All do respect why are atheist people in this forum God please place me next to them at judgment day lol so many perverted versions of christianity only one acceptable version you either believe in Jesus and live for him or perish in hell
Re: twoxroasties wants you to be a compassionate cuck when your wife cucks you, births some chad's spawn, bails on you, and then leaves you to raise chad's spawn. women are a meme.
(C0nserve)
I had my suicide planned in case the day he would realize I wasn't worthy of his love because of my genetics would come
Roastie on leddit experiences 1% of the hardships of incel lifestyle and wants to rope already
(Brainlaid)
If you ever ascend, DNA test your kids.
Anyway, women don't have consciousness or empathy, she just isn't fucking capable of putting herself in someone else's shoes. It's all about how SHE FEELS and what happens to her.
(Administrative_Worth)
In their minds, them tricking yiu into rasing offspring is actually moral. You see that kid needs resources, it's a kid, it's pure, it's innocent, it deserves fulfillment. Plus she knows it's hers. Therefore she has even more bond to see it succeed and receive resources. Always get your kids tested. Honestly even chad should. Believe me, women cheat, a lot. If they think they can get away with it, and the guys worth it, they cheat. Fact of life.
(Deoxysxx)
I cant even call that man a cuck, he is more of a man than the real father
I'm happy to read this comment in this sub. I also wouldn't leave a little child behind if I have taken care of it for so many years. Cuck or not, if people can show mercy to random people through charity, then you can take care of one more kid. It's not the kid's fault.
Random charity does not mean being legally financially tied against your will to a person you were deceived into believing was your biological offspring. Don't even compare the two. They are nothing alike.
(grilledcheesaroo)
I can. He is a fucking cuck that willingly took unnecessary stress & partially ruined his own life over a whore's bastard daughter.
And you're no better, you fucking cuck. If you don't kick both the whore & her cheat trophy out; you are a fucking cuck. I have no respect for either.
His older parents tried speaking sense into this father but they raised a soft little feminized wimp.
(41PercentIsNotEnough)
Lmao all the comments defending him, this sub is infested by normies, fakecels, and cucks
To each their own
[A peace sign in rainbow colors]
Every color has its place. An ethnic home for every race.
Chicago Tribune Article Today: "'Prison is not where women need to be': All-female task force wants to cut Illinois’ female prison population in half"
(JStheHammer)
“Prisons were made for men, and they are made to traumatize,” said Celia Colon"
(lostapwbm)
“Prisons were made for men, and they are made to traumatize,” said Celia Colon, who teared up after sharing with the group her history of abuse. “They were not made for healing.”
Traumatizing men is perfectly acceptable. Traumatizing women (who got to prison by traumatizing others) is not acceptable because...women are equal to men?
“Prison is not where women need to be,” said Benedict, a partner on the National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women, funded by the U.S. Department of Justice. “Even if prisons were highly functional places, they don’t belong there. It’s a train wreck, to be honest, a train wreck.”
If women commit felonies, then prison is exactly where they need to be. As a matter of fact, women commit felonies and gynocentric judges and prosecutors often REFUSE to send them to prison.
Margaret Byrne, an attorney who for 35 years has represented countless women who fought back against abusers, agreed. Many women call 911 to report the violent crime they’ve just committed on a partner, Byrne said, but they fail at proving the difficult self-defense theory in court.
Probably because you can't 'self-defense' a man while he's sleeping, or when his back is turned, or when he's not presenting an immediate and credible threat.
By the time she was 16 and living in South Chicago, Colon had drifted into gang life, drawn by its offer of support — and guns for protection.
“I saw a lot of hurt and bloodshed,” Colon, 42, told the other women gathered at the first meeting. “Things that are never gonna be erased. It does irreversible damage.”
You mean you validated cholos and gangbangers by giving them pussy.
Those who insist that they cannot be held responsible for their own actions, that they are merely leaves floating along the winds of economic circumstances, ore are victims of societal programming, should not enjoy the right to affect or influence public policy or the use of public money.
(HeForeverBleeds)
I've got a long list of articles where people try to argue for female criminals getting lenient sentences or no jail on the basis of being female. A long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long list. I guess this one can be added
I think part of why it's such a popular idea is because gynocentrism is prevalent in both of the main ideologies. Feminism says females are always the oppressed victim to the point where even female criminals are truly the victims and therefore prison is "victimizing" them again. Traditionalism stereotypes women as helpless, innocent, childlike, and basically too weak to be a threat; therefore she's not really responsible for any crime she commits
Both tend to perceive women as morally superior. Both tend to perceive the well-being of the female in any given situation (whether she's the victim or the perpetrator) as more important and more worthy or in need of being protected
(fractureegg)
Yep. And proof of your argument can be found from a statement made a hundred years ago by Chicago attorney Agnes McHugh. In 1906 she said, “A man-jury will not convict a woman murderer in this county, if the prosecutor is a man. I think this leniency may be traced to the chivalry latent in every man.”
Turns out that having a female prosecutor or judge or females on the jury doesn't make any difference.
I don't have any stats handy but it's possible that female accountability vis a vis the justice system has actually grown over the past few decades. In patriarchies the main female "sin" is adultery, which is often severely punished; but they get away with pretty much everything else. (In some primitive fundamentalist religious societies, "witchcraft" is also severely punished).
But I guess it was inevitable that after a brief flirtation with the idea of treating women as semi-adults, feminists wouldn't be able to resist exploiting gynocentrism to increase their privileges even more. But women are still supposed to be treated like equals somehow. Zero logic or sense of justice, as usual.
(VantagePoint2018)
Generally, people look at the motives and background of female criminals whereas they just assume male criminals are uniquely evil.
(Razorbladekandyfan)
This is why we need a mens movement.
In the face of a superior foreign power, appease them with women. It's a tactic. Nobody ever accused the Chinese of being a noble people. Only practical (if not somewhat shameless).
A 14-year-old Afghan mother washing her new baby
image
I'm gonna play devil's advocate and defend Afghan culture. Here come the downvotes.
14 years old is not the same there as it here. Their whole whole conception of what it means to be an adult and a child are completely different than ours. They don't have arbitrary lines defining when it's ok to vote (18), to drive (16), to drink (21), etc... because they don't have any of those things. They also don't have mandatory public school or college like we do, so they don't see a 14 year old as a "child" like we do. A 12 year old girl probably has all the same responsibilities in a household as an adult woman would have because she has nothing else to do. Now, I'm not defending sex with pre-pubescent girls, but if you want to understand what they're thinking, you have to understand their surroundings.
This can't be blamed completely on Islam. This type of thing is also partly (in my opinion, mostly) due to living in a tribal culture with no real law, institutions, media, education, etc... If you go to any backwards tribal culture you will see things that horrify you. I personally think the stuff that goes on in China is much more horrifying than this.
It's common to hear Westerners say things like that men over there "hate" women, "oppress" women, etc... You can disagree with how men treat women over there, but in their mind they think they are protecting and loving women. Now, once again, you can disagree with what they're doing, but ascribing it to evil motivations is wrong in my opinion.
I may be wrong, but this type of thing isn't common. I think this only happens in the most rural, uneducated, tribal areas. Educated city dwellers don't live like this, so it's not right to stereotype their entire region based on stuff like this.
Here's my most controversial defense: women are ready to have sex when they hit puberty. They're gonna do it no matter what. The American way is to have sex with people your own age clandestinely, oftentimes without your parents knowing or approving, and teenage pregnancy and disease is rampant here. At least there when they hit puberty they enter into a "loving" (you can obviously judge for yourself how loving those marriages are) relationship with a committed partner with approval from their friends and family. Girls in America get dumped a million times before they are 25, have sex with multiple partners, suffer emotional damage and self-esteem issues, etc... I'm not saying the way they do it is better, but it does have some positives that we overlook because we are so confident our way is better.
lets not kid ourselves. the best looking pussy is 14-22 depending on how hard she hit puberty. tits dont magically appear when she turns 18. pedophiles like girls who are PRE-pubescent, that term is just used to shame you for having a hot 19 year old girl. just-developed (or in the process) is the biological prime. the whole 18 thing is government sanctioned prime based on how long it takes to finish school in the United States, to keep girls from getting pregnant while she still in high school (outdated laws from pre-birthcontrol times). old enough to bleed, old enough to breed
Ohh fuck thank you so much. It pisses me off that this is the first time I've seen this opinion openly expressed on reddit.
I feel very strongly about the way pedophiles are treated. They are one of the only groups of people who cannot form support groups without fear of losing their jobs, their friends, or worse. Drug addicts and drunks are both allowed and encouraged to meet up, and we trust that they are actively seeking to deal with their problems, not encouraging each other to continue. Yet there is this fear of pedophiles, to the point that if non-offending pedophiles tried to meet up to talk about and deal with their problems, it would probably end in disaster. They also can't talk to a psychologist, for fear that that psychologist will allow their own feelings to get in the way and report the pedophile seeking help. Once the word is out, they're fucked.
The point is, calling someone a pedophile is arguably one of the worst insults someone could use, especially when you take into account all the things that are said about pedophiles: the death threats, the suggestions that they should all be castrated, the idea that all pedophiles will heartlessly rape little girls and damage them forever if they're allowed to live. When you call someone a pedophile, you're calling them a heartless monster who only sees children as empty vagina holes to fill in order to satisfy their perverted sexual deviancy. You're saying they deserve to be imprisoned, castrated, killed, ostracized, and hated. And that applies to people who have never offended. It's hating someone for the thoughts they think, even if they never express those thoughts in any way.
Now calling someone a pedophile when said "pedo" is attracted to a mature girl, with full reproductive capacity, who is dressing in such a way as to suggest that she is aware of her sexual nature... That's just disgusting. People demonize the idea of being attracted to anyone below the arbitrary line of 18, and flat out deny that anyone below 18 is attractive. I can't even begin to express how mad this makes me, so I'll just stop here.
It's incredible that one of the most hated subreddits is the only one where I can find some goddamn rational thought.
lets not kid ourselves. the best looking pussy is 14-22 depending on how hard she hit puberty. tits dont magically appear when she turns 18. pedophiles like girls who are PRE-pubescent, that term is just used to shame you for having a hot 19 year old girl. just-developed (or in the process) is the biological prime. the whole 18 thing is government sanctioned prime based on how long it takes to finish school in the United States, to keep girls from getting pregnant while she still in high school (outdated laws from pre-birthcontrol times). old enough to bleed, old enough to breed. bonus points if she dresses provocatively or posts suggestive selfies, means she is fully aware and knows what to do with it. ironically, here in the US the high school stock is fitter and tighter cos we have a thriving athletic culture. but by the time they go to college they are left to their own devices, eat like crap, and no longer active. get her while she's ripe and she'll stay fresh for that much longer. unless you have a fit bunny or a very petite slow grower, you will see early signs of the wall as early as 21. for short term enjoyment, fuck the youngest girls your country or state allows. however, keep in mind that that the younger she blooms, the sooner and harder she hits the wall. big tits at 13 lead to big thighs/arms at 17, to big belly at 22, to big face and used meat by 25. plus an entitled attitude, as she spent her formative years being "the hot one" who got all the attention. a wise long-term investment is to find the youngest legal girl who was an "ugly duckling" but became hot.
[on adults marrying 10 year olds in yemen]
It's wrong to my culture, but it isn't to their culture. I don't like that the world goes toestepping on other people's cultures because they don't think something is right or fair. As if their whining actually does anything. To me this isn't right. I'm not saying I agree with what goes on in other countries, I just don't think it's any of our business if it doesn't effect us.
Former Cecilia Junior High teacher pleads guilty, sentenced
A former St. Martin Parish teacher pleaded guilty in connection with improper conduct with a student.
Kaylyn Huval, 28, of Breaux Bridge was charged and pleaded guilty to one count of carnal knowledge of a juvenile, said Assistant District Attorney Chester Cedars.
Cue the faux outrage from morality fetishists who have no problem with priests molesting children but flip out when young adults get giggity with the hot teacher.
(butyourenice)
It's fucking creepy because a 16-year-old is mentally underdeveloped and in many ways still a child, regardless of physical development. Hell your brain does not stop developing until your mid-20s, but teenagers especially lack the frontal lobe development that would allow them to accurately gauge risk and develop informed inhibition. If you think the distinction between a 16-year-old and a 24-year-old is "arbitrary" (because what? They both have tits?), then yeah... Maybe you do belong on some list.
I've already addressed the difference between legality and morality in another comment. Your* entire rant relies on legality being the sole boundary between right and wrong, not to mention you've entirely missed the point of what I said in favor of listening to yourself harp about how adults should be allowed to have sex with kids
the reason my rant relies on the LEGALITY of a topic discussion LEGAL AGE OF CONSENT should be fairly obvious. Also you will note in my comment I state that I think an adult having sex with a 16 year old isnt right. I have taken a stance on morality. My comment was focusing solely on the legal aspect, and I agree with you on the morality part (which you would understand if you read my comment with any level of reading comprehension).My comment doesnt "rely" on the legality issue, i just decided that I would only join in on the debate on the legality side of things. That would be like saying a physics paper "enirely relies on the laws of physics". well no shit, its a specific paper that specializes in that one topic, that doesnt mean that I dont acknowledge all other fields of study just because I wrote something up about one of them.
But anyway, It doesnt matter what is morally wrong, or creepy, the law doesnt cater to your personal code of ethics. And that is my point. Just because someone else is immoral and unethical by YOUR standards does not mean it is immoral and unethical by everyone elses standards. And it certainly doesnt mean we should throw people in jail and ruin their lives because you, specifically you /u/butyourenice dont agree with it. The entire population of a country should follow exactly your moral code? get the fuck out of here you pretentious fuck. Is cheating on your spouse immoral and unethical? yes. Is it immoral and unethical to deny a hungry child food because he doesnt have enough money to pay for it? yes. Is it illegal to cheat on your wife or expect payment for your goods? Im not saying having sex with a 16 year old as a 65 year old ISNT unethical or immoral, what Im saying is that it doesnt matter. Legality is what the state has decided is right and wrong, and everyone living there is forced to follow it. Morality and ethics is how you personally chose to live your life. So if something is legal, then it doesnt matter whether or not you find it immoral, because someone else might not and they have every right to do so just like you. Im not saying having sex with a 16 year old isnt morally wrong, Im saying morality is highly subjective and personal, so if your morals say you shouldnt have sex with a 16 year old as an adult, then there is an easy solution. Dont have sex with a 16 year old as an adult. See? problem solved. And if someone else doesnt think that it is immoral and does have sex with a 16 year old as an adult, then guess what? they have their own set of morals and code of ethics that they chose to live their life by, and thats fine because they arent you, so your morals dont fucking matter to them! Its such an easy concept, but you people who think the whole world should cater only to people who share the exact same opinions and lifestyle as themselves are narrow minded and ignorant. Are 16 year old girls old enough and developed enough to decide if they should have sex? are you a 16 year old girl? Are all 16 year olds the exact same level of maturity? Yes it is something that needs to be determined on a case by case basis. And its a good thing that because it is legal, and rape is still illegal, then having sex as a 16 year old is a choice that they are free to make. If they have a parent/guardian who helps them make that decision, even better. But 16 year olds have a lot of decisions and responsibilities in their lives that require a much higher level of maturity than being allowed to have a penis inside of them.
fucking hell, my grandmother had 2 babies and 500 head of cattle by the time she was 14, she had 3 babies and was widowed and sold the cattle to open a whore house when she was 16.
tell me again how a 14 year old is not a woman and I'll show 40 generations of my family that married and reproduced before they were 15.
That's great for her, but for every 14 year old girl like her, there are hundreds who get used by much older men and end up being scarred for life by it.
who are you to judge what's good for someone else? who are you to tell other cultures how to transfer land, fortune and DNA? Your judgement of people and desire to place your societal norms on others reeks of fascism.
someone else in this thread pointed it out better, millions of years of evolution can't be overcome by 100 years of societal change, the virility of youth is the whole point of discussion here.
What the fuck are you gonna talk about with a teenager?
Nobody gives a fuck what a young woman says anyway.
What possible fucking common interests could you have?
obviously the only common interest would be procreation, young men are not capable of maintaining a family and older women are not capable of creating a family.
Doesn't make it right. You really think your grandmother appreciated being used like a breed mare that young? Being capable is much different from being physically and emotionally ready.
oh shit, who are you to judge 40 generations of my family? Who are you to determine how mature a woman that died 100 years ago is?
And guess what.. she was the fucking MADAM, (you don't really think the owner of the whore house is turning tricks?), it's actually a pretty good commentary of what she thought of men.. she wrote about what dumb brutes men were controlled only by their sex and how easy it was for her to exploit that. She also killed 8 men over the course of her lifetime.
your judgment is shit, you're ideas are bad and deserve to be ridiculed.
What exactly makes you think that? What led you to that?
I came to the alt right specifically to help black and hispanic people. I've worked with non white people all my life and me trying to make them adhere to white standards is not fair to them.
I think our philosophy of peaceful separation is the best strategy for the long term happiness and survival of all races.
Black people shouldn't be held to white standards. They need to live in Africa with their own people and their own unique ways of governing themselves.
Latin people have their areas and need to stay there.
And to answer your question of course I'd shoot an alt right dude raping someone. If it was just a fight and I didn't know the context of course I wouldn't shoot anyone. I'd probably just try to break it up.
Leftists believe diversity is important inasmuch as it disempowers those who they think are unjustly at the top of the socioeconomic hierarchy, that is people of european ancestry.
They couldn't care less about diversity qua diversity, in fact you'll often hear them praise a hypothetical future in which the whole human species is so thoroughly mixed that you can't tell anyone's ethnicity by looking at them, in other words a world with the lowest amount of diversity possible.
Anyone who actually cares about diversity immediately realizes that the only way in which you can guarantee the presence of a great deal of variety in the world is to have different areas for different people.
Now, it's not that leftists are stupid or that they don't know this, it's just that it's a political matter so their brains shut down as soon as you talk about it. They understand pretty much every identitarian talking point as long as it's not about ancestry in humans.
If you tell them that a certain subspecies of rhinos that it's not even clear if it's actually a subspecies or not but it's peculiar enough to stand out, is probably going to die out because of, say, climate change pushing other rhinos in their areas, they immediately mobilize to try to preserve those handful of rhinos: not even one of them goes "but who cares about genes" or "why does it matter if those rhinos die out, there are still going to be other rhinos around!". Not a single one of them says anything of the sort, in fact, those are probably the parodies they're going to create when they satirize the "conservatives" who don't care about the preservation of nature.
My first real red pill occurred when I was 14-15 while I was doing research online about IQ. I already knew that I had a high IQ when I was accepted into a very prestigious private boarding school in New England, but I wanted to learn more about what exactly IQ is. And it was during that research online that I accidentally stumbled across the raging debate over racial IQ differences. After a lot of painful and uncomfortable research and soul-searching, I very reluctantly came to the extremely disturbing conclusion that the toothless, racist, inbred, skinhead, neo-Nazi, KKK pieces of shit really did have science and reality on their side.
But rather than just ending my red-pilling process there, it's probably a good idea to go over more of the details on my background in order to provide additional context to my current worldview since I think that it will help to dispel lazy stereotypes about most Alt-Righters being born into trailer parks or whatever.
My parents grew up in very liberal, wealthy families in the sister cities of Detroit and Flint, Michigan - two cities that were eventually completely ruined by black people during their lifetimes. But they first met each other at a law school that won't be named because I've already provided way too much doxxable info. After they graduated, they White Flighted to Fairfax County, Virginia - which is considered to be a part of the larger Washington, D.C. area (another city that was ruined by blacks) and is where I spent about half of my childhood.
Despite my parents being very liberal, they were actually quite socially conservative in many ways - such as their decision to not allow my siblings and I to watch TV or play video games growing up because they (correctly) thought that it would rot our brains. And the private boarding schools that I attended also didn't allow us to have TVs in our dorms. So, what do you do for entertainment when you can't watch TV or play video games? Read lots and lots of books. I had already read all of Carl Sagan's books, all of Stephen Hawking's books, all of Jared Diamond's books, and many other similar popular science books by the time that I was 13. So, I was an absolutely massive science fanboy growing up.
I was also super liberal and politically conscious growing up because my parents and grandparents were heavily involved in donating to and campaigning for the DNC for decades. Some of my earliest memories were being dragged around the Presidential campaigns of Clinton and Gore back in the 1990s and getting a behind-the-scenes look at the Clinton/Gore administration - which was pretty cool.
That's why I was so fucking incensed to see these racist, redneck fucktards dare try to claim that the science was on their side. I wanted to completely annihilate their arguments, and so I read a small mountain of books and at least a hundred blog posts and online articles and watched several documentaries on this topic before coming to the literally physically painful conclusion that the evil, subhuman racists really did have the data on their side, and that my liberal side of the debate was spouting half-truths and flat-out lies in a desperate attempt to combat White supremacy and uphold their liberal egalitarian paradigm.
I basically went full Kraut & Tea for about half a year or so researching this topic in my free time, except that I actually had the intellectual honesty to admit that the racists were right. I actually genuinely and naively believed in the liberal mantra of being open-minded and following the evidence regardless of how unpleasant it might be to my own sensibilities - and it caused me to realize that racism, social Darwinism, and eugenics is scientifically justified...
So, that was quite the traumatic red pill... But I actually managed to remain a loyal shitlib for several more years despite that paradigm-shattering realization on such an important issue. And that's because it's extremely hard to escape the liberal ideological bubble. My brain had basically been marinating in liberal propaganda my entire life. And simply being a Republican was enough to become a social pariah in the kinds of far-left social circles that I existed in. My family and friends were liberal as fuck, the communities that I lived in were liberal as fuck, the private boarding schools that I attended were liberal as fuck, the authors that I read were liberal as fuck, the popular culture that I consumed was uniformly liberal as fuck, the news that I consumed was liberal as fuck, the university that I attended was liberal as fuck, et cetera.
Reading books from far-left ideologues like Noam Chomsky in middle school and high school actually caused me to become even more far-left in my teens. I was even borderline Antifa at one point. But it was traveling to former and current communist countries, walking through museums that were dedicated to exposing communist crimes against humanity, and reading critiques of the left (e.g., The Black Book of Communism) which caused me to gradually become disillusioned with the left as I started college.
But the last straw that finally broke the camel's back was the brutal murder of my liberal White best friend by a pack of 15 MS-13 illegal immigrant gang members when we were both sophomores in college. I had never even heard of MS-13. While researching them online, I came across a random blog post by conservative pundit Michelle Malkin that was basically sounding the warning bells about the dangers of MS-13 in the Washington, D.C. area and condemning the left for allowing violent illegal immigrant gang members to spread across previously idyllic American communities.
That blog post - which she probably didn't even put that much thought and effort into - completely broke me mentally. I could barely even look at the screen while reading it because I knew that just a few weeks ago I probably would have left an angry comment on her blog calling her a racist, right-wing asshole and hoping that she got hit by a bus for writing something that was so blatantly ignorant and bigoted.
I had also strongly supported open borders, multiculturalism, diversity, tolerance, sanctuary cities, and amnesty. I was basically a global citizen of the world that supported a UN on steroids because I didn't think that global problems like climate change and inequality could be solved without much stronger global governance. I basically viewed nation-states as being these primitive, tribalistic relics that were enabling disease, income inequality, war, environmental destruction, and xenophobic racism.
After reading that blog post, I finally realized that my best friend's blood was on my hands because I had supported those dangerously retarded leftist policies. And I also finally realized that my leftist views were helping to completely ruin one previously serene White community after the next and sacrificing countless innocent White lives to the altar of diversity and anti-racism. I became completely radicalized against my former leftist comrades after I realized that they had taken advantage of my ignorance and innocent altruism by brainwashing me with such a dangerously suicidal and delusional ideology.
When I first left the left and joined "the dark side", I actually started out as a fucking neocon because neocons still dominated the conservative movement - and because I was reading lots of neocon journals and books as I was exploring right-wing ideology and right-wing critiques of the left. I also became an Islamophobe because I was reading Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch blog on an almost daily basis. And I even briefly became a non-Jewish Zionist because Zionist propaganda is omnipresent in the mainstream cuckservative movement, and especially in the Islamophobia community.
Robert Spencer and other Islamophobes constantly denounce racism and routinely spout the talking point that criticism of Islam has absolutely nothing to do with race; but brown- and black-skinned Muslims flooding into the White Western world and leeching off of our welfare states, filling our prisons, turning underage White girls into sex slaves, slaughtering us in terrorist attacks, aggressively shoving their way of life onto us, and openly declaring their desire to rule over us is obviously a racial issue.
That realization caused me to seek out moderate White "racialists", which is how I discovered Jared Taylor's work. The flawless logic of his arguments and his relatively moderate approach towards pro-White activism completely changed my perceptions of White nationalists. I quickly became a closeted White nationalist and race realist (I have to pretend to be a liberal in real life in order to avoid being socially ostracized). And then Richard Spencer's work impressed me back in around 2014, which caused me to join the Alt-Right.
As to the JQ; I was very close-minded and dismissive towards the JQ my entire life, even after I became a White nationalist. I basically viewed the JQ as extremely counterproductive conspiracy mongering which didn't have any merit and would only scare people away because it reeked of Nazism; but it was during a debate with a fellow White nationalist about 4 years ago where he recommended that I read Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique, and so I did. That's one of those paradigm-shifting books which completely transforms how you view the world. I checked his references to see if they were actually true, and I was shocked to see that they were. I'll never look at Jews or the world the same way again after reading that book.
So, yeah - that's a really long-winded explanation for why I left the left and joined the Alt-Right.
Re: Liberal feminists are so predictable I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
(blairbitchcraft)
This is literally what happened to me when I was younger - well, I recognized the whole trans thing didn’t make sense. “TERF” wasn’t a thing back then. I found more people that agreed with me and then I found a version of feminism that really resonated with me: radical feminism. But everyone hated them. So, I whistled while I walked away and didn’t look back for years.
Liberal feminism has gotten a lot more aggressive than it ever was. You used to be able to find people discussing it, discussing their honest feelings (“I don’t really FEEL like a woman; I just like looking like one,”), and people debating with respect.
It’s so weird.
(FriendlyCommie)
The irony is that the context of the aforementioned thread was I was talking about how anti-feminists claim to support intellectualism and being well-read when talking about how well read St. Jordan Peterson is, but dismiss any literature that contradicts their pre-established conclusions. Everyone in the generally progressive sub was agreeing with me, but once I mentioned rad fem literature everyone... immediately dismissed it, funnily enough.
Lib Fems pretty much forced me to become radical feminist. I remember I had a youtube channel where I used to just post very casual off the cuff videos and one time I made a video literally just saying, "Hey guys... maybe we should actually engage gender critical feminists in debates, rather than just calling them bigots and shutting them out."
The video got loads of thumbs down and some guy who had been I subscriber for ages commented saying I was literally responsible for transgender people committing suicide... just because I said we should actually talk to gender critical people.
By contrast every radical feminist community I've found so far has been incredibly accepting. This is actually one of the few places on the internet where I don't feel like I'm wrong one word away from a downvote avalanche.
Edit: how ironic that I mistyped the phrase "one wrong word"
(Kluannoa)
Yes indeed! And downvotes are one thing, but what I ''feared'' before I found radical feminism was just the abuse that you get if you say one word that's considered wrong. They made me feel like I was walking on egg shells, and that their ideology was suffocating and full of arbitrary rules, that also changed arbitrarily.
One thing that I did learn from that crowd, was the value of basic human respect. You don't make the world any better if you borderline bully someone for some honest, tiny infraction, you don't make the space more pleasant when well-meaning and sincere people get treated like witches because they used the word ''crazy'' or because they wrote ''transwoman'' instead of ''trans woman''.
These people have no respect as I see it; I think that there's something inherently disrespectful about bullying people into compliance, feeling entitled to be incredibly rude and hostile for ridiculous reasons, and always assuming the very worst about people you disagree with.
Thus, I rarely even participated in their discussions. They reminded me of my past abusers.
(afistfulofyen)
The ideologies are straight from The Abuser's Handbook. Same tactics couple with cult strategies to keep people ever guessing, ever trying, ever in line.
Good little libfems *pats heads* good little libfems, you're doing the Lord's mens' work and we appreciate most of all that you do not think for yourselves.
(justhysterical2018)
Yes! And, while they talk about inclusion, they fail to recognize that they are incredible elitists. If someone says something "wrong" (because god forbid they don't spend all their time reading woke thinkpieces) that person is immediately jumped on, rather than engaged in a discussion or provided with resources. Or, if they deign to explain, it is incredibly condescending.
I understand there may always be an elitist aspect to certain feminist discussion. But I think one of the reasons people swing to the extreme right is no one wants to be treated like they're stupid. Or called a bigot for disagreeing or having different ideas. I understand wanting no part a "movement" that forces you to walk on eggshells and allows for zero difference in ideas. I know every movement is vulnerable to ideological puritanism, but I see radical feminists as people who are generally able to disagree respectfully and who actually talk through differences in opinion rather than immediately jumping to "YOU'RE A BAD PERSON" and name calling. It's one of the things I appreciated about this sub when I first started lurking. Even though some things were shocking to me (just being so used to "trans women are women" it was a shock to the system seeing them referred to as males), I kept reading and learning because of the way people conduct themselves here. "Ohhhh these women actually care about putting women first!".
(eccentricvibe)
I'm convinced that libfems have so much anger towards radfems because the majority of us actually do research and have well rounded opinions. A lot of libfems really don't know shit about the history of feminism, all of their talking points come from Tumblr/social media in general and they dismiss 2nd wave feminism as "old TERF bullshit" even though those are the women that helped get the right to vote and better access to healthcare.
(afistfulofyen)
Libfems are the definition of birdbrained. The men need them tho: that water won't carry itself!
How I love that they compare THEMSELVES to the handmaidens when they are the aunts.
The truth is they don't. The Italian and Irish immigrants and their descendants never fully assimilated into WASP culture. You can see differences in all sorts of metrics attesting to this fact. But, and this is very important, they have assimilated better than most other non-white ethnic groups because they are closer to us as kin and in disposition. And while their descendants are not necessarily where the WASP elite is, they're phenotypically indistinguishable to the casual observer. European-Americans are still in their ethnogenesis, and this can only occur during the span of several generations.
You dismiss people's religious beliefs rather cavalierly. I don't rely on faith healing, personally, but I have no problem with those who do. As I pointed out in another place, when parents are prosecuted for not seeking care, what's really happening is that the State is attempting to punish adults for having different values than the State. The State's value is "Physical life and health are the highest values, nothing else competes." But many people believe that there is something more important and valuable than physical life. If such a person enacts such a value in the life of his child, the State has a fit and says, "NO, you must enact MY value instead -- physical life is the most important thing!" So, either you have parents enacting their values in the child's life, or you have the State enacting its values in the child's life. I think the parents have a higher claim to be the ones to choose the value, rather than the State. And personally, I don't care if the parents' values are based on religion, philosophy, science, materialism, political idealism, or anything else. It's easy to look in from the outside and say, "Those poor children, they're at risk." But you don't know the richness of their inner experience, which their parents may be expert at imparting, because they have a purpose in life that's higher than simply continuing to exist.
If parents starved their child to death, that would be horrible. Only a miniscule percentages of parents are so malicious. There are SO many more likely threats to a child's life, I find it kind of silly to hyperventilate over this rare hypothetical. There are better targets for self-righteous rage. The vast majority of parents would give their own lives for their children, and they deserve the benefit of any doubt, as well as the assumption that they do, indeed, act in their children's best interests as they understand them. That might not be the way YOU understand them, but really? It's not even your business.
People act to preserve their children's well-being in different ways. Sometimes taking your child to the doctor is a harmful thing to do, such as in the Stiehler (sp?) case that's ongoing in Michigan right now. Without knowing exactly what was wrong with the 7-month-old in this case, without knowing how easy it was to KNOW that something was wrong, and without knowing the efficacy of various forms of treatment, it's impossible to judge whether the parents did "enough" to care for their child. A large part of the tyrrany of the medical establishment consists in its ability to hookwink everybody into thinking that it has the only solutions, or the only valid solutions. There is often a scientific reason to refuse medical treatment, not just a religious reason.
What if the parent neglected to remove the infant from the train tracks if it ended up there by no fault of the parent?
If the parent had the power to save the child's life, and instead he just casually watched his infant get hit by a train, we would universally condemn that, no matter what legal or criminal label you put on it.
IMO, such a parent shouldn't be prosecuted for negligence. Yes, it's a really bad thing to do. The problem is that once you establish that theory, that someone has a legal obligation to save someone else, then prosecutors turn the common-sense applications on their heads trying to get convictions. The next thing you know, parents are going to jail for not taking their children off the train tracks when the parent was tied up and unable to help, or because the parent was looking the other way and didn't know the train was coming and was deaf and couldn't hear the train, or because they were chasing their other kid who was running off in the other direction and the parent couldn't chase both kids. Stuff like that happens all the time, it's ridiculous. I think the bottom line is that the criminal apparatus should always assume that a parent acts in his child's best interest unless there is damning evidence to the contrary. The vast majority of parents won't intentionally let their children die. Those that do, deserve to have something horrible happen to them, like having their children die.
Haha. Seriously though, I don't think people in general should be prosecuted for failing to help someone. Parents are generally the people we should be LEAST worried about in this department, because they are naturally protective of their children. "Good Samaritan" laws have been repeatedly struck down in the context of requiring the police to help a citizen in need. Those are the situations I'd be far more concerned about. Although, I do agree, if a parent doesn't want to be responsible for his child, he ought to give the child to someone who is willing to care for it appropriately.
As I've said elsewhere, there are various ways of caring for a child. In this example, an infant died while the parents relied on faith healing. It seems to me that they DID seek treatment according to their religion. I can't think of a reason to prosecute them for acting according to their own values instead of the State's.
In other words, simply knowing that a child is in danger is not sufficient "damning evidence" for negligence. There are always a ton of details that modify every situation. That's why, as a general rule, I don't think anyone should be legally liable for not helping someone else. Obviously, the world would be a better place if we helped each other, and if you don't want to care for your child, give it to someone else to raise. But I can't see putting the State in a position to enforce this with guns
Also, if a person neglects their animals and the animals die, they are still punished, even though it was "on accident."
Completely different from killing someone (person or animal) on purpose. But actually, it depends on the animal and how it was neglected. Last year, my 6-year-old forgot to feed her goldfish and it died. Do you think she deserves to go to jail?
In my view, it was a good learning experience for her, even though she didn't face any legal consequences. I'm not saying that people should get off scot-free for neglecting other human beings for whom they're responsible, but let's keep in mind that humans and animals are different just like murder and negligence are different.
you could make the logical argument that a fetus is part of a woman's body and a woman should be able to do whatever she wants to her own body, including destroy parts of it, but to excuse a person who killed a fetus with meth by saying "nobody's perfect" sounds inhumane to me.
I don't make that argument, I am pro-life. But I also don't believe that every living being ought to be locked up in a tower somewhere to prevent any possible bad thing from happening to end its life. This is life, there is risk involved, bad things happen to real people. Not every bad decision needs to lead to jail. If doing meth is illegal, then prosecute the woman for that. Not for negligent homicide. Otherwise we will be looking at negligent homicide charges any time any fetus dies for any reason. That's just unreasonable.
So if a child stops breathing and a parent decides that it's the lords will or whatever the reason is, it's okay for them to stand by and take no action?
Of course it isn't OK. I don't know anybody who wouldn't condemn that. As an issue of rights, I think it's a violation of a parent's right as an individual to be criminally prosecuted for failing to help someone. But most parents aren't going to watch their children choke to death. I think we're really grasping at improbable hypotheticals, here.
[ on liabiliy in faith healing cases where a child dies]
I would say they're not liable, because it's not like they were negligent, they were trying to heal their child but in a different way. The faith healing didn't harm their child directly, it was the lack of medical attention.
Plus, it's their right because we have freedom of religion
Who decides what is neglect and what isn't? Who decides which children should be taken away from their parents and which children shouldn't be taken away from their parents? I have an issue with declaring guilt before innocence. Furthermore, who pays for Child Protective Services? Should we be giving money to the government so they can sometimes wrongfully separate a child from his/her parent.
[ on faith healing]
/I tend to agree with you. I think the family unit should be basically allowed to operate, unless active harm is being done or unless one member asks for help.
The idea is that 99% of families will do their best to keep each other safe and healthy. That's human instinct. If you invite government in to nanny everyone with the "Norm," you have the potential to do more harm than good.
I think that people connected to the family (religious leaders, community leaders, relatives, etc) can keep an eye out to make sure, but sometimes a person dies. I don't agree with this idea that everything must be heavily medicated or treated. I agree that ADD medicine and depression medicine is a negative thing (as a whole) and I think that parents should have the right to choose what happens to their kids body.
If we really wanted "protect" every kid from his parents, we would take them from birth ala Brave New World and raise them in government centers where everyone is equal. That's not how it works in nature though. We should improve nature through technology through iteration, not by imposition or by declaration.
Liability when a child dies due to reliance on faith healing
I made a comment in /r/atheism thread the other day that i knew what draw a lot of fire, but i was disappointed that there was very little real discussion. I am curious what the libertarian thread thinks.
Basically there was a case where a young (7M) died because his parents depended on faith healing and didn't take him to the hospital.
First I certainly don't agree with what he did, i would have my kid there in a second. But actually i don't see anything illegal in what he did. For me how ones cares for their child is a parents right, the government should not interfere. This case looks very black and white. where the parents withheld even the most basic medical care but where would you draw the line?
Here are a few things that do occur or could occur.
schools being allowed to give students medicine (including birth control) without parental consent.
What if its consider cruel that i don't give my child add drugs or anti psychotic if he had some mental illness
deciding that my child should have this surgery or that surgery because its what's approved.
I just don't want the government deciding what happens to my children and i don't want the government telling other people how to do it, I'm an atheist and mostly libertarian but i could be wrong. So who i, or us, or the government to tell other people how to live even in extreme cases like this, where do we draw the line?
[On whether or not it should be fully legal for parent do deny their children medical care for faith based reasons ]
For the record faith healing is a little silly even for an old hpippie like me. However....
Unless your willing for the "government" to get involved and regulate guns so the 60+ children who die each year from gun related deaths are saved then no, you can't regulate to save children from what some states have decided is reasonable.
It comes down to how badly you want the freedoms you already have. If you want them you have to take the good with the bad and that includes allowing parents to decide what is best for their children even if they end up dying from it.
[On whether or not it should be fully legal for parent do deny their children medical care for faith based reasons ]
I don't think people realize how dangerous it is to start saying that the government should regulate religious freedom.
I believe that modern medicine has its place and can be very effective, but why should a parent be forced to involve their children in something they do not agree with? Why should parents not have a right to protect and care for their children in whatever way they see is best?
What if I disagreed with the type of medicine you used on your children? What if thousands or even millions of people disagreed with your idea of healthcare for your children? Does that mean that the government should step in and stop you from creating for your child the way you wish to?
Just because you disagree with a parent's decision, that does not give you the right to intervene.
I agree that life is sacred and that parents cannot be allowed to kill their children, but if they attempt to heal their sick child in their own way, but the child dies regardless of the parent's car, there is no one at fault here. Unless the parent truly has malicious intent of course, and their intent is to be neglectful or to administer poison or something, but this is not usually the case.
And we can't just say that the parents were wrong because their care didn't result in a full recovery, otherwise we could place the same blame on every modern medical procedure that didn't ultimately result in a full recovery.
Doctor's patients die too. Drugs/medicine are often incorrectly prescribed. Surgeries often cause more damage than they solve.
Yes, modern medicine can be beneficial. But there are risks. Why should parents be forced to choose the risks of modern medicine over the risks of their own choice of healthcare
Because faith healing is not health care
And why should they be forced to subscribe to what YOU think is adequate care?
If an adult chooses to not treat their own illness and dies, fine. But the parent is responsible for the child. If their child is bleeding to death and the parents believe that praying is the best "healthcare" and the child dies, the parents should be prosecuted.
So should a doctor be prosecuted when a child dies in their care regardless of the treatment the doctor gave or prescribed?
No, because not believing/trusting medical treatment is no defense and just stupid. If a parent's view is the other way around and believes it is better to pray then seeking medical treatment because they think medicine is bad and just watches his child bleed to death, then that parent is an idiot and should be punished.
And that parent might be thinking the same thing about you while your child is being given the wrong prescription by some doctor that has wrongly diagnosed the problem.My point is that they have just as much of a right to cater for their child as you do for yours.
And besides, your argument only has validity if we assume that prayer and faith healing is completely ineffective, but in reality, that can't be the assumption. And just because you say so doesn't make that assumption true.
on brock turner
A young intoxicated male college student making out with a young intoxicated female college student should not be accused of rape. It is going to get to the point where our sons needs to take vital signs and give females breathalyzer tests. Did she fondle his penis b4 passing out? If so, is she a rapist? Take some responsibility ladies.
One more thing, if a child is a high achiever great athelete, is white and was raised in an upper middle class family why is he being penalized and stereotyped? He's an easy target. It's no longer correct to hate on African Americans, gays, transgendered people, or women. So, bam Brock turner is it.
Look. No race is inferior to another.
Races ARE absolutely different from one another though.
So, inferior in what aspects? IQ? On average, yes. Athleticism? On average you would be superior to most whites in that area.
Races also all have a general set of personality traits among them. Blacks are generally aggressive and very short tempered. Whites are somewhere in the middle, and Asians are the least aggressive and short tempered out of the three.
So, you'd have to ask about specific areas you're referring to. Based solely off your ancestral lineage you are no worse or better than any other person of any other race.
But (and a big but), a lot of times blacks do tend to be objectively shittier people than whites.
Honestly, I wish there was an Amerindian version of the alt-right, similar to the American Indian Federation of the WWII era, and that both the white and indian races could ally themselves with each other in order to create two distinct ethnostates within the US, and then a neutral zone for everyone else. Reservations are not ethnostates as people on this sub have said.
No one, no one actually thinks transwomen are women. That's what drives me crazy. Even when I was trans-inclusive I didn't believe that (I wasn't being asked to chant it either, probably would've peak transed me a lot sooner).
NO ONE thinks they are female/women. They think they should be allowed to play pretend, to have everyone else play pretend too, and the cost to actual women is not important.
Justice is coming, Nippon; aint nothing you can do to change it, not even hiding behind the skirts of white men is gonna save you; shit, trying to suck up to China to escape justice aint gonna help. The day will come when the time is right and your children will become loyal Chinese vassals, soon enough.
Pay attention to how they portrayed the local cuisine by filming in at an economically-priced establishment (not saying that lower end is bad) as opposed in an equivalent high end institution such as Fook Lam Moon, a place that existed for local tycoons who succeeded in spite of the British fat cat types that dined at The Peninsula.
Makes you think doesn't it? Architects of White supremacy portray poverty in Asia as a sign of 'grit', 'character', and 'soul', conveniently glossing over the fact that the destitution and hardship only exists as a DIRECT CONSEQUENCE of their brutal and barbaric colonialism. It bewilders and exasperates me when I see the British gloatingly demand their colonial exploitations be seen as 'accomplishments'. I honestly can't think of a more disgustingly evil people. It takes a certain kind of rotten national psyche to celebrate things like this.
Btw, afternoon tea at The Upper House completely destroys The Peninsula's offering.
Stockholm syndrome runs deep in Japanese society. They were utterly beaten and subjugated by the US and now they worship the ground Americans walk on. This fact alone precludes Japan from ever properly atoning for their past since they consider other Asians inferior while they eagerly kiss white ass. Similarly, this also precludes Japan from joining in some pan-Asian alliance since the only way to cure Stockholm syndrome is to first free the victim from its captor - without the victim's help or consent. IMO, I honestly don't care about japan or its future.
And even if you were to consider lolicons pedos, if a pedo came out to anyone, they'd get the police called on them. Therapists are required to aren't they? Even if said pedo isn't hurting anyone and has no intention to. Which I think is pretty harsh imo. Furthermore, taking away pedo's outlets is dangerous, because if anything they is going to be illegal, what is stopping them from doing actual harm, other than them wanting to protect children. It might not be a perfect defense against child abuse, and those who rape kids are going to anyway, but at least it gives the ones who do not want to harm kids something safe to rub their rod.
But I really don't think it's fair to everyone who enjoys lolicon a pedo, just as it's not fair to call someone into bdsm or rape porn a rapist, nor do they really wish to be raped. And rape porn is a popular genre. It's a fantasy, an escape. And I think escapism is fine just so long as you don't take the fantasy into real life. The loli porn is not the problem, it's the people who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction.
Either way, I don't think people should care what I wank to if it harms nobody. Also sorry if I seem like a cunt at any point, I am not trying to. I've noticed that I am probably being too bitter in the past comments. Just very passionate about the topic I guess.
Alright bro. I'm going to level here. If anyone is trying really hard here to keep porn where children lookalikes are in, then I think that person is a massive pedo. Murdering another human being is completely different to allowing lolis in porn. And don't get on a high horse about defending fiction and how it shouldn't be messed with. You look like a pedo, defending this. Take a step back, and just reevaluate yourself.
Yea this is an edit just went through your profile a little. I understand why you are defending this so hard. Cause you are a pedo.
Double edit: "17 is more than old enough tho" yea your a pedo
So it's okay to murder another human being but not okay to allow lolis in porn? Do people look gay for defending gays? Do people look like murderers for defending murder in games?
I really don't see how violent video games and lolis are so different that they cannot be compared. Both are fiction and both depict something illegal and wrong, I think that's fair ground for comparison.
The only reason I look like a pedo to you is because you're not willing to accept that fiction isn't reality and enjoying something in fiction doesn't mean you enjoy in real life.
Ahem, I am from/in Mexico, born, raised and will die here. With all due respect, fuck the "native americans". The northern tribes had an atrocious reputation across the board even as far back as the pre-conquest era (1400s) and they were extremely poorly regarded by the tribes of mesoamerica (Aztecs obviously, Tarahumara, etc.).
The "heritage" of the norther tribes is non-existent. They engaged in constant warfare until they met an opponent beyond their ability to defeat. They lost the war, they have no claim to the land.... if anything they should be immensely thankful that the pioneers didn't wipe them out because of the situation were reversed, the northern tribes would never have hesitated to kill every man , woman and child that was part of the opposing faction. Mercy was not something the northern tribes were known for, at all. So be grateful that the winners of the war didn't think the same way.
tldr, no, the native americans are dumb for thinking they have a claim.
It's hypocritical to say that lolicon is wrong because it's immoral or gross, calling it pedophilia, even to say you don't care that they're not underage, and then go on to play some video game where you brutally murder innocent people and children.
Imagine a woman being 30 and looks like a child so she often gets mistaken for one. What is she to do? If she fucks someone, that person she fucks will be deemed a pedo and jailed? Do we care about age then, or just looks? After all, if she looks underage, then she is underage.
Why do so many people care so much about fictional children but never seem to talk about real children being raped? They're just pixels on a screen. If you wanna bitch about pedophilia, go and hunt the real pedos.
The one thing I have to say about most lolicons I've seen, it's that they seem to be a bunch of pussies. To afraid to stand up for themselves. They'd rather others fight for them, but who's going to do that when most non lolicons detest lolicons? You don't get in anything in life by staying idle and nothing easy to obtain is worth having.
Reddit should ban the furry and gaming communities, because that's just immoral and wrong. At least play it fair.
Re: Sex Before Kissing: How 15-Year-Old Girls Are Dealing With Porn-Obsessed Boys
Fascinating. I didn't know the US had already degenerated to this level although I suspected something along these lines.
15 year old girls should be kept seperate from boys their age or at least supervised. At that age boys have levels of testosterone exceeding even that of violent adult males. I recall thinking about sex or something sex-related almost all the time when I was that age. It faded as puberty ended of course, but pubescent males are basically drugged up on a powerful aphrodisiac drug that also makes them aggressive and impulsive.
The media and liberalism have made it normal for 15 year olds to have sex. The truth is that as much as the hormones tell them to have sex at that age, they're just not mentally and emotionally ready for it.
I don't know about full segregation, but we at least need to be talking about this on a societal level, in comprehensive sex ed classes, etc... & parents are going to have to get over their squeamishness over talking about sex with their kids. As for the last part, I am grateful that I was strong willed & had strong boundaries at 15, because I ended up hearing too many cautionary tales that involved girls who didn't.
At that age boys want to have sex with anything female that moves. Liberalism has normalised sex for all ages to such a degree that it's now bordering on pedophilia.
These days when a teacher has sex with a student it's not even seen as wrong anymore. It's called a sex romp these days. Even when the kid later comes out and feels seduced and abused, the media will often still speak of it as a sex romp instead of rape. The media has created this sense that rules are meant to be broken, that no means yes if you try hard enough and that 'bad boys' are real men.
Too many women put up with it though. These boys become fuckboys in adulthood and consider relationship gatekeeping as a tool to get women to have sex with them. They don't see women as persons proper, just as delectable creatures with warm, soft and moist holes for them to stick their penises in. It was bound to happen at some point though I mean women are objectified just about all the time. I wonder if women are aware of it.
For example I'm sure a bikini is nice to wear but it's effectively the same as being naked, Almost everything of interest is already on display if women wear it, so any time a man wants to ogle women who are stripped almost bare, he can just go to the beach and have his fill.
While there is definitely a faction of pedos trying to normalize their behavior, I really am not convinced that 'liberalism' is wholly to blame for this- people practice child marriage in many of the most socially conservative societies on earth. Even here in the US, FLDS(a breakaway sect of Mormonism) members practice child marriage, & I myself met several girls under 16 who were married off, legally(with 'parental consent'), to much older men in fundamentalist evangelical christian communities. I am not convinced that any of those marriages turned out well. I can't remember who said it, but there was some quote to the effect that many right wing guys consider women private property, but left wing guys consider women public property. I wish what I have observed in my own life convinced me otherwise, but it doesn't.
I don't believe that all men engage in this or are responsible for it, but then they don't really have to- one of the greatest myths is that it takes a majority to influence social trends or societal expectations. As for swimwear/beachwear, my own choices just aren't centered around men's preferences at all- I don't care for hot, crowded beaches, so I'm usually in swimwear either because I'm going for a relaxing swim, or I'm doing some other sort of activity. Neither bikinis, nor the 'burkinis' that are positioned opposite them are actually optimal for any of the activities I like to do...trying to swim, dive, or stay on a board while I'm having to worry about a boob popping out, or dealing with so much extra fabric I might as well be wearing a beekeeper costume doesn't appeal to me. If I wanted to wear lingerie, I would wear lingerie, & I wouldn't be trying to swim in it.
I'm a nihilist and marxist. I'm not coming from the religious angle here (although most men who blame liberalism are so I understand why you would assume that). I'm not trying to say what came before wasn't extremely bad. I mentioned liberalism because as an ideology it's just bad on almost all fronts. I'm anti totalitarian but do believe in a little bit of authoritarianism/illiberalism when needed. Of course I believe in limits to such authoritarianism, I'm of the opinion that some rights are sacred, including right to bodily integrity, as well as the sovereignty of the self, and should be beyond legislation.
Left wing guys who think women are public property are just crazed tankies. Mao used to force people to do everything communally, including take showers together, sleep (not have sex, just sleep) in same room.
There's this thing called dialectical materialism. Some ideas come from the material realm, that is to say the ideas are thought up to justify the material conditions. Right wingers and left wing traitors will come up with ideas to justify the oppression of certain groups, just like how the rich like to claim the poor are lazy and that they are the parasites of society, etc.
Berniebros and common leftists don't even know what marxism is and have never read Das Kapital let alone excerpts of it. Marx says that society is divided into classes. There are the owner classes and then there are the proletariat classes, or simply the proletariat. These workers are exploited and forced to sell their labour as well as their body in certain conditions, to survive.
In a sense, men women and children alike are objectified. Men and children were worked in mines, used like disposable tools and were discarded of when their bodies were destroyed or outlived their usefulness. Women same thing, but also exploited in sexual manner. Men were sent to war like living meat bags to be shot up and bleed to death and die a few years later of PTSD if they survived.
Marx, meant not just labour but oppression as a class. That's why he makes it so very clear that there are the oppressed classes and the capitalist owner class doing the oppression.
Berniebros and so forth don't know anything about Marx, they just want a bailout for their student loans and useless college degrees. (I do think student loan debt has to be restructured though because it's abundantly clear that it's set up as a slavery ring)
Comments under "'This War is a Jewsh War' Propaganda stamp produced in 1944 by prisoners in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp for Unternehmen Wasserwelle (Operation Waterwave), based on the British Silver Jubilee half penny stamp. Germany, 1944."
@Manfromthesudan
@OyVeyGoyimNose
@Manfromthesudan
Stalin hated the jewish people.
There are more than 1 race of jew btw , Hitler had a Jewish driver and Himmler (commander of SA/SS) was Jewish
So?
From OyVeyGoyimNose:
Stalin didint hate all Jews just the ones that murdered 30 million Russians
Bullshit. My ancestors conquered this land and built it from scratch, that’s completely different than coming here to an already established society. Whites were 85% of the population historically, Asians less than 1%. While you certainly helped with railroads this is by no means your home, and by no means are you an “American”, especially with your vitriolic anti white sentiments. How can you possible take advantage of everything done here by my people and still want
to do us harm
What if whites fled to Japan and used the same rhetoric you use against us? “Japanese supremacy” “Straight Japanese male privilege” “the Japanese are over represented in all aspects of their government, we white demand representatives!”
Pls. Also the quickest cure to Asian thots dating white men (which I also see as a massive problem, I don’t want Hapas and prefer white genes to all others) is separation and nationalism. A homeland for all. Whites respect Asians for being intelligent and hard working with a good culture centered on family. There’s no reason to have conflict between our people especially considering that Asians and whites are the two highest iq groups and that our societies are objectively the best and most prosperous
Also I laugh at the idea that Asians are “second class citizens” maybe in the sexual market but look at government statistics by race. Asians make more than whites on average, you guys commit less crime and use less government handouts, you make up 30% of Ivy League colleges and score the highest on average in terms of test scores in the US. What are you fighting against here again?
I'm gay and an alt-righter. I think gay people like myself should be accepted in society, especially because sexuality is not really a conscious choice. Both your genes and the environment you find yourself in contribute towards becoming gay over a long period of time, and not in a way you have direct conscious control over, so I find it immoral to strongly persecute people for it if they are not harming anybody else.
That said, homosexuality should not be directly promoted and often encouraged like it is now in western societies. This is because the homosexual lifestyle is one that, to an extent, undermines the traditional family structure that is extremely important for a sustainable society. Also, we've seen that homosexuals are more likely to take issue with other fundamentals to a sustainable society, especially because we've seen they are prone to pushing the narrative about how they are "oppressed" that leads down the road to Marxist thought. It's no coincidence that the vast majority of gay people are leftists that have fallen into various leftist hivemind communities. Therefore, we should be accepted but only to a limited extent and not pushed as role models or anything like that, whereas those practising the traditional family lifestyle should be promoted.
Alaska is great for farming too. The eskimos didn't have a high enough IQ to grow much but I know you could do it!
Ironic Hypocrisy in TwoXChromosomes right now
So over on TwoXChromosomes right now there's a post called "I was just catfished and it was kind of terrifying" posted by a transwoman. I commented before I realized. I'm not posting the link because I don't want them to get the notification and I really don't like brigading.
Anyway all the comments are like "OMG you poor thing, it's absolutely atrocious how men don't respect lesbian's boundaries and try to convince lesbians to have sex with them!"
Of course OP is a pre-op transwoman who previously posted "hey fellow women how can I make my voice cuter cause you all do that" and "does everyone want to be their favorite anime girl or is it just me?"
Reality is broken. This is peak. Seriously, how is this not an episode of South Park or the Twilight Zone?
(YahwehTheDevil)
That thread is fascinating:
"Here me out, I know you don't like dick but you haven't seen mine!" Fucking losers.
I’m a lesbian as well and have also been catfished by men, unfortunately multiple times. So many men just don’t take lesbianism seriously, and view it as a challenge.
You just don't appreciate the mystical power of dick! As if lesbians could actually be happy without dick, they're just deluding themselves! Then when you trick them into coming close you shove yours in their face and BOOM their delusion crumbles and they'll be desperate for your schlong.
I don't care if you are gay or straight that is not cool, who thinks anyone would want to start a relationship based on a lie?
I was supposed to meet “her” at the Walmart because it was near my house and in a public place.
If you don’t understand why a man catfishing a lesbian is creepy as fuck, you’re part of the problem
By misleading a lesbian and making that connection while in the guise of a woman, you pretty much out yourself as a creep and a liar. The connection was made via deceit
I'm of the opinion that, although adults should be allowed to get SRS and HRT, and that they shouldn't be discriminated against because of those things, people have a reasonable expectation for a man to have an actual, functioning penis, and for a woman to have an actual, functioning vagina. Genitals, while not a sufficient condition for attraction, are for most people a necessary condition, and to call yourself a woman when you don't have a vagina is deceptive.
I wonder if that thread would play differently if everyone know that OP was a pre-op trans.
(radfemanon)
It's almost like trans ideology is super duper homophobic.
(DifferentAirGC)
Off-topic, but I wonder if TIMs think the name of that subreddit is exclusionary and "TERFy"
(contecorsair)
There's a few xx subs like that, like xxketo for example, which I like/hope is for actual women and transmen, because biology matters, especially when specifically talking about something that effects your hormones and so many women, myself including, have absent or two week+ menstruation from keto or are using keto to help with diabetes and ovarian cysts. (And no transwomen are not "just like women with PCOS". Gag me.) There was this "I'm an XY women am I welcome?" Seriously, who other than trans ask if they are "welcome" on a sub? People are free to subscribe and post to any sub as long as it's relevant. Why ask? Even GC doesn't have a "no Transcribers" rule. They are just fishing for validation at our expense. Like, if I'm uncomfortable with it, like I am, what am I supposed to do? Say, "Actually, this sub is not for you, it's for people talking about the specifics of dealing with keto and how it changes the female body."? No. I'll be downvoted to hell and labeled transphobic. So they come seeking validation, I'm just asking an innocent honest question, no hate plz~ but we all know that there's only one allowed answer to the question or you get banned, downvoted, or threatened.
(lesbianisntabadword)
Go sort by “top of all time” on xxketo and you’ll find a post at the very top welcoming a TIM with open arms.
Many even suggest changing the name because xxketo is “exclusionary” and “chromosomes shromosomes”. And that was as of 74 days ago.
Many even had the audacity to say that women with PCOS could “relate to his androgen problems” so he should fit right in.
Uhh... seriously? I have PCOS and that does NOT make me relate more to a man, Tina. Get out.
So annoying!!
(SeverelyModerate)
I’m sorry .... WHAT?!!?! Are you fucking kidding me!? That’s enraging!!! Chromosomes DO matter when it comes to the expression of literally every gene in the body. Your risk of osteoporosis, certain cancers, certain diseases ... it doesn’t give a flying fart what the patient “identifies” as. I promise. And the PCOS thing has my head spinning like Beetlejuice. I can’t. It’s too stupid.
(lethalmachine)
I was just part of a thread where a TIF called me a dick. I said “I’m a cunt if you want to be technically correct” so he sent me a PM calling me a terf and all of those pleasantries. When I said “isn’t using genitals as an insult kind of terf-y?” He blocked me right after. The irony is ALWAYS lost on them.
(That90sCaliChick)
Oh trust me. There was a thread where a mother posted about her daughter being 18 and already being a cam girl. I suggested that there could be a chance she was groomed into it and I was dogpiled by these idiots who were pro sex industry!
That's so disturbing, you're probably right! I bet they were like oh no don't tell her to stop, give us her camera name
They didn’t ask for her camera name, but they were making the typical sex pozzer libfem arguments:
“But what if she knows other cam girls”
“You’re perpetuating the stigma.”
(Candentia)
I'm hoping if nothing else that seeing the dogpile on you would convince the mother to refrain from taking pro-porn arguments to heart. If she legitimately cares about what may be happening it's better that her daughter could have someone to talk to about it instead of being left to handle it alone...or worse, with no one but other sex-positive individuals (far more likely to find around her age today) who will offer nothing but encouragement for doing it.
(artificialgraymatter)
The guy in that thread that says lesbians and women should give him a chance as a platonic friend....
Women always owe men something.
*Edit: And I haven’t even gotten to the incel yet.
(Hooksandfangs)
Remind me why we’re not supposed to say these men are utterly revolting, again?
(Burbseverywhere)
LOL. This guy thinks that this other guy has anything in common with his lesbian mother.
I’m glad you’re safe...I should mention that I am a straight married male, but I grew up with a gay mother and I couldn’t imagine someone trying this to her, if you need any help trying to figure out witch VPN to go with I have a few in mind that should help you on all platforms, just let me know if you need any help
I love how these men white knight for trans but when a woman is harrassed it is her fault.
Silly womens acting so sensitive. /s
The glaring difference between the definition of "male" and "female" on Medicine Net
(totalrando9)
It's funny... until you realize that young women are being pressured to 'define their gender' and 'decide what pronouns to use.' As the qualifications for 'being a woman' get more obscure and complicated, women will be pressured to dis-identify with the label 'woman.'
What's even worse is that this is supposed to be a medical definition of 'female' - they aren't even limiting their revisionism to 'women' anymore.
(XXisBornFemale)
Men are human.
We are non men.
We are whatever men say that we are. Men define us. We will never be permitted to define ourselves.
(raddy-set-go)
Scrolling further down that very same page:
" Women should be aware that they metabolize a number of drugs differently than men. In some cases and for some medications, the rate of metabolism may be slower, and in other cases, faster. It is, therefore, essential that women are well informed about the kinds and correct dosages of any drugs they are taking. "
But I suppose one can just "identify" out of those differences nowadays
(exhaustedstudent)
A great example of the way that society defines male as the default and woman as some sort of “variation”, which in turn opens the door for every other thing not defined as clearly male to come under the female umbrella.
(TerribleConfusion)
Wow, the thought police truly DGAF about trans men. So much of this movement is purely about sheltering and validating the precious, precious egos of narcissistic transwomen.
I'm thinking also of Cancer Research UK who changed all the wording on their website associated with cervical cancer and other women's illnesses, and left the wording on the men's cancers intact and straightforward.
Anyone got other instances like that? From this thread it seems like the Wikipedia page history for "woman" would be another good example of this. A few years ago the problem with that page was that it was full of misogynistic slurs listed as "synonyms" for "woman" while the page defining "man" was straightforward and scientific. It really does sometimes seem like the trans activists have stepped in to take over where the openly misogynistic dudebros have left off.
You could not 'Give' the us back to native americans any more than you could give Italy back to the Romans.
That history is over. Americans and natives fought...we killed each other...and ultimately the Americans were victorious.
We did not eliminate the last of the natives and I'm glad we didn't. We gave them reservations instead. That was an honorable choice imo...and it seems rather crappy to use our mercy against us by trying to extort us with the remaining natives. Would you really want us to wind up regretting that we did not complete the genocide?
Natives are not one people for starters. They are different nations and tribes and were frequently fighting and sometimes genociding each other before we arrived. Then they died in the millions from disease weakening their cohesion and culture significantly.
Another important note to point out is that natives didn't and many still don't believe in land ownership. They are basically nomadic and this inability to adapt to westerner and easterners that believe in individual rights and land rights was a major major failing. Therefore, the natives were conquered and conquered people don't get their land back (unless of course the jews propagandize them into emotional terrorists and in that case they actually do get some handouts! Whites are often so dominant the only way to get anything out of them is to manipulate their emotions and their women who are allowed to vote. )
So no we don't have to give them 1/2 of a country they never owned or dominated.
If I ran a small ethnostate I'd ignore them and give them full autonomy in their homelands with no aid or help. I'd try to trade with them and if they polluted my lands or fuck with me I'd wage war on them.
If I ran the entire US as an ethnostate I'd give each member a lump sum payout (100k or so) and then turn the best parts of their reservation into a national park and auction the rest of it off to the highest bidder. Then I'd end all welfare programs for natives within the ethnostate. Sink or swim.
(That90sCaliChick)
What if we women just stopped all emotional or activist labor for TRAs?
I’ve been thinking about this for quite some time. I almost wonder what would happen if every last woman on earth stopped performing emotional or activist labor for TRAs given how shitty they treat us.
I’ve stopped doing any activist labor for them and I’ve never felt better! Same goes for some former libfems I’ve talked to. The minute they put women first is when they realized where they need to be.
Think about it. TRAs get tons of corporate funding and media attention. Why do they need the labor of us everyday women? They can rely on their corporate buddies.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the only reason they guilt and terrorize us into performing labor for them is so they can have us preoccupied and we can’t do things for ourselves. That needs to stop.
I think it would be what is deserved.
I would like to see it now on this website: no more using "cis", as we are humans, not isomers. No more using the word woman for anyone but adult human females. No more emotional labor for men who post here.
If only the libfems would see it that way. They exhaust themselves performing all this labor for them. I can see it in their eyes.
I feel many of our sisters waking up, however. This site has grown so large- there were 4K subscribers when I arrived, and there are 4x that after 18 months.
It is difficult to have patience for women who spend so much of themselves on men. Try to raise consciousnesses wherever you can. I found this site through an article about boys join a girls' sports team.
We will never change all of their minds, but women are worth it, even the ones who oppose us.
Yep. I’m even finding common ground with conservative women on this issue. I know conservative women are handmaidens too, but even if they’re willing to team with us for a short time, it’ll be worth it.
(Omina_Sentenziosa)
The best (or worst) thing about it is that it' s not going to be enough anyway. At the smallest infraction, they will be labeled TERFs as well, and if that doesn' t happen the goalposts will move and TRAs will ask even more insane and impossible shit than they are doing now.
Frankly, I think that TRAs are acting this way because 1) they need women working for them and supporting them since they are lazy and entitled and would never think of, you know... doing something themselves, 2) because they are testing us to see how much we' re willing to take and how far they can go before we snap and tell them to go fuck themselves and 3) because they want to have a "justifiable" reason to hate on us: think about it, what' s better than telling a woman to choke on your dick? Telling a woman to choke on your dick and be called awesome for that.
(XXisBornFemale)
We shouldn't be doing anything at all for men.
Men always do well. And they have plenty of extra energy to rape/mutilate/murder/abuse girls and women. They look out for each other.
Perhaps if they had to make their own sandwiches, do their own laundry, raise their own children, etc., they wouldn't have time or energy to control every uterus, imprison us for miscarriage, etc.
Amen!! This is part of why I’m not having children. I know I would be doing the majority of the child rearing. Fuck that.
Not having children was the single best decision that I ever made.
Some women don't have any choice about their own pregnancies, and I understand that, too.
I am glad that I didn't create more men, for obvious reasons. And I don't know how I would deal with it if I knew that I would be leaving daughters behind when I die. Especially when so many women are so centered on men.
(FabulousNerfherder)
Agreed. I'm going to start a meetup for "womyn" and then plan that woman's festival.
(That90sCaliChick)
Just let me know when and where! I’m sick of every last womyn’s event being coopted by trans activists and porn sick men! Fuck that!
I don't think whites can truly assimilate into asian culture for the same reason I don't think it's really possible for asians to really assimilate into white culture. Because no matter how white/asian you feel, it's other peoples perception of you that decides how you are treated. I therefore see the assimilation process as somewhat generational, by for instance producing a half white/half asian child, this child will have a greater chance of being "accepted" into either culture because they look more white/asian than if they were "full" either.
While I STRONGLY disagree with her being allowed anywhere near a teaching position again , and I do think she should have been punished by being forced on a sex offender registry.... her crime is not the same as when a man does it.
Men and women are not interchangeable. Tabula rasa is bullshit and anyone implying it is a propagandist of the highest order. This is one of the biggest contentions I have with many people on this subreddit, they want to play along with the commie bullshit of tabula rasa despite us knowing that it's bullshit.....
Don't play that game. Not saying that's what OP did, but often times people will respond with what I have mentioned and I am pre-emptively striking.
Yes it is,
When a woman has sex with someone under-age, it is rape!
When a man has sex with someone under-age, it is rape!
Having sex with someone under-age is rape! I don't give a fuck who had sex with who!!
No.
No.
No.
Rape by etymological hard-lock definition means force and violence. A breach of age restrictive protocol does not qualify. The grossly misnamed "Statutory rape" is not actual rape unless the target is 12 or younger, in which case I will concede that point.
In simple terms, not all so-called "rape" is equal and to suggest otherwise is pure unadulterated idiocy.
Fantastic opinion you got there. Should I (40 year old male) be able to go out looking for a 14 year old girl to have sex with? As long as she consents, it's all good, right? You are one sick individual for this opinion
Fantastic strawman argument you got there.
Try again, little one.
It's considered a straw man if all he did was switch genders of the situation? I'm not sure you know what a straw man is. Your IQ may be under 18 and like to get fucked but that doesn't apply to children.
He grossly misrepresented my argument, and you are doing the same, what a joke.
You tabula rasa loonies are beneath the level of a child.
I think victim impact should be part of any sentencing.
I work with male survivors and don't know the research, so maybe you could enlighten us.
Half the survivors I work with had female perpetrators. They would disagree with your last sentence. They found their sexual assault by a woman crippling.
Don't be a joke.
her crime is not the same as when a man does it.
It's exactly the same, because it's about age, and position of authority. She raped a minor, while in a position of authority.
Nope.
Men and women are not interchangeable. You can try to pretend otherwise, little tabula rasa acolyte, but reality does not bend to your emotion.
I had sex with a (at least) 24 year old when I was 14.
She was my sisters friend & offered to help me study. She never did & instead we spent a month fucking.
I thought it was cool at the time, it was not. She was gross, a loser, and a predator.
It normalized some things in my mind that were not good. It also let me think some things I did in the future were okay, they weren’t.
I hurt people I care about, and one reason is because this event and others taught me the wrong lessons about what is okay and what isn’t.
Adults should not have sex with children, it’s that simple.
Strawman argument, yawn.
Can I just say that this subreddit is the only place I feel sane?
I'm a millennial (I only mention that bc it seems everyone my age is obsessed with TGism), bisexual woman married to a man and this subreddit is the only place I don't feel f*cking crazy!!! I can't tell anyone how I feel though for fear I'll be seen as a bigot or ignorant. I've been seriously disturbed by the backwards mindset of transgenderism for years - starting in Feminist Theory in college. My professor posed this very question: If we truly believe as feminists that our gender does not define our capabilities, why the hell do people insist on changing their gender? Because they "feel" a certain way? It reinforces the idea that only women are supposed to cry or have close friendships or love men. I know I'm preaching to the choir hear, it just feels so good to get this all off my chest.
It also drives me absolutely mad that TG is seen as SOOOOOOO BRAAAAVE and people are elbowing each other out of the way to use certain bathrooms and be allowed on sports teams, be considered women for the purpose of pursuing lesbian relationships, say they've felt this all their lives, it's medically accepted and yet lesbians are still raped, abused, mistreated, and discriminated again every second of the day. These men want to control a woman so desperately that they decide to create their own "ideal" woman. Where my ugly trans chicks at, huh? *crickets* That's what I thought. Even if they don't fit into societal standards of pretty, they all seem to striving for that ideal. It's disgusting and sad.
I cannot stand this trend. I'm a psychiatric professional and I cannot see this as anything but mental illness brought on and/or encouraged by the radical left/men who have internalized homophobia. Our spaces are being invaded, our identity is being invaded. It's utter madness and I can't stand it! I'm so glad this community exists.
