The normal female need to belong, and also to be in charge of a family. That is normal female authority.
As nobody has troubled to marry them. And they were rendered unmarriageable by their darling mothers and sometimes even their fathers, so they are beyond miserable.
Men aren't the only ones with strong natural drives.
Men aren't the only ones who go nuts when their strong natural drives are thwarted.
I think you hit on something. But also, I think the lack of religion in their lives leaves them empty to connect to something bigger than themselves (shocker I know) so virtue signaling takes this place.
Yes. Agree. You make an excellent point about religion and what happens to people who relinquish it.
There is having children and there is having ENOUGH children. If a woman has the personal capacity for having five children, and you forcibly stop her at two, you are going to get an angry, and then a divorced, woman.
Men have to stop horsing around just a little bit with women. Either you like her or you don't. If you won't marry her, leave her un-phoned and un-dinnered. Do not play with fire.
But everybody did play with fire. Free love blah blah. "Women are harmless, amusing people. They are sweet. They can't bite."
Men have to become the gatekeepers of both now. I do not for one second think women can really say "no" in an atmosphere where men insist that to not be mocked and ejected from polite society the woman has to say Yes. At least sometimes.
That will get you an angry woman and that is what you see running through the streets bleating.
It is a man's world and the men bear responsibility for all of it, so I guess I do not agree with you.
What men want they will get. They get the women they deserve. Ooops.
I don’t quite follow your reasoning, perhaps if you don’t care to expand.
If men were the gatekeepers of sex, as you state, rapes would be higher in the US.
Care to rebuttal?
Or is that your point, that
what men want they they will get. They get the women they deserve.
If that’s your point, than the stats do not match what you say, as far as the US.
While most like to speak about Darwinism, they tend to focus on the Natural Selection, not usually the Sexual Selection. In the animal kingdom (just as a generalization) the best specimen to have offspring are chosen in some that have the ability to “choose”- that choose is used lightly as a lot of sexual selection in the animal kingdom is “rape”).
We’re animals, mammals with a large frontal lobe, tools, and other factors to consider.
It’s not just the symmetry of the face, one major factor of choice for women of “attraction” is what most other animals do not have; currency. Have you noticed not many highly paid people do not have copious offers for women? That the “equivalent” of a nest may be a high status, money, and resources?
There was a re-tooling a few decades ago, and now even men, who are fundamentally and eternally stronger, think they don't want children. They have been brainwashed into thinking that. In actual fact most of them do want children but do not know that about themselves.
Men do not know they are the gatekeepers of sex. They are, in the sense that they can withhold it, but they never do. They do not know they can use this power and never use it.
The marriage system assured that twos got twos, fours got fours, sixes got sixes, elevens got elevens, and everybody had, well, something.
No more.
It is men's brainwashing that they have to have at least an eight, when they could get most of what they want from a five, that is making the men feel they can't get no satisfaction.
People who virtue-signal do it because they feel useless and worthless. So they look for a cause. Or they look for somebody to scold over a minor offense. Either way, the goal is the same: to feel like they're doing something important.
They usually virtue-signal for a LIBERAL cause, because, well, think about somebody who virtue-signals for the Second Amendment or Pro-Life or some other CONSERVATIVE cause. That particular mental image is not appealing for a lot of these spoiled whiny white brats. That's why virtue-signalers usually go left.
Also, there's public exposure. Some people ACTUALLY make a difference. They do actual work to better themselves, they get a useful job or some such. But you don't hear much about those people. News media aren't interested, Twitter isn't interested. Virtue-signalling is kind of the "Dark Side of the Force" here: it's more seductive because it's readily usable to get clicks.
And virtue signaling by sharing a post that someone else made on Instagram is far easier than actually improving yourself or the world and still makes them feel good.
Haha for real. I’m at the point where I almost don’t care. I saw a post saying if you support Trump you can’t be an LGBTXYZ ally... and I’m just thinking “yeah I know... and?”
AWFL
Affluent White Female Liberal...
The normal female need to belong, and also to be in charge of a family. That is normal female authority.
As nobody has troubled to marry them. And they were rendered unmarriageable by their darling mothers and sometimes even their fathers, so they are beyond miserable.
Men aren't the only ones with strong natural drives.
Men aren't the only ones who go nuts when their strong natural drives are thwarted.
I think you hit on something. But also, I think the lack of religion in their lives leaves them empty to connect to something bigger than themselves (shocker I know) so virtue signaling takes this place.
Yes. Agree. You make an excellent point about religion and what happens to people who relinquish it.
There is having children and there is having ENOUGH children. If a woman has the personal capacity for having five children, and you forcibly stop her at two, you are going to get an angry, and then a divorced, woman.
Men have to stop horsing around just a little bit with women. Either you like her or you don't. If you won't marry her, leave her un-phoned and un-dinnered. Do not play with fire.
But everybody did play with fire. Free love blah blah. "Women are harmless, amusing people. They are sweet. They can't bite."
Not true. Women are not harmless one bit.
This is the whirlwind that is being reaped.
Women are the gatekeepers of sex, men of commitment in a civilized society.
Men have to become the gatekeepers of both now. I do not for one second think women can really say "no" in an atmosphere where men insist that to not be mocked and ejected from polite society the woman has to say Yes. At least sometimes.
That will get you an angry woman and that is what you see running through the streets bleating.
It is a man's world and the men bear responsibility for all of it, so I guess I do not agree with you.
What men want they will get. They get the women they deserve. Ooops.
I don’t quite follow your reasoning, perhaps if you don’t care to expand.
If men were the gatekeepers of sex, as you state, rapes would be higher in the US.
Care to rebuttal?
Or is that your point, that
If that’s your point, than the stats do not match what you say, as far as the US.
While most like to speak about Darwinism, they tend to focus on the Natural Selection, not usually the Sexual Selection. In the animal kingdom (just as a generalization) the best specimen to have offspring are chosen in some that have the ability to “choose”- that choose is used lightly as a lot of sexual selection in the animal kingdom is “rape”).
We’re animals, mammals with a large frontal lobe, tools, and other factors to consider.
It’s not just the symmetry of the face, one major factor of choice for women of “attraction” is what most other animals do not have; currency. Have you noticed not many highly paid people do not have copious offers for women? That the “equivalent” of a nest may be a high status, money, and resources?
While you think about that, have some Blue Tits, mate
I agree the natural system is lurching oddly.
But it is still in place. It is eternal.
There was a re-tooling a few decades ago, and now even men, who are fundamentally and eternally stronger, think they don't want children. They have been brainwashed into thinking that. In actual fact most of them do want children but do not know that about themselves.
Men do not know they are the gatekeepers of sex. They are, in the sense that they can withhold it, but they never do. They do not know they can use this power and never use it.
The marriage system assured that twos got twos, fours got fours, sixes got sixes, elevens got elevens, and everybody had, well, something.
No more.
It is men's brainwashing that they have to have at least an eight, when they could get most of what they want from a five, that is making the men feel they can't get no satisfaction.
Certainly they can.
Not sure if I addressed what you mean.
Race-traitors.
You nailed it on the head with the picture.
People who virtue-signal do it because they feel useless and worthless. So they look for a cause. Or they look for somebody to scold over a minor offense. Either way, the goal is the same: to feel like they're doing something important.
They usually virtue-signal for a LIBERAL cause, because, well, think about somebody who virtue-signals for the Second Amendment or Pro-Life or some other CONSERVATIVE cause. That particular mental image is not appealing for a lot of these spoiled whiny white brats. That's why virtue-signalers usually go left.
Also, there's public exposure. Some people ACTUALLY make a difference. They do actual work to better themselves, they get a useful job or some such. But you don't hear much about those people. News media aren't interested, Twitter isn't interested. Virtue-signalling is kind of the "Dark Side of the Force" here: it's more seductive because it's readily usable to get clicks.
And virtue signaling by sharing a post that someone else made on Instagram is far easier than actually improving yourself or the world and still makes them feel good.
They are arrogant and think everyone will listen to them because they think they have white privilege.
Oh yeah that makes sense. They’ve been told that white privilege is not only real but makes them special. Of course they think they have a platform.
"Sure I'm racist...but not as racist as those who vote for the party of slavery, Jim Crow and affirmative action."
Haha for real. I’m at the point where I almost don’t care. I saw a post saying if you support Trump you can’t be an LGBTXYZ ally... and I’m just thinking “yeah I know... and?”
Dude right!!! It’s all around me in suburban America!
Because they are paid activists who get off on telling people what to do and masterbating while thinking about their imaginary power.
By the power of white girl I am offended on your behalf.