Because men never had a chance to stop them. It was down to women, and you betrayed us like always for a few more privileges.

Now you perform the endless ballad of the good woman™, but I lived in the UK. I know what women do when injustices hit men. They cheer for more.

I needed a laugh today. If anything, the elite want women to rule the world.

Maybe you missed the part where women have advocated for men to be borderline exterminated for decades.

Can't be worse than single mothers and the damage done to the world by appeasing women for biological reasons.

Can't be worse than single mothers and the damage done to the world by appeasing women for biological reasons.

Also, despite the headline, it isn't just for gay men. Anyone would be able to have a child, without a financial tie to a woman. It would be the greatest attack against female supremacist ideology that would ever exist.

Anything that weakens women's negotiating position is a gain for society, because if their position gets too strong, you end up like the UK.

They are getting rid of women

How ironic.

The male population must be reduced to 10% and power restored to women. - The true meaning of "The Future is Female".

Anything where the proceeds for the video didn't go directly to the woman starring in it was removed as part of a deal with Mastercard to re-enable payments.

Considering a transgender won a beauty contest, is there anything women are best at? I suppose no one will ever beat them at genocidal rants.

I see only good things coming from this. Women's biological purpose being usurped will greatly weaken their negotiating position and maybe, just maybe, cause feminism to collapse because men and society don't need women at all anymore.

Yeah, it looks fine now.

The one problem I have with alternative voice chat, messaging etc is that it's so hard to convince your friends and family. It took me 2 months to convince my mom to use Skype over WhatsApp. It was even harder to convince her to move from Messenger, but I just got myself banned from FB and deleted the account to force it to happen.

Fucking lmao, this is the most obvious satire I've ever read.

Do you really believe that Disney would do anything for men or boys? Look at fucking Soy Wars. If they owned PH they'd ban everything but femdom.

I mean, thinking about it...

Something that destroys everything it touches just because it can is a great allegory to women.

I lost my phone in a tragic accident.

Formatting is off. Some good ideas here though.

They cut 90% of their videos to appease feminists, then pandered even harder on women's day.

They basically just lost the plot. I don't even watch porn and I know how much they fucked up.

It's always a woman, isn't it? Same with Bond, that went woke when a woman got hold of it. Not as if it was much good before, it was always shit, but at least it wasn't feminist.

Are you too fucking stupid to realise what your actions would cause?

I know you're probably just a troll looking to scare people, but holy shit. If someone killed the dementia patient, we'd all be in camps.

Please don't. Not only would it harm us all greatly through the repercussions, but there'd also be a President Harris.

Calm down.

Did anyone think the dementia patient was running things?

Playboy and Pornhub.

Misogyny isn't real.

Where's the bulge? Kek.

So, you think that people with clear talent are fired for making one mistake? Considering that any other company in the sector would hire them in a second, I severely doubt it. If one project doesn't work, the people on it are simply moved elsewhere and the project itself is killed. The CEO takes the hit in loss of share value and the outlay of development, but this risk was known at the beginning and weighted against the reward if the development succeeded.

For example, how many failed projects have Google gone through? Stadia is the latest, but there was Google+, Google Glass, YouTube Red shows and many more. The people involved with these projects were not fired, they were moved either to a new project or to try and develop an existing money maker.

But he's the one taking the risks if the innovations don't work. The scientists and engineers don't lose out if something goes wrong, the stockholders and CEO do. That's the way the risk is balanced - the people who create get their salary and have low risk, while the people who put down the cash to allow the creation have high risk and get nothing if the creation is a failure.

I don't know enough about that story to comment.

Why do you refuse to answer on capping divorce settlements to a fair level? I've noticed this about leftists, they always say they want to destroy those who make money from nothing, but when they realise that group are also their allies through identity politics, they talk about "the rich" and pretend you never said anything. Everyone knows "the rich" is a proxy for "the patriarchy", communists are the most obvious feminist puppets in a long time.