Null is out of touch with women

Shotgun for home defense, bird shot first for pepper and buck shot second to finish em off. On a walk or on the road conceal carry a pistol, 9mm or .45 should work unless you got granny wrists then get a .22
I've browsed for stuff online before, but am in completely unfamiliar territory when it comes to what manufacturers are superior and which ones are inferior.
 
Men exist to rape and abuse women...except in western countries
Yes, because white men usually possess the miraculous skill of empathy, and the ability to understand that rape is bad.
And you radfems don't hate men
I do hate men. Except for Null, he's cool.
men are nothing but slobbering rapists who have to be stopped from abusing women at all times?
Yes. When men aren't restricted by the court of law, they devolve into animals.
 
This photo right here
The fact that POC vote is always blue is making me severely question how accurate this all is. Many black Republican men are extremely hesitant to signal their politics aloud and will often call themselves Democrats just to avoid the drama. I feel like these numbers reflect what is being said aloud, but not what will actually happen in the booth.
 
Yes, because white men usually possess the miraculous skill of empathy, and the ability to understand that rape is bad.

I do hate men. Except for Null, he's cool.

Yes. When men aren't restricted by the court of law, they devolve into animals.
So what makes you any different from the most deranged incel? And why shouldn't your opinion be discarded just like theirs?
View attachment 5675630

This photo right here shows that at the very least white women are turning around over time. The HR nutcase and social sciences cabal do not represent women as a whole. If you want to deal with the woman problem, then you must bypass them and take control over these institution and its best to do that by not forcefully coercing them.
And @Blackhole I get what you're aiming at but the nutty shrieking schtick doesn't work. You probably mostly agree with these guys on other issues but you're only helping it stay a flame war.
Part of the issue is just a simple fundamental mismatch in women's favour. They tested men and women for in-group preference and found that women have a lot of in-group preference while men don't. You see a lot of this with the woman respecters in this thread: they're a-okay being called slobbering rapists by women and take no steps to defend their sex, instead trying to be "one of the good ones".
 
Yes, because white men usually possess the miraculous skill of empathy, and the ability to understand that rape is bad.

I do hate men. Except for Null, he's cool.

Yes. When men aren't restricted by the court of law, they devolve into animals.
Did you used to read tarot cards on div? Because the way you type and the way you act reminds me of a certain redhead with a shiv.
 
they're a-okay being called slobbering rapists by women and take no steps to defend their sex
Not necessarily okay with it, but it's really immaterial unless there's some kind of proof behind it. I don't feel the need to defend myself from a woman's delusions about men.

This is also why these women hate the fifth amendment.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: m1ddl3m4rch
I know engineers, programmers, and accountants who make between 83-110$ annually and they have trouble finding dates for the crime of being 5'8. Many of them have their own homes but the only girl they can attract is either a whore with kids or a woman 10 years older than them willing to settle down.

I didn't use to hate women, you know. But one day a girl who told me to fuck off 5 years earlier slid into my DMs and asked me if I was still interested. Once I told her no since she was a single mother i realized that w*men were never allowed agency because they are idiots who don't see how their past actions affect their current position.
I make a post talking about guys for exposing themselves as losers, and you respond to me with this whiny, pathetic confession? You've clearly been in online echo chambers for too long for any of that to seem like a normal, rational thing to think and type out.
 
I know engineers, programmers, and accountants who make between 83-110$ annually and they have trouble finding dates for the crime of being 5'8. Many of them have their own homes but the only girl they can attract is either a whore with kids or a woman 10 years older than them willing to settle down.

I didn't use to hate women, you know. But one day a girl who told me to fuck off 5 years earlier slid into my DMs and asked me if I was still interested. Once I told her no since she was a single mother i realized that w*men were never allowed agency because they are idiots who don't see how their past actions affect their current position.
Calm down an hire escorts. If boogie can afford it so can you.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Johnny Salami
I really did not come around to listen to the MATI episode.

Yeah he went on a tirade about how it’s men’s fault women are progressive and are not attracted to reactionary movements.
Unless that quote is wrong. That is the opinion.
Unless those movements do offer women a better term in general, they will not join them. So the questions for me would be. Which movements are we talking about and what do they advocate for in terms for women?
 
Women can't be trusted to run a faucet much less a country. They shouldn't be allowed in any positions of power. There is a reason why women weren't allowed to vote. We are seeing why now.

Keep in mind whenever they say this percentage of women voted a certain way, they mean the women that actually bothered to vote. The 18-29 age group is notorious for not voting. They don't vote in large numbers. It doesn't really matter what the gender is. They just don't vote, and it's always been that way. As far back as I can remember. They did plenty of youth vote drives when I was younger and when the numbers came in, they were always lower than expected. While they might hold certain political leanings it doesn't really matter because they don't vote. They should just stay apolitical at that point.

I watched a video by Red Eagle Politics on YouTube where he talked about this push to make Nikki Failey Trumps VP and how she would help with the college educated suburban women. He spends about 10 minutes debunking this myth. They only make up 1/7 of the electorate. They aren't that big of a voting bloc. They get their political views from TV shows like The View. They are single or divorced. Single women and divorced women tend to lean liberal/left. Married women usually don't. In 2016 Trump got 54% of the white female vote. Most of them were probably married. He got 65% of the white male vote though. Some of them were college educated.

Trump is going after non college educated whites. There is a better chance non college educated women will vote for Trump. The men definitely will. Non college educated whites make up a large portion of the electorate.

I this kind goes well with the topic of the thread. You are wasting your time with college educated women. They aren't going to change. My numbers are a little dated, but I heard a while back that only 38% of the US population attended high education after graduating high school. I recently heard this has declined. Less people are going to college in the US now. So, there can't be too many college educated women out there these days. The number was already pretty low. That 38% was both men and women.

 
we'd simply catch you.
Men as a class may perform better than women as a class in running, but did they compare incels to women?

And considering they have no interest in hamplanets, did they compare incels to non deathfat women?

I'm honestly not so sure incels would beat them on average.

They are the ones out of touch with women, because they can't reach em.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: DavidS877
Depends, did they? Feel free to link the demography on that, if it was collected at the time. I'm also not really swayed that eisenhower was actually a good president, but if it turns out someone got elected in spite of women rather than because of them, you don't have much of a point.

e: upon cursory searching appears so, so I will just say he was kindof a statist shitbag and not good for the country, you can keep that one

IIRC good data was not really collected until after WWII, so we don't really know how women voted before then. After that, men and women voted not that differently at first, but then began to diverge in the 70s and 80s. This is around the time of second wave feminism and no fault divorce becoming the norm. So the reasons behind this aren't hard to theorize, gynocentric state policy and ideology created and sustains a class of single/divorced women who are basically married to the state instead of a man.

View attachment 5675630

This photo right here shows that at the very least white women are turning around over time. The HR nutcase and social sciences cabal do not represent women as a whole. If you want to deal with the woman problem, then you must bypass them and take control over these institution and its best to do that by not forcefully coercing them.
And @Blackhole I get what you're aiming at but the nutty shrieking schtick doesn't work. You probably mostly agree with these guys on other issues but you're only helping it stay a flame war.


On the contrary forcefully coercing people is usually the only thing that works when it comes to bringing about a serious change. Remember that racial integration in the 60s literally had to be enforced by federal troops. Most gynocentric policies of today such as no fault divorce are imposed with the implicit threat of government force. By and large people were not somehow persuaded to actually accept these things, rather the people who wanted them had more access to the government gun and were more willing to use it. Everyone else just had to get over it and their kids were then taught by government schools to like it.
 
Back