Because emasculating men is what insecure women do to try and achieve relationships with men, since nobody with any balls would want anything to do with them.
Q: How does mom stop son from becoming a man and leaving the coup?
A. By turning him into a pussy who isn't able to take care of himself and needs mommy.
She's your typical bang 'em and leave 'em type libtard that attracts nothing but dudes (and sometimes women) who just want to use them up and leave.
SPEZ: I just searched for an article about her not dating and found a gem. What a crazy world where, between Charlize Theron and Seth Rogen, it would turn out to be Charlize that can't find a partner! Hollywood is as fucking backward as it gets.
Tom Hardy had to do Mad Max with her and they barely made it through the movie because Tom HATED her on first sight. Then she said from then on that it was she who couldn't stand him. I'd bet you a gorillion dollars she expected she was going to have sex with him, and when he denied her even mild flirtation (probably because he's happily married) it hurt her pride so much she pretended to hate him.
Charlize Theron is/was one of the most stunningly beautiful women on the planet. Rather encouraging to learn that maybe looks aren't everything after all.
Because emasculating men is what insecure women do to try and achieve relationships with men, since nobody with any balls would want anything to do with them.
Pedes. Everyone. Gather round. This. You got to read and understand this. Know it.
Big government is for losers who don't want to deal with the consequences of their lousy personality. Like this karen, there are women who are just toxic to everything but with money and entitlement and privilege, they can do a lot of damage.
No one will volunteer to do jack shit with them more than once. They are marxist creeps who follow you and will kill you if you won't let them in to the good times they aren't invited too.
Yet, the good times only exist because they aren't invited.
I think being a karen should be a federal offense and they should be shipped to one concentrated camp for re-education. A life time of learning, if that is what it takes.
Men have the biggest stake in the success of their home nation. They survive by being the winners. Defeat, at the very least, means a significant reduction in access to quality women, and in many cases in history has been met with outright genocide.
Women, even as part of a less successful or defeated nation, need primarily to be beautiful and exercise good mate selection. Their reproductive survival is less tied to their homelands success, and more tied to appeasing powerful actors within their given societal context.
This is reductionist, and both sexes have serious stakes in the well being of their home society. But when it comes to building and leading a nation in a competitive geopolitical landscape, men, on average, possess a natural understanding and inclination towards successful, long term strategic decision making. Women, on average, will tend towards short term intrasocietal appeasement, neglecting the long term, outward-facing strategic outlook. This seems to inevitably lead to an irreconcilable weakening of society.
Have any societies lasted more than a few hundred years with women having an equal or greater guvernatorial say?
Women are fantastic contributors to a society in many ways, but it needs to be recognized that governance largely belongs to the male role. Not doing so is another suicidal rejection of reality.
Damn right. Men have it in their genes that they have to defend their territory.
Feminists retards seem to think that a few millennia ago men of thousands of different human societies all got together and said "hey guys, let's oppress women". Did I say human societies? Even most mammals have gender roles.
There must be a reason if all societies of human history have been "patriarchal". The only society which hasn't been, ours, is literally being colonized by a patriarchal one (Islam) even if they are inferior in terms of IQ, technology, etc.
Female hypergamy will be happy with an invasion by other tribes, and even a race war. The females throughout history that have passed down their genes have not been the ones that stood up to their conquerors as their men did, but who laid down and switched sides when their men were killed.
Because emasculating men is what insecure women do to try and achieve relationships with men, since nobody with any balls would want anything to do with them.
Q: How does mom stop son from becoming a man and leaving the coup?
A. By turning him into a pussy who isn't able to take care of himself and needs mommy.
She was just complaining recently that no men want to date her. Gee, I wonder why.
She's your typical bang 'em and leave 'em type libtard that attracts nothing but dudes (and sometimes women) who just want to use them up and leave.
SPEZ: I just searched for an article about her not dating and found a gem. What a crazy world where, between Charlize Theron and Seth Rogen, it would turn out to be Charlize that can't find a partner! Hollywood is as fucking backward as it gets.
Seth Rogen is a leftwing cuck crazy fuck too.
Think he meant Seth is ugly as fuck, while that other one is kinda hot.
Just cover the crazy eyes.
Canadian
Tom Hardy had to do Mad Max with her and they barely made it through the movie because Tom HATED her on first sight. Then she said from then on that it was she who couldn't stand him. I'd bet you a gorillion dollars she expected she was going to have sex with him, and when he denied her even mild flirtation (probably because he's happily married) it hurt her pride so much she pretended to hate him.
This makes me love Tom Hardy even more.
he's so great, he and his wife fell madly in love playing the lead roles in wuthering heights, and theyve been together ever since.
Gotta stay away from those crazy liberal women or before you know it, you’ll be stuck raising the United Nations and carrying her purse.
Charlize Theron is/was one of the most stunningly beautiful women on the planet. Rather encouraging to learn that maybe looks aren't everything after all.
Have you ever met her? If not how can you tell?
Any woman who is even remotely in shape can look beautiful on a movie or on professional photos.
Female beauty is very common.
No sane man would willingly set foot on this landmine.
Pedes. Everyone. Gather round. This. You got to read and understand this. Know it.
Big government is for losers who don't want to deal with the consequences of their lousy personality. Like this karen, there are women who are just toxic to everything but with money and entitlement and privilege, they can do a lot of damage.
No one will volunteer to do jack shit with them more than once. They are marxist creeps who follow you and will kill you if you won't let them in to the good times they aren't invited too.
Yet, the good times only exist because they aren't invited.
I think being a karen should be a federal offense and they should be shipped to one concentrated camp for re-education. A life time of learning, if that is what it takes.
Women don't value competitiveness and independence, not to mention rationality over feelings.
Giving the vote to women was a mistake.
Downvote away, but you all know that we wouldn't be in this shit if men hadn't been emasculated.
Men have the biggest stake in the success of their home nation. They survive by being the winners. Defeat, at the very least, means a significant reduction in access to quality women, and in many cases in history has been met with outright genocide.
Women, even as part of a less successful or defeated nation, need primarily to be beautiful and exercise good mate selection. Their reproductive survival is less tied to their homelands success, and more tied to appeasing powerful actors within their given societal context.
This is reductionist, and both sexes have serious stakes in the well being of their home society. But when it comes to building and leading a nation in a competitive geopolitical landscape, men, on average, possess a natural understanding and inclination towards successful, long term strategic decision making. Women, on average, will tend towards short term intrasocietal appeasement, neglecting the long term, outward-facing strategic outlook. This seems to inevitably lead to an irreconcilable weakening of society.
Have any societies lasted more than a few hundred years with women having an equal or greater guvernatorial say?
Women are fantastic contributors to a society in many ways, but it needs to be recognized that governance largely belongs to the male role. Not doing so is another suicidal rejection of reality.
Damn right. Men have it in their genes that they have to defend their territory.
Feminists retards seem to think that a few millennia ago men of thousands of different human societies all got together and said "hey guys, let's oppress women". Did I say human societies? Even most mammals have gender roles.
There must be a reason if all societies of human history have been "patriarchal". The only society which hasn't been, ours, is literally being colonized by a patriarchal one (Islam) even if they are inferior in terms of IQ, technology, etc.
Female hypergamy will be happy with an invasion by other tribes, and even a race war. The females throughout history that have passed down their genes have not been the ones that stood up to their conquerors as their men did, but who laid down and switched sides when their men were killed.
I re-read this post again, it's very interesting. I agree wholeheartedly.
Saved.