Official Kiwifarms Woman-Hate Thread - DO NOT post about OTHER USERS or OTHER THREADS from THIS WEBSITE.

[The Ugly One]

What makes me shy away from having most women as friends (let alone forming romantic relationships) is not only feminism, but parts of the female psyche that predate feminism by billions of years. The constant talking. Their obsession over minor details of things. Their absurdly high disgust reflex. Their incredible sensitivity to social cues. Their prioritization of safety over literally everything else that matters. I know not all women are like this (even seen some exceptions here of all places,) but enough of them are to make me shy away from interacting with women at all unless absolutely necessary. I suppose feminism amplified some of these aspects, but many are not exactly new.

Feminism is the reason you think you should want a woman to be your friend. Feminism says men shouldn't first and foremost see women as our sexual complements; we should see them as our equals and worthy of every social role in our lives that another man should have. That's nonsense. Of course you shouldn't be friends with women. Go read some classics of pre-feminist literature. Could be anything, Grapes of Wrath, Grant's Memoirs, Tale of Two Cities, you name it, and you know what you don't find? Men chumming around with women, all buddy-buddy. The fact that women aren't people I want to be friends with doesn't upset me or make me hate them because I don't accept feminism.

"Romantic partner" is a silly concept. What even is that? Someone you ejaculate into for a while until you both move on? It's more nonsense promoted by feminists, who insisted, following Andrea Dworkin, that marriage and motherhood are prison cells that oppress women, and must be abolished so women can be free to be the equals of men that they truly are.

Reminder that most of our modern ethos surrounding love and sex comes from this woman:


You shouldn't be looking for a "romantic partner." You should be looking for a "wife and mother." All those traits make for admirable mothers, as children need a lot of care, especially in the early days, and someone who's a little neurotic about filth and attentive to every variation in a baby's cry does a pretty good job of making sure they survive. A woman who doesn't want to be a wife or mother is trash; discard her.

 

[Squishie PP]

Bro. Women are different to us.

If you can't accept that and don't like their odd little quirks then you might be autistic...or gay.

I'm confused about what you are trying to get out of this.

You shouldn't be looking for a "romantic partner." You should be looking for a "wife and mother." All those traits make for admirable mothers, as children need a lot of care, especially in the early days, and someone who's a little neurotic about filth and attentive to every variation in a baby's cry does a pretty good job of making sure they survive. A woman who doesn't want to be a wife or mother is trash; discard her.

What thread are we in again? The "Official Kiwifarms Trad Couple Thread?" I'm not here to do that, and I have explained why earlier. You know my opinion, I know yours, lets agree to disagree.

 

[Pool's Closed Due to AIDS]

I'm confused about what you are trying to get out of this.

Just something to consider about yourself.

If you are autistic to the point women disgust you or if you're gay, then it is absolutely pointless for you to bother engaging with women beyond basic civility when you encounter them.
You should continue avoiding them like you do now.

 

[Shao Khan]

View attachment 6378416

when the fuck clubs turned into ugly sub stripper girls whoring it up for social fucking media

 

[The Ugly One]

What thread are we in again? The "Official Kiwifarms Trad Couple Thread?"

Women being the gestating half of the species and gametes making zygote isn't "trad;" it's just reality. Our entire moral order right now is just a rebellion against Nature. Sure, everything in the past managed to be less idiotic than our current social mores, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[Iron Jaguar]

You got to be careful with these lessons otherwise your kids might fuck themselves up just to get back at you.

IDK. I once made her look at pics of kids with First Degree burn scarring, as a lesson on "Why You Have Been Repeatedly Told Not To Play In The Kitchen When I Am Cooking, Because Girls With Scarred Faces Don't EVER Look Pretty Again". It worked.

 

[Squishie PP]

Just something to consider about yourself.

If you are autistic to the point women disgust you or if you're gay, then it is absolutely pointless for you to bother engaging with women beyond basic civility when you encounter them.
You should continue avoiding them like you do now.

Fair enough, thanks for the advice. There are some I know who are truly nice people with redeeming qualities, but they are so few and far between that I just don't want to bother. Sorry if I came across as stand-offish.

Women being the gestating half of the species and gametes making zygote isn't "trad;" it's just reality. Our entire moral order right now is just a rebellion against Nature. Sure, everything in the past managed to be less idiotic than our current social mores, but that's neither here nor there.

My point was more:
1) I have no intention of following through with any of the advice you have given
2) That there are others here that have no interest in doing so either.
3) Such advice is extremely annoying especially when appeals to nature are thrown in as if any of us are even capable of understanding the complete cosmic horror that is nature whatsoever.
I won't waste my time explaining that last bit unless you really need to know. Your mind seems to be already made up.

 

[anustart76]

Just about everything we "hate" about women is a product of feminism

And feminism is a product of giving women rights and taking their opinions seriously.

 

[Squishie PP]

when the fuck clubs turned into ugly sub stripper girls whoring it up for social fucking media

Social media provides all (or much more more) of the rewarding feeling they get by showing off to males, but without any of the risk of doing it in-person.

 

[Ultrapenguin]

What thread are we in again? The "Official Kiwifarms Trad Couple Thread?"

Kind of: your more legitimate dislike of women is apprently born out of the fact they don't act identically to men but with tits and a vagina.

Meanwhile for men without anime avatar autism the conflict is born from almost the exact opposite, that feminism promotes the idea that women and men should act exactly the same and compete over the same roles.

Therefore if you think about it your view is almost diametrically opposite.

 

[Georgio Cocklord]

Kind of: your more legitimate dislike of women is apprently born out of the fact they don't act identically to men but with tits and a vagina.

Meanwhile for men without anime avatar autism the conflict is born from almost the exact opposite, that feminism promotes the idea that women and men should act exactly the same and compete over the same roles.

Therefore if you think about it your view is almost diametrically opposite.

My hatred of women mainly stems from their hypocrisy, nothing else and it's not even rabid seething hatred anymore. It's like antisemitism, it's a very mild annoyance, it's like looking at the credits of a Hollywood movie and seeing the name stein popup for the fifth time. I don't care if they're coal burning degenerate shits. I just dislike the attitude of "I'm not like other women but all scrotes are rapists" while she does the exact same things she blames men of doing. If Lorena bobbitt was a kween then the Arab guy who fgmed his cheating wife is also a kang. It doesn't matter whos doing what as long as they do the same thing for the same reasons.

 

[Georgio Cocklord]

In today's episode of Women Refusing To Take Accountability, we are going to be talking about Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). This is something women bring up when men talk about circumcision as they think the two are comparable.

They are not.

I will not downplay the horrors of what is involved during these barbaric procedures being inflicted predominantly on female children.

However I will note that, thankfully, there are no medical authorities on the planet encouraging these procedures and no research articles being (((funded))) to argue the benefits of FGM.
It is an illegal procedure and I fully support this.
#womanrespector

Where does the lack of wimminz accountability come in?
Men are often blamed for the prevalence of FGM and yet, when you scratch the surface, this is what you discover:
View attachment 6396575
View attachment 6396576
View attachment 6396577
View attachment 6396578
View attachment 6396579
Women mutilate girls and other women but this is the fault of men?

The cope I've been seeing from the female mutilation camp is that men won't marry women who have not undergone this procedure.
When western men say "we won't marry busted up hoes" it doesn't seem to stop our women from doing that.

Perhaps instead of complaining about manspreading, mansplaining, or males having "the audacity" to look at them in public, feminists could teach their African and Arab Qween sisters to stop cutting up their daughters to please Mohammed and Abdullahi?

Can you imagine any article about systemic child abuse perpetrated by males handwaving the magnitude of the abuse by suggesting "they thought it was in the best interests of the child"?

Sorry for doublepoosting but this takes me back to the hitchens days when there was the big debate between the Jewish community and the atheists about circumcision and how it was child sex abuse. That was just completely buried for some reason just like fgm shit was buried when the muzzies started invading.

 

[The Ugly One]

My point was more:
1) I have no intention of following through with any of the advice you have given
2) That there are others here that have no interest in doing so either.
3) Such advice is extremely annoying especially when appeals to nature are thrown in as if any of us are even capable of understanding the complete cosmic horror that is nature whatsoever.
I won't waste my time explaining that last bit unless you really need to know. Your mind seems to be already made up.

People who live as though nature isn't real tend to be miserable and fat. You don't have to fully understand nature to understand that women aren't men and you shouldn't expect them to be men any more than you have to in order to understand that you can't live on a diet of Mtn Dew and Skittles.

And feminism is a product of giving women rights and taking their opinions seriously.

Too many simps got into government in the 20th century. Teddy Roosevelt was a massive simp.

 

[Squishie PP]

Kind of: your more legitimate dislike of women is apprently born out of the fact they don't act identically to men but with tits and a vagina.

Meanwhile for men without anime avatar autism the conflict is born from almost the exact opposite, that feminism promotes the idea that women and men should act exactly the same and compete over the same roles.

Therefore if you think about it your view is almost diametrically opposite.

Not as opposite as you would think. The only major difference is that these people still buy into the trad shit, whereas I don't see a way that humanity will be able to do so for much longer.
Let me explain:
When humanity transitioned to agriculture (the first "rebellion against nature" to come,) female behaviors (especially mate selection preferences) were still optimized for hunter-gatherer societies. To a large degree they still are. Because of this, such mate preferences were inherently malthusian; any agrarian civilization that allowed women to behave the way they always used to was doomed to be out-competed by neighboring civilizations. So patriarchy was developed; any woman who acted out of line had her head caved in with a rock. It was essentially a hack for bypassing maladaptive female mate selection behaviors during a period when evolution could not keep pace with the rate of technological development. Keep in mind that this was ONLY necessary because of the game theoretical advantage it conferred over civilizations that couldn't produce huge armies due to women having a say in their mate selection (see the fall of the Native Americans for an example.)

Too many simps got into government in the 20th century. Teddy Roosevelt was a massive simp.

Speaking of which, the whole patriarchy thing worked pretty well for thousands of years, until the discovery of oil happened. This resulted in the industrial and medical revolutions, both of which allowed the human population to skyrocket higher than it has ever been before. This had 3 major implications:
1) The incentive to force women to keep being baby-making machines started to become weaker.
2) The incentive to exploit female neurosis, idiocy, and other traits I listed in my previous post for political gain increased.
3) The value placed on all the lower-class human beings by those in power plummeted. We were now all disposable.
Needless to say, the geopolitical incentives that enforced patriarchy in oil-rich countries were now gone. All that had to really happen was for the culture to catch up over the years. This is why we are here now.

But where might we go? Around the same period, the discovery of DNA, the main mechanism for heritability, was made. Subsequent discoveries for manipulating said DNA were made decades later. You already know this and probably don't think much of it now. But just as agriculture drove the formation of patriarchies and the discovery of oil drove the formation of female-centered idiocracies, this new development has the potential to shake things up in a way that none of us will be able to predict. Why? We simply don't know what kind of horrors await when people are genetically engineered. We don't know what kind of behaviors or idiosynchracies they will have at all; it all depends on what genes are chosen and the conditions under which they are expressed. I know one thing for sure though; after this shit hits the fan for real, there is no going back whatsoever. Anyone trying to resist may survive for a while at least, but will ultimately be crushed the same way the indigenous populations were crushed and subjugated by their colonizers.

See what I mean now? Is it not our own nature that has driven us to clash against our own nature?

 

[Chunky Salsa]

Local man discovers Faustianism and the concept of infinite space. Germans of the 1910's nod approvingly.

 

[Male Idiot]

Duh, the solution is to reproduce artificially and gestate 1488 million albino Chuds to form the Yakub Reich and dominate for 6000 years.

 

[Pool's Closed Due to AIDS]

any woman who acted out of line had her head caved in with a rock

Uhh bruh, no what the fuck.
That never happened.

Males have always protected the females in our species because that's the only way to ensure continuation of the tribe.
We fight ONE another for access to them.
Women would stay with us because we could protect them from other men.

If you beat up a woman to make her frightened of you, you're a piece of shit and she will leave you the first chance she gets to go find another mate which means less offspring for you.

Yes, there are exceptions to this rule just like how some men dress up in frocks and call themselves Glenda. Those women are aberrations.
There is no evolutionary advantage for us to be violent towards them.

The rest of your post is just rambling nonsense which, given the quoted comment, makes me think you want to be violent towards women because you're not able to woo one on your own.

In which case, just neck yourself and do the rest of us a favour.

 

[Squishie PP]

Uhh bruh, no what the fuck.
That never happened.

Males have always protected the females in our species because that's the only way to ensure continuation of the tribe.
We fight ONE another for access to them.
Women would stay with us because we could protect them from other men.

If you beat up a woman to make her frightened of you, you're a piece of shit and she will leave you the first chance she gets to go find another mate. Yes, there are exceptions to this rule just like how some men dress up in frocks and call themselves Glenda. Those women are aberrations.
There is no evolutionary advantage for us to be violent towards them.

The rest of your post is just rambling nonsense which, given the quoted comment, makes me think you want to be violent towards women because you're not able to woo one on your own.

In which case, just neck yourself and do the rest of us a favour.

I was referring to stoning, which was commonplace at the time (at least if the bible is to be trusted, which many of you seem to believe in.) I don't want to be violent towards anyone. If you actually read it, most of it doesn't have anything to do with women so much as it just describes why I don't think a collective return to pre-industrial patriarchy is possible.

Edit: Sometimes I think this subforum should be called the "screeching moralfag thunderdome" instead of the "autistic thunderdome" since apparently actual autism isn't tolerated here.

 

[Pool's Closed Due to AIDS]

I was referring to stoning, which was commonplace at the time (at least if the bible is to be trusted, which many of you seem to believe in.) I don't want to be violent towards anyone. If you actually read it, most of it doesn't have anything to do with women so much as it just describes why I don't think a collective return to pre-industrial patriarchy is possible.

Stoning was the punishment for any behaviour that was considered disadvantageous to the tribe and even animals could be stoned. It's called "third party punishment" and animals do it too.

You don't think that male/female relations could be improved because designer babies?
That's your hypothesis.

Pre-industrial isn't something I've seen anyone ask for either.
The acknowledgement that males and females are different socially and biologically doesn't mean we must RETVRN to agricultural times.

Your argument could also be expressed as "Your only options are capitalism or communism".

 

[Squishie PP]

Pre-industrial isn't something I've seen anyone ask for either.
The acknowledgement that males and females are different socially and biologically doesn't mean we must RETVRN to agricultural times.

I guess I thought that because it was suggested that I look for a woman to start a family with. Knowing the catastrophe that is likely going to hit us within my lifetime makes me both
1) Want to pack lightly. Having a family means a decrease in mobility.
2) Not want to subject anyone else to the torture that is to come