全 64 件のコメント

[–]menial_optimist 52ポイント53ポイント  (12子コメント)

I just think most females would be happier in the caring/housewife role, but I do acknowledge a small minority of women prefer the career role. Feminists should stop demonizing their own kind that prefer the traditional natural role.

[–]Sawagurumi 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yes, agree with that entirely. And not just their own kind, either. Here we have 'women' who can look back at what men have done for women throughout history and turn around and spit in our faces, making up some bullshit about being 'oppressed'. I'm all in favour of feminists not being in any way dependent on men (although they are, of course), men should shun them completely. Fucking parasites. (that was not aimed at you, btw). They are certainly not welcome here. Anywhere that feminists go they fuck up and free speech goes out the window. http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/06/oxfords-new-feminist-hit-squad/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2KPeMcYsuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0

But, as for your small minority preference, yes, these are masculinised women.

Madison, G., Aasa, U., Wallert, J., and Woodley, M. A. (2014). Feminist activist women are masculinized in terms of digit-ratio and social dominance: a possible explanation for the feminist paradox. Front Psychol, 5:1011.

The feminist movement purports to improve conditions for women, and yet only a minority of women in modern societies self-identify as feminists. This is known as the feminist paradox. It has been suggested that feminists exhibit both physiological and psychological characteristics associated with heightened masculinization, which may predispose women for heightened competitiveness, sex-atypical behaviors, and belief in the interchangeability of sex roles. If feminist activists, i.e., those that manufacture the public image of feminism, are indeed masculinized relative to women in general, this might explain why the views and preferences of these two groups are at variance with each other. We measured the 2D:4D digit ratios (collected from both hands) and a personality trait known as dominance (measured with the Directiveness scale) in a sample of women attending a feminist conference. The sample exhibited significantly more masculine 2D:4D and higher dominance ratings than comparison samples representative of women in general, and these variables were furthermore positively correlated for both hands. The feminist paradox might thus to some extent be explained by biological differences between women in general and the activist women who formulate the feminist agenda.

[–]ModeratorPaperStreetVilla 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Women that don't offer me value aren't on my radar enough to spite.

They can do them. I will do me.

Unfortunately, I've yet to see a feminist of any note who can keep to their own damned business.

[–]Badgerpride3 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

I think the fact that not all women are drawn to motherhood is nature's way of keeping the numbers of humans down (I think homosexuality plays a similar role). So actually they DO play a role in society. That one-child Chinese policy was right and proper, guys. The planet cannot sustain these numbers anymore.

Also remember that there is a difference between a woman with a good career and a woman who does not want children. Virginia Woolf was obsessed with her writing and would not have done well as a mother, as I think we can all agree. Women like that, with a vocation or an obsession, are simply not meant to be mothers and the fact that they are not forced to be is actually a blessing on their potential husbands and kids. Life with them would be HELL.

Women with a career are a different thing. They do want kids, and work just for the money. The reason why feminism supports them is that of course a man would hold the upperhand within a family if he brought in all the income (except in my parents' case. My mom bossed my dad around like crazy, but I loved him). So by encouraging women to keep jobs you ensure they are not in a position of dependence from a man.

But I agree with you that the second type of woman I have described is indeed primarily motivated by a desire to raise and provide for her family.

[–]francinerose 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're aware that first word nations under feminism aren't having enough children....

The people who NEED to not have children are those in third world nations that are breeding like rabbits, yet their numbers keeping sky rocketing....

The intelligent are killing themselves out of existence

[–]Sinborn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The intelligent are killing themselves out of existence

Idiocracy is a great movie about just that. Maybe a bit campy at points, but prophetic at others.

[–]Ecanonmics 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

So by encouraging women to keep jobs you ensure they are not in a position of dependence from a man.

Which adds to the workforce unnecessarily. This forces the requirement a two income household to advance which further cements their dependence on a man. There is no benefit.

[–]Daerrol -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

well lower prices, further specialization, higher gross domestic product but yeah no benefit

[–]Ecanonmics 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lower prices offset with lower wages due to increased competition. Specialization? Who cares? Higher GDP sure, but with a weakening of the dollar that's also pointless. So yes, no benefit.

[–]wrekd 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

And more tax payers for the government to leach off of. Hard to have a tax based ponzi scheme if the tax base is decreasing. I can't wait for social security to be bankrupt once I'm old enough to collect.

[–]dodgingbadger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Do you have examples of a feminist who demonized another woman who preferred to stay at home with the kids and take care of the home?

[–]TheReformist94 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know if I'm convinced about that.women seem quite bored and trapped in relationships/the kitchen in general. They enjoy working/sluttijg around. The unhappiness doesn't come from working or not being a mother but the hypergamyy as there aren't enough menn above them socioeconomically

[–]TRP VanguardArchwinger 39ポイント40ポイント  (6子コメント)

You misunderstand women and feminism.

Women don't want to be men. They just want free shit and an easy life.

There they were, taking care of kids and keeping house, and it was hard work. Because raising kids, cooking, cleaning, and maintaining a home is very difficult and very stressful. And often very under-appreciated. And they see Dad come home from the office, wearing nice clothes, working a respected job, getting lots of money for it, and having the gall to act like what he does is important when he gets to sit in a comfortable office with adults doing something rewarding and intellectually stimulating and getting paid for it!

So they decide that Dad has an easy, privileged life and why should they be working so hard? They want to have that easy, privileged life, too.

So they go enter the workforce and find out that getting a good job is hard, and regardless of what job you have, work is hard. And they immediately proclaim that this is all because of discrimination. Surely it wasn't this hard for men to get jobs and do them. And they don't get paid enough! The system must be rigged and biased against women due to years and years of patriarchal structuring.

So we start legislating to revamp the system in ways that lower standards for female hires, require certain percentages of female hires in some positions, give them maternity leave, day care, places to breastfeed, require a lot of woman stuff to be covered on employer insurance.

And women still aren't happy, because working is hard.

[–]AmadeusCziffra 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

Not that I'm one for fighting for equality, but I've noticed this and it always pissed me off: Women fought to have "equal rights" to stay at home or have a career, and they got it. They can now choose either with no criticism, as should be their right. But men are still expected to work. There's no job opening for stay at home fathers, no woman puts that option for you on their okcupid profile. They strived to get opportunities men never had to begin with. Once they got theirs, they moved to the next problem(manspreading™), leaving the other gender behind.

[–]TRP VanguardArchwinger 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It is, very definitely, a woman's right to make her own choices in life.

It is hardly a woman's right to choose something "with no criticism".

In fact, it is a woman's right to reap the benefits and consequences of every single choice she makes, one such consequence being judgment, criticism, and condemnation. If you make a shitty choice, you're not free from judgment for that choice simply because you had a right to do it.

That's shitty blue pill thinking. That just because you have a right to do something and were within your rights when you made that choice, that means nobody can judge you for it or give you shit. That's bullshit.

[–]lord-denning 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

You said it best at the beginning of your post - women aren't happy because life itself is hard.

[–]PIGamer86 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Something something Bill Burr.

[–]knowthyself6 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This, plus the bottom 80% of men are invisible to women, so they only saw the rich success stories at the top and the survivorship bias made them think that being wealthy and powerful was the standard for all working men.

[–]ModeratorPaperStreetVilla 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm reminded of the fable of the fishermen who meets the genie at work

[–]Auphor_Phaksache 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

This morning I was laying down at my sisters house and she said "hey my tire is flat." Translation: can you fix my tire. I don't know why women want to be men or even act like men. Men work and suffer and don't complain at all. Women just want the results that men get without actually putting in the effort. They want the fixed tire but they don't want the sweaty shirt and dirty hands.

[–]TheThingsIThink 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Men always make the mistake of thinking they can solve a women's problem. Makes them feel omnipotent. If her tire is flat she doesn't want you to change it. She wants you to sympathize. She wants you to say 'sis, I too know what it's like to have a flat tire.'

You need to connect with her, on the consequences of flat tireness

[–]MigTau 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

  • For 200 years gender was a term used in classification, (e.g., Gender of person, animal, word is Male/Female).
  • For 460 years gender was used as "sex of a human being".
  • For 50 years feminists have attempted to redefine gender to fit their reality.

gender (n.)

c. 1300, "kind, sort, class," from Old French gendre, genre "kind, species; character; gender" (12c., Modern French genre), from stem of Latin genus (genitive generis) "race, stock, family; kind, rank, order; species," also "(male or female) sex," from PIE root *gene- (see genus). Also used in Latin to translate Aristotle's Greek grammatical term genos. The grammatical sense is attested in English from late 14c. The -d- is a phonetic accretion in Old French (compare sound (n.1)).

The "male-or-female sex" sense is attested in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous. Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference to pop star David Bowie.

[–]MrChadthunderc0ck 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Its sad this even has to be mentioned BUT in this day and age the brainwashing our young children/next generation get will cause them to believe shit like this. They are being trained to ignore what they can see with their own two eyes and critique in their mind. Such a shame.

I will say this though that the feminists are smart with the "gender is a social construct" part because this ties in to pushing the other agendas such as the gay agenda and transgenders. What better way to lube up the process than to deny sexual gender and say its ok not to procreate but do degenerate shit instead.

Its genius though I gotta say. What better way to control a population than to prevent more people. Add federal laws and you can make a nation destroy itself ala Sweden. Whoever is at the top in control of the Psy Ops the West has is one hell of a smart fucker.

[–]Jaymilineal 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

One of the tenets of great business is to confront the brutal facts. if i did not say that the second half of that is to have faith then i would be regretful. Point is, greatness comes with accepting the facts and to OP's point gender is not a social construction.

[–]dodgingbadger 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

Bro science, to the max. No sources. Nada. Whether or not gender is a social construct or not, Jesus Christ, this is just bad 'science', and I can't believe posts like this get fancy atomic flair and the support of the community. It's genuinely ridiculous.

How do you reconcile this recent study with your 'research'?

A 2015 study at Tel Aviv University used an interesting and very thorough approach to compare the structure of male and female brains. Researchers looked at MRI scans of more than 1,400 people.

First, they measured the amount and location of gray matter (sometimes called "thinking matter") in 116 parts of the brain to find out which areas had the biggest sex differences. Next, the team scored these areas on each scan as either falling into the "female-end" zone, the "male-end" zone, or somewhere in the middle.

It turned out that maybe 6 in every 100 of the brains they studied were consistently a single sex. Many others had a patchwork quilt of masculine and feminine features that varied widely from person to person.

To check their findings, the team used similar methods to analyze more than 5,500 people's personality traits and behavior. While some activities were more common in women (including scrapbooking, chatting on the phone, and keeping in touch with mom) and others in men (such as golfing, playing video games, and gambling), 98% of those studied didn't fit a clear-cut gender profile.

Overall, the findings suggest that "human brains do not belong to one of two distinct categories.1"

[–]Sawagurumi 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

To make matters worse, studying sex differences in the brain was for a long time distasteful to large swaths of academia.4 Regarding sex differences research, Gloria Steinem once said that it’s “anti-American, crazy thinking to do this kind of research.”5 Indeed, in about the year 2000, senior colleagues strongly advised me against studying sex differences because it would “kill” my career. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4087190/

Still, here are a few to be getting on with

Nyborg, H. (2005). Sex-related differences in general intelligence g, brain size, and social status. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(3):497–509.

Hines, M., Constantinescu, M., and Spencer, D. (2015). Early androgen exposure and human gender development. Biology of Sex Differences, 6:3.

Luders, E., Toga, A. W., and Thompson, P. M. (2014). Why size matters: Differences in brain volume account for apparent sex differences in callosal anatomy. NeuroImage, 84:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.040.

Cahill, L. (2014). Equal ≠ the same: Sex differences in the human brain. Cerebrum: the Dana Forum on Brain Science, 2014:5.

[–]lord-denning 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

[–]dodgingbadger 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

That doesn't support anything OP says. That asserts something pretty uncontroversial that the SDN influences sexual preference and certain sex behaviors for some mammals. It says nothing about other higher order capabilities like leadership, mathematics, interest in hobbies, etc., which are way beyond the scope of what is presented in this wiki, and which OP says are hard-wired behaviors like sexual preference.

[–]ModeratorPaperStreetVilla 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Great, this is a great rebuttal to femenist trans theory...

how do you tie this into rule 0?

[–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

[removed]

    [–]ModeratorPaperStreetVilla[M] 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Lol, you're here to run your mouth. Rule 0.

    Next time, don't lead with 'I'm an X' we don't care who someone is, only what they say. your uterus doesn't make you correct.

    [–]netpy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I like your post but please proof-read before posting. It was painful reading through all the typos and grammatical errors.

    [–]5pecial 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    testosterone doesn't make you taller. if anything, it makes you shorter because it closes your growth plates faster.

    [–]rattamahatta 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    One can either believe that transgender people were born "in the wrong body", or that gender is solely a social construct. Can't have both, afaik.

    [–]francinerose 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Women want to have the cake and eat it to with patriarchy

    They want to work but have men pay their way.

    They want to get pregnant and have maternity leave which enforced the patriarchy that women should stay home with their child (which I believe in the patriarchy/redpill)

    They don't want dads to be stay at home dads..

    [–]Moonshineraider 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I doubt anyone here needs a lengthy explanation on why gender is not a social construct

    [–]Endorsed ContributorMattyAnon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    There are obviously deep gender differences. Testosterone is just part of this. Bodies and brains develop differently due to chromosomal differences. It's not JUST caused by testosterone (you need proof? something must be making the testosterone).

    [–]yuxxy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I think gender politics are a complete waste of time... whether someone identifies as a woman or a man, it really doesn't fucking matter. If a dude wants to wear a dress, I don't give a shit. Btw, the argument from the cucks is that gender=/= sex....

    [–]Atlas_Returns -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050121100142.htm This is a study from the University of California - Irvine. It's a study from 2005 and it seems what you stated in your bullet point about gray and white matter is different than observed.

    Here is another article with sources in it about portions of the brain. http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/men-women-different-brains3.htm#hoag

    [–]Lookin4SomethingReal -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Jews would have you believe it is

    [–]Daerrol -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    How do you reconcile the fact that we can, with basic drug treatement, cause levels of testosterone and estrogen to move up and down in someone, regardless of birth gender? "In Nature" is all well and good, but we live in a society where these are realities and becoming more available.

    [–]randarrow 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Cutting someone's balls off, inverting their penis, giving them a boob job, and injecting massive amounts of hormones does not make someone a woman.

    Yes, personality can be shifted with hormones. However, decades of body and mental changes can not be undone with a few injections. You can't unbreak a leg, you can only pile scar tissue on top of a break making it firm again. The break never really goes away, is always visible on xray. Same with physical and mental traits of people. You can't remove, you can just add.