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

[There Is Light At The End]

women need to be locked away in camps for humanity's survival.

What kind of camps?

 

[World Famous Quasi Payer]

What kind of camps?

The kind were a couple men stand at the gate with rifles and tell you if you try to leave they are authorized to shoot.

 

[Spud]

What kind of camps?

Fat camps, bitches need to lose weight and will be educated to know that no fad diet of foid slop will help them. The average American woman weighs 170lbs and it doesn't have to be like this.

Chart for the unaware.

 

[The Ugly One]

I don't think we should not women vote. Only unmarried ones. For a man to put some sense into woman. And for woman to balance out a man

Originally, there weren't enough unmarried women to be a meaningful voting bloc. Married women voted to relax consequences for irresponsible behavior among unmarried women (including not getting married) for the reasons I outlined earlier. Relaxing those consequences eventually resulted in a proliferation of unmarried women, who are now driving the country into a ditch. There was not a single positive outcome in the government from giving our wives political power over us.

 

[God of Nothing]

Originally, there weren't enough unmarried women to be a meaningful voting bloc. Married women voted to relax consequences for irresponsible behavior among unmarried women (including not getting married) for the reasons I outlined earlier. Relaxing those consequences eventually resulted in a proliferation of unmarried women, who are now driving the country into a ditch. There was not a single positive outcome in the government from giving our wives political power over us.

but muh equality
so what if they're not forced to go and die for israel?
that's man work
they can do everything else except for the one job that offers very little personal benefit and all the benefit of society
coincidentally, women vote for socialist programs reliant on the work of others vastly more

....hmmmmm

 

[Sperg Coalition]

Why did this woman feel the need to mention Zootopia? Could it be possible this fat bitch probably wants to have sex with a dog? Just by her wording, not even the most desperate of simps would fuck this obese BPD trainwreck.

>lolcow.farm
Not worth spending time understanding what she says. I can safely bet that she posts on crystal.cafe

If you go into the "Serious LGBT Discussion" thread, you'll notice something interesting. While a lot of the gays in there dodge and deny the chomo question—they're allergic to per-capita, predictably—something even more interesting happens when you ask them to give an account of what childhood innocence is and why it's important: they all refuse to answer it.

Why don't you hop on the faggot hate thread? We seriously need some real content instead of the usual suspect derailing the thread.

 

[The Ugly One]

but muh equality
so what if they're not forced to go and die for israel?
that's man work
they can do everything else except for the one job that offers very little personal benefit and all the benefit of society
coincidentally, women vote for socialist programs reliant on the work of others vastly more

....hmmmmm

It's really interesting to what happens when you change the conversation from why, morally, women should have the right to vote to what specific positive outcomes have resulted from a century of their votes.

 

[God of Nothing]

It's really interesting to what happens when you change the conversation from why, morally, women should have the right to vote to what specific positive outcomes have resulted from a century of their votes.

not really
that's just the outcome you always get when you present information a woman doesn't want to believe

 

[California Newt]

So just that I understand this correctly, it is better to let women to continue to fuck over men than to make common cause with other men because they are gay?

I gave this some thought in the shower just now, and I'll do you one better: I'd rather make common cause with women against gays than with gays against women.

 

[Sperg Coalition]

they're allergic to per-capita, predictably

I guess you could say that they are indeed niggerfaggots.

If you can reach them, though, that's another story.

What do you exactly mean by "reach them"?

 

[Midwit]

What do you exactly mean by "reach them"?

By going around, of course!

 

[Ibanez RG 350EX]

A big part of why normal men feel natural disgust towards homosexuality is that it's an insult to friendship

I think it's less about it being an affront to friendship and more about the man-on-man assfucking.

 

[The Ugly One]

not really
that's just the outcome you always get when you present information a woman doesn't want to believe

I mean having this conversation with other men, you should never talk politics with a woman.

 

[Str8Bustah]

I think it's less about it being an affront to friendship and more about the man-on-man assfucking.

surely it can be both, right?

 

[AgendaPoster]

Received some tips that this thread is interesting again and I have not posted for ages in it, so here goes nothing

 

[Squishie PP]

Received some tips that this thread is interesting again and I have not posted for ages in it, so here goes nothing
View attachment 6430329

> By the way, their marriage was not officially registered.
LMAO

 

[California Newt]

I think it's less about it being an affront to friendship and more about the man-on-man assfucking.

That's why I said "a big part" and not "the biggest part", but yeah true. That's less related to the overall point I was making about childhood innocence and emotional development, though.

This also brings the subject back around to feminism, because a more specific reason that gays can't "help fight feminism" is that gays are feminism: "romantic" love is only between a man and a woman, and this is due to how men and women are structured psychologically. When you say that "romantic" love can exist in a real way outside of that context, it's an obfuscation of the nature of men and women—it reinforces the astroturfed, tabula-rasa view of the sexes that lies at the foundation of feminism.

To copy-and-paste (and mildly edit) from an earlier post in the lesbian discussion thread, here's my working understanding of how men and women "understand" or "know" each other. If it sounds a little fruity, please bear in mind the original intended audience of lesbians:

I think that men love women—beyond the physical sense—because women are more complex on some level, and this gives them the ability to develop and reflect virtues in subtler ways than men can on their own. I think that this is why male attempts to "systematize" the female mind always come across as misogynistic: the part of what a woman fundamentally is that men are attracted to (spiritually) is lost in the rational analysis, because it's the part that transcends rational analysis (at least from our perspective). She's like a deep pool that he wants to dive into and participate in it directly, being unable to grasp it from without. That's the man's "contact" with a woman (I think).

A man's "contact" with a man is finding someone who "gets it" and goes after it with you—"it" being something external to the two of you, but which resonates with the both of you and towards which you struggle together. I've heard that it's possible for women to stack this with the "deep pool" thing in some cases.

A gay man's "contact" (attempt) is the same as the regular one, except "it" is located within the other man. This is part of why many men are uncomfortable or even disgusted with male homosexuality: they see it in some sense as "missing the point", or as a form of attempted vampirism that side-steps mutual struggle for "it". At least, that's as near as I can figure.

I don't know what lesbians are up to or how that works for them, which is why I was in the thread asking. I'm open to correction on any of the points mentioned, especially from anyone with a wife.

Gays and feminism are two sides of the same bullet. It's all about obfuscating human understanding of each other, and when nobody understands each other nobody sacrifices for each other—the will to sacrifice comes from the active texture of common understanding, which in English is imprecisely (more obfuscation; probably intentional) called "love". It's a weapon designed to atomize society under the impersonal rule of an unaccountable and obscured autarch.

What do you exactly mean by "reach them"?

I mean either finding them at or getting them to a point where it's a habit rather than a worldview.

 

[Ibanez RG 350EX]

> By the way, their marriage was not officially registered.
LMAO

Not only will this become the norm as marriage becomes less common, but the growing number of men who check out of dating altogether will also have to be punished for denying women the free ride which is their birthright.

Eventually you will politely say "good morning" to a stranger as you pass her on the street and she will be legally entitled to half your net worth.

 

[DavidS877]

Received some tips that this thread is interesting again and I have not posted for ages in it, so here goes nothing
View attachment 6430329

Does this mean she gets half the prison time?

 

[Squishie PP]

Not only will this become the norm as marriage becomes less common, but the growing number of men who check out of dating altogether will also have to be punished for denying women the free ride which is their birthright.

Eventually you will politely say "good morning" to a stranger as you pass her on the street and she will be legally entitled to half your net worth.

Onlyfans was made to replace wealth-extraction marriages because those in charge noticed fewer men falling for the trap. Maybe the lawfare will really be ramped up that much though. I hope not.