Rating women's attractiveness is rape culture/assault

[TheGreatA]

You are like white knight level 9000.

As long as men are still alive, no woman should rule.

I'm not trying to be an asshole, but I'm sure it comes across that way. I'm just a realist.

Men are better and better equipped for anything life can throw at them.

Faster, stronger, smarter.

Has nothing to do with "white knighting", simply realism.

Most of the men I've known throughout my life were molded by their experiences with women, far more so than anything else. Some for better, some for worse. The modern men are largely raised by women (with the father having significantly less impact on up-bringing), and valued in society based on their relationships with women, thus, their impact and level of "rule" over the society cannot be under-estimated.

If these feminist movements ever grow capable of introspection, and break down female tendencies to the point where women become more self-conscious as a collective group, women might grow to become more suitable for the task of governing. But it impossible to govern over others, when one cannot even govern one's self.

 

[irish_thug]

"Beauty is only skin deep," is an old adage. Our great-grandparents said it.

Only if your great grandparents were ugly.

 

[TheGreatA]

Society is part & parcel with the existence of the human race. Your "natural state" sounds like death. Outside of that we're gonna be influenced by either other and the perceptions of our collective viewpoints.

Society can also be part and parcel with the extermination of the human race, as we have witnessed. Or atleast parts of it.

By a natural state I mean a man's biological tendencies, when not tendered or outright suppressed by society. I do not mean that the natural state is better, or worse. It just is. A man in his natural state does not strive for death, quite the opposite, only the society can condition him to sacrifice himself for the sake of something "greater" than himself (an ideology, religion, whatever).

If you tried to convince a life-long hunter/shepherd in the Northern hemisphere to die for a greater cause, he'd laugh you off and get back to his daily duties, to sustain himself and his immediate family.

 

[WTF2008]

Has nothing to do with "white knighting", simply realism.

Most of the men I've known throughout my life were molded by their experiences with women, far more so than anything else. Some for better, some for worse. The modern men are largely raised by women (with the father having significantly less impact on up-bringing), and valued in society based on their relationships with women, thus, their impact and level of "rule" over the society cannot be under-estimated.

If these feminist movements ever grow capable of introspection, and break down female tendencies to the point where women become more self-conscious as a collective group, women might grow to become more suitable for the task of governing. But it impossible to govern over others, when one cannot even govern one's self.

Only after men are marginalized enough to let that happen.

Media is trying with this white devil bullshit. We'll see what happens when you try to push a natural predator into a corner.

 

[TheGreatA]

Only after men are marginalized enough to let that happen.

Media is trying with this white devil bullshit. We'll see what happens when you try to push a natural predator into a corner.

Well, there is a point where a natural predator can become a domesticated animal, incapable of physically defending its interests.

The aurochs, a huge and imposing mammal, was the ancestor of the modern domesticated cow. The wild boar, too, eventually lost its fur and ferocity, once it had been bred into inferiority and submission for long enough by humans, now only waiting to be butchered for Christmas.

Perhaps it is the man's last "great feat" to domesticate himself, and walk himself to the butcher's lorry.

 

[trolololol]

I'd be serving a triple life sentence if that crazy bitch ever finds out about my hot chick polls in P&M

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Society can also be part and parcel with the extermination of the human race, as we have witnessed. Or atleast parts of it.

By a natural state I mean a man's biological tendencies, when not tendered or outright suppressed by society. I do not mean that the natural state is better, or worse. It just is. A man in his natural state does not strive for death, quite the opposite, only the society can condition him to sacrifice himself for the sake of something "greater" than himself (an ideology, religion, whatever).

If you tried to convince a life-long hunter/shepherd in the Northern hemisphere to die for a greater cause, he'd laugh you off and get back to his daily duties, to sustain himself and his immediate family.

Unlike trees, I guess humans can prune themselves.

If we're talking biological tendencies and what men strive for then the answer is pussy. Hell, homie has it on two of the three most basic tiers.

 

[WTF2008]

Well, there is a point where a natural predator can become a domesticated animal, incapable of physically defending its interests.

The aurochs, a huge and imposing mammal, was the ancestor of the modern domesticated cow. The wild boar, too, eventually lost its fur and ferocity, once it had been bred into inferiority and submission for long enough by humans, now only waiting to be butchered for Christmas.

Perhaps it is the man's last "great feat" to domesticate himself, and walk himself to the butcher's lorry.

Is that the plan?

It looks like it might happen from what I've seen here.

 

[TheGreatA]

Unlike trees, I guess humans can prune themselves.

If we're talking biological tendencies and what men strive for then the answer is pussy. Hell, homie has it on two of the three most basic tiers.

That's a big part of it for sure. And it would be naive to assume that those wielding a man's primary motivator (for the most part), have not had an impact on how the societies have been built, throughout the centuries. Yet that seems to be the narrative from the feminist movement, atleast.

From what I have gathered, the women's hands are as soiled as "ours". It is laughable to play the blame game, in my opinion.

A simple, seemingly innocent tendency such as seeking increased comfort of living, a tendency that women are more prone to have than the men, may have spawned the need for territorial expansion and warfare.

The man has certainly been used as the vessel to achieve such purposes, and has thus assumed all of the guilt involved. But it would be foolish to say that it was "all him".

 

[Gregolian]

Well, there is a point where a natural predator can become a domesticated animal, incapable of physically defending its interests.

The aurochs, a huge and imposing mammal, was the ancestor of the modern domesticated cow. The wild boar, too, eventually lost its fur and ferocity, once it had been bred into inferiority and submission for long enough by humans, now only waiting to be butchered for Christmas.

Perhaps it is the man's last "great feat" to domesticate himself, and walk himself to the butcher's lorry.

There's still plenty of dickhead wild pigs out there though.

 

[TheGreatA]

Is that the plan?

It looks like it might happen from what I've seen here.

Maybe that's it, or maybe this is just PTSD in the form of a whole generation of men. From what has been done, to arrive to this point. A lot of fucked-up shit had to be done.

 

[WTF2008]

Maybe that's it, or maybe this is just PTSD in the form of a whole generation of men. From what has been done, to arrive to this point. A lot of fucked-up shit had to be done.

It had to happen to get here. If you think where we're at is bad, I would love to see what you thought of a few hundred or a few thousand years ago.

 

[trolololol]

"It's always been a crime to objectify women"

Can't wait for the male push back to this retardation in the coming years.

This chick has enough pics and videos on Google for a poll...

I think I'll put her in one and send her the link.

 

[TheGreatA]

It had to happen to get here. If you think where we're at is bad, I would love to see what you thought of a few hundred or a few thousand years ago.

Never said that it was bad. But there is a bit of a "survivor's guilt" thing going on, right now, among the men, now that they can sit back and reflect upon what was done. There seems to be a general feeling in society that men need to whip themselves over their historical transgressions.

That is one of the many things that seems to contribute to the "emasculated" state of men, in modern society.

By no means am I saying that all men are emasculated, but if we observe society in collectives, we can definitely see a clear shift towards gynocentrism.

It's difficult to predict the results of that because the level of knowledge on women as a collective entity, and how they function according to their biological interests, is far lesser than our knowledge on men and their interests. We've become quite adept at guiding men in the "proper" direction in order to improve society, while avoiding the obvious land-mines. We are taking a bit of a step into the unknown with what is now being done, through female "empowerment".

There are no records of proper matriarchies, other than those ancient texts that I referred to. And all that really suggests is that they disappeared from the face of the earth, leaving no trace behind.

 

[WTF2008]

Never said that it was bad. But there is a bit of a "survivor's guilt" thing going on, right now, among the men, now that they can sit back and reflect upon what was done. There seems to be a general feeling in society that men need to whip themselves over their historical transgressions.

That is one of the many things that seems to contribute to the "emasculated" state of men, in modern society.

By no means am I saying that all men are emasculated, but if we observe society in collectives, we can definitely see a clear shift towards gynocentrism.

It's difficult to predict the results of that because the level of knowledge on women as a collective entity, and how they function according to their biological interests, is far lesser than our knowledge on men and their interests. We've become quite adept at guiding men in the "proper" direction in order to improve society, while avoiding the obvious land-mines. We are taking a bit of a step into the unknown with what is now being done, through female "empowerment".

There are no records of proper matriarchies, other than those ancient texts that I referred to. And all that really suggests is that they disappeared from the face of the earth, leaving no trace behind.

There's probably a reason for that last paragraph.

Old native tribes used to give men to the women to figure out what they knew.

I'm honestly not hateful of women. It's just that there's a reason for matriarchies no longer existing.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

That's a big part of it for sure. And it would be naive to assume that those wielding a man's primary motivator (for the most part), have not had an impact on how the societies have been built, throughout the centuries. Yet that seems to be the narrative from the feminist movement, atleast.

From what I have gathered, the women's hands are as soiled as "ours". It is laughable to play the blame game, in my opinion.

A simple, seemingly innocent tendency such as seeking increased comfort of living, a tendency that women are more prone to have than the men, may have spawned the need for territorial expansion and warfare.

The man has certainly been used as the vessel to achieve such purposes, and has thus assumed all of the guilt involved. But it would be foolish to say that it was "all him".

For sure women have influence the shape of society through their wants, needs, abilities, etc. I once heard of this story where the desire for pussy launched 1000 ships. Sounded epic.

With your examples of male-dominated societies dressing women in more modest garb, how much of that is religion?

 

[RockstarChris]

its almost as if men and women are biologically attracted to each other.

 

[TheGreatA]

There's probably a reason for that last paragraph.

Old native tribes used to give men to the women to figure out what they knew.

I'm honestly not hateful of women. It's just that there's a reason for matriarchies no longer existing.

The assumption is that they can exist with the support of modern technology. Which means that the male was merely required for the establishment of the conditions that allow a matriarchy to exist.

Now that the task is "done", the male is no longer truly required, and may, in fact, serve to disrupt the harmonious and flawless existence in such a society. Much like a bull is nowadays seen to disrupt the farm, and has largely been phased out due to the relative ease of the artificial insemination of cows from one particularly strong seed.

 

[TheGreatA]

For sure women have influence the shape of society through their wants, needs, abilities, etc. I once heard of this story where the desire for pussy launched 1000 ships. Sounded epic.

With your examples of male-dominated societies dressing women in more modest garb, how much of that is religion?

Is religion exempt from men's needs, or wants, or abilities, though? Some might disagree (those whom have faith in the divine), but I do not think so. Particularly when it comes to Islamic garbs which are more so a cultural rather than explicitly religious tradition.

Islam is simply the vehicle used by men to impose this form of social control upon the women.

 

[trolololol]

Never said that it was bad. But there is a bit of a "survivor's guilt" thing going on, right now, among the men, now that they can sit back and reflect upon what was done. There seems to be a general feeling in society that men need to whip themselves over their historical transgressions.

Tell us more about how we feel...