant abuse. Think about it, no normal woman would be a conservative.
BTW, I'm guessing 95% of BullDykes vote left-wing. Take a survey of some hard-core Indigo Girls fans and get back to me.Replies: @JohnPlywood
That clip of Elizabeth Warren has caused me to become highly sexist. That’s OK, because I won’t be voting for any of the Socialist clowns of the Blue Squad of The Party.
Tulsi is another idiot Socialist, but I agree that it would be great if she were let into the debates. I think you are correct in knowing it won’t go like that, though.
OK, John, per your advice, I thought about it … for a second and a quarter. Moms have every reason to be a Conservative.
BTW, I’m guessing 95% of BullDykes vote left-wing. Take a survey of some hard-core Indigo Girls fans and get back to me.
Tulsi is another idiot Socialist, but I agree that it would be great if she were let into the debates. I think you are correct in knowing it won't go like that, though.Replies: @nebulafox
Warren had a deeply schoolmarmish vibe. It’s not hard to see why non-self loathing men with a modicum of testosterone were turned off, even within her own party.
(We’ll use the term “men” very, very loosely here, in order to try and describe the Ezra Klein types…)
Don't rap his knuckles, AE. He was talking about the bad schoolmarms.
the Ezra Klein types…)
I'm about half way through his latest book and it is excellent.
BTW, I'm guessing 95% of BullDykes vote left-wing. Take a survey of some hard-core Indigo Girls fans and get back to me.Replies: @JohnPlywood
Why? What does mom accomplish by being conservative that dad couldn’t? That’s what I always ask these people who want to try to push women in to doing things that they naturally won’t. Exactly what are they providing that the man couldn’t?
Besides, mom can’t be conservative and conservative at the same time. Historically, women were discouraged from having political opinions or ideologies of any kind, and female voting is only as recent as the previous century, a period of mass social upheavel. The conservative thing is for mom to know nothing. At least leftism is more consistent with female nature.
Conservative women are like leftist males, or men who have indoor plants. They’re fucking weird, and a lot of people here apparently have a duplicit tolerance for them, on the mistaken assumption that it’s going to make them look good, or strengthen whatever ideology they belong to. It’s not, and you’re really going against the grain, in a garish and unamusing way, trying to make nature fit your ideology, instead of the other way around. The ideal woman is an SJW, preferably nonwhite.
You’re a well known nitwit.
Obviously, 95% of the people on this website would be considered nitwits or loons by the general public; which is also swamped by a myriad of mental disease; and most people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent their activity from being discovered by friends, family, colleagues etc. Your lazy ass is going to have to try harder than this.Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @YetAnotherAnon, @Audacious Epigone
Misogynist is a word used by the liberal left to denigrate the opposition. It’s so unbecoming when used by an independent such as yourself.
Even women that wanted a female candidate can smell a fraud.
She never came across as genuine or caring. That was really her main problem.
For all his faults Bernie comes across as caring about people.
Warren comes across as a politician and people are sick of that. Then there is all the fake indian stuff which would have sunk her in a debate with Trump.
Lol.
Sweet home Alabama!
In 2018, Alabama re-elected Kay Ivey as Governor with 60% of the vote. She defeated 4 men in the Republican primary with 56% of the vote, eliminating the need for a run-off by going over 50%.
This is a statement from her from a couple of days ago:
The execution took place at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. Woods, 43, was officially pronounced dead at 9:01 p.m.
But we won’t vote for Warren because she’s a woman, LOL.
It occurred to me that the latest wave of feminism (I’ve forgotten the number) is purely about power. Years ago, feminists would make the argument that women, by the nature of being a woman, might make better decisions. You don’t hear that argument anymore.
Wait, I thought that "women ruin everything", or at least that is/was the battle cry of the manosphere/patriarchs. So why are conservative men in particular voting for a woman to lead their state? Did not these fine Southern gentlemen forget the lessons of their forefathers?
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/52207/12-cruel-anti-suffragette-cartoons
Warren had a deeply schoolmarmish vibe.
Don’t rap his knuckles, AE. He was talking about the bad schoolmarms.
the Ezra Klein types…)
I’m about half way through his latest book and it is excellent.
Tulsi-hating liberal Democrats are going to lose their minds when she runs as an independent, gets 2% while Gropey loses the battleground states by Hillary-esque margins.
Not only a schoolmarm, but a “make shit up, I CAN’T be wrong” vibe and one of a person allowing herself petty ethical missteps to get ahead. That’s a schoolchild.
If it were well known, your small circle of Catholics wouldn’t have to show up in every thread to call me a “nitwit” or “insane”. The fact of the matter is that I am the most influential voice in tbe comment sections right now; effortless comments like “you are crazy” will never change that.
Obviously, 95% of the people on this website would be considered nitwits or loons by the general public; which is also swamped by a myriad of mental disease; and most people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent their activity from being discovered by friends, family, colleagues etc. Your lazy ass is going to have to try harder than this.
So congratulations: your claim is technically correct, right here, right now, at this particular instant.
How does it feel, being right about something? Must be kind of exhilarating, since it's never happened to you before.
Obviously, 95% of the people on this website would be considered nitwits or loons by the general public; which is also swamped by a myriad of mental disease; and most people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent their activity from being discovered by friends, family, colleagues etc. Your lazy ass is going to have to try harder than this.Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @YetAnotherAnon, @Audacious Epigone
Well, you are literally right about being the most influential voice in the comments section /right now/. With only 13 comments logged on this thread, three of them are yours, and another four or so are about you.
So congratulations: your claim is technically correct, right here, right now, at this particular instant.
How does it feel, being right about something? Must be kind of exhilarating, since it’s never happened to you before.
Obviously, 95% of the people on this website would be considered nitwits or loons by the general public; which is also swamped by a myriad of mental disease; and most people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent their activity from being discovered by friends, family, colleagues etc. Your lazy ass is going to have to try harder than this.Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @YetAnotherAnon, @Audacious Epigone
“I am the most influential voice in tbe comment sections right now”
Didn’t crazy people used to think they were Napoleon?
“effortless comments like “you are crazy” will never change that.”
But you ARE crazy, or your stated ideas are. I brand thee troll, and I still think we need a “cretin” button. What with you and Coronavinus, I’m using my allowance too quickly.
Pot, meet kettle. YOU were the one you agreed with this statement--"We may have to cull/kill children and all persons under forty years age to save the human race" in reference to how the "Corona19 Virus is carried by youngsters under the age of forty with no ill effect, but they infect older people".Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Kratoklastes
“But you ARE crazy, or your stated ideas are.”
Pot, meet kettle. YOU were the one you agreed with this statement–“We may have to cull/kill children and all persons under forty years age to save the human race” in reference to how the “Corona19 Virus is carried by youngsters under the age of forty with no ill effect, but they infect older people”.
“In 2018, Alabama re-elected Kay Ivey as Governor with 60% of the vote. ”
Wait, I thought that “women ruin everything”, or at least that is/was the battle cry of the manosphere/patriarchs. So why are conservative men in particular voting for a woman to lead their state? Did not these fine Southern gentlemen forget the lessons of their forefathers?
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/52207/12-cruel-anti-suffragette-cartoons
It will be interesting to see what kind of third party candidates show up in the general election in the effort to pull votes away from Trump.
Koch brothers bring your money and come on down!Replies: @Audacious Epigone
Without an explanation as to why, you are just another balding fat guy in thick rimmed glasses saying “you are crazy, that is crazy”, like a b-rate actor in a shitty 1960s television episode… But unfortunately for you, words like “insane’” and “nitwit” are meaningless today.
What NPCs like yourself don’t seem to realize is that this website is a place where hardcore individuals go because they want something other that the standard fare discussion you would expect to hear on “Good Morning America” or “Fox & Friends”. If people here wanted or cared about the opinions of “non-crazy” people, they would have gone to a Toastmasters conference or an American Legion bingo hall, or some such cuck association.
I have pretty much demolished your entire worldview over the past few months around here. Notice how the comment sections and even some columnists started singing to my tune on genetics/politics/race, etc a few months ago.
Pot, meet kettle. YOU were the one you agreed with this statement--"We may have to cull/kill children and all persons under forty years age to save the human race" in reference to how the "Corona19 Virus is carried by youngsters under the age of forty with no ill effect, but they infect older people".Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Kratoklastes
Thanks for that gem. YetAnotherAnon, The Germ Theory of Disease, etc, would blow an aorta if somebody doxxed them, and then start calling their friends and family members, in a froth of sweat, to profusely apologize/deny all the outlandish shit they said or agreed with here, before those parties even found out they were doxxed. Basically what they have is an effeminate psychology that is obsessed with looking “normie” and “being part of the crowd” even though their behavior and life history are about as normal as the average pipe sucking crackwhore.
When these guys get doxxed expect to see a bunch of really humiliating stuff, like having been a lifelong Leftist prior to getting robbed/cucked by a Taiwanese immigrant, being a paternally Jewish antisemite, being a member of the #MeToo movement, being a Christian environmentalist or some such faggotry, owning a roundandbrown.com account while donating to Stormfront, etc.
It will be interesting to see what kind of third party candidates show up in the general election in the effort to pull votes away from Trump.
Koch brothers bring your money and come on down!
People acted like they forgot it, but the didn’t: Liz got AA preferences to Harvard while being a Massachusetts white-woman. She filled out the paperwork and everything. She then publically doubled down on a lie that a mirror should have told her was probably quite suspect. She could have had a private test done, but chose to go with a dramatic PR-stunt approach. These arent qualities people generally look for in a leader.
I think Warren’s reflexive response was to go full-on-woke to deflect some embarrassment and appeal to Bernie-leaning-collegeiates. It made her less likeable to economic voters who may have considered her. Nobody likes a scold. The ease with which the humorous jabs at her Native American claims stuck in the mind (Lieawatha, Fauxcahontus, Campaign Trail of Tears, Old Grey Beaver, 1/1024) didnt help. She could be vunerable in her Senate re-election. Nobody likes her personna anymore, and that wasnt always the case.
Misogyny is definitely a real thing, though of course the word is much abused nowadays.
As far as Warren is concerned, she strikes me as a complete sell-out. She obviously understands at least some of our problems, but has just stopped talking about it for $ome rea$on.
Lizzie Borden Warren is a blood ancestor of a Tennessee militia fighter and she has grit in her, but she is behaving like a mentally deranged distaff dope with all this so-called “sexism” talk and it is really annoying.
Michael Tracey has weakened considerably and he has been unable to stop himself from replying to the Warren woman distaffers with undisguised scorn and contempt. Michael Tracey has revealed the Warren Women Staffers to be boneheaded tarts who screwed up the Warren presidential campaign with over the top bird brain female crud and disgustingly large piles of politically correct nonsense and schoolmarm slop not fit for an upper middle class harpy harridan on an alcoholic bender, let alone a regular lady voter of great beauty and spirit and charm and vivaciousness.
These horrible Warren Women Campaign Staffers who wrecked Warren’s campaign were egged on in their nastiness by the female ancestor of a proud and brave Tennessee militia man. That baby boomer woman named Elizabeth Warren is solely responsible for all the viciousness and hatred and shrieking madness that was every female worker who took part in the Warren campaign.
It seems that the violently deranged females who infested the Lizzie Warren presidential campaign were determined to provide a display of ineptitude and outright criminal stupidity that would exceed the boneheaded dumbbell nonsense of that Vermont/New Hampshire idiot named Robby Mook. Mook was the high IQ bonehead campaign manager who steered the Hillary Clinton campaign right into the frigging iceberg without any remorse or care.
“Hold my beer,” the moron females of the Warren presidential campaign said to Robby Mook, “we can be even more moronic and stupid than you.”
Michael Tracey has sacrificed for the rest of us by finally giving the dipshit damsels of the Warren campaign the telling off they sorely needed. Michael Tracy gave up his composure and peace of mind to speak up for the rest of us who have had enough crap from these brain dead females who ran the Warren campaign right off a damn cliff.
Please, Michael Tracey, you’ve done enough, cease your valiant efforts, the battle is over and you deserve some well-earned rest, and God knows you displayed tremendous restraint in your accurate descriptions of those nasty tarts who destroyed the Warren campaign.
I will vote for a WOMAN who represents my worldview and I wish I were a Frenchy so I could vote for beautiful and smart Frenchwoman MARINE LE PEN! Dammit!
I must dedicate this next bit to the brave and proud independent journalist Michael Tracey who momentarily gave up his peace of mind to descend into battle against the demonic harpies and harridans of the evil Warren presidential campaign.
I wrote this in September of 2019 about demonic possession and baby boomer harpy Lizzie Borden Warren:
Now watch me try to exorcise the demons from Elizabeth Warren:
JEZEBEL! Spirit of destruction! Spirit of grief! I bound you with chains of iron!
Lessen Your Hold on Elizabeth Warren and come out of her now!
OUT!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT in the name of Jesus!
OUT JEZEBEL!
Elizabeth Warren was intended by God to be a righteous woman!
Jezebel you have no right there, Elizabeth Warren’s husband is the head of the house! Hey, he opened Elizabeth Warren’s beer bottle for her, so he seems like a nice guy!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
https://www.unz.com/anepigone/becky-against-our-boy/#comment-3460487
Examples of Michael Tracey bravely confronting the monstrous harpies of the Lizzie Borden Warren campaign:
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1235081227155034112?s=20
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1235756732120477696?s=20
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1236377001990270978?s=20
Actually, I find that the force for conservatism, conservatism in life, old-fashioned, don’t fix it if it ain’t broke, the status quo is the way to go conservatism, is women. Keepers of the household and all that.
Historically? Keepers of nothing. If women are a force for anything in your household, that is not a conservative household and you need to stop pretending to be conservative and corrupting the conservative mission with your rootless cosmopolitan ways.
Keepers of the household — in 21st century cuck households.
Historically? Keepers of nothing. If women are a force for anything in your household, that is not a conservative household and you need to stop pretending to be conservative and corrupting the conservative mission with your rootless cosmopolitan ways.
Michael Tracey has weakened considerably and he has been unable to stop himself from replying to the Warren woman distaffers with undisguised scorn and contempt. Michael Tracey has revealed the Warren Women Staffers to be boneheaded tarts who screwed up the Warren presidential campaign with over the top bird brain female crud and disgustingly large piles of politically correct nonsense and schoolmarm slop not fit for an upper middle class harpy harridan on an alcoholic bender, let alone a regular lady voter of great beauty and spirit and charm and vivaciousness.
These horrible Warren Women Campaign Staffers who wrecked Warren's campaign were egged on in their nastiness by the female ancestor of a proud and brave Tennessee militia man. That baby boomer woman named Elizabeth Warren is solely responsible for all the viciousness and hatred and shrieking madness that was every female worker who took part in the Warren campaign.
It seems that the violently deranged females who infested the Lizzie Warren presidential campaign were determined to provide a display of ineptitude and outright criminal stupidity that would exceed the boneheaded dumbbell nonsense of that Vermont/New Hampshire idiot named Robby Mook. Mook was the high IQ bonehead campaign manager who steered the Hillary Clinton campaign right into the frigging iceberg without any remorse or care.
"Hold my beer," the moron females of the Warren presidential campaign said to Robby Mook, "we can be even more moronic and stupid than you."
Michael Tracey has sacrificed for the rest of us by finally giving the dipshit damsels of the Warren campaign the telling off they sorely needed. Michael Tracy gave up his composure and peace of mind to speak up for the rest of us who have had enough crap from these brain dead females who ran the Warren campaign right off a damn cliff.
Please, Michael Tracey, you've done enough, cease your valiant efforts, the battle is over and you deserve some well-earned rest, and God knows you displayed tremendous restraint in your accurate descriptions of those nasty tarts who destroyed the Warren campaign.
I will vote for a WOMAN who represents my worldview and I wish I were a Frenchy so I could vote for beautiful and smart Frenchwoman MARINE LE PEN! Dammit!
I must dedicate this next bit to the brave and proud independent journalist Michael Tracey who momentarily gave up his peace of mind to descend into battle against the demonic harpies and harridans of the evil Warren presidential campaign.
I wrote this in September of 2019 about demonic possession and baby boomer harpy Lizzie Borden Warren:
Now watch me try to exorcise the demons from Elizabeth Warren:
JEZEBEL! Spirit of destruction! Spirit of grief! I bound you with chains of iron!
Lessen Your Hold on Elizabeth Warren and come out of her now!
OUT!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT in the name of Jesus!
OUT JEZEBEL!
Elizabeth Warren was intended by God to be a righteous woman!
Jezebel you have no right there, Elizabeth Warren’s husband is the head of the house! Hey, he opened Elizabeth Warren’s beer bottle for her, so he seems like a nice guy!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
https://youtu.be/gdHSurqqnmYReplies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt
I forgot to provide a link for my comment from September of 2019, here it is:
https://www.unz.com/anepigone/becky-against-our-boy/#comment-3460487
Examples of Michael Tracey bravely confronting the monstrous harpies of the Lizzie Borden Warren campaign:
3LM: Liberal ladies are the literal misogynists
Not to endorse everything you’ve said here, but I do rather suspect that some of the voices who advocated loudly on this site for more birth control for the poor, are themselves guilty of having suborned an abortion in their past.
The Lizzie Borden Warren Women Will Never Get Their Minds Back. It breaks my heart and fills me with great sorrow and ineffable regret to say so.
We must sadly presume that the mentally deranged distaffers who ran the Warren Democrat Party presidential primary campaign into the ground are lost to all of us. What can we do? We all loved them and they slipped into madness; it happens. We must carry on regardless with love in our hearts for the blessed memory of what these lovely ladies were and will always be in our hearts.
It could be a good government worker jobs program to build maximum security loony bins to safely and humanely contain all the raving and shrieking harpies of the Warren campaign. God bless their lost minds and souls we loved them so! And we still love them!
How much box wine and vodka have the Warren women slugged down trying to drown their hatred and anger at all the other beautiful and lovely ladies who voted in the Democrat Party presidential primary for some other candidate instead of Lizzie Borden Warren. Violent harpies Hell bent on retaliation against their fellow women for having the temerity to reject the tempest tossed see you next tuesday terror of the Warren Wacko Weird Sisters nightmare.
Boil Boil Toil and Trouble
Warren’s campaign reduced to box wine harpy bonehead rubble
By the opening of the box wine and rum
Something sexist says Warren this way comes
Safe to assume Warren won’t be the VP pick? My one forlorn hope in this election is that the establishment won’t promote her to a meaningless position where I will hear her shrill voice more often than I heard it before.
Actually, I am just kidding – I don’t want her to become president through Joe’s age-related demise either – but more for the optics than anything else.
Especially when they’re close to home.
Amy lost to Liz in Iowa, where her father’s newspaper has wide distribution and the family name was familiar.
Liz lost to Amy in New Hampshire, most of the voters of which are in Boston’s (i.e., Cambridge’s) media market.
The more Democratic women knew about these candidates, the more Democratic women distrusted them. And preferred older, whiter men.
It would be interesting to the trends over time. I noticed that Montana was not in your list as I recall Montana was one of the first states to repeal any barriers preventing women from voting.
“Actually, I find that the force for conservatism, conservatism in life, old-fashioned, don’t fix it if it ain’t broke, the status quo is the way to go conservatism, is women. Keepers of the household and all that.”
The argument about whether women could was not about being old fashioned. It was simple that the decisions by government effected them as well and they should have a voice to impact the same. And as women entered the workforce in larger and lager number the argument had some force, but more importantly, it challenged some of the old practices in which some men did leverage the financial issues barring women. That women became a voting block helped loosen those practices.
It did not overturn traditional family or home making. That was shifted by economic forces and war. The politics of war was also a primary influencer on the issue of voting. It’s important to note that the battle over women voting was as much between women as it was among men. That is really evident on the issue of prohibition becoming law and its repeal.
As far as Warren is concerned, she strikes me as a complete sell-out. She obviously understands at least some of our problems, but has just stopped talking about it for $ome rea$on.
https://www.amazon.com/Two-Income-Trap-Elizabeth-Warren/dp/B0076AQQ6EReplies: @nebulafox, @Michael Tomac, @MBlanc46
It is a spectacularly stupid idea to apply the sexist (or racist) label to everything you don’t like in politics or culture. Why? Because eventually, people are going to tune you out and become indifferent to the real stuff. You can’t simultaneously make something beyond the pale in polite conversation and omnipresent, at least not indefinitely.
And that’s not good: I think most people agree that real, genuine sexism (or racism) sucks. But when you use it as a cheap explanation constantly, don’t be surprised if the public gets inoculated over time. Warren lost because she was a bad candidate, plain and simple. The attempts of the MSNBC crowd to deny that aren’t helping their credibility outside their sector of the Democratic Party.
Pot, meet kettle. YOU were the one you agreed with this statement--"We may have to cull/kill children and all persons under forty years age to save the human race" in reference to how the "Corona19 Virus is carried by youngsters under the age of forty with no ill effect, but they infect older people".Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Kratoklastes
KEK.
As far as Warren is concerned, she strikes me as a complete sell-out. She obviously understands at least some of our problems, but has just stopped talking about it for $ome rea$on.
https://www.amazon.com/Two-Income-Trap-Elizabeth-Warren/dp/B0076AQQ6EReplies: @nebulafox, @Michael Tomac, @MBlanc46
She actually had a lot of good points, especially in the book she wrote “The Two Income Trap”, but unfortunately she started drifting toward woke politics, which was the beginning of the end for her campaign.
Identity politics for Whites is bad, because it would mean less cheap labor. Identity politics for men is also disfavored because they don't want men resisting efforts to offshore their productive work and recruit them for death and dismemberment in forever wars.
Hence, my particular contempt for Warren. She is not a misguided idealist but a cynical, pandering sellout.Replies: @dfordoom
I’m sure that top men such as Evan McMullen, David French and Mitt Romney are all tanned, rested and ready. Top men.
https://twitter.com/BenBraddock67/status/1235699680618504193
“It is a spectacularly stupid idea to apply the sexist (or racist) label to everything you don’t like in politics or culture. Why? Because eventually, people are going to tune you out and become indifferent to the real stuff. You can’t simultaneously make something beyond the pale in polite conversation and omnipresent, at least not indefinitel.”
Not a feminist, not liberal and I think that is correct when it comes to the general public. But if you have a college education and have taken courses in critical thought. Then you get the argument regarding structural inequities.
But I agree, trying to translate that into a language that the general public can comprehend — would be a dubious enterprise for the public.
Michael Tracey has weakened considerably and he has been unable to stop himself from replying to the Warren woman distaffers with undisguised scorn and contempt. Michael Tracey has revealed the Warren Women Staffers to be boneheaded tarts who screwed up the Warren presidential campaign with over the top bird brain female crud and disgustingly large piles of politically correct nonsense and schoolmarm slop not fit for an upper middle class harpy harridan on an alcoholic bender, let alone a regular lady voter of great beauty and spirit and charm and vivaciousness.
These horrible Warren Women Campaign Staffers who wrecked Warren's campaign were egged on in their nastiness by the female ancestor of a proud and brave Tennessee militia man. That baby boomer woman named Elizabeth Warren is solely responsible for all the viciousness and hatred and shrieking madness that was every female worker who took part in the Warren campaign.
It seems that the violently deranged females who infested the Lizzie Warren presidential campaign were determined to provide a display of ineptitude and outright criminal stupidity that would exceed the boneheaded dumbbell nonsense of that Vermont/New Hampshire idiot named Robby Mook. Mook was the high IQ bonehead campaign manager who steered the Hillary Clinton campaign right into the frigging iceberg without any remorse or care.
"Hold my beer," the moron females of the Warren presidential campaign said to Robby Mook, "we can be even more moronic and stupid than you."
Michael Tracey has sacrificed for the rest of us by finally giving the dipshit damsels of the Warren campaign the telling off they sorely needed. Michael Tracy gave up his composure and peace of mind to speak up for the rest of us who have had enough crap from these brain dead females who ran the Warren campaign right off a damn cliff.
Please, Michael Tracey, you've done enough, cease your valiant efforts, the battle is over and you deserve some well-earned rest, and God knows you displayed tremendous restraint in your accurate descriptions of those nasty tarts who destroyed the Warren campaign.
I will vote for a WOMAN who represents my worldview and I wish I were a Frenchy so I could vote for beautiful and smart Frenchwoman MARINE LE PEN! Dammit!
I must dedicate this next bit to the brave and proud independent journalist Michael Tracey who momentarily gave up his peace of mind to descend into battle against the demonic harpies and harridans of the evil Warren presidential campaign.
I wrote this in September of 2019 about demonic possession and baby boomer harpy Lizzie Borden Warren:
Now watch me try to exorcise the demons from Elizabeth Warren:
JEZEBEL! Spirit of destruction! Spirit of grief! I bound you with chains of iron!
Lessen Your Hold on Elizabeth Warren and come out of her now!
OUT!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT in the name of Jesus!
OUT JEZEBEL!
Elizabeth Warren was intended by God to be a righteous woman!
Jezebel you have no right there, Elizabeth Warren’s husband is the head of the house! Hey, he opened Elizabeth Warren’s beer bottle for her, so he seems like a nice guy!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
OUT JEZEBEL!
OUT!
https://youtu.be/gdHSurqqnmYReplies: @Charles Pewitt, @Charles Pewitt
I should have written “…BLOOD DESCENDENT of a Tennessee militia fighter…”
“These horrible Warren Women Campaign Staffers who wrecked Warren’s campaign were egged on in their nastiness by the female ancestor of a proud and brave Tennessee militia man. That baby boomer woman named Elizabeth Warren is solely responsible for all the viciousness and hatred and shrieking madness that was every female worker who took part in the Warren campaign.”
I should have written “…female DESCENDENT of a proud and brave Tennessee militia man.”
At least Tiny Duck has the saving grace of producing a laugh, or at least a chuckle.
As far as Warren is concerned, she strikes me as a complete sell-out. She obviously understands at least some of our problems, but has just stopped talking about it for $ome rea$on.
https://www.amazon.com/Two-Income-Trap-Elizabeth-Warren/dp/B0076AQQ6EReplies: @nebulafox, @Michael Tomac, @MBlanc46
I suspect that there is a lot more misandry in the world than there is misogyny. The difference must be a matter of orders of magnitude. My view is that people are entitled to their hatreds. A woman doesn’t like men simply because they’re men? Fine. Her business. Just don’t bother me with it. But for those of you that think that misogyny must be extirpated, get back to me when you’re as serious about misandry. I won’t be holding my breath.
The fact is that, whether you agree with feminism or not (and to what extent), the kind of hatred you see in the manosphere is simply not to be found.
And remember, as manospherians are fond of pointing out, criticism is not hatred. Hatred is criticism plus dismissal, that is, the notion that the object of your criticism is not only erring, but so incorrigible that incapacitation is the only solution. With very rare exceptions, feminists do not advocate for disenfranchisement or exclusion of men.
To the contrary, mainstream feminism holds that "toxic masculinity" is learned rather than innate, and can therefore be unlearned.
That said, I'm not interested in peering into men's souls, either. If they are determined to hate, they can't be reasoned with. Just look at John Plywood. He can't decide whether to hate women for being liberal or to hate them for being conservative. All I demand is the right to expose their stupidity (free speech).Replies: @dfordoom, @MBlanc46, @JohnPlywood
Men blame women. Women blame men. Blacks blame whites. Whites blame blacks. Liberals blame conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals. Jews are popular objects of hate on the dissident right. Christians are popular objects of hate on the Cultural Left. Homosexuals hate Christians and heterosexuals. Trannies hate Christians and they hate old school lesbians. Environmentalists (who are almost exclusively white) blame poor white people. Middle-class people hate the poor. The poor hate the rich.
These are all symptoms of a sick sad society in which everyone blames someone else for their problems.
As to misandry, it's mostly only feminists who really hate men (because feminists worship everything about men and want to be men). Feminists also hate women who like being women. There's an enormous amount of misogny inherent in feminism. But most women don't hate men.
And as to misogyny among men, that's largely a phenomenon of the far right. It only seems common if you spend too much time on UR. There are men who grow to hate individual women because they've been treated badly by that woman, just as there are women who hate individual men because they've been treated badly by that man.Replies: @MBlanc46, @AaronB, @showmethereal
What misandry? I seriously don’t see it. White men are hated, of course, but not because they’re men, but because they’re White.
The fact is that, whether you agree with feminism or not (and to what extent), the kind of hatred you see in the manosphere is simply not to be found.
And remember, as manospherians are fond of pointing out, criticism is not hatred. Hatred is criticism plus dismissal, that is, the notion that the object of your criticism is not only erring, but so incorrigible that incapacitation is the only solution. With very rare exceptions, feminists do not advocate for disenfranchisement or exclusion of men.
To the contrary, mainstream feminism holds that “toxic masculinity” is learned rather than innate, and can therefore be unlearned.
That said, I’m not interested in peering into men’s souls, either. If they are determined to hate, they can’t be reasoned with. Just look at John Plywood. He can’t decide whether to hate women for being liberal or to hate them for being conservative. All I demand is the right to expose their stupidity (free speech).
Look at Elizabeth Warren. She has convinced herself that if only she were a man she would be president. Hence the rage. She wanted a male political career. Her life has been based on trying to achieve male things.
In the case of hardcore feminists it's a kind of mental illness.
Luckily most women are not like that.Replies: @Rosie, @showmethereal
And therein precisely lies the problem. The plutocracy doesn’t like bread and butter issues. They like identity politics, and then only insofar as it serves their interests.
Identity politics for Whites is bad, because it would mean less cheap labor. Identity politics for men is also disfavored because they don’t want men resisting efforts to offshore their productive work and recruit them for death and dismemberment in forever wars.
Hence, my particular contempt for Warren. She is not a misguided idealist but a cynical, pandering sellout.
There’s simply a lot of hate in the West. People can’t figure out why they’re so unhappy and so dissatisfied. So they look for someone to blame and someone to hate.
Men blame women. Women blame men. Blacks blame whites. Whites blame blacks. Liberals blame conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals. Jews are popular objects of hate on the dissident right. Christians are popular objects of hate on the Cultural Left. Homosexuals hate Christians and heterosexuals. Trannies hate Christians and they hate old school lesbians. Environmentalists (who are almost exclusively white) blame poor white people. Middle-class people hate the poor. The poor hate the rich.
These are all symptoms of a sick sad society in which everyone blames someone else for their problems.
As to misandry, it’s mostly only feminists who really hate men (because feminists worship everything about men and want to be men). Feminists also hate women who like being women. There’s an enormous amount of misogny inherent in feminism. But most women don’t hate men.
And as to misogyny among men, that’s largely a phenomenon of the far right. It only seems common if you spend too much time on UR. There are men who grow to hate individual women because they’ve been treated badly by that woman, just as there are women who hate individual men because they’ve been treated badly by that man.
The fact is that, whether you agree with feminism or not (and to what extent), the kind of hatred you see in the manosphere is simply not to be found.
And remember, as manospherians are fond of pointing out, criticism is not hatred. Hatred is criticism plus dismissal, that is, the notion that the object of your criticism is not only erring, but so incorrigible that incapacitation is the only solution. With very rare exceptions, feminists do not advocate for disenfranchisement or exclusion of men.
To the contrary, mainstream feminism holds that "toxic masculinity" is learned rather than innate, and can therefore be unlearned.
That said, I'm not interested in peering into men's souls, either. If they are determined to hate, they can't be reasoned with. Just look at John Plywood. He can't decide whether to hate women for being liberal or to hate them for being conservative. All I demand is the right to expose their stupidity (free speech).Replies: @dfordoom, @MBlanc46, @JohnPlywood
Feminism is based on the idea that men are awesome and that everything male is to be admired. Feminists want to live like men and they want male careers and they want to live their emotional and sexual lives like men. They worship the masculine ideal. When they realise that they are actually female they react with rage. That’s what feminist rage comes down to.
Look at Elizabeth Warren. She has convinced herself that if only she were a man she would be president. Hence the rage. She wanted a male political career. Her life has been based on trying to achieve male things.
In the case of hardcore feminists it’s a kind of mental illness.
Luckily most women are not like that.
Identity politics for Whites is bad, because it would mean less cheap labor. Identity politics for men is also disfavored because they don't want men resisting efforts to offshore their productive work and recruit them for death and dismemberment in forever wars.
Hence, my particular contempt for Warren. She is not a misguided idealist but a cynical, pandering sellout.Replies: @dfordoom
Yes, I agree. They’re terrified that if people start thinking about bread and butter issues they’ll start questioning the current economic system that exists solely for the benefit of the plutocracy.
Agreed. But she played the cynical pandering game badly. Joe Biden has been playing that game for half a century. He’s very very good at it. Warren was an amateur coming up against a seasoned professional. The amateur will always lose.
Look at Elizabeth Warren. She has convinced herself that if only she were a man she would be president. Hence the rage. She wanted a male political career. Her life has been based on trying to achieve male things.
In the case of hardcore feminists it's a kind of mental illness.
Luckily most women are not like that.Replies: @Rosie, @showmethereal
This is one of those strange points of agreement between radical feminists and the manosphere. The latter say that “men built civilization” and such things, implicitly claiming that only men’s work is important (i.e. confers rights.)
I've known a lot of lesbian radical feminists over the years and most of them have liked male company a great deal. Oddly enough most of them enjoyed sleeping with men as well, although they didn't like other members of the sisterhood finding out about their little lapses.
The sad thing is that there really are very few feminists who actually want to celebrate femaleness.
Such as building things. Conversely, women have a uterus - which enables them to carry life into the world. That is something a man cannot do. Without the female womb the human species cannot survive. Men's emotional make up often allows him the ability to make difficult decisions from a pragmatic view. Females emotional make up allows them to care for all members of the family and greater society - which ensures cohesion.
Men and women are not better than the other. We simply have different roles to play.
Feminists are not arguing with men... They are arguing against God.
The fact is that, whether you agree with feminism or not (and to what extent), the kind of hatred you see in the manosphere is simply not to be found.
And remember, as manospherians are fond of pointing out, criticism is not hatred. Hatred is criticism plus dismissal, that is, the notion that the object of your criticism is not only erring, but so incorrigible that incapacitation is the only solution. With very rare exceptions, feminists do not advocate for disenfranchisement or exclusion of men.
To the contrary, mainstream feminism holds that "toxic masculinity" is learned rather than innate, and can therefore be unlearned.
That said, I'm not interested in peering into men's souls, either. If they are determined to hate, they can't be reasoned with. Just look at John Plywood. He can't decide whether to hate women for being liberal or to hate them for being conservative. All I demand is the right to expose their stupidity (free speech).Replies: @dfordoom, @MBlanc46, @JohnPlywood
Yeah, you just don’t see it. Why am I not surprised?
Men blame women. Women blame men. Blacks blame whites. Whites blame blacks. Liberals blame conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals. Jews are popular objects of hate on the dissident right. Christians are popular objects of hate on the Cultural Left. Homosexuals hate Christians and heterosexuals. Trannies hate Christians and they hate old school lesbians. Environmentalists (who are almost exclusively white) blame poor white people. Middle-class people hate the poor. The poor hate the rich.
These are all symptoms of a sick sad society in which everyone blames someone else for their problems.
As to misandry, it's mostly only feminists who really hate men (because feminists worship everything about men and want to be men). Feminists also hate women who like being women. There's an enormous amount of misogny inherent in feminism. But most women don't hate men.
And as to misogyny among men, that's largely a phenomenon of the far right. It only seems common if you spend too much time on UR. There are men who grow to hate individual women because they've been treated badly by that woman, just as there are women who hate individual men because they've been treated badly by that man.Replies: @MBlanc46, @AaronB, @showmethereal
There’s much to what you say, d. Generalized hatred and scapegoat seeking. As far as only feminists hating men qua men, I agree. My only emendation would be that all, or almost all, women are feminists.
I don't think there are many non-white feminists. The ones that do exist are mostly part of the media-entertainment-academic complex and they're mostly so far down the intersectional rabbit hole that it's hard to figure out what really matters to them.
Feminism was created by and for rich privileged (and I mean privileged in terms of wealth and social class) white women, mostly ones with serious mental issues or daddy issues. The mental issues/daddy issues probably explains their desire to turn themselves into men. Rich privileged white women were the only ones who had the luxury of indulging in nonsense like feminism.
If most women were feminists we'd be looking forward to President Elizabeth Warren. But it seems most women prefer men as political leaders, which indicates that they're not really hostile to men.Replies: @Showmethereal, @Rosie, @MBlanc46
Depends on the sorts of women you’re encountering. Feminism is pretty much a middle-class white woman thing. Working-class women aren’t big fans of feminism, because they know that feminism doesn’t give a damn about them. Working-class white women seem to like men a lot.
I don’t think there are many non-white feminists. The ones that do exist are mostly part of the media-entertainment-academic complex and they’re mostly so far down the intersectional rabbit hole that it’s hard to figure out what really matters to them.
Feminism was created by and for rich privileged (and I mean privileged in terms of wealth and social class) white women, mostly ones with serious mental issues or daddy issues. The mental issues/daddy issues probably explains their desire to turn themselves into men. Rich privileged white women were the only ones who had the luxury of indulging in nonsense like feminism.
If most women were feminists we’d be looking forward to President Elizabeth Warren. But it seems most women prefer men as political leaders, which indicates that they’re not really hostile to men.
Some people think that the label "feminist" doesn't mean anything, because all women are feminists. That is true to some extent, but I submit that the label is nonetheless very significant, and identification with it is an excellent barometer of women's opinion.
When a woman says, ""I'm not a feminist," what she's really saying is that she feels the legitimate objectives of feminism have largely been accomplished. There is no need for any further action or man-blaming. Of course, that woman would still be a "feminist" by far right standards, but she's not the combative, man-hating lunatic of of far right caricature.
https://miro.medium.com/max/2576/1*wF61fnUU-XiV7Wxpd3ZPRQ.png
Yes, and it’s one of life’s delightful little ironies.
I’ve known a lot of lesbian radical feminists over the years and most of them have liked male company a great deal. Oddly enough most of them enjoyed sleeping with men as well, although they didn’t like other members of the sisterhood finding out about their little lapses.
The sad thing is that there really are very few feminists who actually want to celebrate femaleness.
Men blame women. Women blame men. Blacks blame whites. Whites blame blacks. Liberals blame conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals. Jews are popular objects of hate on the dissident right. Christians are popular objects of hate on the Cultural Left. Homosexuals hate Christians and heterosexuals. Trannies hate Christians and they hate old school lesbians. Environmentalists (who are almost exclusively white) blame poor white people. Middle-class people hate the poor. The poor hate the rich.
These are all symptoms of a sick sad society in which everyone blames someone else for their problems.
As to misandry, it's mostly only feminists who really hate men (because feminists worship everything about men and want to be men). Feminists also hate women who like being women. There's an enormous amount of misogny inherent in feminism. But most women don't hate men.
And as to misogyny among men, that's largely a phenomenon of the far right. It only seems common if you spend too much time on UR. There are men who grow to hate individual women because they've been treated badly by that woman, just as there are women who hate individual men because they've been treated badly by that man.Replies: @MBlanc46, @AaronB, @showmethereal
Lol, so true.
We’re unhappy in the West because we take everything so damn seriously. The Buddha figured it out 2,500 years ago – don’t be so serious, he said (be detached).
But there are probably 5 people alive today who are ready to not take the world seriously.
Everyone else seems to think the world and their lives are really important. That something needs to be done. That the world needs to be fixed. Its very urgent and important, and life very serious, and they are very important.
So the bubble of misery grows and grows until it will pop one day in a huge burst, because the heaviness and seriousness will become unbearable finally – and a huge sigh will be heard across the world.
And mankind will be cheerful and happy again, and lightness and laughter restored to the earth. The Buddha will smile, wherever he is. God will chuckle.
But this is far, far in the future.
For now, the bubble of heaviness still grows, and only a person here or there escapes and finds liberation, and becomes incomprehensible to his fellow men.
The fact is that, whether you agree with feminism or not (and to what extent), the kind of hatred you see in the manosphere is simply not to be found.
And remember, as manospherians are fond of pointing out, criticism is not hatred. Hatred is criticism plus dismissal, that is, the notion that the object of your criticism is not only erring, but so incorrigible that incapacitation is the only solution. With very rare exceptions, feminists do not advocate for disenfranchisement or exclusion of men.
To the contrary, mainstream feminism holds that "toxic masculinity" is learned rather than innate, and can therefore be unlearned.
That said, I'm not interested in peering into men's souls, either. If they are determined to hate, they can't be reasoned with. Just look at John Plywood. He can't decide whether to hate women for being liberal or to hate them for being conservative. All I demand is the right to expose their stupidity (free speech).Replies: @dfordoom, @MBlanc46, @JohnPlywood
White men are the least hated men on this planet. I have never said anything indicating I hate women for their political ideologies.
Rosie wants free speech but her problem, like so many others who cherish that “right”, is that no one cares about what she has to say. Hence no exposure, just lots of wasted effort.
A number of years after that the office radio was on again one day when the news came on that O.J. had been arrested for a robbery. I looked around and saw sullen silence on the faces of the same blacks who had cheered previously. There was no cheering from the whites in front of the blacks that day. Not even a slight smile on any of the white faces when I looked around. They didn't harbor any secret hostility towards him just because he was black.Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie
Would like to add: Alex Jones of Infowars.com has managed to successfully convince about 5 million people that the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre was a hoax perpetrated by the government.
To put that in to perspective, consider that the average human brain consumes about 20 watts at rest. 20 x 5mil = one hundred million watts of electric power.
The human brain is an incredibly efficient organ relative to its creative output. Kwabena Boahen of Stanford University has theorized that a robot equipped with a data processor that could make it as intelligent as a single human being would require 10 million watts of electricity to operate. Such a processor has never been developed before.
Alex Jones basically has access to a theoretical “hivemind”, like Skynet from the Terminator series. In to this 100 megawatt multiprocessor hivemind, he has inserted information that the US government is perpetrating hoax massacres on U.S. soil. The hivemind probably has access to 10 million firearms, and regularly runs violence simulations. Nothing consequential has come from Alex Jones’ hivemind.
Now imagine actually believing you could accomplish anything with your freedom of speech.
“Now imagine actually believing you could accomplish anything with your freedom of speech.”
Oy
“We hold these truths to be self evident . . .”
“Give Me liberty or give me death.”
“Don’t tread on me.”
True – though the funny thing is her type arent against testosterone… They are all for women trying to act like men… And in turn men acting like women. Its just a very confused society now.
I don't think there are many non-white feminists. The ones that do exist are mostly part of the media-entertainment-academic complex and they're mostly so far down the intersectional rabbit hole that it's hard to figure out what really matters to them.
Feminism was created by and for rich privileged (and I mean privileged in terms of wealth and social class) white women, mostly ones with serious mental issues or daddy issues. The mental issues/daddy issues probably explains their desire to turn themselves into men. Rich privileged white women were the only ones who had the luxury of indulging in nonsense like feminism.
If most women were feminists we'd be looking forward to President Elizabeth Warren. But it seems most women prefer men as political leaders, which indicates that they're not really hostile to men.Replies: @Showmethereal, @Rosie, @MBlanc46
Not true… Go into any major city and many – if not most – minority women have become feminists also. It spread much faster and is more detrimental than any flu.
Whites aren’t aware of how much they are hated by nonwhites except when they spend a lot of time around them. I can remember one day in my office when the radio was on. The news came on that O.J. Simpson had just been acquitted in the murder of his white wife. Suddenly all the blacks in my office started ecstatically cheering. I looked around and saw the surprised looks on all the faces of the whites in my office. I wasn’t surprised at all because I had lived in a mostly black neighborhood as an adult and was already aware of black hostility towards whites. As a child, I had also seen blacks moving into white neighborhoods at the end of segregation and engaging in a crime spree against whites, forcing most of them to move out to the suburbs.
A number of years after that the office radio was on again one day when the news came on that O.J. had been arrested for a robbery. I looked around and saw sullen silence on the faces of the same blacks who had cheered previously. There was no cheering from the whites in front of the blacks that day. Not even a slight smile on any of the white faces when I looked around. They didn’t harbor any secret hostility towards him just because he was black.
A number of years after that the office radio was on again one day when the news came on that O.J. had been arrested for a robbery. I looked around and saw sullen silence on the faces of the same blacks who had cheered previously. There was no cheering from the whites in front of the blacks that day. Not even a slight smile on any of the white faces when I looked around. They didn't harbor any secret hostility towards him just because he was black.Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie
Blacks and “nonwhites” are not the same. Blacks in America (and a few other places in the world) have a particularly antagonistic dynamic with whites (and Asians, for that matter) that is not shared by other ethno-racial groups.
Asking any feminist about “misandry” is rather like asking a goldfish about “water”.
Next time you are bored, Google Elizabeth Warren and men’s rights or men’s issues and see what you come up with. For the first 4 pages you get headlines that sound like ‘ Warren demands rights to protect women from men’ and so forth. Basically, she has never done anything positive for men. Ever. She bellyaches a lot about why men don’t like her but I cannot think of a single reason they should. Although we should not single her out, almost every women of her generation with any power whatsoever fails the same test including Hillary Clinton. Add to the fact that she is a nag and it should be pretty obvious why only women and gimps would support her. It is all the more worse when considering that she constantly kvetches about sexism. To her it only applies when women are effected. In fact she is utterly indifferent towards men.
The headline should have read “Why is Elizabeth Warren a misandrist *****”. You get my point.
And you don’t have an argument. Why am I not surprised?
I don't think there are many non-white feminists. The ones that do exist are mostly part of the media-entertainment-academic complex and they're mostly so far down the intersectional rabbit hole that it's hard to figure out what really matters to them.
Feminism was created by and for rich privileged (and I mean privileged in terms of wealth and social class) white women, mostly ones with serious mental issues or daddy issues. The mental issues/daddy issues probably explains their desire to turn themselves into men. Rich privileged white women were the only ones who had the luxury of indulging in nonsense like feminism.
If most women were feminists we'd be looking forward to President Elizabeth Warren. But it seems most women prefer men as political leaders, which indicates that they're not really hostile to men.Replies: @Showmethereal, @Rosie, @MBlanc46
This isn’t really true, Doom. White women are actually the most likely to explicitly reject the “feminist” label. I don’t understand why this misconception that feminism is a White woman thing comes from, but it’s really not true. If anything, you might say that White women are more polarized on the issue than WOC, but that’s not the same thing as saying we’re more feminist.
Some people think that the label “feminist” doesn’t mean anything, because all women are feminists. That is true to some extent, but I submit that the label is nonetheless very significant, and identification with it is an excellent barometer of women’s opinion.
When a woman says, “”I’m not a feminist,” what she’s really saying is that she feels the legitimate objectives of feminism have largely been accomplished. There is no need for any further action or man-blaming. Of course, that woman would still be a “feminist” by far right standards, but she’s not the combative, man-hating lunatic of of far right caricature.
A number of years after that the office radio was on again one day when the news came on that O.J. had been arrested for a robbery. I looked around and saw sullen silence on the faces of the same blacks who had cheered previously. There was no cheering from the whites in front of the blacks that day. Not even a slight smile on any of the white faces when I looked around. They didn't harbor any secret hostility towards him just because he was black.Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie
Twinkies wants us to identify with all non-blacks and race-mix ourselves out of existence with Asians, Hispanics, and assorted off-whites. That’s understandable coming from him. White men should know better.
Ask them what matters most to them, racism or sexism. They’ll say racism. Give them a choice between supporting a male member of their minority group or a white woman and they won’t support the white woman. They don’t like white women any more than they like white men.
Mass immigration has happened, so, in the words of the Great Crocodile: “Adapt or Die.” Left-wing fantasies of a permanent rainbow America only work if you assume the products of interracial marriages won’t assimilate into the American mainstream. It speaks volumes that even now, with the openly anti-assimilationist trends of our elites, it isn’t really working consistently.
(Is it an accident that white separatist fantasies are the same thing with reversed moral implications?)
>White men should know better.
Yeah: we’re not suckers who’ll just sit on our asses until our mid-30s when you decide you want to settle down with a nice, reliable provider type.
I am optimistic about the outcome. I think if there is a sufficient cognitive layer at the top driving productivity, America will continue to do well.Replies: @nebulafox
I don't think there are many non-white feminists. The ones that do exist are mostly part of the media-entertainment-academic complex and they're mostly so far down the intersectional rabbit hole that it's hard to figure out what really matters to them.
Feminism was created by and for rich privileged (and I mean privileged in terms of wealth and social class) white women, mostly ones with serious mental issues or daddy issues. The mental issues/daddy issues probably explains their desire to turn themselves into men. Rich privileged white women were the only ones who had the luxury of indulging in nonsense like feminism.
If most women were feminists we'd be looking forward to President Elizabeth Warren. But it seems most women prefer men as political leaders, which indicates that they're not really hostile to men.Replies: @Showmethereal, @Rosie, @MBlanc46
I’ll certainly confess that most of the women with whom I come into contact are college educated, lower middle class or upper working class white women. They are one and all feminists, some of them quote outspoken in their feminism. And it’s your working class white women that have thoroughly embodied the feminist way of life: children out of wedlock, divorce, and general all-round trampishness. And, I suspect that they are under-represented among voters.
It's also worth pointing out that college educated, upper and lower middle class white men are every bit as crazy. By and large they support the feminist and homosexual agendas, they support the extremist environmental agenda, they are devoted to the cult of diversity, they support open borders.
If you're college educated and middle class and white there's a very high chance that most of your core beliefs are completely insane.That's an underclass thing, not a working class thing. The only working class women I know are married with kids.
There is no conceivable argument pertaining to your biased perception. It simply is what it is.
Agreed. It does appear that race trumps sex. Which doesn’t imply that women of color don’t hate men (of any color).
It will be interesting to see what America will look like 100 years from now, after the races have thoroughly intermixed. It’s particularly interesting because this is the first time people from all 4 corners of the globe have gathered in one place. I don’t think there was any instance in history where East Asians intermarried Black Africans, or mestizos with Indians (proper Indians, Obviously).
I am optimistic about the outcome. I think if there is a sufficient cognitive layer at the top driving productivity, America will continue to do well.
Lies, lies, lies.
Lies, lies, lies.
You don't believe that the feminists who want women to have the right to uninhibitedly "sow their wild oats" vastly outnumber the ones who recognize sex differences for what they are and instead condemn bad behavior in men.Replies: @Rosie, @nebulafox
Those facts support Iffen much more than whatever it is you are claiming.
tl;dr
Reality does not agree with you.Replies: @Rosie
Another race-mixer detected. I suppose that’s part of why hatred of and lies about White women are so popular around here. It gives men an excuse for their race treachery.
Seek professional help.Replies: @Rosie
Rosie, 1965 wants you to get into your way-back machine and return.Replies: @Mark G.
Has anyone mentioned recently that you’re delusional?
Seek professional help.
https://youtu.be/KniUNdVZvH4Replies: @nebulafox, @Mr. Rational
I am optimistic about the outcome. I think if there is a sufficient cognitive layer at the top driving productivity, America will continue to do well.Replies: @nebulafox
Interesting handle, Yahya. Wish I chose something smarter as mine.
I think if things continue along the lines they do now with no interruption, we will become more like Latin America, with entrenched class barriers. The upper middle class will lead pressure fueled lives to keep their status, but will live lives as close to what would have been considered obscenely rich in other eras. The ranks of the declassed, meanwhile, will swell as the middle class is hollowed out. Neo-feudal mechanisms result.
And yeah, the class gaps probably will have racial overtones to them. Intermarriage will fill out as you’d expect, with increasing amount of white/Asian couples on higher socioeconomic strata and white/Latinos in the lower. Nothing hard or fast about these rules, though, given that ideology, class norms and taste are way more important than appearance for our elites. Just a general metric.
This is not the worst fate in the world (consult Yugoslavia for an example of something unimaginably worse) but I find it a distinctly unworthy vision for the United States. Of course, the big question is whether this all happens without bumps, and I have a feeling that this is unlikely given America’s national psychology. If our elites attempt to ham handedly introduce a millet style system with authoritarian, Chinese inspired characteristics to deal with the practical results of their policies decades down the line, things will probably get particulars ugly. America is not the Ottoman Empire.
I realize your point about lower-class whites marrying Latinos and upper class whites marrying Asians. Thank you for that insight. I've changed my mind on East Asians intermarrying with Black Africans. Guess that won't be happening. Oh well. Maybe in another universe!
You're right that there is a real risk of some sort of violence along the road. Especially if there is a severe depression/downturn in the economy. I am hopeful that America's sense of decency will prevail.
Side note 1: I've read through more of your comments and was struck by your good sense, open-mindedness, historical knowledge, and moderation. I haven't seen anyone else on the internet post comments with nearly the same level of knowledge and wisdom as you do. I especially admire your moral fortitude and ability to resist going down the rabbit hole of racial and political animosity others on this site frequently fall into.
Side note 2: Thank you also for the compliments on my handle. I am afraid it's not deserved: the handle is actually my real name. As you might have picked up, its Arabic. I am Egyptian/Saudi Arabian by citizenship (Mother is Egyptian, Father is Saudi Arabian), though I was born in Egypt, lived (and will continue to live after I finish uni) in Egypt most of my life, and speak the Egyptian dialect so consider myself just plain Egyptian.
Also, i'm just going to share my LinkedIn with you since I am not afraid of being cancelled in Egypt (thank god!). https://www.linkedin.com/in/yahya-khogeer/. Feel free to connect if you want to.Replies: @nebulafox
Oh, I am a happy race mixing, woman teasing, misanthropic yet optimistic reprobate, Rosie. I don’t think I’ve ever denied that. Come join us, the water is hot. 😉
Another race-mixer detected. I suppose that’s part of why hatred of and lies about White women are so popular around here. It gives men an excuse for their race treachery.
Rosie, 1965 wants you to get into your way-back machine and return.
Lies, lies, lies.
You don’t believe that the feminists who want women to have the right to uninhibitedly “sow their wild oats” vastly outnumber the ones who recognize sex differences for what they are and instead condemn bad behavior in men.
Seek professional help.Replies: @Rosie
I believe you owe me an apology, sir. nebulafox admitted he’s a race mixer in comment 77.
These things go right over your head. I don't know if your perceptual shortcomings could be cured with therapy or not, but you should at least try. It's a quality-of-life issue both for you and those around you.Replies: @Rosie
Lies, lies, lies.
You don't believe that the feminists who want women to have the right to uninhibitedly "sow their wild oats" vastly outnumber the ones who recognize sex differences for what they are and instead condemn bad behavior in men.Replies: @Rosie, @nebulafox
What the hell does that have to do with nebulafox’s claim about normal White women not wanting to get married?
Anyway, as to your claim, you’d have to poll feminists to find out what they think about “wild oats.” Otherwise, you’re just relying on your impression from the feminists you see on (((television))).
In the current year? Well, I never…!
Lies, lies, lies.
You don't believe that the feminists who want women to have the right to uninhibitedly "sow their wild oats" vastly outnumber the ones who recognize sex differences for what they are and instead condemn bad behavior in men.Replies: @Rosie, @nebulafox
Why do feminists want to uncritically ape everything men do? Men become workaholics. Men are more likely to drink to excess too often. Men engage in destruction toward themselves and others more often. Men die younger, men are more isolated. It’s not all worth imitating.
For a woman, getting a man to sleep with you is not an achievement-no matter how minimal, material or sleazy-like it is the other way around. That’s just biology at work, something that no amount of ideology is going to override. And I’m not under any delusions that women face their own set of challenges, nor am I some sexual Puritan: I truly could care less about other people’s sex lives and myself prefer a woman who knows what she is doing in bed. But I refuse to be lied to about the realities of life, because I’ve noticed the same people tend to be the kind who want to screw me and a lot of other young men over.
Personally, the older I get, the more I’ve come to realize that the Sexual Revolution’s excesses are leading to problems that we are not finding ourselves well equipped to handle as a society. But that isn’t the beef I’m advancing here. I find it supremely annoying that a lot of women seem to expect a vast swathe of men to stoically spend their 20s accepting table scraps and then be ready to commit instantly just when they finally have a chance at enjoying themselves like everyone else has been.. It’s not just unrealistic, but deeply hypocritical and self-serving.
My generation knows that “Man up” doesn’t mean to really behave like a man and embrace masculinity, for better for worse, it translates into “Do as we talking heads who clearly could care less about you and view you as walking caterers demand.” And I don’t think that’s good. Men should have responsibilities, just like women. True masculinity isn’t about being some loudmouthed pseudo-alcoholic who bangs chicks indiscriminately, it involves sacrifice, hardship, duty and in a healthy world, not just strength, but even more so self-control. Any idiot can use his strength for his own whims: a man channels it effectively. But we live in the real world, and people are delusional if they think that they can somehow play “all the restraints of yesteryear and none of the perks for thee, the reverse for me” without eventually being ignored.
Because they want power, and not just their "fair share."
They want as much as they can grab.
But then feminism was invented by a bunch of women with very serious mental issues. Take a look at the leading feminists of the 60s and 70s. An extraordinary number were completely nuts. They were miserable and angry and crazy and they blamed it all on being female. Their solution was to turn women into men.
Feminism is organised misogyny.
https://youtu.be/KniUNdVZvH4Replies: @nebulafox, @Mr. Rational
I also tear the heads off of small animals for fun, spread malicious software, and drunkenly drive down the street “Weekend At Bernie’s” style, running over pedestrians. I even take a Diracian view toward philosophy in quantum mechanics.
I know, I know: I can’t possibly hope to ever exceed the sin of falling in love with somebody from a different race and thus polluting the semi-acceptable, second/third tier white stock that I inherit. I just have to accept that my glory days of perversion are over and hope to gain shallow echos of my past in the eyes of Baal.
LOL
Did you find your horse thief in your pedigree yet?
Good one!
Rosie, 1965 wants you to get into your way-back machine and return.Replies: @Mark G.
Tell her to take some money with her so when she gets there she can give little nine year old Mark G. enough to buy the new Superman comic book, a candy bar and a Coca Cola down at the drugstore. Twenty five cents should be enough.
I paid 6 cents for the first "coke" that I bought, which was about 1961-1962. The price went to 10 cents not long after that.
Twenty five cents should be enough.
I paid 6 cents for the first “coke” that I bought, which was about 1961-1962. The price went to 10 cents not long after that.
Why do feminists want to uncritically ape everything men do?
Because they want power, and not just their “fair share.”
They want as much as they can grab.
Love at first sight, was it?
You were totally powerless in the whole affair?
A gentleman doesn’t kiss and tell, Rose. 😉
https://youtu.be/KniUNdVZvH4Replies: @nebulafox, @Mr. Rational
I note that he doubled down on the sarcasm in #83.
These things go right over your head. I don’t know if your perceptual shortcomings could be cured with therapy or not, but you should at least try. It’s a quality-of-life issue both for you and those around you.
thus polluting the semi-acceptable, second/third tier white stock that I inherit.
LOL
Did you find your horse thief in your pedigree yet?
These things go right over your head. I don't know if your perceptual shortcomings could be cured with therapy or not, but you should at least try. It's a quality-of-life issue both for you and those around you.Replies: @Rosie
Because the extinction of the White race is just really knee-slapping funny, isn’t it?
Because all of the sane people can plainly see the emporer’s fabulous new clothes.
Surely, you’ve figured out by now that manipulative shit doesn’t work on me.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-dangerous-rise-of-men-who-wont-date-woke-women/?highlight=wife
As per comment #108 here, fox apparently isn’t a race mixer, or at least not a married one (yet). He’s just an apologist for race mixing. I stand corrected.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-dangerous-rise-of-men-who-wont-date-woke-women/?highlight=wife
The average age of a US woman on her first wedding day is 27. If she has a college degree it is 28.
Those facts support Iffen much more than whatever it is you are claiming.
tl;dr
Reality does not agree with you.
Besides, couples are living together for years before marriage now, so that statistic is meaningless anyway.
It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that the people one usually encounters in day-to-day life are typical of the entire population.
It’s also worth pointing out that college educated, upper and lower middle class white men are every bit as crazy. By and large they support the feminist and homosexual agendas, they support the extremist environmental agenda, they are devoted to the cult of diversity, they support open borders.
If you’re college educated and middle class and white there’s a very high chance that most of your core beliefs are completely insane.
That’s an underclass thing, not a working class thing. The only working class women I know are married with kids.
It is weird but feminists really really hate everything connected with femaleness.
But then feminism was invented by a bunch of women with very serious mental issues. Take a look at the leading feminists of the 60s and 70s. An extraordinary number were completely nuts. They were miserable and angry and crazy and they blamed it all on being female. Their solution was to turn women into men.
Feminism is organised misogyny.
Those facts support Iffen much more than whatever it is you are claiming.
tl;dr
Reality does not agree with you.Replies: @Rosie
You assume without evidence (and contrary to common sense) that it is women rather than men who resist commitment.
Besides, couples are living together for years before marriage now, so that statistic is meaningless anyway.
Thank you for your reply. Your analysis of future trends in America is a lot more intelligent and perceptive than mine.
I realize your point about lower-class whites marrying Latinos and upper class whites marrying Asians. Thank you for that insight. I’ve changed my mind on East Asians intermarrying with Black Africans. Guess that won’t be happening. Oh well. Maybe in another universe!
You’re right that there is a real risk of some sort of violence along the road. Especially if there is a severe depression/downturn in the economy. I am hopeful that America’s sense of decency will prevail.
Side note 1: I’ve read through more of your comments and was struck by your good sense, open-mindedness, historical knowledge, and moderation. I haven’t seen anyone else on the internet post comments with nearly the same level of knowledge and wisdom as you do. I especially admire your moral fortitude and ability to resist going down the rabbit hole of racial and political animosity others on this site frequently fall into.
Side note 2: Thank you also for the compliments on my handle. I am afraid it’s not deserved: the handle is actually my real name. As you might have picked up, its Arabic. I am Egyptian/Saudi Arabian by citizenship (Mother is Egyptian, Father is Saudi Arabian), though I was born in Egypt, lived (and will continue to live after I finish uni) in Egypt most of my life, and speak the Egyptian dialect so consider myself just plain Egyptian.
Also, i’m just going to share my LinkedIn with you since I am not afraid of being cancelled in Egypt (thank god!). https://www.linkedin.com/in/yahya-khogeer/. Feel free to connect if you want to.
Hahaha!
Good one!
I realize your point about lower-class whites marrying Latinos and upper class whites marrying Asians. Thank you for that insight. I've changed my mind on East Asians intermarrying with Black Africans. Guess that won't be happening. Oh well. Maybe in another universe!
You're right that there is a real risk of some sort of violence along the road. Especially if there is a severe depression/downturn in the economy. I am hopeful that America's sense of decency will prevail.
Side note 1: I've read through more of your comments and was struck by your good sense, open-mindedness, historical knowledge, and moderation. I haven't seen anyone else on the internet post comments with nearly the same level of knowledge and wisdom as you do. I especially admire your moral fortitude and ability to resist going down the rabbit hole of racial and political animosity others on this site frequently fall into.
Side note 2: Thank you also for the compliments on my handle. I am afraid it's not deserved: the handle is actually my real name. As you might have picked up, its Arabic. I am Egyptian/Saudi Arabian by citizenship (Mother is Egyptian, Father is Saudi Arabian), though I was born in Egypt, lived (and will continue to live after I finish uni) in Egypt most of my life, and speak the Egyptian dialect so consider myself just plain Egyptian.
Also, i'm just going to share my LinkedIn with you since I am not afraid of being cancelled in Egypt (thank god!). https://www.linkedin.com/in/yahya-khogeer/. Feel free to connect if you want to.Replies: @nebulafox
I actually thought you were Pakistani, after the military ruler. Nice to meet you!
I am flattered, really I am, but there are far more knowledgeable and wiser people hanging around this website. I’ve been wrong as often as I’ve been right. And on a deeper level, I genuinely don’t think I’ve ever displayed any form of fortitude in my life, moral or otherwise: which is something I will change in the coming years.
To be perfectly transparent, my time here coincided with a pretty dark chapter in my life that I’m really trying to put behind me. I have been trying and failing to do that for years, as seen by my periodic declarations of comment retirement, but something is different about this time.
Have a good one, man.
It seems like you are about to begin a new, better chapter in your life. I’m glad.
Hopefully you’ll be able to come back to this site with a renewed frame of mind sometime in the future.
Thank you for the knowledge you have shared. Your commentary will be missed.
Good luck!
Obviously you know more about yourself than I do. And I don’t want to sound officious. But you’ve left a long trail of comments, and from what I gather, it seems like you’ve had a rough life so far. Yet, I don’t see any signs of the self-pity, resentment, bitterness or hatred many in your situation indulge in. You’ve been able to maintain your decency; and come out as a well-put-together kind of guy. That’s what fortitude is.
It also seems like you are about to begin a new, better chapter in your life. I’m glad. Hopefully you’ll be able to come back to this site with a renewed frame of mind sometime in the future. Thank you for the knowledge you’ve shared. Your commentary will be missed.
Good luck!
Thanks, man. And good luck to you, too, whatever your endeavors are. 🙂
Whites: 68%
Yellows: 59%
Browns: 54%
Indigenous: 53%
Blacks: 45%Contrary to Lee Kuan Yew’s generally accurate maxim, they didn't vote in blocs against each other. And to have gotten so much of the minority vote just shows how different the racial-dynamics of Brazil and the US are.Why is this the case? I think a few factors play a role. 1) Racial classification in Brazil is fluid (although the left, as usual, are harming this by their introduction of affirmative action), 2) Mixed Brazilians see themselves merely as a mix of two races, so identify with both races, rather than as a distinct ethnic group like Latinos in the US (although 3rd gen Latinos increasingly see themselves as white, and that's good). 3) Brazil has been a racially diverse country for a long time, so people are used to it. I think the longer a country is diverse, the more people accept it and forge their identity based on nationality rather than race, unless the histories, languages and cultures are different (like in Yugoslavia). 4) Finally, and most importantly, the elites of Brazil aren't as wokefied as the elites here. Here is an analysis I stored from another Unz commentator after the election:So, all the US needs to do is ensure these factors play out the same as in Brazil: 1) Ensure miscegenation between the races, 2) Don't implement policies which encourage people to identify with their ethnic groups, like affirmative action, 3) Stop the victimization and identity politics nonsense. In conclusion, the Brazil model, if properly emulated, leaves hope for a prosperous and harmonious US. However, given how radicalized and dead-set the coastal elite is at playing the identity politics game, my guess is that the US will be a more prosperous version of Brazil, but still less racially harmonious.
Oh, you’re already back!
Well, since you’re here, I also wanted to add a few more points to the discussion we were having.
I think a very pertinent model for the US to look at is Brazil, which in many ways is sort of a parallel universe to the US. The racial demographics are strikingly similar to what 2060 America is projected to be. ~50% White (for America, we can add Asians here too), ~40% mixed (for America, mestizo/latino), and ~10% black. Brazil is also a nation of immigrants, with a large population, a history of slavery, and class barriers largely based on race.
However, Brazil has somehow managed to avoid any racial conflict/tension. Even in recent years, where there was a lot of economic hardship. Jair Bolsonaro, the supposedly ‘far-right fascist candidate’, was elected with support from large sections of all three classes and races. Bolsonaro won in the mixed-race North, Center, and the Southeast, and even in the Northeast, where he lost, he got the largest percentage of the vote a non-leftist has managed to get in the last thirty years.
Here are the racial categories and the percentages that each group who voted for Bolsonaro:
Whites: 68%
Yellows: 59%
Browns: 54%
Indigenous: 53%
Blacks: 45%
Contrary to Lee Kuan Yew’s generally accurate maxim, they didn’t vote in blocs against each other. And to have gotten so much of the minority vote just shows how different the racial-dynamics of Brazil and the US are.
Why is this the case? I think a few factors play a role. 1) Racial classification in Brazil is fluid (although the left, as usual, are harming this by their introduction of affirmative action), 2) Mixed Brazilians see themselves merely as a mix of two races, so identify with both races, rather than as a distinct ethnic group like Latinos in the US (although 3rd gen Latinos increasingly see themselves as white, and that’s good). 3) Brazil has been a racially diverse country for a long time, so people are used to it. I think the longer a country is diverse, the more people accept it and forge their identity based on nationality rather than race, unless the histories, languages and cultures are different (like in Yugoslavia). 4) Finally, and most importantly, the elites of Brazil aren’t as wokefied as the elites here. Here is an analysis I stored from another Unz commentator after the election:
So, all the US needs to do is ensure these factors play out the same as in Brazil: 1) Ensure miscegenation between the races, 2) Don’t implement policies which encourage people to identify with their ethnic groups, like affirmative action, 3) Stop the victimization and identity politics nonsense.
In conclusion, the Brazil model, if properly emulated, leaves hope for a prosperous and harmonious US. However, given how radicalized and dead-set the coastal elite is at playing the identity politics game, my guess is that the US will be a more prosperous version of Brazil, but still less racially harmonious.
It’s a riff on the “Democrats are the real racists” meme, but your point is well taken.
Obviously, 95% of the people on this website would be considered nitwits or loons by the general public; which is also swamped by a myriad of mental disease; and most people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent their activity from being discovered by friends, family, colleagues etc. Your lazy ass is going to have to try harder than this.Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @YetAnotherAnon, @Audacious Epigone
No dehumanizing language, please. Excuse my slight edit.
Koch brothers bring your money and come on down!Replies: @Audacious Epigone
Don’t we already have that with Bill Weld and Joe Walsh?
Actually, I am just kidding - I don't want her to become president through Joe's age-related demise either - but more for the optics than anything else.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
The GOP would love to run plays out of their socialism bad playbook from here through November. Warren is too close to facilitating that to be picked, I think. My guess is that it’ll be Kamala Harris. But I would guess that, wouldn’t I?
I thought this was a parody using voice impersonation. Michael Tracy is correct. Who could’ve possibly thought this was a good idea?
Well that is natural… They themselves are still black so still face discrimination. But it also a fact that black females make more than black males in the US on average… And they absolute use their power against black males.
See the OJ Simpson case, where the prosecution pushed for women and got mostly got them while the defense pushed for blacks and largely got them.
Men blame women. Women blame men. Blacks blame whites. Whites blame blacks. Liberals blame conservatives. Conservatives blame liberals. Jews are popular objects of hate on the dissident right. Christians are popular objects of hate on the Cultural Left. Homosexuals hate Christians and heterosexuals. Trannies hate Christians and they hate old school lesbians. Environmentalists (who are almost exclusively white) blame poor white people. Middle-class people hate the poor. The poor hate the rich.
These are all symptoms of a sick sad society in which everyone blames someone else for their problems.
As to misandry, it's mostly only feminists who really hate men (because feminists worship everything about men and want to be men). Feminists also hate women who like being women. There's an enormous amount of misogny inherent in feminism. But most women don't hate men.
And as to misogyny among men, that's largely a phenomenon of the far right. It only seems common if you spend too much time on UR. There are men who grow to hate individual women because they've been treated badly by that woman, just as there are women who hate individual men because they've been treated badly by that man.Replies: @MBlanc46, @AaronB, @showmethereal
Great summation of the issues!
Look at Elizabeth Warren. She has convinced herself that if only she were a man she would be president. Hence the rage. She wanted a male political career. Her life has been based on trying to achieve male things.
In the case of hardcore feminists it's a kind of mental illness.
Luckily most women are not like that.Replies: @Rosie, @showmethereal
Yeah I saw a video of Elizabeth Warren trying to look cool drinking a beer…. The mannerisms and with her short hair – if you saw from a far – indeed you might think it was a male. SMH.
Men were made physically stronger than females for a reason. Action in the physical environment.
Such as building things. Conversely, women have a uterus – which enables them to carry life into the world. That is something a man cannot do. Without the female womb the human species cannot survive. Men’s emotional make up often allows him the ability to make difficult decisions from a pragmatic view. Females emotional make up allows them to care for all members of the family and greater society – which ensures cohesion.
Men and women are not better than the other. We simply have different roles to play.
Feminists are not arguing with men… They are arguing against God.