1 2 3 4 5 | bottom
Quote# 139635

Femoids can be anything; and yet always have access to Chads, while men have to fit specific parameters

Femoids can literally be anything, have any type of personality, be shy, be nerdy, be slutty, be traditional, be liberal, have any types of sexual kinks, they can have a high sexual drive, they can have a low sexual drive, be of any ethnicity, etc. They can be depressed, they can have low confidence, they can have high confidence, they can approach the men they like, they can be approached by the men they like, they can want to be degraded and feel bad about themselves, inflicting pain onto themselves, they can be dominant and enjoy putting others down, they can be into practically any subculture genre, they can have any interests, they can live practically anywhere in the world. They can be rich, they can be poor. AND YET ALWAYS HAVE ACCESS TO HOARDS OF CHADS WAITING FOR THEM.

AND GUESS WHAT, as for MEN, we have to be confident, have a specific dominant personality, be good looking, we have to approach women ourselves and face crushing rejection after rejection, we have to fit these SPECIFIC GUIDELINES and yet women can do / be / like literally ANYTHING and still have more than enough access to fullfill every one of their sexual desires.

Women can DO ANYTHING and Men are confined to these tiny boxes of permittable behavior, and if we step out, then we loose access to any potential source of reproductive pleasures.

ReptileCell, incels.me 6 Comments [8/9/2018 6:23:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139627

One of my realest of realtalk posts — women are LESS cooperative than are men — contributed a new aphorism to the national discourse:

Men compete, then cooperate.
Women compete, then cast out.

The post inspired this perceptive comment from a Gabber,

Vertical male hierarchy ensures a place for everyone. Order is kept via rules-based discipline and the threat of demotion. Allows for graceful losing and peaceful surrender. Stable.

Horizontal female hierarchy causes massive churn, clique formation, uncertain and shifting status and frequent change of allegiance. Zero sum. Highly unstable.

There’s a good reason why ascending civilizations and female disempowerment are mutually inclusive and why declining civilizations are associated with female empowerment. The system becomes unstable under female deference and rule (hence the term I coined: gynarcho-tyranny).


Swedish problem glasses. You can practically smell the cat piss through the photo. How many White women are suffering from undiagnosed Williams Syndrome like this hysterical broad? Millions? (apparently)

White women really need to be brought under the White man’s whip hand again. It’s obvious they’re craving the whip hand, and they’ll take it from swarthy invaders if they can’t find it among their own men. It used to be the sensible cure for female hysteria was…

[Gif of woman being spanked]

CH, Chateau Heartiste 3 Comments [8/9/2018 6:17:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 139615

I've Given up on Anti-Degeneracy

For the longest time I believed that the highest level of existence is bonding with a female one on one in a strict lifetime monogamous marriage. I still think it is, however, this is not reality.


After realizing this I had much to contemplate. I came to the conclusion that my idea that people, especially women, start off good and the turn evil is wrong. Rather, women are biologically programmed to be selfish sluts with only a facade of loyalty rather than pure loyalty.

Once I concluded this, I realized anti degeneracy is bullshit. I fully understand now that women truly are just there to fuck, they are literally good for nothing else at all except for raising children. Getting fucked and bearing children is what they exist for. We should make women property in order to ensure we can impregnate them and advance our species rather than let them slut around with unnatural things like birth control and abortion.

Men are biologically designed to love and care for people since as emotionally and physically superior beings, it is our job to advance our species. Thats why emotions such as sympathy and brotherly love exist. However, since women are inferior scum, they dont feel these emotions. Thats why they are heartless and also why it is crucial to not catch feelings for a foid, since there is no point in doing so and a foid will never love you back.

ItheIthe, incels.me 12 Comments [8/7/2018 10:41:05 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139614

Betacucks are an abomination that feminism created.

I believe that older woman becoming invisible to society is something natural, and also divine justice. When women are young they ignore 90% of men, they focus only on men that have money or men that have a good body, handsome face. They don't even give a chance to any men that don't have those attributes. Heck, they only look at ugly men to make fun of and ridicule them.

Those young women often date rich older guys. And they are totally fine with that. They are completely comfortable in ignoring people when they are young and have the world at their feet. Not gold, neither diamonds, nor petrol. The single most coveted good in the world, since the beginning of humanity, is sex with a young fertile woman.

And men will build or destroy anything to have it. For it men raised Empires, Kingdoms and Civilizations, and for it they waged carnage and Wars where they torn apart each other and destroyed those same things they spent centuries building. Young women have all that power between their legs. And what they do with it nowadays? They give it to the Chads and to the Tyrones and other similar handsome, rich, muscular men that will use them and treat them as trash, as sex objects. All that in exchange for fleeting social media attention, and shallow fake validation from other females around them that hate them.

And we ugly, honest men get nothing, we are invisible to them. So it is a bittersweet sensation when I watch videos in YouTube where some old ladies complain that they are very sad and depresses because now that they are old they feel invisible to society. Now that they are 45/50 they see that their future is bleak.

They will die alone surrounded by cats or in some nursing home. It makes me happy that nature works. When the woman is young, she ignores everyone that is not useful to her. Then she becomes old and everyone that is useful ignores her. God is wise.

But then my happiness is gone, and everything becomes dark and cold. When I see news where young betacuck, soyboys date or marry old women. 30 year old guys dating/marrying 40/50/60 years old (and even, believe me or not, 70 or above grannies). THAT IS AN ABOMINATION, THAT IS SICKENING, THAT IS A DISRESPECT TO NATURE AND AN INSOLENCE TOWARDS GOD HIMSELF.

Nature (or God) designed a perfect system where the females that ignore and treat men bad when they are young, are badly treated when they become old.

And those leftists, feminists, socialists, communists, (and don't forget the real minds behind it all [The damn ?'s and George Soros]), use their sick social engineering and brainwashing to turn the weak and coward Betas into those abominations: betacucks, soyboys, sex starved wimps. Those Betas are our real enemies, they are the white knights, they are the M'ladys *tips fedora, they are the ones that keep this feminism atrocity up.

The Betas seriously think that: if they wait long enough the old leftovers from Chad's will be given to them, AND IT DOES! But here is the catch 22, the female will only go for the betacuck provider as a last resort, when they are old and Chad ain't gonna fuck no old, used pussy no more.

The damn, sick, brain dead, betacucks think that slaving away their hard work money and health in exchange for monthly sex with old used hags is just fine. But when they do that they help keep up the fucked up system that is toxic to all of us.

Arthas93, incels.me 14 Comments [8/7/2018 10:41:04 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139561

It is sort of interesting how primal the fear of misogyny is in all our brains. I claim to be misogynist, but am I really? Is misogyny hating women for any reason at all? Is it hating what women do or what they believe or what they represent or something else? The only reason I claim to be one is an exercise in psychological liberation. I do believe that it is okay to have negative feelings about women. I think a lot of men will never advance beyond a certain stage of personal development because there is a whole range of emotions and ideas they're so deathly afraid of that they'll forever suffer from the emotional repression. It's like attempting to thought police your own mind.

WarriorSkull, incels.me 4 Comments [8/7/2018 1:21:15 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139607

Women are sadistic sociopaths

Women love to inflict pain on men and see them suffer . They do not have any kind of sympathy , the more you suffer the more they enjoy.

don2, incels.me 6 Comments [8/7/2018 1:18:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139601

[LifeFuel] Having a daughter doesn't mean you have to be a cuck

(video showing a Texas judge savagely beating up his daughter, uploaded by her; for more, see this quote)
As an oldcel I randomly remembered when this was all over the news back in 2011. I laughed my ass off re-watching it. For those too lazy to watch it's a Judge from Texas who beat his daughter's ass for getting on the internet when she was told not to. At 3:45 he drops a blackpill on what computers have done too.

THIS is the way to deal with an attention-whoring social media-addicted teenaged daughter. Most cucked left-wing dads not only would have tolerated this, they'd have also gone out and bought magnum condoms and gave them to the daughter for all the Chads and Tyrones she would be sleeping with.

Redpill Robert, incels.me 3 Comments [8/7/2018 8:16:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139599

welfare is literally state enforced betabux

think about it, if chad fucks a girl, gets her pregnant, and leaves, the woman goes on welfare. but who pays for welfare? men, the only taxpaying demographic that puts in more than they get out. normans STILL have to pay for chad's kid EVEN if they aren't married to a foid who had 3 kids before settling for betabux. chad still cucks you even if he's never met you. right this moment millions of betas and normies are subsidizing the result of just one of chad's many one night stands. YOU ARE LITERALLY PAYING FOR CHAD'S KID WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, EVEN IF YOU'RE AN INCEL


GIGALUL, incels.me 8 Comments [8/7/2018 8:15:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139590

As a male, your evolutionary and biological impulse is to impregnate females and spread your seed. Each and every one of you is responsible for advancing our species. That is what you are here for. If you fail to do so, you are a failure. You have done nothing to pass on your genes and keep your bloodline in tact. You are among lowest form of life there is.

However, because the purpose of existing is to pass on our genes and advance your species, the true alpha male is the male who has the most children. He did the most to advance our species. Morals are real, because we need them to function as a unit. However, morals do not apply to females, as they are evil and cold-hearted, as well as good for nothing. They are biologically inferior to us, and we, as morally, emotionally, and physically superior, are free to do what we please with them, as we would with any other species we dominate, such as cattle or oxen. Since females are only good for reproduction, there is morally nothing wrong with raping a female - as long as you don't pull out - to ensure you do your biological responsibility and pass on your genes. This is not only okay to do, it is your biological responsibility. The only exceptions are: 1. A female in a "relationship" because societies function better without adultery, and 2. Virgin females because they are extra valuable for a "relationship". All other females are in bounds.

Once again, females are biologically inferior to males. Males are good at all the physical labor that is required to uphold infrastructure and housing. Women are not. Men have made virtually all the advances in science and technology. Women have not. Men have many productive hobbies and interests. The only thing women do is try to seduce males. That is proof that being used for reproduction is their only purpose. In third world countries, especially African ones entrenched in wars, rape happens all the time and no one gives a fuck. Society here only pretends to give a fuck because we pretend to be romantically monogamous. But we're not, the average female has like 30+ partners lifetime and therefore has romantic value. The only thing it is good for is passing on genes. There's nothing wrong with the rape of these females.

I'm not saying I'm going to rape a female, I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with it, since females are unworthy of us. I would not only say that rape is acceptable, I'd actually encourage it as your biological and primitive responsibility to rape a female and advance our species, as long as that female fits those brief conditions.

ItheIthe, incels.me 9 Comments [8/7/2018 6:13:35 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139585

He should have used the XY sex-determination system to back up his opinion and not the religion card. He is a doctor but also doctors are dealing with science in medicine. IF they are also researchers in medicine apart from doctors/healers then they are true scientists.

Females typically have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and are called the homogametic sex. Males typically have two different kinds of sex chromosomes (XY), and are called the heterogametic sex. Exceptions to this are cases of XX males or XY females, or other syndromes.

But these are exceptions and very rare so they should be treated as exceptions. If one has indeed a chromosomal disorder then it could choose whatever chromosomal disorder it's sex represents. Sex is not "assigned" ideologically like these people do. Sex is something you get not at birth, but before birth when your organs are developing. You can be two things and two things only: Male or female.

If you are a male with no chromosomal disorder and claim to be a female your claim is purely ideological and not valid. You are simply a cuck.

Ferox, Anthroscape 5 Comments [8/7/2018 6:13:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139584


This is what runaway credentialism does to our naturally suck-up White women: turns them into Gay Mulatto adoring, poz-pushing, miscegenating White man-haters willing to trash their nation and turn it into a gibs depot for the world’s filth just to get a virtue sniveling tingle in their cooches.

Thankfully, this mental illness is largely confined to over-credentialed White women (I wish this data had been further broken down by marital status). If Trump is to keep winning, he needs a message that appeals to working class women as well as to men. The credentialed battlecunt vote is lost to him; best we can do on Trumperica’s behalf is mock these cat ladies in waiting, shame them for their vapid beliefs, and ridicule their sanctimony. Women do feel the hot burn of shame far more powerfully than do men; a shaming campaign can pay big dividends.

Why do credentialed White broads hate Trump? An MPCer thinks media capture is primarily to blame.

This is the media capture effect. 100% of mainstream political media is anti-Trump, and it hits women hardest.

College educated women listen to NPR and read the NYT. If they’re Republican-leaning they may possibly watch Fox News instead of CNN, but more likely neither. Even the Republican-leaning women still listen to NPR. The Anti-Trump message on all of this media is that supporting Trump is not even something that needs to be rationally considered. Only damaged people like Trump.

This tells on normal women. Plenty of these women would like to support Trump and not vote to sell out their country, but they need social cover for it. There need to be more normal women on TV and the media talking about the bread and butter reasons to support Trump. Jobs, the economy, and protecting what we’ve got from foreign competition are all things to emphasize. Some way, some how, we have to get images of normal women supporting Trump onto the television.

Also, while banging hot women on the side may have helped JFK/Clinton with the average single unmarried Democrat woman, it doesn’t help Trump so much with the average married Republican woman.

Credentialed White Women (CWW) need to be weaned off the Talmudvision. Ripples in their comfortable conformism can eventually effect sea changes in attitude. For instance, ask a CWW at your local airport to remove CNN from the TVs; tell her you don’t want to hear “Fake News”. If she objects, laugh in her face and snort “typical”.

Media capture includes social expectation bias. Some, maybe 5 or 10%, of these CWWs telling survey takers they are voting Democreep are lying to avoid social ostracism from the spinsterhood. I doubt that explains all of the trend, though.

A more potent explanation is that CWWs have come to despise their available White men. These cunts are surrounded on their college campuses by squadrons of soyboys. They resent these un-men and transfer their resentment onto Trump and the shitlord men who support him.

Some of (((their))) resentment is aimed at married White women and popular “Beckys” (a generic term for a psychologically and physically attractive White woman who supports Trump and loves masculine men).

Adding fuel to the CWW rush to anti-Trump and anti-White conformism is the fact that US colleges have become far less discriminatory over the last two decades. Admissions standards have been lowered to accommodate Diversity™ and incoming hordes of White women who want to major in Gender Fluidity and Whorenalism. Colleges are 60+% female, and the sex skew is getting worse, stoking a bitterness in female students who want to nuptially land an educated Chad but find they have to compete with prettier girls just to get a one night stand. Romantic frustration is another culprit pushing CWWs away from sanity and toward Globohomoism.

Which leads to a point I’ve made many times on this blog: when women remain unmarried but economically self-sufficient, they vote for anyone who will strengthen the power of Sugar Daddy Government at the expense of White beta male providers. Government becomes not only a beta provider substitute, but also an outlet for CWWs to vent their spite and signal their loyalty to the gynarcho-tyranny.

The loss of the early-wedded homemaker, in both numbers and status, has created a perverse economic incentive for the CWW who wants cheap consumer products and indentured servants to release her from labor-intensive routine household chores and child-rearing that used to fill a big part of the day of un-credentialed White women, before the DEGREE UP AND LEAN IN, YASS QUEENS ideology took a hold of their imaginations. Throwing more government money at these CWWs isn’t going to solve the problem of them aligning with Globohomo; in the long term it will only intensify their disloyalty to their White men.

The CWW problem isn’t fixed until women have “skin in the game” again. Women have to feel like they are in this together with their men, and that any President and any policies which benefit their men also benefits the women. This means a return to the benevolent patriarchy of America at her height, when sex roles and sex differences were celebrated instead of bitterly cursed like they are today.

CH, Chateau Heartiste 5 Comments [8/7/2018 6:13:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 139582

The Natural Biological Order

This is my first post on this forum, so hello all.

I am a Biology major and therefore am required to learn about life and how different species of animals interact and mate. It’s all about genetics. That’s it.

The biggest Chad sea lion on the beach swims in Stacy sea lion pussy. The Chad Buck with the biggest rack gets all the Stacy doe whores. The Chad Peacock with the best feathers gets to mate with Stacy Peacocks. Humans are animals. There’s no difference. Chads get Stacy’s. Like I said before, it’s all about genetics.

Biologically, females choose males with good genes to pass down those genes to their offspring, bettering their chances of survival. The only problem is that our human society influences women to have ridiculously high standards and tells ugly women that they deserve Chad, and result in ugly stuck up foids aiming for men out of their league. They then neglect men in their own league and think they will eventually meet a Chad willing to settle for a fat fuck.

Until there comes a day where I can walk into a clinic and change my DNA, I will die a virgin fucked over by nature.

(Emphasis original)

LoliLoser, incels.me 8 Comments [8/7/2018 12:44:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139575

Ironic Hypocrisy in TwoXChromosomes right now

So over on TwoXChromosomes right now there's a post called "I was just catfished and it was kind of terrifying" posted by a transwoman. I commented before I realized. I'm not posting the link because I don't want them to get the notification and I really don't like brigading.

Anyway all the comments are like "OMG you poor thing, it's absolutely atrocious how men don't respect lesbian's boundaries and try to convince lesbians to have sex with them!"

Of course OP is a pre-op transwoman who previously posted "hey fellow women how can I make my voice cuter cause you all do that" and "does everyone want to be their favorite anime girl or is it just me?"

Reality is broken. This is peak. Seriously, how is this not an episode of South Park or the Twilight Zone?

That thread is fascinating:

"Here me out, I know you don't like dick but you haven't seen mine!" Fucking losers.

I’m a lesbian as well and have also been catfished by men, unfortunately multiple times. So many men just don’t take lesbianism seriously, and view it as a challenge.

You just don't appreciate the mystical power of dick! As if lesbians could actually be happy without dick, they're just deluding themselves! Then when you trick them into coming close you shove yours in their face and BOOM their delusion crumbles and they'll be desperate for your schlong.

I don't care if you are gay or straight that is not cool, who thinks anyone would want to start a relationship based on a lie?

I was supposed to meet “her” at the Walmart because it was near my house and in a public place.

If you don’t understand why a man catfishing a lesbian is creepy as fuck, you’re part of the problem

By misleading a lesbian and making that connection while in the guise of a woman, you pretty much out yourself as a creep and a liar. The connection was made via deceit

I'm of the opinion that, although adults should be allowed to get SRS and HRT, and that they shouldn't be discriminated against because of those things, people have a reasonable expectation for a man to have an actual, functioning penis, and for a woman to have an actual, functioning vagina. Genitals, while not a sufficient condition for attraction, are for most people a necessary condition, and to call yourself a woman when you don't have a vagina is deceptive.

I wonder if that thread would play differently if everyone know that OP was a pre-op trans.

It's almost like trans ideology is super duper homophobic.

Off-topic, but I wonder if TIMs think the name of that subreddit is exclusionary and "TERFy"

There's a few xx subs like that, like xxketo for example, which I like/hope is for actual women and transmen, because biology matters, especially when specifically talking about something that effects your hormones and so many women, myself including, have absent or two week+ menstruation from keto or are using keto to help with diabetes and ovarian cysts. (And no transwomen are not "just like women with PCOS". Gag me.) There was this "I'm an XY women am I welcome?" Seriously, who other than trans ask if they are "welcome" on a sub? People are free to subscribe and post to any sub as long as it's relevant. Why ask? Even GC doesn't have a "no Transcribers" rule. They are just fishing for validation at our expense. Like, if I'm uncomfortable with it, like I am, what am I supposed to do? Say, "Actually, this sub is not for you, it's for people talking about the specifics of dealing with keto and how it changes the female body."? No. I'll be downvoted to hell and labeled transphobic. So they come seeking validation, I'm just asking an innocent honest question, no hate plz~ but we all know that there's only one allowed answer to the question or you get banned, downvoted, or threatened.

Go sort by “top of all time” on xxketo and you’ll find a post at the very top welcoming a TIM with open arms.

Many even suggest changing the name because xxketo is “exclusionary” and “chromosomes shromosomes”. And that was as of 74 days ago.

Many even had the audacity to say that women with PCOS could “relate to his androgen problems” so he should fit right in.

Uhh... seriously? I have PCOS and that does NOT make me relate more to a man, Tina. Get out.

So annoying!!

I’m sorry .... WHAT?!!?! Are you fucking kidding me!? That’s enraging!!! Chromosomes DO matter when it comes to the expression of literally every gene in the body. Your risk of osteoporosis, certain cancers, certain diseases ... it doesn’t give a flying fart what the patient “identifies” as. I promise. And the PCOS thing has my head spinning like Beetlejuice. I can’t. It’s too stupid.

I was just part of a thread where a TIF called me a dick. I said “I’m a cunt if you want to be technically correct” so he sent me a PM calling me a terf and all of those pleasantries. When I said “isn’t using genitals as an insult kind of terf-y?” He blocked me right after. The irony is ALWAYS lost on them.

Oh trust me. There was a thread where a mother posted about her daughter being 18 and already being a cam girl. I suggested that there could be a chance she was groomed into it and I was dogpiled by these idiots who were pro sex industry!

That's so disturbing, you're probably right! I bet they were like oh no don't tell her to stop, give us her camera name

They didn’t ask for her camera name, but they were making the typical sex pozzer libfem arguments:

“But what if she knows other cam girls”

“You’re perpetuating the stigma.”

I'm hoping if nothing else that seeing the dogpile on you would convince the mother to refrain from taking pro-porn arguments to heart. If she legitimately cares about what may be happening it's better that her daughter could have someone to talk to about it instead of being left to handle it alone...or worse, with no one but other sex-positive individuals (far more likely to find around her age today) who will offer nothing but encouragement for doing it.

The guy in that thread that says lesbians and women should give him a chance as a platonic friend....

Women always owe men something.

*Edit: And I haven’t even gotten to the incel yet.

Remind me why we’re not supposed to say these men are utterly revolting, again?

LOL. This guy thinks that this other guy has anything in common with his lesbian mother.

I’m glad you’re safe...I should mention that I am a straight married male, but I grew up with a gay mother and I couldn’t imagine someone trying this to her, if you need any help trying to figure out witch VPN to go with I have a few in mind that should help you on all platforms, just let me know if you need any help

I love how these men white knight for trans but when a woman is harrassed it is her fault.

Silly womens acting so sensitive. /s

some TERFs, r/GenderCritical 1 Comments [8/7/2018 12:42:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139569

The glaring difference between the definition of "male" and "female" on Medicine Net

It's funny... until you realize that young women are being pressured to 'define their gender' and 'decide what pronouns to use.' As the qualifications for 'being a woman' get more obscure and complicated, women will be pressured to dis-identify with the label 'woman.'

What's even worse is that this is supposed to be a medical definition of 'female' - they aren't even limiting their revisionism to 'women' anymore.

Men are human.

We are non men.

We are whatever men say that we are. Men define us. We will never be permitted to define ourselves.

Scrolling further down that very same page:

" Women should be aware that they metabolize a number of drugs differently than men. In some cases and for some medications, the rate of metabolism may be slower, and in other cases, faster. It is, therefore, essential that women are well informed about the kinds and correct dosages of any drugs they are taking. "

But I suppose one can just "identify" out of those differences nowadays

A great example of the way that society defines male as the default and woman as some sort of “variation”, which in turn opens the door for every other thing not defined as clearly male to come under the female umbrella.

Wow, the thought police truly DGAF about trans men. So much of this movement is purely about sheltering and validating the precious, precious egos of narcissistic transwomen.

I'm thinking also of Cancer Research UK who changed all the wording on their website associated with cervical cancer and other women's illnesses, and left the wording on the men's cancers intact and straightforward.

Anyone got other instances like that? From this thread it seems like the Wikipedia page history for "woman" would be another good example of this. A few years ago the problem with that page was that it was full of misogynistic slurs listed as "synonyms" for "woman" while the page defining "man" was straightforward and scientific. It really does sometimes seem like the trans activists have stepped in to take over where the openly misogynistic dudebros have left off.

some TERFs, r/GenderCritical 1 Comments [8/7/2018 12:40:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139566

[NOTE: Posting this in two parts to make it at least somewhat readable.]

Men Are Not Broken [Part 2]

The evidence for male love for death and destruction is overwhelming. But it would be wrong to assume that this is the end of the argument, that we just have to accept men’s natural dangerousness and adjust to it.

This we do anyway: taking self defense classes, keeping separate bank accounts when married, telling girls not to go with strange men. This is something even the most right-wing women do, however illogical and ineffective their precautions often seem. This is nothing particularly feminist. To – literally or metaphorically – carry a weapon in a world of predators is the bare minimum, not radical. (Many right-wing women carry literal weapons, something radical women should take in consideration for themselves as well.)

But unlike right-wing women and collaborators who simply accept male behaviour or at best demand cosmetical, individual change, Radical Feminists dig deeper. Beside the overwhelming evidence for male dangerousness we also find overwhelming evidence that men actually control their dangerousness when it suits them.

The picture of the man who just can’t help his nature is peddled by patriarchal apologists: The poor man was nagged and mocked by his shrew of a wife and couldn’t take it anymore. The poor man only follows his evolutionary instinct and raped her to assert his dominance. The poor man is the victim of political oppression, he just had to attack women to cope with his feeling of powerlessness. But women’s experiences make it very clear that men are highly selective towards whom they are ?losing control?.

Abusive men don’t attack their nagging and mocking male bosses with their fists. They don’t ambush their male boss on the toilet and rape him to get back at him. When they are oppressed and exploited, they don’t kick the boss from one corner of his office to the other. When their favourite team loses, they are not seeking out the quarterback to use him as a punching bag for their frustration. In a crowded train, they are not driven by some evolutionary instinct to go for the throat of their fellow male who enters their personal space or bares his teeth to them.

Men also are perfectly able to dose their violence. Male violence against women and children follows an escalating cyclic pattern. The escalation is a conscious strategy: How much will she be able to take? How far can I go? How many of my depraved fantasies can I make come true? (We observe the same deliberate escalation in sadomasochism. It is embraced there as ‘slave training’.)

Men are planning their crimes and they are able to cover them. Losing control is adverse to both. Someone who loses control does not build an air-tight terror regime in his own home, by and by cutting off his wife’s and children’s means of refuge and lowering the bar of ?reasons? for his violent outbursts. Someone who loses control does not take upon him the logistics of building torture chambers or digging up graves. Someone who loses control does not buy a new hammer before he goes out again and again to prey on women.

Men can control themselves just fine. They make the active choice to act on the impulses their faulty nature gives them.

So, where does that leave us?

Right-wing women openly collaborate to secure their individual position. If they are just compliant enough, they think they will be allowed to sit at the men’s table. If they are just submissive enough, they will be taken care of and be rewarded.

Many liberal feminists de facto do the same in a more hidden manner, while they are touting an empty ideology of equality. For them, maleness by and itself has worth. Therefore, to them, males can be potential allies, partners, lovers, teachers, people worthy of shaping society. They can even be women. If only they were a bit more friendly, a bit more peaceful, a bit more loving, a bit more loyal, a bit more equality-oriented.
This is nothing new. Contrary to anti-feminist propaganda, ever since feminism came into being – even more so, ever since women started to take action against their miserable situation, pre-dating organised feminism – an overwhelming majority of women preferred the equality approach, the liberal approach. Suffragettes argued that mothers were bringing voters into the world and thusly should be able to vote (6). ‘Bread and Roses’, one of the old songs coming out of the leftist women’s movement, includes the lines ?As we go marching, marching, we battle too for men; for they are women’s children, and we mother them again? (7). Second-wave ?women’s libbers? won out over their radical counterparts, enabling the backlash, sex positivism and the modern mantra of ?I choose my choice!”. Modern third/fourth-wavers with their love of sexual submission, trannies and He-For-She bring this sucking up to men to a logical conclusion.

Many women do this deliberately. They are sell-outs or anti-feminists making use of a liberal feminist mien to gain something from it. TV show creators like Shonda Rhimes or Lena Dunham make good money by catering to a certain urban, slightly feminist, female audience.

Other women are too much invested in the personal privilege they obtain for being compliant to patriarchy: They get to call themselves feminist, without having to change their personal lifestyle or to risk income, while they can keep any convenient patriarchal mind blankie, from religion to sadomasochism. A sizeable portion of these women explicitly doesn’t want to be any more radical. They want to have the privilege AND the sisterhood, without seeing the fundamental contradiction between the two.

But some of them are just not aware of what they are doing. This is an impression I got in the last years. There are plenty of campaigns on Twitter and in the blogosphere (like e. g. #Yesallwomen or Project Unbreakable) documenting the horrors women experience under patriarchy. The thousands of testimonies show two things: Women are reliable, sharp and precise observers of their own lives – and many women are somehow unable to draw radical and long-term conclusions from their experiences.

Instead, they are desperately begging men to be nicer to them because they want to be able to love them. Many liberal feminist suggestions aim in this direction, e. g. trying to make men not use pejorative language. As if a man who does not call them a bitch, a cunt, a whore or a dyke to their faces was somehow rendered incapable of thinking these things in his mind. (Personally, I prefer to be called names, because I instantly know whom never to turn my back to.) On the other hand, liberal women try to achieve their goals by appealing to men’s interests, e. g. when they declare that a ?liberated? feminist is better in bed that those other prudes. Their approach is to be inclusive, as if the oppressed class could make the oppressors relinquish their power by being nice.

These women are actually the ones I expect to do better. Women as a group are not stupid or naive or even close-minded. There is a reason why women are to be found at the forefront of every social cause imaginable. Women as a class – unlike the patriarchal lie of the ‘conservative woman’ proclaims – tend to be more open to new things and ideas than men. They are deeper thinkers than men, capable of understanding the ma-trix rather than the mechanics.

Women have to WANT to think, though. Hoping and wishing and begging is not enough.
The only realistic way for us to shape freedom for girls and women is seperatism. We as women need to put other women – any other woman – above everyone else. Men do that. Men can hate each others’ guts, but they will always close ranks towards women. It is time women do the same. This is the only way for women to make a better future: Stop catering to men in any way. Don’t make them lunch. Don’t listen to their problems. Don’t pick up their dirty coffee cups at work. Don’t have male friends. Give up male family. Don’t have children. Don’t talk to men at all if you are not forced to. Don’t live with them. Don’t sleep with them. Don’t step aside on the street. Don’t take gifts from them. Don’t interact with them online. Don’t imagine the ?perfect? man. Het women do that and when they don’t find any man living up to their ideals, they come to the conclusion that all men are scum while still clinging to their mental image of the perfect man. But the truth is, even the ideal man still is scum.

Start with a small change, e. g. not talking to the creepy neighbour anymore, and work your way. You will realise, the less interaction you have with men, the easier you’ll breathe. This also doesn’t make you more vulnerable. Think about the statistics. We are most likely to be attacked and/or raped by men we know: Family members, boyfriends and husbands, friends, acquaintances. Random attacks by strangers do happen, but they are nowhere as likely as becoming the victim of a man we already know. Living with a man, spending time with men, this is what endangers women most. We have been told the opposite, so this seems counter-intuitive. But it is a fact that the biggest threat to a woman, statistically speaking, is the man whom she thinks of as her protector.

Put women above everything else. Live alone or build separatist communities. Show solidarity. Look for hobbies done in female-only groups. Find the beauty in every woman. Stay away from men and their empty promises.

This is what I do. Cutting one man after the other out of my life. Prioritising Lesbians and women and girls. And I will keep writing about how liberal feminism hurts all of us, because for liberal feminists I still have hope. Not much hope, admittedly, but still hope.

IceMountainFire, IceMountainFire 0 Comments [8/7/2018 12:40:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 139565

[NOTE: Posting this in two parts to make it at least somewhat readable.]

Men Are Not Broken [Part 1]

Looking back on my posts so far, I realise I have written a lot about how liberal feminists are failing other women, and relatively little about the root cause of the miserable state the planet is in: Men.

There is a reason for that. Men are utterly unimportant to me. There is nothing to be expected from them.Writing about what anti-feminist women and men should do is pointless. Anti-feminist women make choices I can only view with disgust and contempt; a sentiment that without a doubt is mutual. And men? Men can’t change.

Their fundamental set-up is faulty. When a man does horrible things to girls and women, he is doing what his very nature commands him to do. Men can’t be reformed, they can’t be reasoned with, and they can’t be fixed. They are not broken.Their lack of intelligence, depth and human emotion is built-in. Even ?matriarchal? societies suffer from men’s inbuilt shortcomings.

Men are biologically brittle. Their Y chromosome is a joke, and their rates of life expectancy, disease, injury, addiction, education failure etc are evidence for their fundamentally faulty design. They can manage to somehow keep the upper hand as long as they manipulate the stakes against women. But even the most timid changes towards some sort of fairness (never mind liberation) make women outrun men in no time. Boys and men are not failing at school and university because these places all of a sudden have become matriarchal habitates, as certain anti-feminists suggest. They fail because as a group they are less intelligent than women. Boys and men excel only when they get to manipulate the testing method: They create IQ tests to favour white Western males, they give each other Nobel prizes and trump this as ?proof? for their intelligence. IQ tests and Nobel prizes are tightly monitored instruments. But schools and unis exist all over the world, with millions of teachers and billions of students. Schools and unis are not controlled by a relatively small gate-keeping elite like the Nobel prize committees or the opinion leaders in the field of psychology who have the power to declare one test valid and to disregard another. Schools and unis can’t be controlled as tightly, and so boys and men are failing in them. I wonder how badly they’d fare if the schools were indeed female-centered.

Even the most intelligent of men are still incredibly dense. Talk to science phDs or techies. I had to do with this demographic more than I ever wanted, and their sheer ignorance often took my breath away. Context, history, depth, complexity, ambiguity and beauty are completely lost to them. It is like talking to vaguely human-like machines. I suspect that this is the reason why so many men are drawn to machines, instruction manuals and lifeless things.

At this point men usually come up with the last two arguments for their existence: Physical strength and sperm. They argue that they are needed for the hard work (or, according to delusional anti-feminists, ?exploited? to do the hard work) and that without them ?mankind? will die out.

But reality shows that all this male strength and sperm is completely wasteful and unnecessary. If tomorrow all men fell down and were dead, the biggest problem would be the stink. Sperm banks would enable the surviving women to bring just enough men into the world to stock up the banks again. There would be far less people on earth, but they would live in peace.

As for strength, nobody needs to be able to lift hundreds of kilograms. It is just not necessary. Make smaller loads and go the way twice. Or build a tackle. There is no industry – including the notorious mining industry which regularly is brought up in such discussions – impossible to function with exclusively female workers. In the very moment men step back or vanish from the picture, women do fine for themselves. Mining, metal work, construction work, fishing, hunting, making timber, finance, business, women simply don’t need men. The truth is, that men are actively keeping women from learning ?male? skills and from working in ?male? professions. By this they secure their financial dominance and keep women dependant on them.

And if that doesn’t help, they use violence.
Men are violent and predatory by nature. Even little boys and very old men are violent. Ask the family of Jamie Bulger (1). Other boys may not kill random toddlers, but they terrorise girls or torture animals. A male toddler squashing ants or dragging around the family dog by the tail isn’t even perceived as violent by most people. A boy hitting, insulting, bullying and harrassing his sister is not perceived as violent – siblings quarrel, that’s just how things are, and boys will be boys.

As for old men, not even physical weakness stops them from attacking girls and women. There is a reason why the phrase ?dirty old man? exists. With the onset of the general mental decay so typical for aging men, their self-control slips and they start to make mistakes. Every ?dirty old man? used to be a dirty young man who just was quick-witted enough to cover up his crimes, and every dirty young man is a grown up violent boychild.

Last year, there were two men prowling my neighbourhood and bashing in women’s heads from behind. One of them was 21 years old and used a crowbar in order to steal money and phones. The other one was 89 (!) years old and used a wooden meat hammer. His reasoning? He married a woman from Thailand 30 years his junior. When he abused her, she divorced him and moved back to Thailand. This made him so angry that he sneaked up on random women and hit them in the head with the meat hammer he specifically bought for this task.

No amount of oppression, weakness or illness keeps men from being violent and predatory.

Logically, men adore death. They bring death. They like death. They like dead things.
Men see women as things, as useable goods, as animated corpses. Some don’t even bother with ‘animated’. Men admit openly in the media that they prefer pornography over sex, as if the women raped on the screen weren’t real. Men work hard to develop realistic sex robots or wife robots (2). Men literally will rape dead women.


Men are usually very much aware that they are scum. Their delusions of grandeur and the demands towards women to cater to them are a reaction to this deep inner awareness of their inferiority. Occasionally men even will admit that they are scum.
Commenters on this article did it: http://valleywag.gawker.com/peter-thiel-admits-the-paypal-mafia-built-bombs-in-hi-1632734435
Look how many commenters casually point out that it is normal for teenage boys to build bombs just for the fun of it.

IceMountainFire, IceMountainFire 1 Comments [8/7/2018 12:40:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139564

What if we women just stopped all emotional or activist labor for TRAs?

I’ve been thinking about this for quite some time. I almost wonder what would happen if every last woman on earth stopped performing emotional or activist labor for TRAs given how shitty they treat us.

I’ve stopped doing any activist labor for them and I’ve never felt better! Same goes for some former libfems I’ve talked to. The minute they put women first is when they realized where they need to be.

Think about it. TRAs get tons of corporate funding and media attention. Why do they need the labor of us everyday women? They can rely on their corporate buddies.

I’ve come to the conclusion that the only reason they guilt and terrorize us into performing labor for them is so they can have us preoccupied and we can’t do things for ourselves. That needs to stop.

I think it would be what is deserved.

I would like to see it now on this website: no more using "cis", as we are humans, not isomers. No more using the word woman for anyone but adult human females. No more emotional labor for men who post here.

If only the libfems would see it that way. They exhaust themselves performing all this labor for them. I can see it in their eyes.

I feel many of our sisters waking up, however. This site has grown so large- there were 4K subscribers when I arrived, and there are 4x that after 18 months.

It is difficult to have patience for women who spend so much of themselves on men. Try to raise consciousnesses wherever you can. I found this site through an article about boys join a girls' sports team.

We will never change all of their minds, but women are worth it, even the ones who oppose us.

Yep. I’m even finding common ground with conservative women on this issue. I know conservative women are handmaidens too, but even if they’re willing to team with us for a short time, it’ll be worth it.

The best (or worst) thing about it is that it' s not going to be enough anyway. At the smallest infraction, they will be labeled TERFs as well, and if that doesn' t happen the goalposts will move and TRAs will ask even more insane and impossible shit than they are doing now.

Frankly, I think that TRAs are acting this way because 1) they need women working for them and supporting them since they are lazy and entitled and would never think of, you know... doing something themselves, 2) because they are testing us to see how much we' re willing to take and how far they can go before we snap and tell them to go fuck themselves and 3) because they want to have a "justifiable" reason to hate on us: think about it, what' s better than telling a woman to choke on your dick? Telling a woman to choke on your dick and be called awesome for that.

We shouldn't be doing anything at all for men.

Men always do well. And they have plenty of extra energy to rape/mutilate/murder/abuse girls and women. They look out for each other.

Perhaps if they had to make their own sandwiches, do their own laundry, raise their own children, etc., they wouldn't have time or energy to control every uterus, imprison us for miscarriage, etc.

Amen!! This is part of why I’m not having children. I know I would be doing the majority of the child rearing. Fuck that.

Not having children was the single best decision that I ever made.

Some women don't have any choice about their own pregnancies, and I understand that, too.

I am glad that I didn't create more men, for obvious reasons. And I don't know how I would deal with it if I knew that I would be leaving daughters behind when I die. Especially when so many women are so centered on men.

Agreed. I'm going to start a meetup for "womyn" and then plan that woman's festival.

Just let me know when and where! I’m sick of every last womyn’s event being coopted by trans activists and porn sick men! Fuck that!

some TERFs, r/GenderCritical 2 Comments [8/7/2018 12:40:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139563

So, STE. I guess the most interesting thing would be knowing who you are in terms of your ideology.
Are you some libtard trying to stir up some of our vague “coalitions” or are you a real libertine who supports Holcoausts’ blog? Or are you something third?

If you are just some leftie I’ll tell you to go fuck yourself. But I’ll assume you’re somebody who actually supports Holocaust21.

I’ve never tried to hide the fact that I hate modern Western women. I believe them to be incapable of being good mothers and wives. This is no secret, most of my writings talk about that. To understand my post, you’d have to know the fundamental change that happened in the world around 2000-2004, which had to do with feminism entering my home country and making providers now unnecessary and to be replaced by seducers. Since I am not a seducer doing horrible shit like that would have indeed made me more attractive to girls that age, when I was 12 myself. Why didn’t I? Because I didn’t know how things were ! My parents, teachers etc were all raised in a society that was much less feminist. The shit a person like that Calvin2018 nutcase blames me for is just that – not getting around in a completely new environment on time. Also, Calvin’s posts, both on Reddit and their blog, are horrendous accusations veiled behind fake intellectualism, as they couldn’t even pretend it’s not about sex for a single day despite claiming they don’t believe it is (I mean it’s just in their title and everything they write, why I am so picky when saying that?) and plainly told me that me not being incel for a year means that I’ve been having sex for an year. That is Calvin, but you’re not mentioning them so I won’t go further into that.

Does that post say I’d do the same thing now? No, it doesn’t !

You call me a misogynist? Do you know what that would entail? It would entail hatred of ALL women. But how many of my posts attacked women in non-feminist societies? There are some sentences I made on female nature in general, but they’re more “buyer beware” than hateful content.

Is killing women wrong? Depends on how you view these women. I view modern Western women as irredeemably evil, and believe killing them makes a male more, not less attractive. Same with rape or other acts of violence against them. I’ve seen the rape thing with my own eyes. You call MRA’s misogynists? What is this, 2012? Honey, MRAs have been losing relevance for some years. And, no, they’re not all misogynists, this is something retarded that a feminist would write in 2012.

And finally, do people you mentioned have disagreements? Of course they do. I disagree with some of Nathan’s ideas and consider them absurd and barbaric (impregnating you daughter? C’mon). I disagree with Holocaust that the best societies were Netherlands or Sweden in the 70s. I mean, I think these were pleasant to live in but were something like that moment before Willie Coyote realizes that there is a nothing underneath him. They didn’t function on sustainable grounds and turned to shit they are now because the foundations were wrong even then.

But why should we agree on everything?

Now, if you wanna make a serious reply to this go ahead. But I doubt you will.

caamib, Holocaust21 1 Comments [8/7/2018 12:40:10 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: badoo

Quote# 139560

It's over for you if:

You have ever searched "how to get a girlfriend" on Google

- You have ever searched "tricks to attract girls" on Google

- You have ever read a PUA book, ebook, or web page

- You have ever paid for a PUA workshop

- You know who any of these guys is: RooshV, Mystery, Neil Strauss

- You have tried to get more muscle so as to attract women

If you have ever done this you are at 90% probability of remaining incel all your life. The explanation is simple: that shows you can't attract women naturally. You're off to a bad start because sexual attraction is pretty much based on genes.

Fontaine, incels.me 9 Comments [8/6/2018 6:10:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139558

Women don't care about what men think. They care about what women think . . .
. . . even if it's completely fucking illogical, because women don't rationalize. They feel. And they feel that their tethered bond to the sisterhood hivemind is a sacred one that they are primordially attached to. This is even beyond CHAD himself. If the sisterhood hivemind decided tommorow CHAD has a a tiny dick, let's all go lezzie, they'd do it.

SlayerSlayer, incels.me 4 Comments [8/6/2018 6:10:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139555

Evolution is on topic for reaction, for the nature of women makes sense and is explicable in terms of Darwinian evolution, in terms of evolutionary psychology. You can also explain it as the curse of Eve, but if you explain it as the curse of Eve, it is rather arbitrary. Why did God curse women that way, and not some other way? (Answer, because we are risen killer apes, not fallen angels.) And because women are cursed in this fashion we cannot trust them to make sexual and reproductive choices. Nor can we trust them to vote, for they are going to vote for invasion, conquest, and the extermination of their menfolk.


Vox Day’s advice on handling women is not very good. It may well have been adversely affected by his reluctance to believe in evolution. Similarly, his faith in the sexless character of females under eighteen.

While I am delighted that #metoo is devouring those who funded it and sponsored it I know perfectly well that every notable #metoo allegation is a malicious lie, for the targets are always the men whom women very much want, wealthy and powerful men, and the accusers are mostly washed up narcissistic whores that men no longer want – the accusations are directed against those men who are most likely to be sexually contacted by women in a sexually aggressive manner, and the accusations come from those women who are most apt to sexually contact men in a sexually aggressive manner.

While we should never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake, and should enthusiastically cheer our enemies as they devour each other, Vox Day is a blue pilled sucker for failing to identify vicious lying whores as vicious lying whores. Weinstein and company deserve what they are going to get – but they deserve it for sponsoring the movement that is now devouring them. Similarly, when Stalin sent those who set up death camps to their own death camps for “objective fascism”, it was a good thing that they were sent to their own death camps, but one should not be persuaded that they were actually were objectively fascists. And it will be a good thing if Weinstein and company are convicted of rape, but they are no more rapists than Trots were fascists, and if Vox Day thinks they are guilty, he is ignorant of the nature of women, to which ignorance his rejection of evolution has likely contributed.

Jim, Jim's Blog 6 Comments [8/6/2018 6:10:04 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 139544

But why is that? Because after sexual revolution and so called "liberation" of women men have no incentives to be husbands and start family anymore. In general, men will do what it takes to get sex, and sex drive is a huge factor behind met getting married. It is well-known that the traditional (pre 1960s) mating system required men to be reliable husbands and providers in order to marry, and marriage was by large considered the only legitimate sexual release (as it should be). In other words, women and society required men to become husbands and providers in order to get sex and satiate their sex drives.

This was also a moral solution in which sex was restricted to the confines of marriage, as it should be (sure, there were patologies, but I'm talking about the system in general). Also, women married in their early 20s, giving incentives to men to work hard and become candidates for husbands and providers. Fast forward to today. "Liberated" women are not interested in marriage untill their late 20s/early 30s, spending that time at various LTRs/casual sex with whomever they like. Therefore, women no longer require men to marry them and be reliable husbands and providers in order to get sex, so men don't do it, because they don't have to - simple as that.

It has also another layer. Sexual revolution removed all shackes on female sexuality. Women can now financialy support themselves and don't need to lock down a provider husband like they did before the 1960s. All social stigma was removed from fornication, therefore women are free to select their partners solely (or at least mainly) on the basis of sexual attraction. It is well known and proved by research that due to their hypergamy majority of women are sexually attracted only to top 20-30% men (alpha males) - these men get tons of casual sex and don't need to become husbands/providers in order to achieve that.

Other 70% men (mostly betas) receive little to no female attention in their early 20s (women will settle on them only later, when they can't lock down one of the top 20-30% for marriage), therefore they also have no incentives to do work to become reliable providers and husbands. Before the 1960s an average beta male had a good shot at marrying a feminine woman early, as he was in demand as a provider. Now, with "liberated" women supporting themselves and entering the workforce, a beta provider is no longer needed (women often settle for one in their late 20s/early 30s, since there are not enough alpha males to go around, but they are not happy about it, which results in 40% divorce rate).

Add to this terribly unfair divorce laws in the US which are heavily skewed in favor of women, including no fault divorce (70% of divorces are initiated by women - women can blow up marriage for any reason any time and be sure of getting cash and prizes), child support (imputed income, in some states men can go to jail if they lose a job and can't afford child support) and you have further disincentives for men to work to be husbands, again caused by feminism. Finally, husband's authority as head of family has largely been dismantled by the aforementioned unfair divorce laws, feminist propaganda, state education, popular culture, #MeeToo, etc.

Tl;dr - men will do what women and society require them to do in order to be selected as mates. After sexual revolution, advent of feminism and decline of Christianity and its moral values in Western societies, women rejected early marriage en masse, no longer requiring men to be husbands and providers in order to get sex, so men don't do that. Also, the authority of husband and father has been completely destroyed by feminism. Feminism started all of this and remains the main driving force behind this process. All of this is well documented and covered in Christian/Catholic manosphere by such bloggers as Dalrock and Donalgraeme.

Arvinger, Suscipe Domine 5 Comments [8/5/2018 12:04:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139543

This is a very interesting observation. A divorce or abortion doesn't have to take place for people to suffer the effects of feminism. Every bond is weakened, every family relationship takes on a new and different nature. Even before it reveals itself in exterior manifestations, the invisible ontological reality of family ties has been transformed, from something permanent into something temporary, from something fundamental to our nature into something based on pragmatic calculations.

A specific example of this is the permanence of the marriage bond. That bond does not lose its permanence on the day on which one of the partners files for divorce. That bond always lacked the sacramental quality of permanence from the very beginning to the extent that divorce was ever an option. On the day when the couple stand on the steps of the altar and say "I do," they form a permanent sacramental bond if they enter into marriage with the understanding that divorce is never an option no matter what difficult circumstances they might encounter, and they form a different kind of bond if they

When you live in a culture of feminism and divorce the way we do, you can't help breathing the air around you. Everyone is affected by the society in which they live. Everyone is affected by the laws under which they operate.

The famous "Radio Replies" had a pamphlet on "Mixed Marriage" that they published in the thirties warning Catholic boys, "No matter how much that protestant girl says that she believes in the permanence of marriage and that she would never get divorced, her words mean little in comparison the fundamental reality which is that she can divorce you at any time and get remarried. You, meanwhile, will be stuck for life."

What was true back then for protestants is just as true today for Catholics. Anyone you marry can divorce you at any time, and they can get remarried without any obstacles from the state or from the Church.

Maximilian, Suscipe Domine 4 Comments [8/5/2018 12:03:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139540

Whenever I go on reddit and lurk around, I always see post wall females on Reddit virtue signaling about their beta providers or their past boyfriends. One common theme is that they always bring up "emotional intelligence".

This is an oxymoron. Intelligence involves logic and critical thinking to solve problems and see rationally. Emotions get in the way of logical thinking. Emotions are just a reaction to things that happen around you, no person is more "emotionally" intelligent than others.

These women clearly don't care about so called emotional intelligence. They care about strong jawlines, blue eyes, being 6 ft+, and having a stable job. In regards to their providers, they care about their resources, not them. Females as a whole usually deny having any physical requirements when dating yet in reality, your genetics are what determines your success 95% of the time.

I have noticed that younger females on Instagram tend to be more honest about what they are attracted to, and IT hates that. They follow pages dedicated to jawlines, handsome guys as a whole, and post memes about how attractive tall guys are. Then when you go on reddit, females magically are attracted to guys who go hiking on the weekend and share their politics opinions.

Cool fact: Women hate when you agree with them on everything. It is a sign of weakness.

Ap0calypse, incels.me 3 Comments [8/5/2018 12:03:37 PM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139539

Apart from beeing a reject, I actually hate women for some reason. The only female who ever wanted me was bitching around. It was a nice time when we get to know better but after that we're argued all the time we saw each other, just as expected. Women keep bitching and grumbling about every small errors. Yet I have to provide and protect her with such a shitty attitude? Fuck that, I prefer hanging with my friends, having a wonderful time.

Women are fucking, little parasites that should be exterminated and so the humanity imho. I may be a low IQ, mentally disorded idiot but isn't it even more idiotic wasting my time on women? In the end I just get even more frustrated. I'll rather focus on how to make money rather than wasting my time with those parasites.

SupremeG, incels.me 6 Comments [8/5/2018 12:03:28 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie
1 2 3 4 5 | top