4chan archive /lgbt/ (index)
similar threads
2015-10-01 11:54 5012456 Anonymous (facepalm-computer.jpg 608x409 66kB)
> anti-feminism /lgbt/ anons

7 min later 5012484 Anonymous (1412961273884.jpg 584x812 71kB)
>>5012456 A board about men fucking men has no time for your period tantrums? Who fucking knew.

10 min later 5012491 Anonymous
>>5012484 >thinking /lgbt/ is a board for gay men How new are you?

13 min later 5012508 Anonymous (1429429867130.jpg 778x2016 402kB)
>>5012501

15 min later 5012513 Anonymous (A+little+otter_484436_5103819.png 455x707 365kB)
>>5012508 Marty makes a good waifu Sea Slut can be my whore on the side

20 min later 5012537 Anonymous
The duluth model alone, which allows women to abuse men, is enough to hate feminists.

40 min later 5012587 Anonymous (guts.jpg 800x1147 302kB)
>be a hetero man >women start to annoy even though they are sexy >almost consider men or nothing fucking modern society and acceptance for everything [spoiler]honest to god, I am not sarcastic[/spoiler]

2 hours later 5012881 Anonymous (hetero women.jpg 1484x1118 407kB)
>>5012587 >women

2 hours later 5012886 Anonymous
>>5012508 >Marty the tranny got destroyed HAHAHAH EPIC

2 hours later 5012902 Anonymous
>>5012537 By abuse you mean saying "no" to a date invitation?

2 hours later 5012907 Anonymous (supporting gays is oppressive.png 698x961 759kB)
>>5012491 >gay and bisexual men aren't the majority of the board >muh natural allies

2 hours later 5012909 Anonymous
>>5012508 What comic is this?

2 hours later 5012915 Anonymous
>>5012909 a neko tranny comic

2 hours later 5012918 Anonymous
>>5012915 The actual name. Or a link. That shit just gives me futanari porn tumblrs.

3 hours later 5012924 Anonymous
feminism See definition in Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary Syllabification: fem·i·nism Pronunciation: /ˈfeməˌnizəm/ Definition of feminism in English: noun The advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. That;s the entire thing in a nutshell. The radical idea that women are equal to men. Please post your nutjob/nazi/tranny sperg flameouts below as I'm sure you can not handle this very, very simple idea, the idea that women and men are equal and should be treated as such

3 hours later 5012929 Anonymous
I'm a gay man and a radical feminist.

3 hours later 5012937 Anonymous (duluth model.png 556x349 188kB)
>>5012902 Men are being sent to jail even if they're the ones who called the police. They had to record everything if they're being abused, because the police have to assume that they're the perpetrator because of the duluth model thanks to feminists.

3 hours later 5012941 Anonymous
>>5012937 men literally have so much power in society and there are so many institutions in place that favor them that the idea of one being abused by a female is fucking hilarious not even they can take themselves seriously when it comes these things

3 hours later 5012960 Anonymous
>>5012941 >forced to enlist to vote, become a citizen, and be legalized >no abuse shelters >can't be raped according to feminists >always assumed to be perpetrators >no free scholarships based on sex >no decision power in abortion/keeping their children >almost never get child custody >almost never get child support >nothing bad happens to spouse if child support is late >gets sent to jail if can't send child support >still have to pay child support after going to jail >feminists still thinks men have more power in society This is why people think feminism is just misandry

3 hours later 5012965 Anonymous
Feminism is the same as fascism

3 hours later 5012997 Anonymous
>>5012881 feminine structure is very appealing to me, but sometimes I just can't handle the bullshit that's inside it

3 hours later 5013019 Lyn (1442839023241.jpg 379x417 46kB)
>>5012508 >>5012909 >>5012915 >>5012918 http://pinterest.com/pin/3417106904 53442441/ Holy shit, Hard Blush. This is one of the hotter things I have read in a while.

3 hours later 5013020 Anonymous
>>5012960 are you retarded or something? all these "problems" you just pointed out are due to the very same system (i'm not going to say THAT word because i know it scares some of you) that keeps women down and which men are interested in preserving because it favors them 9 out of 10 times. for centuries men have absolved themselves of the responsibility of child-raising, and now you guys want to complain that women are favored when it comes to this very specific thing . lol (not that most men in real life care anyway. most of them are happy not to have this deal with this - they just dislike having to pay child support). there are no abuse shelters for men because THEY don't see the point in creating them since they know (even if unconsciously) that male abuse isn't any sort of systematic problem. also, MOST men who are raped are raped by other men so when that argument comes up i always laugh. men rape each other, men have systems in place that consider it unmanly to be penetrated by another man, which leads to male rape victims almost never coming forward for fear of being ridiculed and losing their manhood, and the ones to blame are the feminists!

3 hours later 5013025 Anonymous (1418970817977.jpg 500x484 139kB)
>>5012929 So you're part of an ideology that categorically rejects the concepts of natural rights and individualism, and use minorities as scapegoats, wonderful. Nice knowing there's guys who want the state to step in and march everyone gay and trans to the ovens, here even. You're why I don't want to get involved in feminist activism anymore.

3 hours later 5013028 Anonymous (1439498681930.jpg 460x368 27kB)
>>5013020 >there are no abuse shelters for men because THEY don't see the point in creating them since they know (even if unconsciously) that male abuse isn't any sort of systematic problem. also, >MOST men who are raped are raped by other men so when that argument comes up i always laugh. >men rape each other, men have systems in place that consider it unmanly to be penetrated by another man, which leads to male rape victims almost never coming forward for fear of being ridiculed and losing their manhood, and the ones to blame are the feminists! Not him, but do you realize you either lied or don't know what you're talking about. Even a cursory search into actual research proves you wrong, you have added nothing of value to the conversation.

3 hours later 5013034 Anonymous
>>5012907 Mtf's are probably the majority, their generals do more posts before starting new generals, and yet their generals are replaced faster

3 hours later 5013044 Anonymous
>>5012965 What's wrong with fascism?

3 hours later 5013046 Anonymous
>>5013028 and you clearly have added a lot by just saying that i'm wrong and that i don't know what i'm talking about!

3 hours later 5013047 Anonymous
>>5012456 Hey, fuck you, asshole. Just because I'm trans doesn't mean I'm a perpetual victim, and no amount of pampered bitches complaining about the patriarchy is going to make me feel like enough of one to cede my free will to them.

3 hours later 5013050 Anonymous
>>5013020 >that keeps women down How are women being kept down in our society?

3 hours later 5013053 Anonymous (1442689306645.jpg 846x846 64kB)
>>5013046 >you clearly have added a lot by just saying that i'm wrong and that i don't know what i'm talking about! Sorry, bud. The burden of proof isn't on me. Please find a a few independently verified pieces of evidence that suggest anything close to what you've postulated. Please & Thank-you.

3 hours later 5013057 Anonymous
>>5013020 Literally nothing is keeping women from doing any thing. It's the scaremongering of feminism that limits women. And now feminists have warped the law to keep men in paying them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gS 92kdVXqw >inb4 women have been down for centuries it's their time now it's a proof that feminists doesn't want equality. they want society to become a matriarchy. >there are no abuse shelters for men because THEY don't see the point in creating them since they know (even if unconsciously) that male abuse isn't any sort of systematic problem that's like saying gay rights shouldn't be made because there's only 5% of us. >implying women can't rape men >implying women don't rape gay men this is why people hate feminism

4 hours later 5013076 Anonymous
>>5012456 Why should I support feminism when feminism hates me

4 hours later 5013088 Anonymous
Why do feminists hate everything that is actually feminine?

4 hours later 5013092 Anonymous
>>5012924 it's not about equality anymore

4 hours later 5013097 Anonymous (1437523998675.png 291x517 42kB)
>>5013047 >>5012456 Well, it's more like the radical feminists will do anything to get the public to murder you, even lobbying against hate crime laws like they just did with Sheppard or claiming gay men and you are kidnaping straight women as surrogates and using the neocons to publish your own version of the protocols of the elders. Liberal feminism might not hate you but they don't care about you either and they won't do a thing to stop the radicals from trying to kill you.

4 hours later 5013113 Anonymous (37233310_big_p19.jpg 272x496 53kB)
>>5012915 >>5012886 >implying all femmy twinks are automatically mtf Uh, guys...

4 hours later 5013116 Lyn
>>5013097 This right here is why I'm not a feminist. Well, that and Humanism is just flat out objectively wrong.

4 hours later 5013120 Anonymous (1415000899736.jpg 408x408 54kB)
>>5013113 >implying they're not

4 hours later 5013126 Anonymous (1440982850205.jpg 336x633 47kB)
>>5012456 Gays: Should hate feminism since a lot of feminism is misandry Lesbians: get a bad rep by association MTFs: Some of the greatest setbacks in recent history for mtf's were by feminist scholars and politicians, arguably more so than by fundamentalists. both socially and legally FTMs: should hate feminists because many feminists are misandrogynists and many feminists view them as liberal women.

4 hours later 5013128 Anonymous (Shinjitears.gif 500x200 990kB)
>>5013120

4 hours later 5013129 Anonymous
>>5013097 I can't tell the difference between feminists and far-right wing Christian conservatives when it comes to surrogacy. They're all fucking ridiculous and they blame gays for surrogacy, which is an institution that is used 95% of the time by straight couples. They blame gay men for supposedly trafficking in wombs when in reality these women get paid a far higher sum than they could possibly do so in their regular lives and they make an economic decision to better their standing in life. Of course there is corruption in that practice, as there is corruption in all of Southeast Asia, but to say this is the fault of gay men is anti-gay hate.

4 hours later 5013160 Anonymous (3036027.jpg 640x405 122kB)
>ITT >waaaaaaaah! >50 years ago a few TERFS promoted homophobia and blocked health care for trans! >I'm still mad at the vocal minority of feminism! Get over yourselves and stop blaming real feminism for your problems

4 hours later 5013177 Anonymous
>>5013160 The neocons are also helping radfems publish a smear campaign on how gay men and trans women want to kidnap and enslave proletarian women for surrogacy. You can't make something this crazy up. http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/1 0/27/the-guardian-promotes-discredi ted-debunked-book/201327 https://www.weeklystandard.com/arti cles/international-baby-business_99 2195.html The fact you dismiss it just means tacitly supporting them.

4 hours later 5013199 Anonymous
>>5013126 All of the ftms I have met are rabid feminists. I don't understand it.

4 hours later 5013201 Anonymous
>>5013097 I don't get it, should a surrogate not be allowed to change her mind and keep her baby?

4 hours later 5013202 Anonymous (shinji_on_dysphoria.png 500x283 164kB)
>>5013113 >shinji >not a tranny Are you an idiot? stop

4 hours later 5013211 Anonymous
>>5013160 "radfems": men are invading women's bathrooms! >*silence* "radfems": the gays are using women for surrogacy! >*silence* lgbt: feminists are assholes >MUH VOCAL MINORITY

4 hours later 5013214 Anonymous
>>5013199 lots of trenders in the ftm community. Not saying that all feminists ftm's are trenders though.

4 hours later 5013259 Anonymous
>>5013160 how come almost every feminist you hear about is in the vocal minority? When talking about an activist group, the group that gets heard is the one that matters, and the silent majority just lends that "vocal minority" credibility.

4 hours later 5013265 Anonymous
>>5013214 These guys were fully transitioned, facial hair, balding, generally middle-age man look. If you saw them, you might think manlet, but not trans. They were all about the "evils of masculinity" though.

5 hours later 5013286 Anonymous
>>5013126 > feminism is misandry Are you even trying

5 hours later 5013298 Anonymous
>>5013286 a lot of it is, yes. I wasn't making a blanket statement.

5 hours later 5013301 Anonymous
>>5013286 read the whole thread scrub

5 hours later 5013308 Anonymous
>>5012484 This Boys are the superior gender. Even MtFs are better then biological girls.

5 hours later 5013328 Anonymous
>>5013308 A lot of trannies look better than women these days tbh fam

5 hours later 5013332 Anonymous
>>5013328 proof?

5 hours later 5013334 Anonymous (morninghug.jpg 699x470 96kB)
>>5013308 >better than biological girls >tfw will never have a baby

5 hours later 5013335 Anonymous
>>5013332 Internet.

5 hours later 5013341 Anonymous (chong chong bong.jpg 599x315 17kB)
>>5013334 The gooks would like a word

5 hours later 5013343 Anonymous
>>5013332 https://twitter.com/izzyperola https://instagram.com/sue_lightning /

5 hours later 5013368 Anonymous (hail-science.png 1443x811 646kB)
>>5013341

5 hours later 5013373 Anonymous
Why people still think that radfems = all of feminists?

5 hours later 5013380 oddish
>Feminism Go

5 hours later 5013386 Anonymous
>>5013341 The moment we invent artificially grown babies, it is the moment women become completely useless.

5 hours later 5013394 Anonymous
>>5013334 Don't give a shit about having some snot nosed brat tbh

5 hours later 5013410 Anonymous
>>5013394 they don't want you having them win-win

5 hours later 5013420 Anonymous
>fags actually think that boys are better then girls Lol keep engaging in your disgusting anal sex habits with barely legal boys to make yourselves feel good Meanwhile I'll be enjoying vagina , an actual sexual organ that is healthy and safe to perform sexual activity on. In fact our sex is the least risky and yours is the most! How's that for superiority?

5 hours later 5013431 Anonymous
>>5013410 Lol I've had women hit on me so there goes your argument. I just don't care for them ok. I don't like them. I like boys, they're more rational, they're cuter, and they're lewder

5 hours later 5013441 Anonymous (o-OBAMA-THUMBS-UP-facebook.jpg 2000x1000 412kB)
>>5013047 >doesn't mean I'm a perpetual victim You can thank feminism for that.

5 hours later 5013482 Anonymous
>>5013386 Because the mother-child connection doesn't matter or anything, and taking that away isn't going to produce sociopathic babies... >>5013394 Why? It's like the most meaningful thing in the world. Look up womb-envy. Part of the reason guys brag about their shits so much is because it's the closest proxy they'll get to having a baby. They're jealous.

5 hours later 5013489 Anonymous
>>5013343 >~~pansexual princess//part-time porn poetess~~ BA in cunning linguistics, MA in debate They're poly, I guarantee it.

5 hours later 5013498 Anonymous
>>5013482 I'm not jealous at all. Women don't have a single thing I like or care about. I'm happy being a boy and I am extremely happy that I get to like other cute boys Seriously you can enjoy being a woman but stop implying that every man is jealous of you. We're not all trannies

6 hours later 5013503 Anonymous
>>5012501 That's an angry cock. And I like both sea salt and Marty. Fishlips is sexier, but redrusker does belly bulge and inflation.

6 hours later 5013510 Anonymous (pure hate reaction.gif 359x345 2715kB)
>>5012456 >pro feminism anyone

6 hours later 5013511 /pol/ack (lgbt's political views.png 912x972 130kB)
>>5012456 Don't worry too much. They only exist on the internet and are a tiny minority.

6 hours later 5013515 Anonymous (1437607171063.gif 200x200 1599kB)
>>5013020 >because it favors them 9 out of 10 times. >being more likely to be homeless is better >being more likely to die early is better >being more likely to be bashed is better >having less social support is better >picking the most dangerous or degrading jobs is better >meanwhile feminists complain about "manspreading" and "mansplaining"

6 hours later 5013518 Anonymous
>>5013511 is that saying gays like AfD more than CDU? sheiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

6 hours later 5013524 Anonymous
>>5013201 >ould a surrogate not be allowed to change her mind and keep her baby? Most of the time surrogate contracts cover ALL expenses of the surrogate during the time of pregnancy, in some situations it may be up to $500.000,00 Now imagine if you paid all of that and suddenly after the birth the surrogate now decides that she's a mother, you can't do anything about it and you won't get a penny of your money back. How does that sound to you?

6 hours later 5013532 Anonymous
>>5013334 >5 years until artificial womb transplants Where were you when women became useless?

6 hours later 5013536 Anonymous
>>5013532 >became

6 hours later 5013538 /pol/ack
>>5013518 That isn't saying much though.

6 hours later 5013545 Anonymous
>>5013482 >Because the mother-child connection doesn't matter or anything, and taking that away isn't going to produce sociopathic babies... >BUT MOMMAS ARE VERY IMPORTANT >implying being a sociopath is a bad thing Oh look at these dumb emotional women getting so buttblasted because they are literally useless

6 hours later 5013552 Anonymous
>>5013386 I wouldn't say "grown babies" but true "in vitro" pregnancy WOULD remove all their power. No more need for surrogates. Actually there's a research about making an egg out of a stem cell made from a skin cell, which means we won't even need them for eggs.

6 hours later 5013553 Anonymous
>>5013373 Because "radfems" are having an effect in society and "good feminists" are ignoring them.

6 hours later 5013559 Anonymous
>>5013532 Lol. You're delusional if you think you can artificially recreate the mother-child bond. Face it, men are only good for manual labor, and in the future they will only lose more and more influence.

6 hours later 5013572 Anonymous
>>5013265 FTM's are lesbians/feminists poodles. Brandon Teena as a martyr for the lesbian community, alright?

6 hours later 5013586 Anonymous
>>5013559 >artificially recreate the mother-child bond >implying Many people are born without ever seeing their mothers, many turn out ok. Many others are fucked up in the head thanks to their mothers. Women will lose their biological power over men, I'm sure that any difference for me, are YOU prepared for when sexbots replace men's need for the female sex?

6 hours later 5013592 Anonymous (wink.jpg 500x402 56kB)
>>5013559 >implying mother-child bond is important >implying father-child bond won't replace it Who's the one getting buttblasted when men invented realistic sexdolls again?

6 hours later 5013595 Anonymous
>>5013592 >implying sex with men is satisfying

6 hours later 5013600 Anonymous
>>5013559 Fuck the stupid mother child bond. Women are cancerous annoying cunts. Men are the way to go and that's why I'm so glad I'm gay so I can just snuggle with boys instead of having to put up with your dumb asses

6 hours later 5013605 Anonymous
>>5013595 Sex with men is far far more satisfying then sex with women. Women are so awkward in bed and way too passive.

6 hours later 5013607 Anonymous
>>5013595 >implying women have sex with men for the pleasure At least most of the times it's about manipulation.

6 hours later 5013612 Anonymous
>>5013595 >inadvertently acknowledged that women are just holes to fuck topkek m80

6 hours later 5013613 Anonymous
>>5013607 This too. When boys get in bed to have sex with each other it's cause they actually want to have sex. They don't want anything extra out of it other then to fuck/get fucked

6 hours later 5013614 Anonymous
>>5013559 You can artificially recreate anything. There are no mystical properties to the universe. Besides, if you really need a 'mother', just hand the babby over to a professional caretaker and when shoot her full of drugs to replicate the effect of the emotional birth bond. There's literally no reason to oppose artificial wombs unless you think period cramps and pain are good things. Fuck I get so excited about thinking about the future of child rearing. Only professionals will need to bother with it and we can pay them full time to put up with that shit. Everyone else can follow their careers without ever having their progress stunted by the insane demands of parenthood.

6 hours later 5013618 Anonymous
>>5013600 >Women are cancerous annoying cunts With all this baseless hatred, you're the one being annoying and cancerous.

6 hours later 5013619 Anonymous
>>5013034 several polls have said otherwise. mtfg is just that busy because the people in there have nothing to do but post

6 hours later 5013623 Anonymous
>>5013538 its a decent amount considering AfD's polling around 6% in the general pop now

6 hours later 5013629 Anonymous
>>5013613 Except when they are in love, then it's like a hot volcano mix of one trying to pleasure the other with the the lust that only high test can create.

6 hours later 5013632 Anonymous
>>5013592 Fathers will rape their children 4 times out of 10. It's better to not risk.

6 hours later 5013638 Anonymous
>>5013618 Your gender really is. You're clingy, emotional, vindictive, irritating , and annoying. Boys on the other hand are cute, lewd, nice and kind.

6 hours later 5013649 /pol/ack
>>5013623 It should me so much higher considering the surge of UKIP in GB or the FPÖ in Austria. I really hope that the same is going to happen to us.

6 hours later 5013650 Anonymous
>>5013629 Yup! I love it :3. I love fucking a boy hard in his tight butt, hearing him let out soft cute moans as I pound into him and finally pulling out and creaming all over his tummy!

6 hours later 5013655 Anonymous
>>5013650 >literally scat play And you say women are disgusting?

6 hours later 5013656 Anonymous
>>5013632 >implying mothers don't rape their children >implying feminists didn't changed the perception of people that women can't rape >implying it didn't help increase the domestic violence between lesbians lovers >lesgen had a general about mother-daughter sex

6 hours later 5013659 Anonymous
>>5013656 >>5013632 did either of you control for consensual encounters before spewing your propaganda?

6 hours later 5013668 Anonymous
>>5013656 Lesbians do rape, but straight women don't. Ever. Your stupid greentexting won't change that.

6 hours later 5013672 Anonymous
>>5013655 It's women who don't know the concept of thoroughly cleaning the hole(s) that your man is going to fuck. Yes women are disgusting on this.

6 hours later 5013679 Anonymous
>>5013672 >women are disgusting That's why so many of them get AIDS then, I suppose?

6 hours later 5013680 Anonymous
>>5013668 Of course you'd ignore all those occasions when a mother rapes her son.

6 hours later 5013684 Anonymous
>>5013298 You really don't know a lot on the subject, then. Saying feminism is about hating men is like saying PETA is about human rights. Stop using the actions/beliefs of Tumblr to place everyone in the same category.

6 hours later 5013690 Anonymous
>>5013680 Only happens in porn videos directed by men Can't even be compared to the disturbing amount of men who mercilessly rape their children all over the world every single day. Absolutely disgusting. Men are sick creatures.

6 hours later 5013692 Anonymous
>>5013679 >women are too dumb to understand that aids has nothing to do with cleanness If aids passed during pov sex as easily as it does during anal sex, all those "surprise" pregnancies would be a new aids infection.

6 hours later 5013693 Anonymous
>>5013679 You realize that PReP is turning this into a non-issue, right? Get with the times.

6 hours later 5013695 Anonymous
>>5013690 >Only happens in porn videos directed by men It's an actual crime that scars the child, but of course it's a male child and you wouldn't care about him. Remind me again, why isn't feminism misandry?

6 hours later 5013700 Anonymous
>>5013690 This is some 480p bait, not even HD

6 hours later 5013704 Anonymous
>>5013668 >>5013659 >1,267,000 men were made to penetrate within the last 12 months. This figure really isn’t far from the 1,270,000 women forced into sex within the last 12 months. >pages 18 and 19 of the report, or 28 and 29 of the pdf http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePreventi on/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf

6 hours later 5013705 Anonymous
>>5013655 Who said anything about scat play? Obviously he cleans it out before I fuck him!

6 hours later 5013706 Anonymous
>>5013684 I'm not saying feminism is about hating men at its core, I'm saying that a lot of feminists hate men, and a lot of the views that get claimed to fall under feminism are misandry.

6 hours later 5013713 Anonymous
>>5013690 Men are not. Quit being a gender hating bitch. See this is why boys prefer other boys cause we understand each other. You annoying cunts don't understand anything but "muh feewings"

6 hours later 5013715 Anonymous
>>5013706 I've found that outside of Tumblr (believe me, I keep up to date on their bullshit), Feminists like Big Red are very rare. Even at Uni, there was a chick just like her that everyone hated and ignored because of how big a bitch she was.

7 hours later 5013722 Anonymous
>>5013704 The violation a person is subjected to when they are forceably penetrated can't even be compared to the one they face when they're forced to penetrate something. The act of having something forced inside of you is a lot more violent and humiliating.

7 hours later 5013723 Anonymous (1437709967015.jpg 300x300 29kB)
>>5013704 >http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevent ion/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf And those disgusting cunts don't even HAVE the excuse of saying that one of the most powerful hormones leaded them to it.

7 hours later 5013726 Anonymous
>>5013722 >my rape is worse then yours Fuck off cunt

7 hours later 5013727 Anonymous
>>5013715 I never go to tumblr and my views are pretty much exclusively based off real life encounters and I don't find them rare at all.

7 hours later 5013728 Anonymous
>>5013722 >feminist defending rapists this is why people hate you

7 hours later 5013730 Anonymous
>>5013722 >source: my ass

7 hours later 5013739 Anonymous (7fch3ow.jpg 640x480 61kB)


7 hours later 5013749 Anonymous
>>5013713 Are you fuckign retarded or something? First of all, gay boys are not even considered real men by the vast majority of straight men in the world, so you can sit down, you idiot. Up until the beginning of this century faggots weren't even allowed to have sex in some states in the USA. Faggotry is still punishable by death in many countries and to this day faggots are still kicked out of their houses by their fathers and shunned by their communities because of their degeneracy. Please go look at yourself in the mirror you dumbass. Faggots are much worse off than women when it comes to being discriminated against and hated so get off your high horse and go get laughed at and humiliated like the typical faggot is. Straight men despise you. Ha that's just what I needed, a bunch of faggots thinking they have the right to say shit when they were getting executed just for existing by most Western states not too long ago.

7 hours later 5013769 Anonymous
>>5013749 >hardcore feminist >using homophobic slurs unironically kek

7 hours later 5013775 Anonymous
>>5013749 Lol and now no one really cares in western countries. I kissed boys all through high school and never got shit for it. I can marry a man if I want to. Also you can't say gay boys are degenerate without saying the same of gay girls. I'm getting tired of your shit so just fuck off with your period induced rage you annoying cunt.

7 hours later 5013797 Anonymous
>>5013749 still not joining in your problematic movement hunty

7 hours later 5013804 Anonymous
>>5013749 >Straight men despise you Something of a relief, at least. Will Eggbutts finally get that straight men and cis women ain't our business? Die.

7 hours later 5013819 Anonymous
>>5013749 >to this day faggots are still kicked out of their houses by their fathers And mothers >Faggots are much worse off than women when it comes to being discriminated against and hated That's because women are NOT discriminated against or hated >Ha that's just what I needed, a bunch of faggots thinking they have the right to say shit Oh so you are all this buttblasted because we dare to talk. Remind me again, how isn't feminism misandry?

7 hours later 5013835 Anonymous (out.jpg 526x482 29kB)
>>5013595 Having had sex with both, yeah, women are useless in bed.

7 hours later 5013838 Anonymous
>>5013775 >No one cares in Western countries lol Give me a fucking break. 40% of the homeless youth in America is gay. Considering that not even 5% of Americans identify as LGBT, that says a lot about how loved you faggots are in the land of the free. "No one cares" haha you must live in a tight-knit progressive community and never go out in the real world where most people despise gays, even in the oh-so-progressive Western countries! :^) Don't think that the legalization of gay marriage means the end of homophobia, dumbass. It means you guys are STARTING to become citizens now. Your relationships were completely outlawed not too long ago. And that was my first post in this thread by the way, but nice try >>5013769 Not even a feminist, actually. I just think it's hilarious that a little demented gay boy thinks so highly of himself just because he has a few rights now when not too long ago he would've been slaughtered like a pig.

7 hours later 5013849 Anonymous
>>5013838 If you honestly think it is difficult to be a gay adult in a Western country then you're a fucking fool. The reason that so many gay youth are on the streets is that individuals are still homophobic when it comes to their own progeny. Idiots get hung up on who their children associate with and that's who gets ostracized and put on the streets Once you're an adult though you're not liable to face too much bad shit. I live in an extremely conservative small town with my boyfriend and I've never experienced any negativity because in public people don't give a shit. Behind closed doors of course there are going to be family problems with homosexuality. That's why the suicide rate stays high in liberal countries; because it's not about how the rest of society treats you, it's about how your family reacts to your sexuality.

7 hours later 5013853 Anonymous (018495794.jpg 1280x720 81kB)
>>5013722 >your rape isn't as rapey Die.

7 hours later 5013863 Anonymous
>>5013835 This

7 hours later 5013866 Anonymous
>>5013838 This isn't an argument about gays being hated or not you dumb bitch, it's about how no men should be feminist because it's a joke movement on the west, because it doesn't give a fuck about male problems despite their treacherous claims, because not long ago they helped the religious extremists bar a law for the protection of gay people.

7 hours later 5013897 Anonymous (image.png 707x350 185kB)
Sooooo anti-feminism thread..?

8 hours later 5013927 Anonymous
>>5012960 wow it's like an entire list of r9k grade >muh feels shit that has no basis in literally anything anywhere Men's shelters, where they exist, exist largely thanks to feminists, because mras are too busy pissing and moaning about bitches calling them deadbeats for not helping raise their three kids.

8 hours later 5013961 Anonymous (1442960243696.jpg 1280x720 42kB)
>>5013927 This is the worst bait I've seen on this thread, 0/10 apply yourself.

8 hours later 5013987 Anonymous
>>5013160 50 years ago that to this day is still not back to the standards it started with. Not to mention the effects of that smear campaign still ringing around society. Fuck your it's in the past bullshit. It's all very much here still.

8 hours later 5014011 Anonymous
TERFs are scum tbh fam

8 hours later 5014015 Anonymous
>>5013420 That's the poorest quality dyke-bait I've seen in a long time.

8 hours later 5014020 Anonymous
>>5013656 >mothers don't rape their children >mothers >rape I dont think you know what that word means. You have to physically penetrate another persons orriface sexually to have it count as rape. Most of the time its just sexual assault for women, 95% of rape comes from men. Women do not rape really ever.

8 hours later 5014032 Anonymous (1440119688554.gif 490x367 937kB)
>>5014020

8 hours later 5014057 Anonymous
>>5014032 >anything i dont like is a shitpost Do you know the definition of rape? I dont think you do, this thread is full of retarded children thinking any form of sexual assault is rape, which is incorrect. You literally have to, key word here, PENETRATE someone else's vagina mouth or anus to have it count as rape. IF you are not penetrating someone else it is not rape. Go cry more you pathetic mra faggot

8 hours later 5014058 Anonymous
>>5014020 When will you dykes realize that gay boys are not your allies? We like other boys. You faggots hate boys. See the issue there?

8 hours later 5014064 Anonymous
>>5014057 :^)

8 hours later 5014096 Anonymous
>>5014058 >We worship straight boys and are too stupid to understand that the more we do it the more they hate our faggy asses

8 hours later 5014097 Anonymous
>>5014058 you are literally retarded. Im a gayfag and that has NOTHING to do with what i was talking about anyways. https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u cr/recent-program-updates/new-rape- definition-frequently-asked-questio ns >The new Summary definition of Rape is: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim That is the definition of rape. Once again, you have to penetrate someone.

8 hours later 5014119 Anonymous
>>5014058 >hate boys What.

8 hours later 5014138 Anonymous
>>5014096 No we like gay guys. I like gay guys not straight guys. >>5014097 Fuck off dyke supporter >>5014119 Yeah dykes/lesbians hate us. They hate males.

9 hours later 5014167 Anonymous
>>5014057 >feminism is not misandry Yeah seeing it right there on this post.

9 hours later 5014183 Anonymous
>>5014138 >Fuck off dyke supporter >if you dont change the definition of words you are a dyke supporter This is why this board is a joke. Holy shit gayfags are ridiculous.

9 hours later 5014190 Anonymous
>>5014167 >if you use words with their correct definition you are a feminist. Cry more faggot. Every single dictionary and legal site says to rape someone you have to penetrate them. Dont like it? Too fucking bad

9 hours later 5014198 Anonymous
>>5014190 What happened to the feminists pushing "if there wasn't consent, it was rape"?

9 hours later 5014207 Anonymous
>>5014198 i dont really care since im not a feminist :)

9 hours later 5014210 Anonymous
>>5014198 It's the theory definition. Legal definitions are lagging behind, originally it was strictly vaginal penetration at a time when feminism wasn't even a thing because muh precious womb, then it became unwilling penetration in general (except in a lot of places buccal)

9 hours later 5014224 Anonymous
>>5014057 or if you'd actually new the law, you'd know it differs country to country and state to state. For example in Michigan, there isn't a seperate law for rape, it's degrees of sexual assault. Non-penetrative is a different degree of sexual assault than penetrative, but they are both sexual assault. Now there is a lot of bullshit where people act like if it's sexual assault but not rape, it's somehow not a bad thing, but that's bullshit.

9 hours later 5014225 Anonymous
>>5014183 I'm just fucking sick of dykes and women in general. Take your stupid meme sexuality and fuck off you whiny annoying cunts. All you do is bitch all day long about the lot lifes handed You.

9 hours later 5014233 Anonymous (bullshit man.gif 420x237 566kB)
>>5014190 >Every single dictionary and legal site says to rape someone you have to penetrate them. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ra pe http://www.yourdictionary.com/rape http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/ dictionary/english/rape http://www.merriam-webster.com/dict ionary/rape http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/u s/definition/american_english/rape Even urban dictionary says that rape is forced sex http://www.urbandictionary.com/defi ne.php?term=rape

9 hours later 5014234 Anonymous (cnARTXk.jpg 500x667 72kB)
>>5014225 hey i found your pic you mra faggot

9 hours later 5014249 Anonymous
>>5012907 Today I learned that I'm not really gay because I don't have "visible piercings"

9 hours later 5014252 Anonymous
>>5014190 Except the term statutory rape also exists and it doesn't need to involve penetration at all, it states that it's rape because children can't consent which brings the idea that rape is about NON CONSENSUAL sex.

9 hours later 5014255 Anonymous
>>5014233 >http://www.thefreedictionary.com/r ape The crime of using force or threat of force to compel a person to submit to some other sexual penetration.

9 hours later 5014260 Anonymous
>>5014255 >ignores the first definition The crime of using force or the threat of force to compel a person to submit to sexual intercourse. S E X U A L I N T E R C O U R S E

9 hours later 5014262 Anonymous
>>5014234 Epic Now fuck off. Don't you have some carpet (and an extra large triple topping pizza) to munch on you fat dyke?

9 hours later 5014265 Anonymous (7QKfOwK.jpg 453x604 59kB)
>>5014260 >to submit >to be dominated >to have something put inside of you cry more mra faggots your tears are delicious.

9 hours later 5014280 Anonymous (1430930491488.gif 350x349 3100kB)
>>5014265 I highly doubt that MRAs would come here. All this shitposting... can't we just hug?

9 hours later 5014290 Anonymous
>>5014265 >first definition is "The crime of using force or the threat of force to compel a person to submit to sexual intercourse" >second definition is " The crime of using force or threat of force to compel a person to submit to some OTHER sexual penetration." >ignores the first definition >didn't notice that the second definition is actually just an addition to what rape actually is. >prefers only the second definition of rape so women won't be accused of doing it this is why feminism is actually harmful

9 hours later 5014292 Anonymous (5fdd5f7c26f182b85ff4e24edaac6119.png 257x240 93kB)
>>5014280 lgbt is actually full of mras who hate women and this thread proves it lol

9 hours later 5014304 Anonymous (1433012044958.gif 640x360 402kB)
>>5014292 >guys getting pissed when you deny their experiences and say they can't be raped. >mras

9 hours later 5014308 Anonymous
>>5014290 Pretty much this, and then when they realize they have no arguments they just post a bunch of fedora pictures to try to derail the other people into anger.

9 hours later 5014397 Anonymous
>>5014292 No it's full of gay men who got sick of women's bullshit and left for the superior gender.

9 hours later 5014409 Anonymous
>>5014304 no, mras are ones who think that because some radical feminists say that men can't be raped, all feminists or even all women think this way. Or go on from there to say that the statistics that men commit the vast majority of sexual assaults, and women are the majority of victims. even though sexual assault laws aren't limited to penetration, so their argument has no grounds. or stuff like that.

10 hours later 5014433 Anonymous
>>5013373 Because radfems have a large influence on the doctrine and actions of other feminists.

10 hours later 5014445 Anonymous
>>5014433 or your suffering from asshole overrepresentation problem, where the various biases of the human mind and news media cause the assholes in any group to seem like a much larger proportion and having far greater influence to anyone who personally involved with that group. add in the greater internet fuckwad theory, and when looking on the internet, all you're going to see of any group is basically fuckwads.

10 hours later 5014446 Anonymous
>>5014397 So you are saying men are gay through choice of not liking women? I wonder what other real gay men would think of that.

10 hours later 5014453 Anonymous (412312.png 160x260 52kB)
Not everyone on /lgbt/ is an egalitarian (including myself) and even if we were, feminism is not an egalitarian movement. It is only this on the margins of a paper. Also consider that there are many men on this board. Feminism posits patriarchy and demonizes men. Why would we want to associate ourselves with such a socially destructive movement? Feminism has done some good, yes, but has really fucked up women and men over the last couple decades or so.

10 hours later 5014466 Anonymous
>>5013431 Pedo detected.

10 hours later 5014469 Anonymous
>>5012937 The Duluth model does not mean "automatically assume the man is the preparatory". That's something else. The Duluth model is just a theory of man-on-woman abuse being an expression of toxic masculinity. >>5013328 That's because trannies have to prove themselves as women. >>5013638 I've encountered the opposite tbh. A lot of guys are awkward, don't care about their appearance, have a sense of entitlement, don't care about others, and have meme interests. Whereas I know quite a few girls who make an effort to look good, are intelligent and actually have interesting personalities and are actually nice people. >>5013961 Care to address the fact that most shelters for men were created by feminists, not MRAs who are too busy obsessing about being "alpha" to actually accomplish anything? >>5014011 This tbh. >>5014020 Nope, rape is any sex without proper consent. If one uses a threat of force to make you have sex, or uses drugs to knock you out and has sex with you while you're unconscious, it's still rape. >>5014057 No, that's an outdated definition of rape. >>5014255 That definition doesn't say it has to be the rapist's body part doing the penetration. >>5014304 >ignoring all the gay men with /r9k/-tier beliefs and think women are literally only good for sex

10 hours later 5014485 Anonymous (1434413808662.jpg 356x374 57kB)
>>5014469 Now you're just going full autism.

10 hours later 5014487 Anonymous
>>5014466 Fuck off Boy and male are interchangeable I use boy to describe more feminine males because it sounds cuter and I like femboys

10 hours later 5014497 Anonymous
>>5014469 >MRAs who are too busy obsessing about being "alpha" to actually accomplish anything? Why don't you prove that they were made by feminists first?

10 hours later 5014527 Anonymous (1427503358847.jpg 126x126 17kB)
Can't think of any reason to support feminism tbh. Women have more rights, less responsibilities, and preferential treatment in courts. Since I'm gay I don't even want to pay them lip service in hopes of some sexually-liberated feminist pussy.

10 hours later 5014560 Anonymous
>>5014497 Pretty much every major men's shelter in the US was set up by either known feminists or men who are affiliated with feminist groups. There were men's shelters in Canada when MRAs were mostly busy shooting up schools and acting like morons in superhero costumes on major bridges.

10 hours later 5014576 Anonymous
>>5014560 2/10 I got half a sentence in

10 hours later 5014577 Anonymous
>>5014527 >more rights have you watch any of the news about the trying to remove reproductive rights in the US? >less responsibilities child care is still expected to be the woman's reposibilty, even with working women. While on the books some places give women paid maternity leave and not men paternity leave (though in the US, paid maternity leave is a rarity). The fathers I've talked to have been given less trouble requesting time off to be with their kids, or for quiting to be full time dads. It's seen as 'brave', while the mothers are seen as 'irresponsible' for not being able to do their work. >preferential treatments in court only place this is documented is in custody hearings, and male rape, and there I will agree with you. As will a lot of feminists. It's about the assumption that women will take care of kids, or not giving respect to rape victims. Add on to this: Study in the last 5 years found that when identical resumes are sent in, with the only difference being gender, women get less calls in for interview then men.

10 hours later 5014581 Anonymous
>>5014527 Truth

10 hours later 5014588 Anonymous
>>5014560 >are affiliated That doesn't prove they were CREATED by those groups you dumbfuck. You know what I refuse to believe someone would be actually this stupid, this has to be bait.

10 hours later 5014593 Anonymous
>>5014588 >Set up >Not the same as created I guess we can add functional illiteracy to the list of things that causes mraism

10 hours later 5014601 Anonymous
>>5014593 I know black men fuck your wife while you watch but being a degenerate malebashing feminazi won't help you get her back ;)

10 hours later 5014606 Anonymous
>>5014577 >reproductive rights in the US? You really gonna say men have more reproductive rights than women in the US? You know how a man consents to raising a child? By cumming, thats it. Doesn't matter if he's underage, unconscious, or being raped. If you create a child with your DNA you have to support it. Men have NO reproductive rights. Woman doesn't want to/can't support a child? Birth control, plan B, adoption, abortion, gov't assistance. Man doesn't want to/can't support a child? Pay up or go to jail.

10 hours later 5014612 Anonymous (Document comprehension across race.png 800x600 16kB)
>>5014577 >Study in the last 5 years found that when identical resumes are sent in, with the only difference being gender, women get less calls in for interview then men. That's because degrees and job experience aren't equall predictors for job performance across race and gender. The most extensive research I know is done with respect to race, see picture. Hint: Catch-up effect don't real. Source for picture/tabel http://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93275.pdf

10 hours later 5014618 Anonymous
>>5014560 Source? Earl Silverman from Canada ran a domestic abuse home for men and he committed suicide when he got too poor running it. The government didn't give him any funds. >http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ canada/earl-silverman-who-ran-mens- safe-house-dies-in-apparent-suicide >http://womenspost.ca/owner-of-shel ter-for-abused-men-and-children-com mits-suicide-after-financial-ruin-r idicule/ Feminists also threatened Erin Pizzey when she claimed that domestic violence is reciprocal and that women are also capable of violence. >http://www.webcitation.org/6NkS24W 8a Feminists also disrupts a forum about battered husbands >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qo dygTkTUYM

10 hours later 5014634 Anonymous
>>5014560 0 >>5014618 1

10 hours later 5014645 Anonymous
>>5014588 What do you think affiliated means then? >>5014601 shitpostingloudly.png >>5014606 I'd like to see a source that underage male rape victims are forced to care for their children. And why isn't adoption an option for men, i.e. you get stuck with the child, why can't you put it up for adoption?

10 hours later 5014664 Anonymous
>>5014560 Can I have a source on that?

10 hours later 5014672 Anonymous
>>5014560 that's still no source for your claim >>5014645 Affiliation means that they are close associates, which is still an unproofed claim.

11 hours later 5014680 Anonymous
>>5014672 >Affiliation means that they are close associates, which is still an unproofed claim. Close associates still is a pretty strong connection though. It at least shows that these feminist groups were supportive of men's shelters.

11 hours later 5014684 Anonymous
>>5014645 your entire post is unironic shit as have all your posts been, I post ironic shit once and I am shitposting. what kind of mental state allows for this kind of cognitive dissonance?

11 hours later 5014700 Anonymous (ironicshitposting.png 534x400 140kB)
>>5014684

11 hours later 5014719 Anonymous
>>5014700 yeah I was really derailing something that was well on track. this fucking threat is a trainwreck cause of all the bullshit bad bait tier posts you keep making. I guess calling you out on shitposting yourself is just going to end up with me somehow being a male supremacist though, cause who but men could hate on such a smart informed little puffin such as yourself? Consider suicide

11 hours later 5014721 Anonymous
>>5014680 >Close associates still is a pretty strong connection though. Depends, it may go from just sharing statistics and data to being two small segments of a larger NGO. It literally means nothing specially since that poster hasn't showed any proof.

11 hours later 5014738 Anonymous
>>5014719 You don't even know who I am. I'm not the one who called you a male supremacist or whatever. I'm not even a woman (but I am a feminist). What I was calling you out for was >>5014601 , shitposting and not actually addressing any of their points.

11 hours later 5014745 Anonymous
>>5014645 >I'd like to see a source that underage male rape victims are forced to care for their children. 1993 Kansas surpeme court case Hermesmann v. Seyer set the precedent that underage boys are liable for the support of their child even when the conception was the result of statutory rape. For a recent example: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/ 09/05/nick-olivas-alleged-rape-vict im-_n_5773532.html >And why isn't adoption an option for men, i.e. you get stuck with the child, why can't you put it up for adoption? It is if you're a single father, you can do whatever you want with your child, but if the mother is still involved she has the final say.

11 hours later 5014747 Anonymous
>>5014738 the point of illiteracy being a trait to be linked as a cause of "becoming a men's right's activist" needed active disproving? yeah totally.

11 hours later 5014749 Anonymous
Feminist campaigns to end male circumcision: 0 They could end it within a year if they gave a fuck.

11 hours later 5014796 Anonymous
>>5014749 It's actively considered a matter of discussion in feminist circles and the main defenders of it are the same people who would otherwise defend shit like clitorectomy on cultural relativism basis anyway.

11 hours later 5014799 Anonymous
>>5014749 >implying the jews would ever let that happen

11 hours later 5014817 Anonymous
>basement dwelling losers complaining feminism is misandry cant you faggots just agree to hating each other already

11 hours later 5014886 Anonymous
>>5014745 >It is if you're a single father, you can do whatever you want with your child, but if the mother is still involved she has the final say. Really, that seems pretty silly. I mean, the mother should have 4 choices: take care of the kid, get an abortion, put it up for adoption, or let the father take care of it. In the last case, if she's not willing to take care of the kid, the father should be allowed to put it up for adoption. It shouldn't be the mother's decision at that point.

11 hours later 5014949 Anonymous
>>5014886 Men don't have that right. Women can put the child up for adoption without the father knowing. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/n ational/19fathers.html

13 hours later 5015473 Anonymous (1432608993242.jpg 704x1024 306kB)
>>5013202 Just because his creators said his being girly was a defining trait, and cause in instrumentality his self image was female, and that he's ridiculously feminine around Kaworu in those drafts, doesn't mean he's automatically mtf.

13 hours later 5015542 Anonymous
>>5014527 That's pretty egoistical of you, especially when feminists are always arguing for gay rights.

14 hours later 5015610 Anonymous
>>5015473 Isn't having a female self-image a pretty strong sign of being trans? Isn't that basically what gender identity means?

14 hours later 5015637 Anonymous
>>5015610 Not if you believe Carl Jung: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima _and_animus Anima and animus From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The anima and animus, in Carl Jung's school of analytical psychology, are the two primary anthropomorphic archetypes of the unconscious mind, as opposed to both the theriomorphic and inferior function of the shadow archetypes, as well as the abstract symbol sets that formulate the archetype of the Self. The anima and animus are described by Jung as elements of his theory of the collective unconscious, a domain of the unconscious that transcends the personal psyche. In the unconscious of a man, this archetype finds expression as a feminine inner personality: anima; equivalently, in the unconscious of a woman it is expressed as a masculine inner personality: animus. The anima and animus can be identified as the totality of the unconscious feminine psychological qualities that a man possesses or the masculine ones possessed by a woman, respectively. It is an archetype of the collective unconscious and not an aggregate of father or mother, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, or teachers, though these aspects of the personal unconscious can influence the person for good or ill. Because a man's sensitivity must often be repressed, the anima is one of the most significant autonomous complexes of all. It is said to manifest itself by appearing in dreams. It also influences a man's interactions with women and his attitudes toward them and vice versa for women and the animus. Jung said that "the encounter with the shadow is the 'apprentice-piece' in the individual's development...that with the anima is the 'masterpiece'".[1] Jung viewed the anima process as being one of the sources of creative ability.

14 hours later 5015767 Anonymous
>>5015637 >believing Carl Jung Next you'll say you're into Wicca too.

14 hours later 5015800 Anonymous
>>5012456 Hey do you have a patreon I can support?

14 hours later 5015809 Anonymous
>>5015542 >feminists are always arguing for gay rights ah yes, how could i forget the fearless efforts of the redstockings?

14 hours later 5015816 Anonymous
>>5014886 You know I totally live with women having a greater say in child care given their role in it and how things just worked out in society. But man Id love some acknowledgment of this disparity. Like fuck me the smoking gun of what gender has more legal rights?

16 hours later 5016403 Anonymous
>>5012907 >Not a single one of them has dyed hair, visible tattoos, or unusual piercings >And that day, maximum tumblrina was achieved

17 hours later 5016449 Anonymous
>>5013020 >favors [men] 9 out of 10 times >citation needed I don't understand how a system that is aimed at benefiting men is able to disenfranchise men and women equally. If the same limitations are set on both sexes then wouldn't it be equal.

17 hours later 5016489 Anonymous
>>5015637 >Not if you believe Carl Jung >Not if you're completely insane! Yeah, uh-huh, mmm. You do know Carl Jung just made a bunch of stupid shit up, right?

17 hours later 5016506 Anonymous
>>5015809 See >>5013160

17 hours later 5016515 Anonymous
>>5016449 This. >The Jewish conspiracy is bullshit! >If Jews run the world then why do they still face violence? >The Patriarchy exists! >It's also why men face violence Jews don't run the world and the Patriarchy is just as fake

17 hours later 5016540 lol im /pol/ack
>>5016515 the jews could have prevented the holocauster...but did not so they could kill off all the poor jews...and have more bank jobs for rich jews...ay lol idfk

17 hours later 5016543 Anonymous
>>5012456 I think feminism is a stupid word. I'm a humanist. I don't think most feminists actually want equality. They want revenge and that's why most people don't take them seriously.

17 hours later 5016583 Anonymous
>>5016506 See >>5013177 >>5013211 >>5013259 >>5013987

17 hours later 5016628 Anonymous (Not even trying to bait anymore.jpg 255x255 8kB)
>>5012456

17 hours later 5016681 Anonymous
>>5016515 well, if you go by the non-retarded version of the Patriarchy, which sadly is not the version used by many women, it doesn't refer to all men. it refers to a small number of powerful men using gender norms to reduce the level of influence of those not part of their group, so all women and 99% of men. So the 99% of men still face violence, because them facing violence is part of the system that keeps the 1% in power.

17 hours later 5016699 Anonymous
>>5016681 This is the first fucking time I've ever seen anyone claim this definition. Admit that you just made it up on the spot because you're sweating bullets over how demolished your ass is getting.

17 hours later 5016705 Anonymous
>>5014020 >All those sources Oh wait

17 hours later 5016720 Anonymous
>>5016699 And the irony is, if she'd just given up her ass to a man she would have been trained to handle this. Being a dead fish in the sack comes back to bite her in the—

18 hours later 5016733 Anonymous
>>5016699 nope, it's just a rarely used one. It comes up in the actual discourse of feminist theory, but it doesn't get talk about much outside of there. If you actually took part in the discourse of feminist theory instead of relying on the reprinting of the sensational stuff, or the shoutings of the crazy ones, you'd have heard it before. But nuanced discussion of terms gets a lot less clicks that 'all men are rapists'. So guess which one you hear? Or do you think that moderate republicans actually hear about gay men questioning the value of pride parades as representation of the culture? Or the self critique of casual sex? Do you think they even know about something as common as the stigma against bisexuals in a lot of the gay community?

25 hours later 5017632 Anonymous
>>5015610 no. being trans is a physical disorder, not a choice of identity. you can identify as a "gamer" or some shit, but that doesn't mean there's a strong genetic prerogative

26 hours later 5017745 Anonymous
>>5014796 I've NEVER read or heard feminists decry circumcision of male infants, not in the US. they talk about female genital mutilation but claim male circumcision is proper and normal and superior to a man's natural born body

27 hours later 5017765 Anonymous
>>5017632 If self-image isn't neurological, what is it?

27 hours later 5017842 Anonymous (femen jews.png 1698x1805 1016kB)
>>5016681 >it refers to a small number of powerful men using gender norms to reduce the level of influence of those not part of their group, so all women and 99% of men. /pol/ calls them "jews"

27 hours later 5017858 Anonymous (giphy (1).gif 278x300 118kB)
As a gay man i dont give a flying fuck about feminism and any women outside of my family is completely irrelevant to my life. I do enjoy when terfs and trannies fight, quite the good laugh

29 hours later 5018071 Anonymous (1431223271680.jpg 1280x1033 197kB)
>feminist >on 4chan go back to tumblr you fat ugly dykes

29 hours later 5018095 Anonymous
>>5012907 >anti-white >anti-normal >why do people pick on meeeeee People bring that shit on themselves. If gays acted normal or as Tumblr puts it "white/evil" most conservatives wouldn't have a problem with it. But the face of gay America is what that Tumbrite only wants in the movement. And that shit scares most sane people.

29 hours later 5018168 Anonymous
>>5018071 Someone sounds triggered. >>5018095 Only the moderate conservatives would be okay with "straight-acting" gays. There are plenty who believe that simply being gay itself is immoral and sinful.

31 hours later 5018408 Anonymous
>>5012456 Fuck off. I just want to be a cute girl, not a raging hon who sits on her ass all day whining about white male privilege on tumblr.

31 hours later 5018461 Anonymous
>>5012456 Feminists are mostly scum, there is only a select few I respect.

33 hours later 5018704 Anonymous
>>5018168 >Only moderate conservatives would be okay with straight-acting gays >Hard right conservatives would still hate them >Moderate and ultra left progressives would still hate them Sounds about right.

33 hours later 5018713 Anonymous
>>5018704 >Moderate and ultra left progressives would still hate them Ultra leftists might hate them because they're "not progressive enough" for being cis and non pansexual or something, but in general the left is more tolerant of gays than the right is. The original implication of the comment was that of the conservatives, it would be the moderates, not the extremists, who are okay with "straight-acting" gays.

33 hours later 5018754 Anonymous (Your_gonna_need_a_bigger_b8.jpg 625x626 29kB)
Try Harder pls

33 hours later 5018770 Anonymous
It's a shame most modern feminism isn't an equal rights movement, but a special treatment/anti men movemoment. 3rd wave is shit, fight for equal pay, fight for harsher sexual harassment fines/punishments, etc But don't ILLEGALIZE WHAT I DON'T LIKE, FEELING TRIGGERED. IT'S ALRIGHT FOR ME TO SAY ALL MEN ARE SCUM :^) BUT DON'T SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT WOMEN SHITLORD!

33 hours later 5018802 Anonymous
Thread summary: nobody on 4chan actually knows what feminism is.

33 hours later 5018816 Anonymous (sweden.jpg 544x2739 603kB)
>/lgbt/ still rails against feminism >/lgbt/ still rails against their own best interests Feminism is the first step to reducing sexism, misogyny, and even homophobia in society, and you're all against it? I think everybody should read this article. It's about a straight het man learning through feminism to become a better, more empathetic person. https://feministisktperspektiv.se/2 014/12/16/den-manliga-skammens-femi nism/ >>5014453 Feminism doesn't demonize men. It simply teaches them how their presence and influence affects oppressed minorities in society, and how they and help improve themselves so everybody can be happy. Feminism can help men, too! >>5018802 Yeah, it's pretty pathetic. I expected better from THIS board, at least.

33 hours later 5018821 Anonymous
>>5018770 >most hardly. Oh, they exist and it's problem, but the human brain is actually really shit about determining proportions of things we only see in clusters, and the biases of the media, social and otherwise, exacerbate those biases of the brain. So yes, its a thing, but your perception is almost certainly skewed. This isn't just a defense of feminism thing. Pick any group you don't belong, or work with. Your perceptions of that groups is almost certainly skewed.

33 hours later 5018825 Anonymous
>>5014560 Yeah like Erin Pizzey. Feminists sure loved her...

33 hours later 5018848 Anonymous
>>5018816 I find the best way to teach men feminism is to skip the advocacy part and jump straight to theory. I'm trans and I pass pretty well, but I'm also a physics student and know how to explain things to folks who see logic as the only valid form of argumentation in a way that makes them listen. It's a skill I practice.

33 hours later 5018859 Anonymous (2015100219333245.jpg 528x384 197kB)
>>5018816 How insightful. I'll be sure to try and enlighten other straight white males into the wonders of feminism. To HELP them.

33 hours later 5018863 Anonymous
>>5018816 I think the issue isn't that 4chan isn't entirely opposed to what feminism is trying to achieve, but feel that it doesn't do enough to focus on men's issues (preferential legal treatment of females etc) and looks at the bad aspects of each branch of feminism and assumes they apply to feminism as a whole. Like, they read something written by a TERF and assume all feminists are opposed to transgender people, and then read that feminists opposed a MRA group which happened to support a policy or program which they wanted and assume that feminists are against it, etc.

33 hours later 5018876 Anonymous (feminism.png 452x800 18kB)
>>5018816 >Feminism is the first step to reducing sexism, misogyny, and even homophobia in society, and you're all against it? >muh natural allies Bitch, please. We live a lifestyle with as little female interaction as possible on purpose, why would we want an inferior gender to fight homophobia on our behalf? And why would we want to help you fight the patriarchy when a patriarchy is exactly what we want?

33 hours later 5018890 Anonymous
>>5018876 >implying LGBT = gay men

33 hours later 5018892 Anonymous
>>5018876 fuck the matriarchy, bitch paradigm shift will be turned on it's ass. and fucked.

34 hours later 5018896 Anonymous
>>5018876 You realize that you're not part of the patriarchy the moment you decide to not start a family with a woman, right? Misogynists are so stupid, damn. Stop making conclusions from dumb internet comics.

34 hours later 5018902 Anonymous
>>5018863 Our society's gender system kinda sucks for everyone in different ways, it just sucks more for women in general. The West sees maleness and femaleness as being fundamentally in opposition to one another, so changing things for women changes them for men in the opposite way. Like MRAs complain about how women always get child custody, but it's because men usually don't content it in court because they aren't as involved in their children's lives, or at least in the same ways the woman is. If we saw women less as the people who are in charge of childcare by default, then men could more easily take up that role.

34 hours later 5018935 Anonymous
>>5018876 >>5018863 >>5018848 None of you have read the article >>5018896 >You realize that you're not part of the patriarchy All men are part of the patriarchy since they all contribute to a culture of masculine dominance in our western society. While some are more toxically masculine than others, that does not excuse the ones who aren't, if they don't explicitly make an effort to reduce their negative influence on others by being a member of the male gender in our society. "Just following orders" isn't an excuse, especially when ALL men benefit from the patriarchy they claim to not support, whether they're a "moderate" or "seriously not a sexist!!" or not. And if anything, feminism teaches us just how all-encompassing and overwhelming masculinity's oppressive nature is in our society. It's everywhere, and needs constant vigilance to monitor it and resist its influence. >>5018902 This. In the end, all of men's problems are their own faults and due to their own misogynistic dominance in our culture. The only problems they ever have are ones resulting from them being seen as the dominant gender. If they would embrace feminism and help get rid of the problems facing women first, all of their problems will disappear afterwards too as a result of it. THAT is how feminism can help men. It is not "male-hating" or some bullshit buzzword, it's simply about wanting to help men be free of their own toxic gendered culture that forces them to be oppressors.

34 hours later 5018949 Anonymous
>>5018935 >All men are part of the patriarchy since they all contribute to a culture of masculine dominance in our western society. How exactly do they contribute to it? What can they do to stop contributing to it?

34 hours later 5018954 Anonymous
>>5018949 Read the article. It lines everything out perfectly.

34 hours later 5018972 Anonymous
>>5018935 >All men are part of the patriarchy since they all contribute to a culture of masculine dominance in our western society Any assertion this general is fundamentally flawed. If this is really how feminists describe patriarchy, then it is a fundamentally flawed concept and their philosophy is broken. If I said "All women are bad at math and contribute to a culture of weakness in STEM fields" I would rightly be mocked and ridiculed for intellectual laziness.

34 hours later 5018973 Anonymous
>>5018935 I wonder how long it'll take you to realise you wasted years of your life on that gender studies degree.

34 hours later 5018984 Anonymous
>>5013046 she/He removed the falseness you presented, liar.

34 hours later 5018995 Anonymous
>>5018935 I did read the article. As a feminist, I found it both insulting and stupid. >>5018972 >If this is really how feminists describe patriarchy it's one of the descriptions. Feminist theory is actually pretty broad and there is lot of contention within it. There are other descriptions.

34 hours later 5019005 Anonymous (image.jpg 372x788 121kB)
>>5013690 >Only happens in porn videos directed by men

34 hours later 5019016 Anonymous
>>5018954 That article is just a retarded rant against straw feminists. Stop thinking it has any value, and most importantly, get familiar with the concept of bias. Any reasoning against this "article" will just be discarded because it's not what you people want to hear, so it's pointless.

34 hours later 5019060 Anonymous
>>5016733 >nope, it's just a rarely used one. It comes up in the actual discourse of feminist theory, but it doesn't get talk about much outside of there. So it's not what they actually believe? Good to know, femishit.

34 hours later 5019065 Anonymous
>>5013819 Feminism IS misandry.

34 hours later 5019069 Anonymous
>>5019065 That's like saying Christianity IS homophobia.

34 hours later 5019071 Anonymous (1341134101102.png 320x287 109kB)
>>5014409 Funny. Everytime I see moderate feminists like Christian Hoff Sommers try to speak at a university, they get shouted down and removed by the hordes of radical feminists on campus. Almost as if the insane radicals are the majority of feminists.

34 hours later 5019075 Anonymous
>>5019060 >they >all feminists are copies of the same person so they believe the exact same thing and do the exact same things. >complete ignore the part about where in any group you're going to hear the crazy extremes more than the nuanced and rational when you're only seeing it from the outside.

34 hours later 5019077 Anonymous (Frank Castle.jpg 385x545 45kB)
>>5018816 >Feminism doesn't demonize men. It simply teaches them how their presence and influence affects oppressed minorities in society, and how they and help improve themselves so everybody can be happy. Feminism can help men, too! You blame men for all of societies problems and yet never breathe a word that they are responsible for every single 1st world comfort you currently enjoy. Like the internet. How is feminism not a hate movment?

34 hours later 5019083 Anonymous
>>5019077 They don't blame men. They blame the patriarchy, which is essentially male culture and social norms.

34 hours later 5019086 Anonymous (1428124089101.png 500x300 37kB)
>>5018935 >all of men's problems are their own faults and due to their own misogynistic dominance in our culture. >it's simply about wanting to help men be free of their own toxic gendered culture that forces them to be oppressors. Replace the word "men" with "Jews" and "gender" with "race". Then repeat that in German, please.

34 hours later 5019091 Anonymous
>>5019083 >They blame the patriarchy, which is essentially male culture and social norms. So, men. You'll just attribute any male behavior that you don't like to "culture" and "social norms"

34 hours later 5019094 Anonymous
>>5019075 >>all feminists are copies of the same person so they believe the exact same thing and do the exact same things. They don't ever seem to disagree with each other. "Manspreading" would like a word...

34 hours later 5019097 Anonymous
>>5019086 If Jews were actually oppressors of the German people, and Hitler wanted to free them of their oppressive culture rather than systematically slaughter them, the situation would have been much different than the Holocaust turned out to be. This is a case where that metaphor or whatever doesn't really work. >>5019091 It is specific male behaviors they are opposed to, not the mere existence of men. It is possible for men to act in such a way that feminists approve of.

34 hours later 5019099 Anonymous
>>5012456 Considering that being gay is now considered muhsoggynees by some of the more radicals in your movement, I would think that a lot of gay men hate them...also, TERFS... so no Trans people up in that mofo...

34 hours later 5019100 Anonymous
>>5019094 They disagree with each other all the time. There are numerous feminist disputes over issues like pornography and prostitution (whether it's empowering or oppressive) and whether trans women should be regarded as women.

34 hours later 5019101 Anonymous
>>5019094 they do. A lot. But see, when they do, they are talking to each other. So you're not going to hear that as much. You're going to hear more when they are talking to you, or at least talking to other people about you. So your impression on what they say will be biased. Add in that we remember things that upset us more than things that please us, we repeat things more that upset us more than what pleases us. We being humans. Together, your going to think that the main thing that the group deals with is negative things about you. And that there isn't much disagreement, because even if they are disagreeing about you, they're talking to each other, and disagreement between people who aren't you is typically emotionally neutral, so we notice/remember/talk about that even less than things we like, which is less than things we don't like.

35 hours later 5019102 Anonymous
>>5019099 TERFs seem to be a minority of modern feminists. Most feminists today seem to be trans positive.

35 hours later 5019103 Anonymous
>>5019071 Still drawing conclusions from a few people. Amazing.

35 hours later 5019105 Anonymous
>>5019101 I dislike everything about feminists, though. No objective measure for oppression means I don't have to take a single thing you say seriously.

35 hours later 5019114 Anonymous
>>5019071 >it's almost as if the load crazy ones are the ones who make a whole tons of noise at inappropriate times.

35 hours later 5019115 Anonymous
>>5019105 Ok, so you admit your whole argument is basically "I don't like feminists"? That's fine, you don't have to like them, but it's not a valid criticism of feminism.

35 hours later 5019123 Anonymous
>>5019114 you can say that about most people, the majority is pretty silent, but what they accept becomes a norm feminists have chosen to accept the radical anti male wing

35 hours later 5019126 Anonymous
>>5019115 My argument is that men and women aren't biologically equal, and thus we shouldn't treat them equally.

35 hours later 5019138 Anonymous
>>5019126 Not all men are biologically equal to other men, not all women are biologically equal to other women. Does that warrant not treating them equally? I'd say it only does when the differences are relavent - a stronger man should be preferred for a job requiring physical strength, but should not otherwise be given special privileges over other men or women, i.e. should not have greater political rights, have their opinions and views more valued, etc. Feminism isn't about assuming all humans are biologically identical or about treating everyone EXACTLY the same, it's more about fighting against UNJUSTIFIED discrimination on the basis of sex.

35 hours later 5019140 Anonymous
>>5019123 >you can say that about most people true >feminists have chosen to accept the radical anti male wing false. you've chosen to accept that those speaking loudest are speaking for all. Or if you're just saying that the radicals are accepted as part of feminism, then yes, but that same argument works for pretty much every political or social movement. The radicals are a part of it, the radical part, that makes a lot of noise and gets a lot of attention.

35 hours later 5019146 Anonymous
>>5019102 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womyn -born_womyn interesting article.. they aren't even welcome in a canadian lesbian organisation...

35 hours later 5019158 Anonymous
>>5012456 >290 replies. Ill have to remember this one for the future. Such a short and simple statement yet its trolled so many. I tip my fedora to you good sir.

35 hours later 5019163 Anonymous
>>5019138 The brains of each sex are different. Any transgendered person on here could tell you that. The fact of the matter is that females are the ones who have babies. they can't hold down a full-time job without taking at least a month of absence, and even then, they won't be able to raise the child properly once they go back to work. Breast milk is crucial to a child's development after all, so don't give me the whole father as homemaker spiel. The mother has the milk sacs. Get over it. I would also take feminists more seriously if they stopped focusing on White men for gendered violence and started focusing on Black men, who do it at higher rates.

35 hours later 5019174 Anonymous
>>5016681 Honestly, I always saw it as a large collection of both men and women (influenced and controlled by a powerful, wealthy, male dominated, nigh-unattainable pseudo-nobility class, your typical movers and shakers of the modern world) who learn, teach and subtly reinforce strict, traditionalist, male-dominated social mores generation after generation that restrict men, women and everyone in between to harsh, unhealthy and often unfair social roles. But that's just me. I see a new definition pop up every day so I usually don't even try to discuss it. I typically say "traditionalist authoritarianism" which is basically what I see patriarchy as.

35 hours later 5019175 Anonymous
>>5013559 are you fucking retarded?

35 hours later 5019177 Anonymous
>>5019163 White men abuse more white women and feminism hates not focusing on white women.

35 hours later 5019178 Anonymous
>>5017858 You do give a flying fuck about them or else you wouldn't have subjected your opinions to their scrutiny for a cheap ploy at attention. Go out and get laid or something man.

35 hours later 5019179 Anonymous
>>5013595 I had sex with both...men are more satisfying. and I'm made to have sex with women...

35 hours later 5019183 Anonymous
>>5019163 >they can't hold down a full-time job without taking at least a month of absence men can do child care too, either split or being the primary care giver. Time off for actual pregnancy and childbirth recovery is much shorter, and it's not unreasonable for the father to also take that time off to help. >they won't be able to raise the child properly once they go back to work only if you assume the nuclear family model where the mother must be the primary caregiver. >Breast milk is crucial to a child's development after all, so don't give me the whole father as homemaker spiel oh, I will, because that's bs. And you know it's bs. >mother has milk sacs yeah, and we've used technology to get around a lot of biology. Or do you have a problem with artificial insulin too? >only take it seriously if they make it a race issue.

35 hours later 5019184 Anonymous
>>5019163 We are living in the 21st century. Women don't have to stay home and be nursemaids. Stop fetishizing vague evo-bio bullshit.

35 hours later 5019187 Anonymous
>>5019163 >The fact of the matter is that females are the ones who have babies. they can't hold down a full-time job without taking at least a month of absence, and even then, they won't be able to raise the child properly once they go back to work. Breast milk is crucial to a child's development after all, so don't give me the whole father as homemaker spiel. The mother has the milk sacs. Get over it. That depends on the assumption that all females will become mothers. Being a mother is a role (albeit one only truly available to natal females), not a gender itself. Yes, we should take into account the fact that some women will be unable to hold a full time job while pregnant and while the child is very young. But once the child has reached a certain age, breastfeeding is no longer necessary, so it's certainly possible for the father to take care of the child at that point. And there are plenty of women who don't become mothers at all, or don't intend to do so for many more years. Not to mention that some women are biologically infertile. This is what I mean when I distinguish between "justified" and "unjustified" discrimination. Recognizing that a woman will not be able to work full-time when pregnant and taking actions to account or adjust for that is justified discrimination. Assuming that women are unreliable workers simply because they are women is unjustified discrimination.

35 hours later 5019193 Anonymous
>>5019184 >evo-bio bullshit. So you're a creationist? >>5019187 The only solace I have is that feminists are less likely to have children and will thus die out in a couple generations.

35 hours later 5019199 Anonymous
>>5019193 I bet you think the think of the 50s at the good ol days

35 hours later 5019205 Anonymous
>>5019199 No, but thanks for confirming how close-minded and predictable you are.

35 hours later 5019212 Anonymous
>>5019193 >So you're a creationist? No, I'm a person who doesn't draw bullshit social inferences about objective biological facts.

35 hours later 5019216 Anonymous
>>5019193 >So you're a creationist? Just because someone believes in evolution doesn't mean they assume it's a perfect model of every sort of social situation. The theory of evolution is a scientific model which works quite well for explaining what it's designed for, but it can't be generalized to explain everything, you'd need a "theory of everything" to do that. Evolution is admittedly based on collective behaviors of groups, not individuals. Evolution will say that a more fit organism will survive and reproduce - on average that is true, but due to "random" variation, sometimes an organism that is technically more fit will have bad luck and die before it can reproduce. So it's really not accurate as a comprehensive explanation of individual's behaviors.

35 hours later 5019224 Anonymous
>>5019205 >thinks that feminists can't have children or be mothers >thinks that social ideas are only passed down genetic lines >calls others closed minded

35 hours later 5019225 Anonymous
>>5019205 At least wait for people more willing to elaborate on how stupid you are to actually respond before you start gloating about how euphoric you are.

35 hours later 5019227 Anonymous
>>5019212 >No, I'm a person who doesn't draw bullshit social inferences about objective biological facts. Stop confusing cause and effect. Objective biological fact leads to social structure. >>5019216 The only reason you exist is because you're apart of an unbroken chain of reproduction. Go ahead and break it though like a good little feminist. Your genes won't be missed.

35 hours later 5019232 Anonymous
>>5019193 > implying feminists 'dying out' will have anything to do with procreation > implying we're not moving into a post-gender, post bio-natural sex world. lol. I give it 3 decades before sex is purely for fashion and recreation.

35 hours later 5019244 Anonymous
>>5019224 It's no wonder feminists adopt a horde of cats later in life to keep themselves placated from the crippling depression brought upon by being childless. >>5019232 I can't wait for gene-selection technology to take hold so we can craft the perfect humans. More to humanity's benefit.

35 hours later 5019250 Anonymous
>>5019216 okay, I agree that the bio-truths guy is an idiot, but you're missing an important part about WHY he's and idiot. Evolutionionary fitness is not universal but depends upon the system the organism exists within. Technology and society create a system, and as thinking beings we can play an active part in creating that system. His 'truths' depend upon and assumption of a system that is both not necessary or currently the case.

35 hours later 5019258 Anonymous
My only solace is that this thread won't bump anymore. Feminists have been shutdown in this thread numerous times but they keep ignoring those posts.

35 hours later 5019262 Anonymous
>>5019227 >The only reason you exist is because you're apart of an unbroken chain of reproduction. Go ahead and break it though like a good little feminist. Your genes won't be missed. If you actually read my post, you'd realize that I was arguing that genetics, although neccessary for reproduction, is not everything. Isaac Newton died a virgin, does that mean we should consider him a failure of a person? Yes, from a purely evolutionary perspective he was a failure. But the point is that's not a good way to view humans in general. It's too specific a way of evaluating things. Though reproduction is necessary to continue the species, there is far more to human existence. If we focused our efforts exclusively on reproduction, we'd still be alive, but we would have no art or science, no culture, we'd be nothing more than a biological program executing an infinite loop. There would be nothing to make our lives meaningful. What then would even be the point of reproducing? Why work to continue a species that has no culture, nothing of any real value?

35 hours later 5019269 Anonymous
>>5019258 Yelling at feminists and telling them to GTFO doesn't mean you win the argument.

35 hours later 5019282 Anonymous
>>5019262 >Why work to continue a species that has no culture, nothing of any real value? Leftists work tirelessly to destroy their own culture, so I would hazard a guess that you don't value culture anyway.

35 hours later 5019286 Anonymous
>>5019227 >Stop confusing cause and effect. No, this is exactly what you're doing anon. >Objective biological fact leads to social structure. But your personal opinions about said biological facts do not automatically establish a sound and functional social structure by grace of you uttering them. Your arrogance is astounding.

35 hours later 5019289 Anonymous
>>5019282 >Leftists work tirelessly to destroy their own culture Lol, it only looks that way to you because you're an outsider projecting your own cultural standards onto them. Leftists are destroying *your* culture, not theirs. And thank heavens for it.

35 hours later 5019292 Anonymous
>>5019282 Begging the question. Just because you can echo rhetoric like a good little parrot, it doesn't mean the rhetoric is valid.

35 hours later 5019307 Anonymous
>>5019282 Leftists only target certain aspects of culture, they want to reform culture, not destroy it entirely.

35 hours later 5019308 Anonymous
>>5013722 who said men weren't being "forceably" (is that a tumblr word?) penetrated as well? >>5013749 what the fuck is the meaning behind this you undouched cuntess ???

35 hours later 5019317 Anonymous
>>5019269 read the whole thread

35 hours later 5019319 Anonymous
>>5013838 i think it'll be hilarious when you're slaughtered like a faggot, you fucking pig.

35 hours later 5019324 Anonymous
>>5019307 The exact same tactics were used by Maoists and Stalinists. They saw their own culture as "oppressive" and did everything in their power to make everything gray, uniform, and made of cinderblocks. >>5019292 And who would be teaching me this rhetoric if I'm echoing it? Certainly not the media. Certainly not the education system. Those things are utterly dominated by people who agree with everything you say.

35 hours later 5019334 Anonymous
>>5014020 fingers and tongue can penetrate, mr or madam.

35 hours later 5019335 Anonymous
>>5019289 If our culture is not superior, then why is everyone trying to get into our countries?

35 hours later 5019338 Anonymous
>>5019324 >The exact same tactics were used by Maoists and Stalinists. >They saw their own culture as "oppressive" and did everything in their power to make everything gray, uniform, and made of cinderblocks. Yet you're basically arguing that any criticism of culture is oppressive. Don't make the mistake of thinking real world communist states really cared about culture - they just wanted power like any other dictatorship.

35 hours later 5019342 Anonymous
>>5019324 >stalnists and maos >thinks those two developed the same culture >characterize the entire Soviet Era of art as gray and uniform >thinking that being made of cinderblocks was anything but a concern of practicality lets add that to the list of things you've been wrong about.

35 hours later 5019343 Anonymous
>>5019335 Because we have better opportunities and a higher standard of living.

35 hours later 5019352 Anonymous
>>5019343 Yes. Because of our culture.

35 hours later 5019357 Anonymous
>>5019335 I never said the current cultural state wasn't superior to others. But that doesn't mean it can't be superseded by something better.

35 hours later 5019363 Anonymous (equal in slavery.jpg 848x960 112kB)
>>5019338 > they just wanted power like any other dictatorship. Sounds a lot like feminists.

35 hours later 5019364 Anonymous
>>5019177 Lesbian couples have the highest rate of domestic abuse

35 hours later 5019373 Anonymous
>>5019364 That's called foreplay, breeder scum.

36 hours later 5019376 Anonymous (lesbians.jpg 640x607 115kB)
>>5019357 Right now it's looking like the only potential culture it could be superseded by is Islam. You know, the one that prosecutes women for being raped and pushes gays off 20 story buildings with nooses around their necks. >>5019364 This is a fact.

36 hours later 5019387 Anonymous
>>5019352 Not necessarily. For one I don't think it's practical to define culture as being better or worse than another, that's like comparing apples and oranges. And while certain aspects of culture can lead to a higher or lower standard of living with everything else held equal, the standard of living is largely dependent on resources and economic forces. So unless you're willing to classify economic circumstances as culture (in which case you'd basically be arguing that some backwards African tribe that discovers oil under there land will instantly become "more cultured"), it's clear that there is more that determines standard of living than culture alone. And if it really is all about culture, why do so many immigrants move to new countries yet cling to their own culture and try to avoid integrating? If our culture was the source of our prosperity and high standard of living, why would immigrants hold on to their old culture?

36 hours later 5019402 Anonymous
>>5019376 > Right now it's looking like the only potential culture it could be superseded by is Islam. Yeah, if you cherrypick. Where I live, we've got a fabulous techno-progressive culture that balances everyone's needs and differences remarkably well. It's constantly being improved upon and we use more and more automatic technological solutions as opposed to political ones.

36 hours later 5019403 Anonymous
>>5019363 Except feminism isn't a dictatorship, it cannot be since it's not an actual government. They're interested in power so as to achieve their goals (which, assuming we're talking about moderate feminists, I would consider a good use of power). Whereas dictatorships generally use power to protect their own existence and increase the wealth and privilege of those at the top - they do not generally make an effort to benefit the majority of their constituents/supporters.

36 hours later 5019418 Anonymous (feminists are in power.jpg 1151x2134 717kB)
>>5019387 >(in which case you'd basically be arguing that some backwards African tribe that discovers oil under there land will instantly become "more cultured") I never said that. In fact, they lack the infrastructure to extract, process, and utilize the oil, so it's completely useless to them and has no value to them. >If our culture was the source of our prosperity and high standard of living, why would immigrants hold on to their old culture? Have you noticed that people who hold onto their old culture are universally poorer than those who adopt the culture of the nation they inhabit? >>5019403 It is a dictatorship. You can't plug your ears forever. Pic related.

36 hours later 5019434 Anonymous
>>5019418 Who is the dictator?

36 hours later 5019436 Anonymous
>>5019097 >If Jews were actually oppressors of the German people, and Hitler wanted to free them of their oppressive culture rather than systematically slaughter them, the situation would have been much different than the Holocaust turned out to be. This is a case where that metaphor or whatever doesn't really work. You've come to the wrong website darling.

36 hours later 5019442 Anonymous
>>5019434 White San Francisco-dwelling feminists propped up with Patreon accounts.

36 hours later 5019447 Anonymous
>>5019442 A dictator requires a single seat of power. You cannot have multiple 'dictators' simultaneously. Did you graduate elementary school?

36 hours later 5019451 Anonymous
>>5019418 >In fact, they lack the infrastructure to extract, process, and utilize the oil, so it's completely useless to them and has no value to them. It has a great deal of value to them. They can sell rights to drill for oil to those who do have the infrastructure to make use of it. >It is a dictatorship. You can't plug your ears forever. Pic related. Given that the picture criticizes the CDC survey for being indirect, it's odd that it uses such indirect vague language such as "criminalize previous legal male behavior". What does this refer to? In many places marital rape was legal, though I certainly don't think it's something that should be legal.

36 hours later 5019456 Anonymous
Can we just all agree labels and identity politics are stupid? That's part of a reason why we're all anon and not tripfagging or on tumblr right? I don't label myself anything because of all the strawmen people throw around.

36 hours later 5019461 Anonymous
>>5019436 Care to elaborate?

36 hours later 5019463 Anonymous
>>5019447 Be pedantic all you like. Even Mao was a member of a council and yet could still colloquially be described as a dictator. >>5019451 >"criminalize previous legal male behavior" You haven't heard of that guy in Canada that got arrested and jailed for 3 years for disagreeing with a feminist on twitter? http://news.nationalpost.com/full-c omment/christie-blatchford-ruling-i n-twitter-harassment-trial-could-ha ve-enormous-fallout-for-free-speech

36 hours later 5019469 Anonymous
>>5019456 I don't get why identity politics is so bad as long as you're actually affected by the issues you're focusing on.

36 hours later 5019475 Anonymous
>>5019463 > be pedantic all you like There's another word for pedantic: "Correct" Regardless, my point that completely flew over your head, is that if you can't even tell us who EXACTLY this dictator is, why would anyone trust your understanding of this mysterious, sp00ky cabal?

36 hours later 5019483 Anonymous
>>5019463 >Be pedantic all you like. Even Mao was a member of a council and yet could still colloquially be described as a dictator. And what would happen if one of the council members disagreed with him, who would get their way?

36 hours later 5019486 Anonymous
>>5019469 Because they demand acceptance for their whimsical and disturbing life choices. >>5019475 >if you can't even tell us who EXACTLY this dictator is, why would anyone trust your understanding of this mysterious, sp00ky cabal? Irony. Who rules the "patriarchy"?

36 hours later 5019491 Anonymous
>>5019486 > implying the patriarchy is a real thing lol. This isn't the 60's anymore.

36 hours later 5019496 Anonymous
>>5019486 So in other words, because people demand acceptance for things you don't like. >Who rules the "patriarchy"? The patriarchy isn't claimed to be a dictatorship.

36 hours later 5019499 Anonymous
>>5019496 I concede that the word dictator is inappropriate. However, you asserted that feminists are oppressed and not in power, and I proved you wrong.

36 hours later 5019510 Anonymous
>>5019499 Feminists certainly do have influence, but they do not control everything like you're basically implying. The misleading 1-in-5 statistic likely caught on because someone heard it out of context and passed it on without taking the time to learn what it really specifically means. This sort of thing happens to statistics in the media all the time, it's not evidence of some secret cabal pushing an agenda.

36 hours later 5019521 Anonymous
>>5019510 Who's pushing the false statistic if it's not feminists? You think people wouldn't do a little more research before posting it everywhere if they were not feminists, and did not have a vested interest in keeping the lie going?

36 hours later 5019535 Anonymous
>>5019521 No, in the media people often use a statistic that sounds good if it agrees with the point they're trying to make, or will get people's attention. And obviously the people using these statistics are likely to be feminists, however it's not evidence that there is some concerted effort from the "top" to manipulate people, it's just people using statistics that support their viewpoints which happens all the time.

36 hours later 5019545 Anonymous
>>5019535 >a statistic that sounds good if it agrees with the point they're trying to make It would only sound good and agree with the opinions of feminists. Who else would be insane enough to think 20% of ALL women in America will be raped in their lifetime? It's the most ridiculous line of bullshit I've ever heard, and yet feminists gleefully repeat it at every opportunity. >it's not evidence that there is some concerted effort from the "top" to manipulate people The mainstream media, the United States government, and the United Nations seem to be about as "at the top" as you could possibly get.

36 hours later 5019554 Anonymous
>>5019469 Because they stifle dialogue as people play tennis with strawmen. Most people aren't misandrists or misogynists or TERFs or believe women aren't equal to men or rape is acceptable or w/e hot topic is reduced to a few buzz words. I have a problem with the word privilege as well because the semantics surrounding it just brings idiocy from both sides when it should really just be thought of as when you have privilege, you aren't forced to encounter as many bias as someone unprivileged but at the moment it's just used mostly as a SHUT UP YOU'RE STUPID STOP TALKING ad hominem.

36 hours later 5019569 Anonymous
>>5019545 >The mainstream media, the United States government, and the United Nations seem to be about as "at the top" as you could possibly get. There isn't any one plan or person behind the mainstream media. The media isn't completely controlled by the government - the government can influence it sometimes, but it's not like the media is constantly saying what the government wants. And you do realize that different parts of the mainstream media disagree with each other, right? There isn't some agenda that it's trying to accomplish. And why exactly would this 1-in-5 statistic benefit the UN and US government anyway?

36 hours later 5019580 Anonymous
>>5019569 >There isn't some agenda that it's trying to accomplish The agenda of feminists seems awfully popular universally, however. >And why exactly would this 1-in-5 statistic benefit the UN and US government anyway? They're both full of feminists, they enjoy exploiting stupid people for votes, or both.

36 hours later 5019600 Anonymous
>>5019461 /lgbt/ is very much in cahoots with /pol/. Filthy jews probably aren't the people you want to be painting as victims if you want to win sympathy points.

36 hours later 5019602 Anonymous
>>5019580 >The agenda of feminists seems awfully popular universally, however. The fact that something is popular doesn't mean there's some single agenda behind everything. Most scientists believe the Earth is round, is that evidence of a conspiracy? >>5019580 >They're both full of feminists, they enjoy exploiting stupid people for votes, or both. That's the same situation with virtually every other political issue. Politicians support things that either align with their own views, or are likely to get them elected.

36 hours later 5019646 Anonymous
>>5019600 I was only using Jews because the anon I was replying to was already trying to use the "SJW or stormfront" metaphor.

36 hours later 5019660 Anonymous (German Revolution of 1918.jpg 1205x944 527kB)
>>5019646 >why do they persecute us poor innocent Jews?

36 hours later 5019663 Anonymous
>>5019646 Yeah, but the problem is that Stormfront is right. The Jews deserved to be gassed.

37 hours later 5019696 Anonymous
>>5019660 >>5019663 This is off-topic. You're reading too much into a metaphor.

37 hours later 5019714 Anonymous
>>5019660 You do realize that central Europe had a large Jewish population? So it's likely that any significant social movement would include plenty of Jews. And if you think systematically slaughtering the Jewish population is a reasonable reaction to a movement led by Jews, you must concede that it's also reasonable for feminists to propose depriving all men of their legal rights and privileges as a way to stop rape. Also, including "anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white" has no connection to anything else on there and just hurts your credibility.

37 hours later 5019738 Anonymous
>>5019714 Men are also the ones who protect women from rape by establishing police forces, military forces, and gunsmithing. Jews didn't protect the Germans at all.

37 hours later 5019755 Anonymous
>>5019738 There weren't Jews in the German military, or contributing to the German economy? Also, feminists could take over all of those things if men were deprived of their rights.

37 hours later 5019765 Anonymous
>>5019755 >Also, feminists could take over all of those things if men were deprived of their rights. Cute, it thinks it can do men things.

37 hours later 5019770 /pol/ack (Multiple Trumps.webm 720x404 977kB)
>>5019660 >Rosa Luxemburg Immediate hate. Btw what are you guys all talking about? I can't keep up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mkq R0DCIJRM

37 hours later 5019787 Anonymous
>>5019770 >Btw what are you guys all talking about? I can't keep up. The Tumblr feminist is also a dirty Jew, it seems.

37 hours later 5019791 Anonymous
>>5019755 >Also, feminists could take over all of those things if men were deprived of their rights. No, no you really couldn't. There is no historical precedence for that in any culture that had ever existed..

37 hours later 5019794 Anonymous
>>5019765 Either sex can theoretically do anything the other sex can. Maybe not as efficiently, but it could still do it. The biggest issue would be reproduction, and with sufficient technological advances even that would be possible for a single-sex society.

37 hours later 5019806 Anonymous
>>5019791 There has also been no culture where it was necessary. Women certainly can be soldiers, police officers, or gunsmiths.

37 hours later 5019807 /pol/ack (pol was right again.jpg 1235x486 131kB)
>>5019787 /pol/ was right again! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJY VtPLDY80 >>5019755 No they can't. The blacks in South Africa and Zimbabwe are trying and tried that. It doesn't work.

37 hours later 5019811 Anonymous (669.gif 267x219 1104kB)
>>5019794 >Either sex can theoretically do anything the other sex can.

37 hours later 5019838 Anonymous
>>5019806 They're bad at those jobs though. There has yet to be a woman who could complete the minimum physical requirements of the marines.

37 hours later 5019844 /pol/ack (women sex.jpg 1223x1570 319kB)
>>5019811 >Evolution resulted in 2 different sexes in humans, but the female and male brain work exactly the same physically >The only difference between them are social constructs and norms implanted into the minds of children. >We can solve all this by education, even the low IQ of blacks, that's why we need affirmateive action and quotas and regulation

37 hours later 5019861 Anonymous
>>5019811 Care to offer a counter-argument other than quoting me? >>5019838 True, but there are female soldiers. And I suspect part of the reason none pass the requirements for the marines is that those rely on training, not just natural ability - and female soldiers are not adequately prepared since the female training program for the normal army is less intensive than that for males, in order to increase the number of female soldiers. In other words, regular army holds women to a lower standard, marines doesn't, so women trying to get into the marines are less prepared.

37 hours later 5019862 /pol/ack
>>5019714 I bet they didn't have anything bad in mind. They just had the monopoly on media for some reason.

37 hours later 5019867 Anonymous
>>5019844 You do realize that no one on this board claims that gender is a social construct, right?

37 hours later 5019868 /pol/ack
>>5019861 >True, but there are female soldiers. And I suspect part of the reason none pass the requirements for the marines is that those rely on training, not just natural ability - and female soldiers are not adequately prepared since the female training program for the normal army is less intensive than that for males, in order to increase the number of female soldiers. In other words, regular army holds women to a lower standard, marines doesn't, so women trying to get into the marines are less prepared. Surely it can't have anything to do with the fact that men are just BETTER at physical jobs? You're really grasping for straws here.

37 hours later 5019879 Anonymous
>>5019861 >True, but there are female soldiers And they're bad soldiers.

37 hours later 5019884 Anonymous
>>5019868 On average, men certainly are better at physical jobs. But certain women are better at physical jobs than certain men, and being "not as good" is not the same as being unable to do something.

37 hours later 5019896 Anonymous
>>5019879 [citation needed]

37 hours later 5019906 /pol/ack
>>5019884 http://www.npr.org/2015/10/01/44504 8715/congressman-reacts-to-marine-c orps-report-on-women-in-combat They are too weak to throw their backpack over their wall. >But certain women are better at physical jobs than certain men, and being "not as good" is not the same as being unable to do something. They are simply not strong enough. Sorry.

37 hours later 5019920 /pol/ack
>/lgbt here actually want to argue the point that women simply can't be as strong as men. >can't accept the fact that the body has limits, even if you train hard

37 hours later 5019921 Anonymous
>>5019884 >but certain women are better at physical jobs than certain men One woman out of a thousand being able to do something does not discount the fact that 500 men out of a thousand are able to do that same thing. Stop being disingenuous. Your utopian "one gender" world is a false god.

37 hours later 5019928 Anonymous
>>5019906 >They are simply not strong enough. Sorry. On average, yes. But the thing with the statistical distribution is that there is no hard maximum or minimum, just lowering probabilities as you get farther from the average. You're basically claiming that the strongest woman in the world isn't able to meet those requirements, and I find that hard to believe.

37 hours later 5019938 Anonymous
>>5019921 I'm not seriously advocating a one gender world. I'm just saying that apart from reproduction, either gender could by itself potentially create a functioning society. >>5019920 No one's claiming that women have a higher average or maximum strength than men. What is being claimed is that there are women strong enough to perform male jobs.

37 hours later 5019947 /pol/ack
>>5019928 Look up women and pullups, maybe that will open your eyes. >But the thing with the statistical distribution is that there is no hard maximum or minimum We're talking about humans here, not some theoretical subject, we have no practical knowledge about. If the military says they don't need women, they don't need women. >>5019938 >No one's claiming that women have a higher average or maximum strength than men. What is being claimed is that there are women strong enough to perform male jobs. Show me an elite female soldier.

37 hours later 5019969 Anonymous
>>5019947 >If the military says they don't need women, they don't need women. But that's not really relevant to the discussion here. The question isn't whether women are better soldiers than men (which they aren't). The question is whether women can be adequate soldiers. And I'd still say that if a larger army is needed, but no more men are willing to enlist, female soldiers could provide a better end result than drafted males. >Show me an elite female soldier. Elite soldier isn't a job. It refers to someone who is well above average at their job. I'm not claiming that a woman can be as strong as the strongest man, but that there are women strong enough to perform male jobs adequately.

37 hours later 5019973 Anonymous
>>5019969 >The question is whether women can be adequate soldiers. You know what happens to "adequate" soldiers? They're killed by exemplary soldiers.

37 hours later 5019984 Anonymous
>>5019973 That is true. But there are already plenty of countries that manage to make do with only adequate soldiers.

38 hours later 5020014 /pol/ack
>>5019969 >But that's not really relevant to the discussion here. The question isn't whether women are better soldiers than men (which they aren't). The question is whether women can be adequate soldiers. And I'd still say that if a larger army is needed, but no more men are willing to enlist, female soldiers could provide a better end result than drafted males. If the military doesn't want them, they aren't needed. The military leadership should decide that on their own without outside influence. >Elite soldier isn't a job. It literally is. I'm from Europe, I don't know all the badass shit you can be part of, but from the little stuff I've seen, where are the female Rangers? Or female Marines? Navy Seals? Etc etc

38 hours later 5020015 Anonymous
>>5019984 I don't want to be protected by the adequate. I want to be protected by the best.

38 hours later 5020022 Anonymous
>>5020015 I can understand that. I'm just saying not all countries even have a meaningful number of above-average soldiers.

38 hours later 5020023 Anonymous
>>5019969 >Elite soldier isn't a job Navy SEALs. British SAS.

38 hours later 5020025 /pol/ack
>>5020015 It's also not like we're fighting another world war and need 10% of our entire population on the front.

38 hours later 5020028 Anonymous
>>5020022 But at least they make an effort to get the best. I'd rather be safe than be equal.

38 hours later 5020043 /pol/ack
>>5020028 >than be equal Not to mention that this is neither an ideal worthy to strive for, nor even remotely possible.

38 hours later 5020063 Anonymous
>>5020043 Indeed. There is no real value in equality.

38 hours later 5020066 Anonymous
>>5020028 Right, but the point is that even merely adequate soldiers are enough to allow a society to function.

38 hours later 5020082 /pol/ack
>>5020066 >but the point is A completly inconsequential point!

38 hours later 5020089 Anonymous
>>5020066 A society that can function with an equity-enforced adequate military can function without a military at all. If you want your female soldiers to get raped and enslaved by enemy combatants who don't give a shit about equality, then go right ahead. Put them on the front lines. After all, you only need "adequate" soldiers, right? You fucking monster.

38 hours later 5020096 Anonymous
>>5020082 >A completly inconsequential point! No, you've just forgotten where this conversation started. It's gotten horrendously derailed. >>5020082 >A society that can function with an equity-enforced adequate military can function without a military at all. Several countries have sub-optimal militaries. Why don't they just disband their militaries to save money?

38 hours later 5020109 Anonymous
>>5020089 >If you want your female soldiers to get raped and enslaved by enemy combatants who don't give a shit about equality, then go right ahead. Put them on the front lines. After all, you only need "adequate" soldiers, right? You really think there's never been a war in which one army is vastly superior?

38 hours later 5020120 Anonymous (Ivan 5.jpg 1278x312 203kB)
>>5020096 >Why don't they just disband their militaries to save money? Because then they won't be able to justify the taxes they levy. They apparently need extra taxes in order to pay for female soldier tampons and pensions when they get pregnant while on duty and get "honorably" discharged. >>5020109 I don't want to be on the inferior side.

38 hours later 5020135 /pol/ack
>>5020089 There was an "living like during the Ironage" experiment going on in Great Britain some decades ago. Long story short, it was a cool experiment, but these hippies had to approve every single decision any individual there makes by a vote. They argued over whether it was ethical to "exploit" bees, butcher a pig, etc. This made me realize that in an ideal society, the people bitching here right now about equality in the military, wouldn't be involved at all in those decisions. >>5020096 >Several countries have sub-optimal militaries. Why don't they just disband their militaries to save money? Ask them. Today's Democracis are really not known for their efficiency with their finances or bureaucracy. >No, you've just forgotten where this conversation started. It's gotten horrendously derailed. Ebin.

38 hours later 5020147 Anonymous
>>5020135 This discussion was originally about a female-dominated society, not laws requiring forced equality.

38 hours later 5020164 /pol/ack
>>5020147 >a female-dominated society History proves that they don't work. They are not stable. Prove me wrong. :^)

38 hours later 5020171 Anonymous
>>5020164 Were there any actual examples of them historically?

38 hours later 5020177 Anonymous
>>5020147 Female-dominated societies exist in only two forms: failed societies, and tribes which are stuck in the agricultural level of technology.

38 hours later 5020191 /pol/ack
>>5020171 Well, do you see any today? 100 years ago? Clearly a failure.

38 hours later 5020201 Anonymous
>>5020191 If it's never been tried, you can't say it was a failure.

38 hours later 5020226 /pol/ack
>>5020201 If that was actually true, this would be the ultimate testament for it's failure.

38 hours later 5020238 Anonymous
>>5020226 It would only mean people THOUGHT it was a bad idea, not that it actually is.

38 hours later 5020264 /pol/ack
>>5020238 It really is a bad idea, we already know that. Just look at what happens if Women get complete control over their children. Single mothers is the worst possible indicator of a life as a failure. So if Women fuck up their own children, when we let them rule over them, why would they do a better job with society? And that is all with "free moneyz" subsidising them. Bet you didn't see that coming, huh?

39 hours later 5020286 Anonymous
>>5020264 And what you're describing is a totally different scenario than an actual matriarchy. "Free moneyz" wouldn't exist with a female-dominated society. And what you describe is not entirely an effect of single mothers, but largely an effect of the same circumstances that cause single mothers.

39 hours later 5020303 Anonymous
>>5020286 Single mothers have children with the highest rates of future drug use, criminal behavior, and ironically, committing rape. This is controlling for economic status.

39 hours later 5020314 /pol/ack
>>5020286 >And what you're describing is a totally different scenario than an actual matriarchy. It's actually not, since neither of us defined it. Also having control of the live of a child is somehow totally different? wut >And what you describe is not entirely an effect of single mothers, but largely an effect of the same circumstances that cause single mothers. And you can prove that? And it would matter, because ... ? >"Free moneyz" wouldn't exist with a female-dominated society Women overwhelmingly support social programs. You really are fucking stupid and getting on my nerves. All your arguments are completly baseless.

39 hours later 5020324 Anonymous
>>5020303 >This is controlling for economic status. Does that mean it also takes into account the fact that most single mothers are poor (i.e. controlling for the mother's economic status as well as the children's).

39 hours later 5020364 /pol/ack
>>5020324 Into account maybe, but of course should not discard it. It's the logical consequnce of a divorce for the single mother to be poor. Marriage has always worked this way. Single mothers are really the scum of the western world.

39 hours later 5020372 Anonymous
>>5020364 We pay them to churn out violent criminals. It's disgusting.

39 hours later 5020387 /pol/ack
>>5020372 Let the following sink in: Men pay them, so they can live independent from them, but dependant on their money.

39 hours later 5020509 Anonymous
>>5020364 Most of that would be true of single fathers too. You wouldn't expect positive results from having one person do the job of two.

39 hours later 5020531 Anonymous (lol females.jpg 3584x2102 2053kB)
>>5020509 >Most of that would be true of single fathers too Actually no. Single fathers show far better results than single mothers.

40 hours later 5020556 Anonymous
>>5020531 But they're still far worse than actual dual parent households. There's also the fact that women tend to have lower income jobs, meaning that single mother households have substantially lower income than single father households.

40 hours later 5020567 Anonymous
>>5020556 >But they're still far worse than actual dual parent households Of course. Especially heterosexual dual parent households. >There's also the fact that women tend to have lower income jobs That's not society's fault.

40 hours later 5020579 Anonymous (projecting.jpg 490x333 35kB)
>>5020567 >That's not society's fault. Technically it is to some extent, if society discourages women from taking higher paying jobs, or gives them less incentive to do so than it does men. But I never claimed that in the first place.

40 hours later 5020609 Anonymous
>>5020579 >if society discourages women from taking higher paying jobs But it doesn't. Literally 1/4 of all my college's programs are specifically for women to get into STEM.

40 hours later 5020650 Anonymous
>>5020609 Those programs are to counter the preexisting bias in society that discourages them from going into high paying jobs. Our society still does encourage women to rely on husbands/boyfriends to support them financially.

40 hours later 5020671 Anonymous
>>5020650 >preexisting bias It's a bias because woman aren't as good on average in those fields as men are. You're confusing cause and effect.

40 hours later 5020700 Anonymous
>>5020671 You're confusing assumptions with fact.

40 hours later 5020716 Anonymous
>>5020700 That's rich coming from you. Your entire narrative of unjust discrimination is based on the false belief that men and woman are actually equal (they aren't).

40 hours later 5020747 Anonymous
>>5020716 Depends on how you define equality. No sane person claims that men and women are exactly the same or completely different. The issue is to what extent we should treat women differently.

40 hours later 5020784 Anonymous
>>5020747 How about you let people sort it out on their own rather than criticize culture all the time?

41 hours later 5020894 Anonymous
>>5019016 >That article is just a retarded rant against straw feminists. No it's not. Read it fully. It's from a feminist website.

41 hours later 5020937 Anonymous (feminist.jpg 590x350 27kB)
>"NOT ALL FEMINISTS!!": the thread

41 hours later 5020952 Anonymous
>>5020784 Uh, what?

41 hours later 5020985 Anonymous
>>5014409 >mras are ones nuh uh, not all mras

41 hours later 5020993 Anonymous (mansplain4.jpg 1212x1024 304kB)
>/lgbt/ is still living in the dark ages and being sexist get educated

41 hours later 5021086 Anonymous
>>5020993 But that's not a woman.

41 hours later 5021100 Anonymous
>>5021086 don't mansplain to me shitlord reeeeee

41 hours later 5021117 Anonymous
>>5013559 Do I have some news for you! https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the -aap/aap-press-room/pages/American- Academy-of-Pediatrics-Supports-Same -Gender-Civil-Marriage.aspx Screw the mother-child bond

45 hours later 5021849 Anonymous
i am both anti-feminism and anti-lgbt both communities are fucking cancer if you're not a degenerate

45 hours later 5021890 Anonymous
>>5021849 >posts on /lgbt/ >is anti-lgbt Why?

54 hours later 5023047 Anonymous
>>5021086 It's safe to say that the LGBT community has disowned Wu.

59 hours later 5024159 Anonymous
>>5021890 Closet /pol/ homos sometimes escapes.

59 hours later 5024169 Anonymous
>>5020937 "Not all men!" "What about the men!" Every time feminism is discussed.

3.483 0.584