Null is out of touch with women

Who cares about physical superiority a lot of the time? That's what women have tongues for. We can convince men to do a lot for us if we just say it right.
How many queens, even pharaohs proved that their sharp mind can rule a kingdom?
How many mistresses have ruled from shadows while their degenerate husbands were dying from some STD in a brothel?
This is what I don't get.
There are women who understand their sex and its advantages and embrace that. And there are women who would seethe 24/7 if you point the differences out.
Men can be weak too.
I literally live in a country that has to "woman" its way into "patriarchal" protections from stronger ones.
It's not pleasant, but such is life. Best not to seethe and try to use what you can to improve your situation, while also always acknowledging reality.
Does being a gypsy and Romanian go hand in hand? I'd hate to associate one with the other.
In these forums 110% turbo YES.
You cannot take the mutt out of the American. The vatnegro out of the Russian. The hohol out of the Ukrainian. And you obviously cannot separate the Romanian from the gyppo.
As for Arabs and niggers, lol
 
OK so if a sex is superior in physical prowess but equal in intellectual prowess (allegedly), how does that compute that the sex that is inferior in physical power should be considered equal?

I know "human rights" and "civil liberties" are relatively new concepts in the Eastern European shithole you come from, but they were talking about voting. Women being recognized as "equal" under the law is not a value judgment of their physical or intellectual merits, but rather an acknowledgment that they are full US citizens whose rights are protected by the Constitution, including the right to vote in government elections.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Squawking Macaw
I know "human rights" and "civil liberties" are relatively new concepts in the Eastern European shithole you come from, but they were talking about voting. Women being recognized as "equal" under the law is not a value judgment of their physical or intellectual merits, but rather an acknowledgment that they are full US citizens whose rights are protected by the Constitution, including the right to vote in government elections.
Ooooh an American!
First things first - let me thank you for the grandiose, progressive concepts you've given us savages from the 3rd world here!
Would you care explaining to us exactly why women should be given "rights" by default?
What's the reasoning for these liberties, my lady? How were they argued into existence?
 
Ooooh an American!
First things first - let me thank you for the grandiose, progressive concepts you've given us savages from the 3rd world here!
Would you care explaining to us exactly why women should be given "rights" by default?
What's the reasoning for these liberties, my lady? How were they argued into existence?

Well, it's not "by default," it's specifically addressed in the 19th Amendment in the US Constitution. The reasoning for it is that women are human beings, full citizens of the United States, who are impacted by the decisions of the elected government. Therefore, they deserve a say in how it's run & who represents them, the same as any given male citizen who has the right to vote, regardless of his intellectual or physical merits.
 
Ooooh an American!
First things first - let me thank you for the grandiose, progressive concepts you've given us savages from the 3rd world here!
Would you care explaining to us exactly why women should be given "rights" by default?
What's the reasoning for these liberties, my lady? How were they argued into existence?
Some of the more conservative types will tell you we owe the ideas to Christianity. I suppose that could be argued, somewhat. But the reality is most of this stuff came out of the Enlightenment period and was adopted into various philosophies espoused by the Found Fathers when they wrote the Constitution.

Since then, however, it's become this nebulous political ploy that nobody really questions because of how it twists the language. It used to be "Human Rights" but now it's become a plethora of "rights" that are seemingly made up on the spot. There's no such thing as "women's rights" or "gay rights" or "trans rights." Everything was supposed to exist on a singular plane of "Human Rights." But now that we have all these special interest groups popping up like daisies, they disguise their intentions by saying you're trodding on their "rights."

The truth is, women had rights even before the 19th amendment. Voting was never considered a universal "right." In order to vote, you also had to own property and have actual stake in the land. The 19th Amendment also gave men the right to vote in addition to women. Meaning, men who didn't own property were also allowed to vote.

EDIT: Sorry, it was the 15th amendment, not the 19th that changed voting rights for men and women. The 19th, just said the right would not be denied or abridged on account of sex.
 
Last edited:
The 19th Amendment also gave men the right to vote in addition to women.

This is not true. Here is the full text of the 19th Amendment:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

This only applies to women, because no states at that time were denying men the right to vote on account of being male.

In the United States, all white men who did not own property had the right to vote by 1856, regardless of which state they lived in. The 15th Amendment (ratified in 1870) extended that right to all men, regardless of race. The 19th Amendment (ratified in 1920) extended that right to women.
 
Well, it's not "by default," it's specifically addressed in the 19th Amendment in the US Constitution. The reasoning for it is that women are human beings, full citizens of the United States, who are impacted by the decisions of the elected government. Therefore, they deserve a say in how it's run & who represents them, the same as any given male citizen who has the right to vote, regardless of his intellectual or physical merits.
Niggers are humans too. So are 5 yrs olds.
Who says that the bare minimum of a genetic makeup should guarantee privileges? What's the reasoning for such an impactful choice?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Johnny Salami
Who says that the bare minimum of a genetic makeup should guarantee privileges?

The principles of democracy and civil liberties, enshrines in our Constitution.

Which, again, I know may be difficult for you to grasp in Eastern Europe, but I do not think that your people are genetically incapable of understanding human rights, even if you as an individual are particularly slow.
 
"Principles" is not data nor logic nor reason.
It's just emotion and fee fees, miss.
In short, RELIGION.

Sure. Against all logic and reason, I believe in abstract concepts like unalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Even for women. Even for the likes of you. Ideals are not a bad thing. They are what separate us from the chimpanzees and gorillas.
 
Back