MGTOWrama : A FEMINIZM CONSEQUENCE
Options
Comments
-
atribecalledgabi wrote: »atribecalledgabi wrote: »You have a couple different types of mgtow.
Your average mgtow man is a bloke who wants the stability of a relationship, the wife the family etc etc but they recognize how dubious and detrimental the set up is with women either cheating and divorcing cuckolding and divorcing or just cutting off sex period. So these men go mgtow as the only logical course of action until the legal and social landscape adjusts. These are the men who are red pill ragers because the duplicity of females keeps them from being in relationships
Another type of mgtow is the true forced lonliness. Tfls are guys that are just physically unappealing to women. They've never been in long term relationships have few or no causal encounters. Nerds dweebs fatties basement dwellers low t just unappealing. So they are mgtow by default. They recognize women want nothing to do with them so they reject women as well.
The third type of mgtow is the guy who realizes that women are liabilities. That involvement with females does nothing but curtail your fun and deplete resources. These men value their freedom over everything. Generally these men are good looking and financially well off so they naturally draw female attention. They usually have strings of causal relationships and when the girl wants to get too serious he just drops her.
The fourth type is the burn victim. This is the guy who has either been in the court system for some combination of divorce and child support. He witnessed a woman who he loved and thought returned those feelings, absolutely decimate and defame him in court. It's at this time he realizes she was only in it for the money. So this guy is distraught, alienated and financially devastated. He just learned a life lesson the hard way. Don't trust these hoes, they don't love you.
All these scenarios are applicable to women as well.
We all got stories of somebody taking advantage of us or know somebody who has, are or know ppl that just ain't that attractive and blame their lack of game on the opposite sex, or ppl that just flat out don't wana be told what to do and won't succumb to a relationship/marriage...or at least not a traditional one.
Tf is the point of putting a name to this basic ass ? . Don't wana be married and tie yourself financially forever to a spouse and kids, then don't. Who cares. This ain't no earth shattering ? . It's 2017 do what you wana do.
For whatever reason this seems like a foreign concept to most. People cant just do ? without it being a movement whether is feminism, mgtow, political affiliation etc.
In normal terms, meaning, as long as no crazy ass war breaks out or some wild environmental ? happens, or something else that is way above me that I cant control happens, no man or woman can effect my life in a positive or negative way unless I let him.
Mgtow, and feminism, and similar movements all seem like a bunch of victims crying over ? that they have control over to me.
I feel like it's necessary if these groups are tryna enact change to things that actually will make things equal between sexes and hold each other accountable. Like I personally don't believe in alimony or spousal support unless a spouse was a homemaker or made waaaaay less...and even then it should be capped a certain amount of years to allow the other person to get back on their feet. Especially if there's kids involved. And I don't believe in ridiculous amounts of child support or the threat of jail if said amount cant be paid cuz that doesn't encourage co-parenting.
But i totally agree that at the end of the day you have complete control over your social interactions and who you ? or get in relationships with. Vet your partners. If ? /? ain't pulling their weight in your eyes, drop em and move on. Do not ? marry them.
I mean, sure. It's not like you can be sued if an engagement doesn't fully go through, and you change your mind, right?
Oops, never mind....
Yep......here, too.
But I mean, OK. It's not like if relationship doesn't even make it to an engagement, the course have no effect. After all, if no one gets engaged, no real promises have been made to anyone, so muhfuckas should be safe on that, right?
You're wrong...
Ok...and I disagree with that. You gon post something else that ima say i disagree with and wouldn't do and know other women who also wouldn't?
I mean....what are we doing here? Are you gonna completely stop interacting with women altogether for the rest of your life or are you gonna do you and do you what you want in your relationships? Like I've been saying... -
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol this whole attitude that I am only worried about me is also a function of the slow collapse of society and is very feminine as selfishness is not really a male virtue.
One of the benefits of laws is that they serve to mitigate the results of bad human decisions, the family/divorce laws in the western world only increase the suffering of people therefore they are bad laws and should be changed.
the argument that they these laws ? over both sexes therefore we should both just suck it up is a ridiculous argument because if goes against the very social utility of the law
Lol @ Selfishness being a feminine attribute...comments like this is why the convo gets contentious
And expound on how divorce laws are leading to a soceital collaspe or to more human suffering
Prior to no fault divorce laws and the likes of the tender years doctrine, women ( who make up 50-51% of the pop) could potentially get stuck in abusive and unhappy marriages because they faced poverty and the very real threat of being deprived of seeing their children. Now at least women have options
Not to say these these laws are perfect or havent had any averse effects that can be addressed...the answer is not to go back in time..nor is stigmatizing life styles...
Please can we stop romanticizing the past
I literally JUST had a convo with my homie about women being more selfish than men by nature. Men have an instinct to protect and provide. That takes a certain level of selflessness. Nit to say men arent and cant be selfish, but I think women are more prone to it.
I wont titanagraph on this point so you got it champ. -
atribecalledgabi wrote: »atribecalledgabi wrote: »atribecalledgabi wrote: »You have a couple different types of mgtow.
Your average mgtow man is a bloke who wants the stability of a relationship, the wife the family etc etc but they recognize how dubious and detrimental the set up is with women either cheating and divorcing cuckolding and divorcing or just cutting off sex period. So these men go mgtow as the only logical course of action until the legal and social landscape adjusts. These are the men who are red pill ragers because the duplicity of females keeps them from being in relationships
Another type of mgtow is the true forced lonliness. Tfls are guys that are just physically unappealing to women. They've never been in long term relationships have few or no causal encounters. Nerds dweebs fatties basement dwellers low t just unappealing. So they are mgtow by default. They recognize women want nothing to do with them so they reject women as well.
The third type of mgtow is the guy who realizes that women are liabilities. That involvement with females does nothing but curtail your fun and deplete resources. These men value their freedom over everything. Generally these men are good looking and financially well off so they naturally draw female attention. They usually have strings of causal relationships and when the girl wants to get too serious he just drops her.
The fourth type is the burn victim. This is the guy who has either been in the court system for some combination of divorce and child support. He witnessed a woman who he loved and thought returned those feelings, absolutely decimate and defame him in court. It's at this time he realizes she was only in it for the money. So this guy is distraught, alienated and financially devastated. He just learned a life lesson the hard way. Don't trust these hoes, they don't love you.
All these scenarios are applicable to women as well.
We all got stories of somebody taking advantage of us or know somebody who has, are or know ppl that just ain't that attractive and blame their lack of game on the opposite sex, or ppl that just flat out don't wana be told what to do and won't succumb to a relationship/marriage...or at least not a traditional one.
Tf is the point of putting a name to this basic ass ? . Don't wana be married and tie yourself financially forever to a spouse and kids, then don't. Who cares. This ain't no earth shattering ? . It's 2017 do what you wana do.
For whatever reason this seems like a foreign concept to most. People cant just do ? without it being a movement whether is feminism, mgtow, political affiliation etc.
In normal terms, meaning, as long as no crazy ass war breaks out or some wild environmental ? happens, or something else that is way above me that I cant control happens, no man or woman can effect my life in a positive or negative way unless I let him.
Mgtow, and feminism, and similar movements all seem like a bunch of victims crying over ? that they have control over to me.
I feel like it's necessary if these groups are tryna enact change to things that actually will make things equal between sexes and hold each other accountable. Like I personally don't believe in alimony or spousal support unless a spouse was a homemaker or made waaaaay less...and even then it should be capped a certain amount of years to allow the other person to get back on their feet. Especially if there's kids involved. And I don't believe in ridiculous amounts of child support or the threat of jail if said amount cant be paid cuz that doesn't encourage co-parenting.
But i totally agree that at the end of the day you have complete control over your social interactions and who you ? or get in relationships with. Vet your partners. If ? /? ain't pulling their weight in your eyes, drop em and move on. Do not ? marry them.
I mean, sure. It's not like you can be sued if an engagement doesn't fully go through, and you change your mind, right?
Oops, never mind....
Yep......here, too.
But I mean, OK. It's not like if relationship doesn't even make it to an engagement, the course have no effect. After all, if no one gets engaged, no real promises have been made to anyone, so muhfuckas should be safe on that, right?
You're wrong...
Ok...and I disagree with that. You gon post something else that ima say i disagree with and wouldn't do and know other women who also wouldn't?
I mean....what are we doing here? Are you gonna completely stop interacting with women altogether for the rest of your life or are you gonna do you and do you what you want in your relationships? Like I've been saying...
Nah. I'm just pointing out and putting the hypocrisy on front street, where it needs to be. -
Psmag says,New Evidence That Women Are Less Selfish Than Men
https://psmag.com/news/new-evidence-women-are-less-selfish-than-men -
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »The motto is work smart not work hard.
Each and everyone of your weak rebuttals has been fully rebuffed by plenty of people doing in-depth research and investigating.
Biggest example is the "best interests of the child" scam. Children are exponentially more likely to be abused in the homes of single mothers than single fathers. The reason the courts award custody to mothers more is because divorce lawyers often coach women to fabricate instances of abuse in order to be awarded custody.
Secondly, men often make more than the woman so child support often becomes an issue. The courts get paid from child support. Conflict of interests detected.
Women lie about everything under the sun, including ? .
https://youtu.be/TZrzCAuiw7w
Why women lie about ?
https://youtu.be/1tgXgpD3X2o
Use ur words bruh
Less than 25% of single parent households are headed by single fathers. And like u said single mothers tend to have fewer resources, i.e. less time and money to allocate to parenting, which often leads to neglect
That said, i never made a case for or against the "best interests of the child" doctrine. And I'm not arguing mothers are inherently better at raising children. A myth that has historically been used to keep women out the work place, in the house and codependent
My argument is that the tender years doctrine came about because the courts agreed that the child's interest should take precedence over the man's right to his children - SEE: women still not having a legal right to the children at the time - and maternal care (if the mother was not seen as at fault in the divorce proceedings) was considered at the time again by both men and women to be in the child's best interest
Even after the fact if the mother was proved to have committed adultery or to have left her husband to what the state considered to be "unfit" reasons, she was deemed unfit and the best interests of the child was then considered to be living with the father
General the entirety of child support payments go to the custodial parent unless he or she receives cash assistance from the state...with the exception of processing fees some states may impose which makes sense
Still many men have fallen victim to judges who side with gender over parenting skills. And still do today. That is because statutes, laws alone aren’t enough to change preconceived biases
I never made the case women dont lie about ? . Some have tried to make the case, like some like to argue women lying about ? is the norm. But like ur home girl from the vid says the evidence to suggest how often it occurs is inconclusive. She describes herself as a feminist so we arent all bad. And we're not a monolith. She also admitted that historically ? and sexual assault cases were not taken seriously and women often blamed for there attack so shes seems like a fair minded person you could learn a lot from her
But like i said its alot of ? going around from both sides ...
Lol @ weak
I said abuse. Not just neglect. Physical, emotional. You seem to be interested in making excuses for women. It's easy to not have kids if you can't financially support them.
The results for false ? accusations are inconclusive because females who do such things are rarely charged. If they are it's for filing false police reports or some other crime associated with wasting time. False accusers aren't charged with felonies they Damn sure aren't threatened with sentences or ostracism that the accused face.
Christina Hoff Somers is a feminist in name only. She struggles with the cognitive dissonance that comes with having done more to dismantle feminism than any mra or mgtow.
The ? that feminists have orchestrated over the past 40+ years is nothing short of state sponsored dissolution of the state's biggest threat, which is men. The state stepped in as a husband and father figure to which the woman would have no obligation or duty to. In return women only engaged in concerted efforts to remove men from the family, criminalize and demonize them socially. Silence and censor any and all narratives that contradict the feminist propaganda
Mgtow may not be 100% spot on but they've peeped game. The extent of their ? results in men just not ? with women. Not tryna send them to jail, not trying to remove them from families or strip their money away from them, or use the state for various levels of proxy violence.
So the whole "there's ? on both sides" is false equivalence like a ? . -
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol this whole attitude that I am only worried about me is also a function of the slow collapse of society and is very feminine as selfishness is not really a male virtue.
One of the benefits of laws is that they serve to mitigate the results of bad human decisions, the family/divorce laws in the western world only increase the suffering of people therefore they are bad laws and should be changed.
the argument that they these laws ? over both sexes therefore we should both just suck it up is a ridiculous argument because if goes against the very social utility of the law
Lol @ Selfishness being a feminine attribute...comments like this is why the convo gets contentious
And expound on how divorce laws are leading to a soceital collaspe or to more human suffering
Prior to no fault divorce laws and the likes of the tender years doctrine, women ( who make up 50-51% of the pop) could potentially get stuck in abusive and unhappy marriages because they faced poverty and the very real threat of being deprived of seeing their children. Now at least women have options
Not to say these these laws are perfect or havent had any averse effects that can be addressed...the answer is not to go back in time..nor is stigmatizing life styles...
Please can we stop romanticizing the past
I literally JUST had a convo with my homie about women being more selfish than men by nature. Men have an instinct to protect and provide. That takes a certain level of selflessness. Nit to say men arent and cant be selfish, but I think women are more prone to it.
I wont titanagraph on this point so you got it champ.
I counter that selflessness requires a certain amount of empathy. Empathy requires the ability to, understand the feelings of another person. And women tend to outperform men on nearly all emotional intelligence measures
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2016/03/11/new-study-shows-women-consistently-outperform-men-in-emotional-intelligence/amp/
I'd also argue with many men I've encountered their main focus is with projecting an image of strengh and dominance and doing things to reaffirm his masculinity...opposed to doing things to best address the needs and concerns of others
And from my observations with relationships and sex, women tend to let their husbands or bfs influence their decision making and behavior by taking their opinions and feelings into account. ...whereas alot of men see compromise and accepting the influence of their girl as being emasculating
You know the men who rather his family go without because the thought of his wife or girl working or making more money than him is emasculating
The men whose biggest fear is not being needed by his wife or girl. How can he control her then?
Y'all talk about women getting jealous of a ps4. But what about these men out here jealous of their wife's or girls relationship with her or their child
That said, there is no concrete evidence that says without a doubt say one sex is more or less selfish. Ppl naturally are self involved. There is also a lot of social conditioning involved. And my granddad is prob the most altruistic person I've ever known. I believe its really situational -
Women use empathy as a means to emotionally manipulate
-
Women use empathy as a means to emotionally manipulate
I've lost count how many times a man has tried to emotionally manipulate me. As soon as you 'feel moved into action' look for manipulation. Humans in general are very good with this bad habit. -
-
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »The motto is work smart not work hard.
Each and everyone of your weak rebuttals has been fully rebuffed by plenty of people doing in-depth research and investigating.
Biggest example is the "best interests of the child" scam. Children are exponentially more likely to be abused in the homes of single mothers than single fathers. The reason the courts award custody to mothers more is because divorce lawyers often coach women to fabricate instances of abuse in order to be awarded custody.
Secondly, men often make more than the woman so child support often becomes an issue. The courts get paid from child support. Conflict of interests detected.
Women lie about everything under the sun, including ? .https://youtu.be/TZrzCAuiw7w
Why women lie about ?https://youtu.be/1tgXgpD3X2o
Use ur words bruh
Less than 25% of single parent households are headed by single fathers. And like u said single mothers tend to have fewer resources, i.e. less time and money to allocate to parenting, which often leads to neglect
That said, i never made a case for or against the "best interests of the child" doctrine. And I'm not arguing mothers are inherently better at raising children. A myth that has historically been used to keep women out the work place, in the house and codependent
My argument is that the tender years doctrine came about because the courts agreed that the child's interest should take precedence over the man's right to his children - SEE: women still not having a legal right to the children at the time - and maternal care (if the mother was not seen as at fault in the divorce proceedings) was considered at the time again by both men and women to be in the child's best interest
Even after the fact if the mother was proved to have committed adultery or to have left her husband to what the state considered to be "unfit" reasons, she was deemed unfit and the best interests of the child was then considered to be living with the father
General the entirety of child support payments go to the custodial parent unless he or she receives cash assistance from the state...with the exception of processing fees some states may impose which makes sense
Still many men have fallen victim to judges who side with gender over parenting skills. And still do today. That is because statutes, laws alone aren’t enough to change preconceived biases
I never made the case women dont lie about ? . Some have tried to make the case, like some like to argue women lying about ? is the norm. But like ur home girl from the vid says the evidence to suggest how often it occurs is inconclusive. She describes herself as a feminist so we arent all bad. And we're not a monolith. She also admitted that historically ? and sexual assault cases were not taken seriously and women often blamed for there attack so shes seems like a fair minded person you could learn a lot from her
But like i said its alot of ? going around from both sides ...
Lol @ weak
I said abuse. Not just neglect. Physical, emotional. You seem to be interested in making excuses for women. It's easy to not have kids if you can't financially support them.
The results for false ? accusations are inconclusive because females who do such things are rarely charged. If they are it's for filing false police reports or some other crime associated with wasting time. False accusers aren't charged with felonies they Damn sure aren't threatened with sentences or ostracism that the accused face.
Christina Hoff Somers is a feminist in name only. She struggles with the cognitive dissonance that comes with having done more to dismantle feminism than any mra or mgtow.
The ? that feminists have orchestrated over the past 40+ years is nothing short of state sponsored dissolution of the state's biggest threat, which is men. The state stepped in as a husband and father figure to which the woman would have no obligation or duty to. In return women only engaged in concerted efforts to remove men from the family, criminalize and demonize them socially. Silence and censor any and all narratives that contradict the feminist propaganda
Mgtow may not be 100% spot on but they've peeped game. The extent of their ? results in men just not ? with women. Not tryna send them to jail, not trying to remove them from families or strip their money away from them, or use the state for various levels of proxy violence.
So the whole "there's ? on both sides" is false equivalence like a ? .
Mgtow is not 100% spot on is really all that needs to be said
The evidence in concerns to how often false ? accusations occur are inconclusive because its incredibly difficult to prove the accuser did not feel as though he or she was victimized. And the case usually hinges on the words of the accused verses the accuser. Even if there are sperm and tears, the accused could argue she wanted it rough. Same reasons why its incredibly difficult to prosecute a ? or sexual assault case and get a conviction. Which is why most ? and sexual assault reports never result in charges. The lacks of charges however doesnt mean a crime did not occur. Not to mention evidence suggest ? and sexual assaults are underreported
Neglecting ur child is typically considered abuse, legally and otherwise
Not making excuses, providing context...which is important especially if u want to make these sweeping generalizations and suggest women and feminist today conspire to imprison and exploit men. Otherwise you run the risk of sounding ignorant...Like you did with the tender years doctrine
Telling half truths and absolving men and the actual culprits of any responsibility of their actions or role they've played isn't whats up
And if I'm not mistaken the state is run by a bunch of old white men who think very little of anyone that isnt white and or doesnt have a ?
But as i said before there is a lot ? being pushed out here
Like the idea the misognitic and sexist rhetoric perpetauted by mgtow and others does have little to no real world consequences close to the last 300 + years
I'll end with this, labeling oneself a feminist only supports the very basic premise of gender equality, anything additional is what one makes of it
-
It is difficult to prove a negative.
The evidence for consensual sex is the same as the evidence of ? .
There are tons of individual stories to piece together why women lie about ? .
Revenge and financial compensation.
To be honest. This work has already been done. Feminists, females in general, are full of ? .
Master post of false ? accusations results consequences and motives
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://falserapeculture-blog.tumblr.com/post/77484772927/a-cruel-nurse-who-falsely-accused-her/amp&ved=0ahUKEwis3qy4yKjXAhUM9IMKHbGcATgQFgheMBA&usg=AOvVaw2wApzCg4EGt_iVEwxYK4bC&cf=1 -
In short,
The reason why mgtow exists is because women have exposed themselves as liabilities.
Most mgtow aren't even mad at feminists they actually thank feminists for doing the most to expose general female nature.
Men in general are responding to these revelations by dating less, marrying less, spending fewer and fewer resources on women so much so that women across the world are complaining about the lack of available men and men approaching them.
Even in the u.s. college females complain about men not dating them or approaching them, especially if they identify as a feminist.
In the regular world females complain that the rise of close male friendships has resulted in men not seeing them as companions any longer.
The stories are out there. The perception is growing. There's little women or feminists can do at this juncture. Which is why there are tons of articles by women trying to get women to buy into reverse hypergamy and marry down. -
Smh...Tariq Nasheed tried to keep this from happening.
-
It is difficult to prove a negative.
The evidence for consensual sex is the same as the evidence of ? .
There are tons of individual stories to piece together why women lie about ? .
Revenge and financial compensation.
To be honest. This work has already been done. Feminists, females in general, are full of ? .
Master post of false ? accusations results consequences and motives
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://falserapeculture-blog.tumblr.com/post/77484772927/a-cruel-nurse-who-falsely-accused-her/amp&ved=0ahUKEwis3qy4yKjXAhUM9IMKHbGcATgQFgheMBA&usg=AOvVaw2wApzCg4EGt_iVEwxYK4bC&cf=1
Tumblr? Lol
No need to overthink it...most ppl lie about being ? or sexually assaulted for many of the same reasons ppl lie about being the victim of or witnessing other crimes
U want to argue some sexual assault or ? accusations are bunk, I'll agree. The policies concerning alcohol and consent are murky as hell and one sided. And the way sexual assault and ? accusations are being handled at college campuses is mess. Innocent men and women have suffered. Many women + feminist would agree with all these things
But this idea that everything was fine before feminist decided to step in and the aforementioned is proof women ain't ? or that there is some grand conspiracy to imprison and exploit men is ridiculous
While there has been an increase in reported sexual assaults and rapes on college campuses the last 15 yrs, many college campuses report very low numbers of reports
For example, recently analyzed federal data collected between 2014 and 2015 and found that 89 percent of college campuses reported zero incidents of ? during that time period
https://www.thedailybeast.com/theres-been-a-huge-increase-in-campus-sex-assaults-why
And accusations of ? and assaults reported to the police have plummeted the last 40, 50 years despite this alledged conspiracy that have so many women brainwashed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800610.html
Yet evidence suggest most sexual assaults and rapes go unreported
How do explain all this in ur own words??? Could the world actually be more complicated than what u r suggesting
Not to mention how stereotypes such as men being inherently aggressive and lustful, while women as passive and weak reinforced by society have hurt male victims and accused ...stereotypes similar to those you and some of the mgtow used to support ur own ? narrative when convenient
-
This was inevitable.
Women have always believed themselves to be better than men. That they are smarter, better leaders, fitter parents, more civilized, higher mortality. They believe that the only reason they haven't been able to prove this is because the barbarity of men had forced them into these stifling gender roles
Keep in mind women believe this all the while it is men who are responsible, who die daily in labor to either progress society or maintain the hidden infrastructure of civilization that makes the conveniences and luxuries possible.
So young men in general are stepping back. They see themselves being demonized and their efforts mocked. So women will have to step up and prove their hype.
Personally i can't wait to watch this ? show. -
This was inevitable.
Women have always believed themselves to be better than men. That they are smarter, better leaders, fitter parents, more civilized, higher mortality. They believe that the only reason they haven't been able to prove this is because the barbarity of men had forced them into these stifling gender roles
Keep in mind women believe this all the while it is men who are responsible, who die daily in labor to either progress society or maintain the hidden infrastructure of civilization that makes the conveniences and luxuries possible.
So young men in general are stepping back. They see themselves being demonized and their efforts mocked. So women will have to step up and prove their hype.
Personally i can't wait to watch this ? show.
Of course it's going to fail, they can only get so far up the ladder. That will never happen. Society* will literally crumble to ? before that ever happens. -
In short,
The reason why mgtow exists is because women have exposed themselves as liabilities.
Most mgtow aren't even mad at feminists they actually thank feminists for doing the most to expose general female nature.
Men in general are responding to these revelations by dating less, marrying less, spending fewer and fewer resources on women so much so that women across the world are complaining about the lack of available men and men approaching them.
Even in the u.s. college females complain about men not dating them or approaching them, especially if they identify as a feminist.
In the regular world females complain that the rise of close male friendships has resulted in men not seeing them as companions any longer.
The stories are out there. The perception is growing. There's little women or feminists can do at this juncture. Which is why there are tons of articles by women trying to get women to buy into reverse hypergamy and marry down.
what do you mean by have to marry down? -
i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ? -
2stepz_ahead wrote: »i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ?
This is the neo - feminism bruh. To be honest it hasnt to be called feminism.
There are people that have taken over feminism to push their own agendas:
- fat people : fat acceptance, fit shaming, scientific facts denial,
- transgender people: no gender theory, then gender fluid theory, public restrooms and bathrooms ,
- unfuckable, divorced, sour women: male gaze, man spreading, mind ? , male space, trigger culture, independent women mantra.
And the list goes on. We are not talking about feminism anymore if you look closely, but about something else.
Thats why you got recently real feminists who are starting to see that they have been screwed by these groups. -
2stepz_ahead wrote: »In short,
The reason why mgtow exists is because women have exposed themselves as liabilities.
Most mgtow aren't even mad at feminists they actually thank feminists for doing the most to expose general female nature.
Men in general are responding to these revelations by dating less, marrying less, spending fewer and fewer resources on women so much so that women across the world are complaining about the lack of available men and men approaching them.
Even in the u.s. college females complain about men not dating them or approaching them, especially if they identify as a feminist.
In the regular world females complain that the rise of close male friendships has resulted in men not seeing them as companions any longer.
The stories are out there. The perception is growing. There's little women or feminists can do at this juncture. Which is why there are tons of articles by women trying to get women to buy into reverse hypergamy and marry down.
what do you mean by have to marry down?
Basically, women naturally engage in a practice called hypergamy. She desires and attempts to become the mate of a man that is financially more secure than she is.
However the practice of women using divorce to poach resources from men has caused many of these select males to forgo relationships. Simultaneously you have women that make high 5 figs to 6 figs that cannot attract men in the same or higher income bracket. So if they truly desire a mate they are forced to look below their bracket. Which goes against the female's natural inclination.
Females dont understand that what attracts a woman to a man does not work the other way. So they've been upset by this for a while. Especially black females -
i think all this ? just makes hoes more in demand
-
LEMZIMUS_RAMSEY wrote: »2stepz_ahead wrote: »i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ?
This is the neo - feminism bruh. To be honest it hasnt to be called feminism.
There are people that have taken over feminism to push their own agendas:
- fat people : fat acceptance, fit shaming, scientific facts denial,
- transgender people: no gender theory, then gender fluid theory, public restrooms and bathrooms ,
- unfuckable, divorced, sour women: male gaze, man spreading, mind ? , male space, trigger culture, independent women mantra.
And the list goes on. We are not talking about feminism anymore if you look closely, but about something else.
Thats why you got recently real feminists who are starting to see that they have been screwed by these groups.
This is real ? .
That's why it's just called IDENTITY POLITICS. It's this idea that everyone is oppressed somehow, and that everything is equally oppressive and offensive etc
It's ? -
LEMZIMUS_RAMSEY wrote: »2stepz_ahead wrote: »i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ?
This is the neo - feminism bruh. To be honest it hasnt to be called feminism.
There are people that have taken over feminism to push their own agendas:
- fat people : fat acceptance, fit shaming, scientific facts denial,
- transgender people: no gender theory, then gender fluid theory, public restrooms and bathrooms ,
- unfuckable, divorced, sour women: male gaze, man spreading, mind ? , male space, trigger culture, independent women mantra.
And the list goes on. We are not talking about feminism anymore if you look closely, but about something else.
Thats why you got recently real feminists who are starting to see that they have been screwed by these groups.
an who does it all come down on?
but who is the most intriguing and sought after?
and who is the most feared?
i dont understand how a black man can fit into all three of those, but we do. -
2stepz_ahead wrote: »LEMZIMUS_RAMSEY wrote: »2stepz_ahead wrote: »i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ?
This is the neo - feminism bruh. To be honest it hasnt to be called feminism.
There are people that have taken over feminism to push their own agendas:
- fat people : fat acceptance, fit shaming, scientific facts denial,
- transgender people: no gender theory, then gender fluid theory, public restrooms and bathrooms ,
- unfuckable, divorced, sour women: male gaze, man spreading, mind ? , male space, trigger culture, independent women mantra.
And the list goes on. We are not talking about feminism anymore if you look closely, but about something else.
Thats why you got recently real feminists who are starting to see that they have been screwed by these groups.
an who does it all come down on?
but who is the most intriguing and sought after?
and who is the most feared?
i dont understand how a black man can fit into all three of those, but we do.
This is the CONFUSION BUSINESS bruh.
This is what i call the INVISBLE CHAKLE : you have no origin, you question everything, even the obvious. You are in a perpetual state of SEARCHING YOUR WAY. Trick is that YOU DONT KNOW WHERE TO GO BACK ONCE YOU DOUBT, FAILED AND ARE SCARED.
Earth is flat
Your have no gender
You have no race
You have no religion
You are whoever you want to be
You have no flag, no country
You have no age
You are infinite
Slavery didnt happened in America
Once you get into that mindstate you are living a hell on this earth. No roots, no clear path, no destination.
Look at a neo feminist nightmare bruh. Take the female navy seals.
The hell to be a straight female who had to get rid of her feminity just to recognize in the end that she CANT DO WHAT THESE MEN DO.
The hell these women are living forcing themselves into big careers just to give up at the door of the top position bexause they finally realised that THEY CANT BEAT THEIR GENETIC WALL AND GET PREGNANT IN THEIR LATE 30s. And it get more sour when all their money cant get them a young decent man.
I have witnessed these women knocking at my mother door at 10pm just to tell HOW THEY ENVY HER CHILDREN, HOW THEY WOULD GIVE UP ALL THEIR MONEY TO TURN BACK THE CLOCK.
They are losing. Some of them realised that they only got turned into FURIOUS CONSUMMERS. And throughout divorces laws they have taken mens money.
Rare are the females who want to be Tatcher or Merkel. Rare are these women who can have a successfull career and mariage. This is a herculean task.
-
2stepz_ahead wrote: »i think all that feminist ? goes out the window when a woman meets a man that can take care of her or she can benefit from.
case and point.
i was just having this convo with a friend the other day. she claims to be a strong woman, independent , dont need a man freshly divorce and out on the rowl and nothing can stop her.
she knows im married but want to give me the ass while giving the ass to two other guys, one of which keeps flying her to the bahamas once a month.
anyway...we are talking about when that beyonce song came out an how her an her freinds was all on the dont need a man,, support myself, pay my own bills type ? . and they acted accordingly. then one of them met a lawyer in DC. she had his three kids married him and they live in a big ass mansion....she dont kick the independent ? no more....she dont kick that pay her own bills ? no more. dude takes care of everything and she keeps her money and she makes really good money. but like i said she keeps it rather than helping secure their future she helping secure her coffers.
feminism goes good when you single...but it dont fit you growing narrative when in a relationship.
cause if you want to be equal....why is it that when the man loses the job in a relationship..its a higher change of divorce? well, then it comes to ...well men are supposed to be providers and protectors. so if he aint doing that , then why is he here. but he cant protect and be unemployed while you pay the bills? oh, wait...then the statement of, i can do bad by myself comes up and a woman shouldnt need to take care of a man. riiight. but you want to be equal when its beneficial to you and not him or you both. so be equal to earn the same amount of money, but single when the couple depends on only her money, or when they depend on only his money, everything is cool.
nah...somebody full of ?
a lot of women are full of ?
but divorce rates are at a 40 year low and marriage rate increased the last couple years primarily among the college educated
http://time.com/4575495/divorce-rate-nearly-40-year-low/
and have you considered the impact job loss has on the husband himself
you ever been around a man who went from making enough money to help provide his family a comfortable life to having no job? it can be rough especially when a lot of men's entire identity is wrapped up in his work
but yea it's weak to just argue this as proof that women are not willing to take on the duties as primary bread winner and only see men as ATMs, especially when more women than ever before have taken on that role. and more women and men are choosing not to marry than ever before
