What Happens When Women Breed With Bad Boys

This is what you get – more bad boys.

What, did you think that they were going to sire nice guys?

I’m not even talking about genetic determinism here – it’s likely that his behavior was somewhat cultivated by his father, as opposed to it happening due to his incompetence or absence.  I say that because whatever the chances are that a milquetoast nice-guy incel could raise a boy to turn out like this, we know that the offspring of someone like this will never become a milquetoast nice-guy incel.  That’s not the direction it goes from one generation to another.

Yes, this dipshit has absolutely no idea about the gravity of what he’s doing.  That’s because he’s a bad boy spawn.  What looks like stupidity to us is making vaginas wet.

He reminds me of someone I worked with many years ago…young, tall, hyperactive, chip on the shoulder…and his dad died before he was old enough to remember.  Raise by a single mom, he developed into more of an unreconstructed ape than a civilized human being.  Popular with the ladies females?  You better believe it.

Incivility is the new masculinity, post-feminism.  This is where evolution is headed.

As the character Servalan on Blake’s 7 said of the ape-like savages on a particular planet (bonus for anyone who can find the video)…These creatures are not what man evolved from, but what man will become. 

Advertisements

Boxer: Mormon Coward Who Can Dish It Out But Can’t Take It

So what do you call a someone who disavows religion generally, but continues to defend Mormon insanity to the bitter end, calls Jews “Gentiles”, blocks people who dare to relate the nonsense of Mormonism to his own criticisms of religion, and uses a picture of Orrin Porter Rockwell over an illustration of a Mormon Temple, as his avatar?

Well, you’d call that someone very confused, and/or very Mormon.  You might also call that person “Boxer”.

boxer

He’s far from being the first person whom I’ve know who has one foot in atheistic iconoclasm and the other in LDS temple..  I come from what used to be a Mormon family (and is no longer, thank God) and I’m fortunate that I became an apostate before I was old enough to have the ghost of Joseph Smith sink his claws into my mind.  Nonetheless, my own background familiarized me all too well with Mormon theology, culture and the level of cognitive dissonance needed in order to entertain such absurdity.  I’ve seen many people I know wrestle with the two opposing forces – the obviousness of the Mormon fraud pulling them in one direction, and the relentless tugging anchor of heavy LDS brainwashing – some of it approaching the level of Scientology in its cruelty and sophistication – pulling them in the other.  Like I say, I’m glad I had an easy transition away from Mormonism as a child…but Boxer, on the other hand, is someone who didn’t get out in time, and is now suffering from cognitive dissonance, which leads to other badness.

Total hypocrisy is hard to let slip by without saying something.  There is a recent thread of his titled My Problems of (with) Theodicy, which he set up for the sole purpose of criticizing the beliefs of some guy going by username “Honeycomb” – and before you point this out, in light of my opening to this paragraph, starting a post for that reason is not what I’m criticizing per say, since that’s what I’m doing here; I’m doing this thread because he has me blocked me/put me in moderation, so this is the only way I can respond.  It’s worth it though, because what I’m criticizing is the fact that he’ll go to such lengths to try and take apart someone else’s point of view, but if anyone dares challenge the “folk religion” that is still obviously with him, that’s unacceptable and he shuts it down.  You can’t respect someone like that.

After a recent dust-up we had in his thread about Jeff Flake and whether or not it’s appropriate to refer to Jews as Gentiles (yes, Mormons do that), I added my 2¢ on this thread, which didn’t even get a response from him…something about negative evidence and Russell’s teapot.  No, that wasn’t worthy of a reply, but this was easily enough to get his temple garments in a bunch…

boxer3

Faggot, huh?  Does he think I’m homosexual?  Hehe, no, it’s that you know that you’ve gotten under someone’s skin when, instead of meeting you with a measured argument, they lash out at you.  Anyone is free to go to Boxer’s page and see all the context for yourself.  If you read his diatribes on the Jeff Flake thread, it makes that all too clear (and if he takes it down, don’t worry – I saved it for posterity).  Easy to see that he’s very, very touchy about his “folk religion”.  Again, this is called cognitive dissonance.  Whatever – a lot of people suffer from that.  I just think it’s worth calling someone out when they challenge the sacred beliefs of others but refuse to put their own sacred oxen to the test.  Again, that avatar is a picture of Porter Rockwell, who is a part of Mormon history that many Mormons wish everyone would forget about, given that he was a hit-man for Brigham Young; as such, you’d think that someone using a picture of “The Destroying Angel of Mormondom” wouldn’t be so easily destroyed himself.

Well Boxer, what can I say…?  If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.  And maybe, just once, quit looking at life through the urim and thummim and letting dead, horny, alpha con men continue to torture your poor little brain.

So for you, I dedicate a song, written and performed by one of your own…

 

Oh, and I also dedicate you this photo of your “prophet” – what’s left of him anyway, after that Carthage, Illinois mob took care of him.

skull+photos+-+Joseph+Smith

BOOM!  HEADSHOT!

 

 

th

FAIR USE NOTICE.  Copyright Disclaimer Under 17 U.S.C. § 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

A Robot Brothel…Where You Have To Get Consent From The Robot?!

Let’s compare business models:

  1. Robot/sex doll brothel — possible, has worked some places.
  2. Robot/sex doll brothel where you have to beg for sex from masturbation with an inanimate object, even after you’ve already paid for it — something only a woman could think up.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/california-cult-leader-uniclone-unicron-plans-sex-robot-brothelwith-a-twist

Someone please tell this California nut-job that men go to brothels so that they don’t have to go through the games and bullshit to get sex.  That holds true regardless whether the prostitute is made of silicone or meat.

Of course this idea will never see the light of day, as she’ll never get the investment to pull it off, but the fact that she has currently raised nearly $3,000 is a sad testament how there can be that much stupidity and money in the same place, even if only briefly.

As for clientele…  Can you imagine how cucked you’d have to be to go there and entertain that kind of shamefulness?  I’ll give her this: she has the location right.  If there actually are men who are that pathetic, indeed, you’ll find them in Southern California.  If I were running the show, the robots would be programmed so that if the cuck actually paid for the privilege of begging a glorified electronic fifi to let him masturbate with it, the robot would still refuse, and then knee him in the nuts, with the full intention of crushing them.  I know that may sound like the kind of thing a tradcon or a feminist might say, but I have very different reasons for saying that: the tradcons and feminists would want to see that happen to him for simply engaging in prostitution, just as they’d wish it on another man who went to a real brothel; I’d wish it on him for going to that brothel instead of real one, where you pay for service, safety and certainty, without the games.  A man that pathetic doesn’t deserve to have testicles.  If I were a testicle, in the scrotum of a man that worthless, I’d want someone or something to smash me too, ending my disgrace.

The “Foreskin Facial” and Shameless Feminism

It was a big scandal when we found out that Oprah’s facial cream contained derivatives of human foreskin, but now, females aren’t even ashamed anymore.

It’s called feminism.

It’s called female empowerment.

It’s bad enough when females brag about using, manipulating and shitting all over the men in their lives – in the name of some kind of social justice payback for gender transgressions they never experienced themselves – but when they actually brag about baby boys being surgically altered for the benefit of their own vanity…?

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2018/11/26/kate-beckinsale-boasts-about-facials-from-foreskin-of-south-korean-infants/

pjimage-95-640x480

“After a long flight I do like to lie down and be covered in a mask of liquified cloned foreskins-frankly who doesn’t?Thank you @georgialouisesk for an amazing facial. I especially liked you reassuring me it would be ‘light on penis’ as it was my first time x,”

Wouldn’t that be weird to be a South Korean boy, with a dick that had been sliced so that no skin can cover the head (which, I know, some won’t be able to relate to the weirdness of; but…) and then you find out that they did this to you so that vain, rich bimbos – whom you’ll never get to fuck with that altered dick – can look a couple of years younger?

Well, at least she did more damage to the image of the Hollywood limousine liberal, and that’s a good thing.  They need all the damage they can get.

Of course, the connection to feminism needs no explanation, so allow me to explain: feminism teaches females that bigotry against and disrespect/antagonism towards males (of any age, apparently) means success, in righting some wrong – well, at least that used to be the justification.  When a weaker demographic (yes, females are weaker) continues to antagonize and provoke a stronger one, and test the tolerance and patience thereof, you might conclude that they’re expecting blow-back at some point.  That stands to reason, but I’m thinking that we may be giving females too much credit there.  It could be more unconscious, like the model of feminism as a macro shit-test.  Whatever the case, I guess it’s a shame that the blow-back won’t reach cunts like this one without going through a bunch of other females first…but alas, that’s starting to matter less and less to the male hive-mind, because we can see that poorer and less famous females aren’t that much different in their attitudes – and if they are, they’re sure not trying hard to show it.  It’s kind of like the deafening silence of the “peaceful Muslim majority” in the wake of Islamist attack after attack after attack…

You know, on that point, it’s almost enough to make you not feel so bad about the idea of Muslims pouring in and putting these western skanks into bondage, isn’t it?  I’ll call it a sad irony that Muslims are into FGM, with respect to any NAWALTs out there who would fall victim (surely there are at least a couple dozen or so) but they’ve got to speak up, and not let cunts like Kate Beckinsale represent them.  The only thing that stands between them and Mohammad is western men, and those men are starting to care less and less for the welfare of western females who, as a collective, seem determined to test men’s patience to failure.

Modern Dating Visualized…

In the first video, they do what SJWs always do: set it up as oppressed and oppressor.

See this is the part where you’re supposed to feel bad for the females (Because there are so few worthwhile men around, right?  Yeah, like one quality man for every 30 quality women…that sounds about like what is assumed).  This video was a view into what feminists would see as justice, setting the man up to have to reject them initially on looks, and do it right in front of their faces.

In this next video, they make it much easier for the woman (well, it’s not really hard for females to reject, as the video will reaffirm) and the best less on is what happens at the end.  She’s definitely overestimating her sexual market value, but that’s nothing unusual.

Don’t change Honey.  Don’t bend your “values”.  I woudn’t be right for you to remain in the gene pool.

Eulogy by Meghan McCain: Fake Crying?

Okay, I’m going out on a limb here, but I can’t help saying what I’m thinking about this…  Even though she’s eulogizing her own father (who was a traitor and a fraud, by the way), laden with back-handed jabs against President Trump, doesn’t her crying sound kinda…fake?

I’m not saying it is fake, but it just sounds a little fake – at least a certain proportion of it.  I mean she even kind of looks like she’s acting, doesn’t she?  God bless her if that is 100% sincere, because to me, it just doesn’t look or sound that way.  Let’s just say this: her speech is overly polished, and the optics are like a bad ’50s movie.  Is that harsh?  Only if I’m wrong.

Bona fide crying sounds different to me.  It has pressure behind it.  It legitimately screws up a speech.  You can hear it being resisted by the person doing it.  This what it really sounds like.

As for McCain, I hope his replacement is better…don’t see how it could be much worse.  I give Senator McCain the same thumbs-down he gave on Obamacare repeal.  I don’t know where he’s on his way to next, but I’m glad it’s not the US Senate.

Anti-Male Hate Festival In (Guess Where) Swedenistan!

Because there was reportedly four rapes and 23 sexual assaults at a coed festival last year (were the perpetrators “migrants”, perhaps?), Swedish feminists decided to hold their own festival that bars all men only “cisgender” men.  I’m actually surprised that they needed that as an excuse – they could have just barred men because, Hell, it’s Sweden!

WEB_INRIKES

This doesn’t look like a crowd I’d want to be around anyway.

Two articles report on this – one from The Local, and one from The New York Times.  Apparently, they don’t even allow any male bouncers, performers or reporters at the event (you know those Swedish reporters, always groping people).  I assume that there are no male event staff either.  Never mind the fact that there are still going to be male police patrolling the streets outside*, which in turn adds to the safety inside, and males running the power grid to keep the sound and lights on, but I’m sure not one of those females in there is going to be thinking about that.  We mustn’t focus on those details. I think it’s much more interesting to think about whether they were able to find enough womyn who can run sound, lights, security, etc. or if this is why some “trans”-womyn are allowed inside.

A gender equality ombudsman (or ombudswoman?) is looking into whether or not this is discriminatory, and asked for clarification on what a “cis man” is.  Of course that’s just a token gesture, in what the former article calls “one of the most gender equal countries in the world” (remember, equality is fem-speak for inequality that benefits females).  The festival is already underway, and will run through Sunday.

Do I even need to point out the elephant in the room?  The elephant among all the clowns in this feminist circus?  Going back to the Bråvalla festival, which was cancelled due to the aforementioned sex attacks last year, we find the last paragraph in this article pretty damn interesting…

A debate about sexual molestation raged in Sweden in 2016 after it emerged that groups of boys, mainly of Afghani and Moroccan origin according to police reports, had been groping girls at the We Are STHLM youth festival for two years running.

You don’t say!  Oh come on, that was a different festival – we must assume that there were no “migrant” perpetrators at the event last year, unless the police reported that there were.  I mean, it’s not like the police would ever cover a fact like that up or anything

So there are some who think that Swedish feminists are going to get it at some point, and finally realize that the real threat doesn’t come from native Swedish men, but from Islamic invaders from Africa and the Mideast, who came from a culture where hard patriarchy, FGM and real oppression of women is the norm and the prerogative of these savages.  You might think it would dawn on them at some point, but you would be wrong, and this no-cis-man festival proves it.  You see how the thought process goes?  Instead of seeing the true contrast between the native men of Sweden and the female-genital-mutilating savages coming off the boats, here’s what they do:

  1. Ignore and squelch the details about the sexual perpetrators’ national/cultural origin
  2. Project the crimes onto all men, with the implication toward culturally indigenous Swedes
  3. Use this as a rallying cry for more feminism, gender exclusion, and sexism (against men who will acquiesce – not the Muslims)

Amazing, isn’t it?  Not only do they ignore the actual problem, but they employ the go-to tactic in the feminist playbook of leaving out key facts to promote their narrative, as they have done with the gender-wage gap narrative.  The real issues go unsolved and, along with the false narratives, snowballs.

In the words of the festival’s founder…

What do you think about us creating an awesome festival where only non-men are welcome until ALL men learn how to behave?

“All” is not a very practical target (but I thought womyn in Sweden were so practical!)  How about even a reasonable percentage of all men – say, 99.9%?  That seems more doable…except that your country is importing as many sex-hungry savages from Islamic theocracies as is can, so at this point, maybe even 70% is not possible – and it’s only going to go down from there.

Now, we can’t let this bother us too much, because females are known for gobbling up logic and shitting out crazy.  As I’ve said before, on a subconscious level, this might actually make some sense, if we buy the theory that womyn are subconsciously letting this all happen as a means of procuring more “masculine” men from Islamic countries, as evidenced by their utter lack of respect for the rights and autonomy of females.  Going by that model, a festival like this, and the otherwise-nonsensical basis for it, was quite predictable.

So one might think: wouldn’t it be just desserts if this festival were raided by a pack of unreconstructed Islamic savages, who will do you-know-what to all of them?  Oh, I don’t know about that…  I think that you’d have to have some pretty misplaced animosity toward females to want that to happen just for being excluded from something really unpleasant.  Although I do think that there should be a legal crackdown on them (that won’t happen) for gender discrimination, I think that any self-respecting man would have no more interest in attending as he would in going into a warehouse-sized womyn’s bathroom.  Not only that, but since some acts that headlined at the Bråvalla festival – Rammstein, Iron Maiden, The Killers, Kanye West – or any other acts of their stature are excluded from this show, I guess you’re stuck with…well, I don’t even know who is performing at this, but I assumed it’ll mostly be DJs and maybe some fingernails-on-a-chalkboard feminist acts – something like Alanis Morissette or worse.  See that, females?  Discrimination leads to brain and talent drain.

The other thing is that it’s a testament to the efficacy of feminism that you could have so many females in one place, and so little attractiveness there…

WEB_INRIKES

…yuck.

But back to the scenario of an Islamic raid on the festival…

*I speculated that there would still be male cops patrolling outside, but let’s just say that it were all womyn cops – that somehow they even barred male cops from securing the perimeter…  We’ve seen how capable female Swedish cops are with Muslims, so you never know – maybe that raid will happen after all.  I hope it doesn’t because, again, it will just mean more feminism, more discrimination against Swedish men and more favoritism toward the Islamic jihadis…actually, do I even care at this point?  I’m not sure I do.  The can have my share.

World’s Biggest Orgy Disinvites Single Men

It was to have been the world’s biggest orgy a couple of months ago (I haven’t seen any reports on how big it actually was) in Las Vegas.  That’s not the interesting part.  The interesting part was that couples and single women were invited, but un-escorted males were not.

http://www.konbini.com/us/lifestyle/hundreds-swingers-attempting-largest-orgy-human-history/

To attend, players must purchase an appropriate Sin City 8 pass. According to Las Vegas Weekly, the price for couples is $200 (or around £145) and the price for single women is $25 (£18)….

…Unfortunately (for some), however, “no unescorted males are allowed at the event,” the team explains, “everyone must have a partner. No exceptions.”

Yes of course, if the shoe we on the other foot, etc…no need to restate the obvious.  What needs to be restated is the basis of this double-standard: that sub-alpha males are truly at the bottom of society.  Males are inherently disposable, and males who have been rejected by females as a whole have been disposed of – human garbage, even in the eyes of “sex-positive” bohemians.

If you ever hear a feminist griping about being judged as a sexual object, show her that article.  Then, remind her that no one judged her that way, and see how she reacts.  Then call her out on her hypocrisy for getting mad.

 

Tradcon Gynocentricism, and the Uncomfortable Conversation

This is your textbook example of a ditzy tradcon THOT disseminating the tradcon stance, which rightly takes to task the lunatic gender-chaos left and their goal of a government-dependent dystopia, but essentially bases the argument on the needs of women and the disposability of men – textbook gynocentricism.  The cherry on top is how she accuses the left of coginitive dissonance at many points, yet displays her own cognitive dissonance when she says that women shouldn’t be excluded from positions of power, then referring to herself as a “strong woman”…

Here’s what she says at 13:58…I transcribed it for you, if you can’t stand her voice – you’re welcome.

Passive masculinity is a disaster on multiple levels, and that is because men are not supposed to be passive – they are, by nature, meant to provide, to protect and to lead.  Now, that does not mean that all men have to macho body builders who only like hunting and fishing and that does not mean that women are excluded from positions of power. You all are strong women with voices, I am a strong woman with a voice – I obviously believe that courageous women are necessary to a flourishing and equal society, but it does mean that men have a natural tendency toward protection and leadership that should be encouraged and trained, not denied and shamed.

Well, actually, excluding women from positions of power is exactly what it means, Mrs. Tradcon (I think we can assume she’s a Mrs.).  You can’t be a “strong woman”, in a position of power – even as a voter, frankly – and bitch about men not “leading” you, because you’re not actually letting them lead you.  I hate to say it, but feminists have got you on this one – you would not be where you’re at without feminism, just like they wouldn’t be where they’re at without patriarchy.  If patriarchy had never existed in humanity in some form or another since Adam & Eve, the invention of the wheel, or whenever – that is, if humans started out with ideal gender egalitarianism from the beginning – even if the species had survived to this point (which is really doubtful) we probably wouldn’t have even advanced to the level of living in mud huts.  We wouldn’t be living like bonobos…we would be bonobos.  And the bonobos are dying out, by the way.

Speaking of apes, particularly those with good love dolls standing by their sides, Turd Flinging Monkey is one of the few people willing to say the inconceivable – that the only way to save western civilization is to pull women out of college, the workplace and the voting booth.  As abhorrent as that idea is to all but the most red-pilled, what’s the logical argument against it?  Let me know if you think of one, because I haven’t been able to yet.  Seriously, I want to hear that argument.  Even I find that idea unpalatable, emotionally; but I haven’t found a way around it logically, so lay the alternative on me.  Now if you want to have a conversation about whether or not a civilization that has to institute such fundamental unfairness should exist, go for it, but don’t fool yourself into believing that the vacuum won’t be filled…and by filled, I mean filled by Islamic hard-patriarchy.  As TFM says, the patriarchy will reassert itself one way the another, and this has been proven by the example of Sweden, a country that is going from the feminist egalitarian extreme to the polar opposite extreme – an Islamic shit hole where Sharia law and FGM are the norm – basically overnight.  A relatively soft patriarchy sounds a lot better than that, doesn’t it?  Well, you’re not going to convince even a self-professed anti-feminist tradcon that it’s one or the other, any easier than you’re going to get her to entertain the idea of a 30-foot-high wall around the country with pig heads spiked along the top edge – that’s the only other way you might keep the Muslim civilization pillagers out.

Of course, I should say that this doesn’t mean that I am going to parrot everything TFM says… First of all, where is he getting the idea that revoking women’s suffrage, employment and educational opportunities is an option in the first place?  I’m sure he realizes that his dream is easier said than done, and he has probably talked about it, but I don’t think he says it enough.  For the passers by, he makes himself sound so naive, saying that we “just need to strengthen our pimp hand” and reassert a soft-patriarchy…okay, well, that’s like saying that setting foot on the moon is as easy as stepping off the ladder on the side of the orbiter, or that all that needs to happen to Make America Great Again is for enough people to vote for the political outsider – yeah, those feats sound doable, on (respectively) July 20, 1969 right after touchdown, or the day before Election Day 2016 after Hillary cancelled her fireworks, but try telling someone that in 1962 who just heard Kennedy give his speech, or to a Ross Perot voter in 1992 who just watched Bill Clinton get elected.  I guess that I prefer discussions to be more practical than academic.  Maybe his idea is that you can only drum up the idea rhetorically at this stage, which is probably true (and now you know why the left suddenly has a problem with freedom of speech).  That doesn’t make you feel much better when you know that there will be knives out for you for even broaching the idea, and for nothing you’ll ever live to see.  If you’re MGTOW, you’re the last person whom history will thank for anything like that (see below).

Let’s do some more analysis…

Passive masculinity is a disaster on multiple levels, and that is because men are not supposed to be passive – they are, by nature, meant to provide, to protect and to lead.1  Now, that does not mean that all men have to macho body builders who only like hunting and fishing2 and that does not mean that women are excluded from positions of power.3  You all are strong women with voices, I am a strong woman with a voice – I obviously believe that courageous women are necessary to a flourishing and equal society4 but it does mean that men have a natural tendency toward protection and leadership that should be encouraged and trained5 not denied and shamed.

  1. Yes, male utility and disposability, of course – a staple concept in gynocentricism, both left and right.  You can be sure that these women would not be having this discussion if it wasn’t centered around the needs of women.
  2. She doesn’t really mean that, you know.  You watch how these tradcons treat males who aren’t the hyper-masculine git-er-done jocks – they’re lumped right in with the worst of the male-feminist soy boys.  Once you realize that your favorite conservative heroes were the popular jocks who showed the weak nerdy boys no mercy, you’ll soon realize why tradcons aren’t your friends.  Now, don’t take that as and argument for joining the soy boys and Marxists, but just file that under unattractive males being respected by no one (see my posts on what Infowars thinks of incels).  As for the women, no one needs to tell us what they think of sub-standard men who have an IQ over 100 and a height under 6-feet…’nuff said on that.
  3. (See above)
  4. Ain’t that rich?  This is the point when someone should ask her who’s side she’s actually on.  She, like other latent feminist tradcon women, wants it both ways.
  5. Once again, the responsibility is put on men to do the heavy lifting.  Whatever the problem is, males have to solve it; when something’s broken, males are where the repairs have to be done.  What about the females?  What are you going to teach them?  Oh, right…teach them to be “strong women” – to be educated and employed, to vote, to be “strong and independent”.  Men just need to get better…they need to keep up with how good women have become.  Just don’t tell them that all of the “advances of women” are pretty much artificial.

Also to note, she gives some historical examples of male passivity leading to disaster, which tells you all you need to know about where she’s actually coming from.  Her example of Aaron Burr’s “constant passivity” leading to the demise of Alexander Hamilton is interesting, when you consider that Burr shot Hamilton dead (she might want to explain that one to those of us who don’t think of gunfire when they think of passivity) but the one that really got me was her blaming 50 years of Communist oppression in Cuba on JFK’s “passive stance” during the Bay of Pigs crisis: Okay, so was Kennedy supposed to get into a NUCLEAR WAR with the Soviet Union?  Would that have even done anything toward liberating anyone in Cuba, save the surviving cockroaches?  If that doesn’t make sense, just bear in mind what she says at the beginning of the video – that she’s a host on CRTV, which is kind of like the Blaze, except that it’s operated by the neocon chameleon Mark Levin instead of the whacked-out and burned-out huckster we know as Glenn Beck.  Now you know why the thought of nuclear war gives this girl gina-tingles.

You know, not that it’s even worth contemplating a solution to this dilemma of latent feminist tradcon anti-feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it too, but if someone pressed me on what a status quo that I’d be comfortable with would look like, I guess I’d say that it would be best if women had all the same rights as men, but had the good sense to not exercise those rights, i.e. staying home and raising the kids, not getting useless degrees, and not voting, as they are natural socialists…but then, if they had that kind of sense, this world would be a very different place.  This is one of the best things about MGTOW – the realization that you don’t really have a dog in the hunt anyway.