Why Women Destroy Nations

This relates to:

archive.org/stream/b20442580

Decay of Sexual Morality and Fall of Civilizations. Guess where we are now.

Other urls found in this thread:

qz.com/306166/the-divorce-stat-that-just-keeps-cheating-50/
people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf
scholar.harvard.edu/rpande/publications/why-have-women-become-left-wing-political-gender-gap-and-decline-marriage
jcpa.org/article/neo-paganism-in-the-public-square-and-its-relevance-to-judaism/
pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/
archive.is/vCQTM
instagram.com/kimwestlatex/
instagram.com/p/BEef5JPpGQr/?taken-by=kimwestlatex
youtube.com/watch?v=Cx70YbMxetY
jstor.org/stable/30026099?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/02/kevin-macdonald-race-bias-and-conception-risk-implicit-and-explicit-whiteness-in-action/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Some special sort of mental retardation is needed to claim that women destroy civilizations.

Very kosher.

Did you watch the video, you massive faggot?

*Women who are not kept under control and run feral destroy nations
fixed

Yes

Who's fault is it for letting women running feral?

Men, comfort and too much peace.

Meant to:

it is men that allow women to destroy nations - we're the ones in charge, and it's on us when things go to shit

men never should've tolerated the decline in sexual morality (we were part of that too btw - anecdotally every one of my friends in high school was truly obsessed with banging as many women as possible, so it's not just women today that are fucked up)

That comes from way before. Try the sexual liberation of the 60s. I guess only religion can enforce sexual chastity on a societal level.

...

I can agree with that, but one cannot argue your point with a normal person who thinks that women are independent, women should vote, and that single moms are gr8. One needs to be convinced that women are to follow, not lead, before accepting your argument.

woman is man's eternal partner in life as his supporter, not his competitor or leader.

also, old.

Actually I found the book first while reading about the Romans and then got linked to the video.

Men are sexually immoral you stupid little (((christian))) apologist weirdo. It's the fact that Civilizations become too successful, they end things like dueling, and frontiers cease to exist, people become materialistic (even in church) and start to give control over to betas and fags, who give control to women that remind them of their mother's power over them. In a society that slaps bitches down like Semitic cults, women grow resentful and raise their male children to be betas as soon as the society is comfortable enough to be able to do so… when warriors are a pay check from the army and heroes are nostalgia on TV or some faggot troops of lounging firefighters who keep lighting forest fires to get over time.

Masculinity died in the early 90s

Masculinity died after the 60s.

tbh I think that both men AND women are a fault here. Both men and women have a debt to society.

All women are obligated by society to attract a man and to give birth to and raise the next generation. The high obesity rates and low fertility rates in Europe and the US mean that white women across the Western world have failed miserably.

All men are obligated by society to provide for the next generation and to protect and defend our motherland. The fact that te West is bankrupt and that more than a million niggers and sand-monkeys were able to walk into Europe unopposed last year means that men have failed miserably.

We need to stop these cancerous battles of the genders and started concentrating on whats important: Securing the existence of our people and a future for white children.

Gender wars are Cultural Marxism.

Except this is bullshit pandering by manosphere weirdos

The most sexually immoral generation hands down, was the baby boomers. Just like every other aspect of their sick culture.

Millennials, contrary to popular belief, have less sexual partners on average than any other generation except for the greatest generation and the silent generation. They are projected to have an average of 8 lifetime sexual partners.

Also on marriage - I'm sure you've all heard that roughly 50% of marriages end in divorce. MRAs and wannabe PUAs bang on about it all the time, they cant stop themselves. Aside from the fact you'd be stupid to think niggers and spics arent bringing the divorce average up….. have any of you actually checked that claim out?

qz.com/306166/the-divorce-stat-that-just-keeps-cheating-50/

its bullshit. Ironically, the "fuck you dad" generation is on track to have more stable marriages than their parents did, completely unsurprising when you consider boomers should have really been called the narcissistic generation.

One of the least palatable aspects of the alt-right is out homegrown coterie of men who are scared (yes scared, its dressed up in vitriolic and chest beating language, but its really born out of fear) of women (while simultaneously investing hilarious amounts of time into learning how to seduce them) to the point of being tone-death to anything but sexual issues.

yes a common trope in the manosphere, and yet its always curiously devoid of evidence. As I said before, millennials - contrary to popular belief - are less promiscuous than the previous 2 generations. This is the paradox of gen y - hypersexualized culture, but less sexual in their personal lives.

For all the manosphere whining about how women open their legs for invaders (dont think for a minute that someone wasnt masturbating when they were writing that crap) the stats on racially mixed couples is so low that its almost statistically non-significant in most of the world.

jesus i could go on, but to be honest, manosphere types fucking drain me, take this shit back to roosh's forums with all the other insecure mystery meat homos.

Listen, my theory is that things started going downhill went women were allowed to vote. This changed social policies in the decades after that. Things like compassion and acceptance started becoming the norm which made it easier to the sexual revolution to occur. Things like universal healthcare and welfare programs started or became bigger. The zeitgeist of society changed so any man trying to take action was and will be shamed and stopped. We're all bigots, racists, fascists and troglodites when we talk about chastity and women's place in civilization.

I'm not proposing a gender war, nor I'm saying it's all women's fault. It's men's fault for letting them have a say in politics in the first place. From there everything went south.

So yeah, it's our fault.

The Fate of Empires by Glubb should be require reading for all Holla Forumsacks.
people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

*required

wow who would have thought?

We may be less promiscuous but our culture is not chaste anymore. Gays and all other kinds of fetishes are being accepted. We all fuck for pleasure nowadays. Porn is bigger than ever. We're all materialists and hedonists. So, yeah, the West is going down and things have been more sexual than ever.

Nonsense. The emancipation of women has been done through and through by the enemy, jewry.

Comfort and peace have nothing to do with it.

Oh, man. This ties perfectly with 'Sex and Culture'.

Comfort and peace makes men soft and more lenient. This happened before. Softer and less masculine men allow liberal policies to come to fruition leading to social decay. When men live in a place of adversity they adopt traditional policies.

so then who the fuck are we? most of us live pretty soft lives

aside from the fact tinder is dying (like most of these social media platforms, they are a flash in the pan), believe it or not, many women resort to tinder because in our atomized society, they arent meeting men in real life.

Theres nothing about tinder that necessitates casual sex. In fact its one of the primary complaints of wannabe PUAs who use tinder, that huge numbers of women are flaky or using it for validation or wanting normal dates.

clueless the post

It hasnt been for a very long time. One of the bizarre machinations of Holla Forums is this idea that before the internet people didnt fuck for pleasure. The last time we had anything approaching puritan values was…. back when puritanism was in fashion, when was that again? oh…

Thats a flash in the pan, and really, you're more aware of these subcultures because the internet has given a voice to everyone, including dysfunctional weirdos.

I strongly expect popular opinion on gays to reverse when a casual link is exposed between homosexuality and child predation.

we always have. And yet many people continue to have fulfilling monogamous relationships, quite often budding into marriages. Just not you or any of the "the west is fucked man!" defeatist crowd

heroin and cocaine use was endemic once too

are we? I'm not. I know many people who are not. Religion is appearing to undergo a major resurgence,

What is it with this defeatism and fatalism? The most perplexing thing is many of you get angry when someone says there is hope or that the fatalism is misplaced - as if you actually want to believe its all fucked, its very bizarre behavior.

Things really are not that bad, in fact if you have been paying attention (outside of said loser circles of the internet) at all in recent years, there a lot to be excited about.

most importantly, no one is having kids, sex has become like fast food, lots of unhealthy fucking, but no substance or responsibility

People need to realise that why men let women vote, were because "we" were supposed to be civilized and better than the savages.

And it actually worked for many years, but why it worked was because there were demands to be meet before you could vote, not like now where you just need an ID (or in some countries *cough* US *cough* not even that)

And another thing, the whites back then didnt know that our countries would be subverted to hell by the jews in the future, creating loose women that dont give a fuck about their fatherland and people, and only votes for gibs and refugess. Who can blame them? I didnt think 5 years ago that my country would be a shithole so how could men in the 1800's predict a vapid-slut-women-culture in the 2000's?

Ok, first. Around what period did women stop being shamed for being a divorcee or having a kid out of wedlock?

Before contraceptives, there was a way bigger risk of pregnancy. Pregnant women out of wedlock were shamed by society. That was a regulating mechanism that forced people to think a bit before fucking around.

That's the point. Sex has become baseless again. In flourishing civilizations sex is harnessed to make men productive via monogamy. Now if you can have the same pleasure of sex with two clicks on the internet, men don't have the incentive to work the same as before.

Feminist… plz

Hush now, your time will come soon enough.

good video

Yes go- guys, women are destroyers, stay away from them, it's best for the future of us Whites if we never breed again.

Seriously, fags. Stop bitching about how terrible women are and go out and get one and teach her how to not be a stupid bitch. Be part of the solution.

One could just as easily claim that declining Church attendance caused the decline of the west. In most western countries, Church attendance started declining after WWI (that is to say, at about the same time that women were given the vote in many western countries.) Correlation != Causation.

& a second point:

This stuff the feminists are pushing about men oppressing women is complete bullshit. When the Titanic went down, women got to go in the lifeboats and men got to take their chances. Imagine if slavers treated their niggers that way. Imagine if slavers and niggers were on a ship going down and the slavers told their niggers to get in the lifeboats and then went silently went to their own deaths. This "patriarchy" was a very strange type of oppressor.

The feminista claim that men denied women a vote is a complete lie as well.

Before 1918, most MEN didn't have the right to vote because, prior to WWI, most of Europe was run by Aristocracies and Empires. Before 1918 the number of democracies on this Earth could be counted on one hand without running out of fingers.

To name a few examples… Before 1918, German men had no control over the political decision making process in their country because the German Empire was run by an unelected Emperor called the Kaiser. Similarly, Austrians and Hungarians had no control over the politics of their country before 1918 because their country was run by the unelected Hapsburgs. Russian men had no say in the political decisions of their country because it was run by the unelected Tsars &c. &c. &c.

The overwhelming majority of European men had no say at all in politics before 1918. To claim that men were collectively conspiring to keep women down before that time is ludicrous. Feminists are retarded.

The only countries in which men had the vote before WWI were Britain, the British colonies (& former British colonies lie the U.S.), and France. & for most of the 19th century, Britain and the British colonies were run by HRH Victoria, a woman, who didn't introduce socialist economic policies in the empire or invite foreign invaders into Britain as your theory suggests.

So here's my second point: The only countries for which your argument holds are the United States, France and the French Colonies. How do you explain the rest of the western world? In the late 19th century, men had the vote in the U.S. whilst the British empire was run by a woman. Why didn't the British empire head to the left under Victoria? Why didn't the Russian Empire free the Serfs and introduce Socialist economic policies under Catherine the Great?

I stand by what I said before. All Gender wars are Cultural Marxism & a cancer on our society.

You dumb motherfucker. Knowing the relation between sexual repression and civilization shows how a good and civilized life must be lived. That means monogamy and no sexual degeneracy, you cocksucker.

...

what part of my post made it unclear that I was saying men were and are also immoral?

also anti-christian is code for anti-white

you may not be masculine, but masculinity has not died

Enjoy being sent to prison for not submitting to her or being financially ruined when she divorces you and goes on a world tour of blacks and arabs. Before you can settle down you must repair your nation, your government, your laws, and your society. THIS is no country or time to start a family.

You must MAKE it first. Trump will not make it for you. No matter how many greentext stories you write about how everything will magically get better and fix itself after he's elected, nothing will ever change unless you MAKE it change. Trump cannot make America great again alone, and he will need more than just your votes to finish the job.

Christianity is a desert religion for desert people.

OK are you
Choose one and only one, there's no legitimate reason to be this pissed.

Saying all women are Destroyers of Worlds is not "discussing the deplorable state of gender relations", but nice try shill.

toppest kek

I think it's because of culture and tradition. See, when a culture has certain traditions, women go with the flow of that society, see women shaming other women for dressing slutty or being divorced. They become enforcers of that tradition too if the men in power keep it. So those two female leaders you talked about were simply following the vigent culture in their time, like they were expected to.

Black Pigeon Speaks, one of the shill collective, playing antithesis to Sinead McCarthy's "women will save the right" thesis.
They work together, creating chaos for clicks.
The same organisation is behind both setups.
Other affiliates:
Millennial Woes.
Stefan Molyneux.
RamzPaul.
Evalion.

Throw them all in the fire.

Did you watch the video? Did you even read the book synopsis?

The video specifically mentions "Not all" for you retards to calm the fuck down and you still push the "all" narrative.

Was planning on making this my next read. Thanks, user.

Good to hear. I just finished it yesterday and I immensely enjoyed it.

This doesn't make any sense to me. If women merely "go with the flow" and do not determine the direction of substance of this "flow", how can they be responsible for anything? Surely a person cannot bear the responsibility of decisions they didn't make? And if women didn't establish the narrative then who did? Was it the men? Does that mean that men were responsible?

I stand by what I said before. All Gender wars are cultural marxism.

To the ones saying I'm saying this is all women's fault and that we should shame only them, I'm not. Who should we truly shame are the cucks of today for allowing this shit to keep happening. The hipsters, liberals, limp-wristed, fat, weak, any man that doesn't conform to a certain idea of patriarchal masculinity. That's the only way the West can be saved. By making most men, men again.

It's a shitty video OP, post it on plebbit for salt.

...

meant
fucking mobile phone. Never again.

It's not a gender war. See:

I'm talking about those two separate examples. They were a single woman in a position of power. They couldn't snap their fingers and suddenly change an entire societal landscape.
Now, millions of women getting the power of voting is an entirely different animal. It's way more insiduous and it changes society slowly OVER THE YEARS. One little concession leads to another that leads to another and the culture keeps changing and changing and changing and we get to where we are today. Erosion.

The ultimate fault is of men allowing this to happen.

Those dubs should tell us that there is more truth to this post than may be clear at first.
Let us explore…
Man should not be guided by his lusts for they are merely the expression of his basic instincts translated in a way that his conscious mind can comprehend.
Those who do not understand that the desire to consume food comes from the biological need for energy become obese.
Those who do not understand the sex instinct become sexual deviants.
And if your compassion for others is not looked at with logic you flood your countries with kebab.

Exactly. The best way to harness sexual energy is also the hardest. Sex for reproduction inside of wedlock only. No casual sex, no masturbation, no porn, no prostitutes. But how hard is that for a man?

Alright, for the sake of the argument I'll concede that putting individual women in charge is not the same as allowing women the vote. That a women in charge of a country promotes different interests than those that ordinary middle-class women vote for. For the sake of the argument I will concede this point.

I still cannot see how you can claim that women push culture to the left. Hell. In our politically correct and extremely leftist world, who are leading the right wing parties in Europe? The leaders of the right wing parties in Poland, Germany, Britain and France, are women. The women in these countries stood up and decided to take a stand against leftism. Most women want to be housewives. Most women like conservative / traditional / right wing values.

Mind you, I do not dispute that women are submissive in bed and that Frauke Petry/Marion le Pen/&c would love for a /fit/izen to hold them down and force them to take it. But politics is not the bedroom.

I put it to you: The changes that have taken place in our society over the last 50 years have more to do with r/K selection theory than differences in the genders. Society has become r/ selective whereas previously it was /K selective. As a result of these changes the women of Europe have become race–traitorous nigger fuckers and the men have become spineless beta tranny-dick-sucking faggots. If the user Conservative is right, this has more to do with our economics and the ready availability of resources than it has to do with differences between men and women.

Prove me wrong.

Get out moar, goyim

This. Women aren't our enemies, but a fundamental part of our survival and therefore dangerous if not kept in check.

Not a single woman is a world destroyer, you massive faggot. They can't beat you physically or outthink you, and they're responsible for all this?

The men who let women lead their lives, these MEN, are world destroyers. Take responsibility for your utter lack of a fucking manhood.

truth trips checked, numales are to blame for everything.

Fuck, man. If you watched the video you'd see this study mentioned:

scholar.harvard.edu/rpande/publications/why-have-women-become-left-wing-political-gender-gap-and-decline-marriage

Now I'm not saying women can't be right-wing. Heck, a woman I know used to be more right-wing than me. I think that comes to upbringing, though. Some women raised in the right way will become right-wing later.

I heard about that before a couple of years ago. That ties with what I said in:

Peace and comfort (abundance of resources) make men and women more lenient and less traditional. But first, men have to allow those women to have some kind of power.

We're kind of agreeing here. Again, I'm not saying it's women's fault, but men's fault for allowing women's nature to run amok.

Irrelevant. What are the women in those countries voting for? What have they been voting for the last decades?

The video talks about voting patterns and reasons for those voting patterns.
Why are you even replying in this topic if you didn't watch it?

Agreed. ultimately, men are the responsible party for allowing women the freedom to let their feelings run policy.

This does not invalidate anything mentioned in the OP's video.

This is an irrelevant point. You can pick outliers from any demographic or group and claim it defeats the argument. But we know this isnt true. We know niggers are subhuman for example, sure theres a few that wiggle out of the muck and achieve greatness. But the overwhelming mass is trash. And YES those same blacks OFTEN speak out against blacks as a group or nigger behavior, or talk about the failings of their racial group. Why? Because they realize that they are an outlier, that they are on the opposite side of the fence to the majority of their group, and can usually look more objectively at the problems within their group

The same is arguably true about women. A few who have become aware, been educated, and grown up seeing the ills that of their sex, have spoken out against it and risen to positions of authority, power, and respect with the opposite view to the norm of their group.

So once again you're making a faulty assumption, just like you did with the few female leaders who didnt radically push to the left. The difference here, is that we dont know if those women WOULD have pushed to the left if the culture allowed, we just know they didnt. We do however know that the women on the "right" currently are in the vast minority of women, and do not go with the average flow of women.

also
vote liberal/leftist groups into office, support immigration, support abortion, support sexual promiscuity (though shame each other for engaging in it), and so on. We know this because we have data backing up it (no nigger I'm not doing the research for you, its well known and established that women vote for leftist groups that support these things, ergo, they support them).

Most women right now do NOT support or want a "traditional" lifestyle, and do not in fact like conservative or right wing values as they see them as limiting their freedom in some way.

At this point you're pulling shit out of your ass and flinging it at the wall to try to justify your point of view, but you're ignoring voting trends that DO show women vote leftists into office, which yes means they support leftist policies, and that a few outliers do not disprove the other anons points. Outliers are just that.

Now please, take your nonsensical arguments and go away. You're literally just making shit up at this point to keep arguing.

Oh and no, I dont necessarily support this whole "war of the sexes" bullshit. We (and by we I mean our fathers, grandfathers, and up) gave these cunts this power, gave in to them, and let them wreck our societies. We are to blame for failing to keep them in their place. They are obviously to blame for being inept fuckwits that have destroyed our societies, but we let them do it.

Unfortunately there is no closing pandoras box at this point, and likely this is all going to eventually lead to the complete ruin of civilization as we know it, and yet ANOTHER massive reset on human advancement. Especially if some powermad cunt like hillary gets into office and glasses half the fucking world

The overwhelming majority of white women are submissive and want dominant partners. I.e. They hate beta-cucks and want dominant Husbands. It is wired into their genes.

I think you're right. Arguing has become pointless at this stage.

I cannot convince you and you cannot convince me. I think I'm right and that you are wrong and you think you're right and that I am wrong. I think this has more to do with the culture common to both women AND men in our society (the women being fat and ugly, the men being beta-cuck wimps) and you think that women, solely, are to blame. Time will prove us right/wrong.Why don't we let the Anons who are reading the thread decide for themselves

YOU FUCKER. WE'RE SAYING WE'RE NOT SOLELY BLAMING WOMEN FOR THIS. IT'S A FUCKUP FROM BOTH GENDERS!

So? They don't grasp cause and effect, so they can't understand how their shaping of society leads to more beta cucks.

It's cognitive dissonance. Basically pic related

Nice dubs. And this does fit into my experiences.
The more SJW feminist they are the sluttier and submissive they are.
Got into a discussion with a date about a "sexist" advertisement we saw, it was that moment that I knew we where going to bump.

\>>6961366

Literally read my first post. Learn how to check IDs you fucking retard. Go back to /reddit/

This:

At this point I can't be fucked.

Do you know that the theory of evolution is?

You seem like you are familiar with the theory of evolution vis-a-vis genders so why don't you let me explain something to you: Anyone who at the same time believes that men and women have a symbiotic relationship whilst simultaneously believing that they are engaged in some sort of a gender war is literally retarded.

Gender Wars of any kind == Cultural Marxism.

Prove me wrong.

Your nose is showing.

You argue like a leftist. Or a woman. Apart from you, how many posters are talking about a gender war in this thread?

Yeah, it's my experience. I think I fucked 3 or 4 that were like that. I know one SJW that's into BSDM too. It must be some kind of Freudian compensation.

Don't deflect away from the true reason why civilizations, fall, Shlomo.

Always the first post

...

Saved.

Oy vey! Keep supporting the eternal femjew, goy!

Reported for shitposting.

Reported for being part of the raid.

Cucks are a dime a dozen. Blaming Christianity for them is a kike behavior, since kikes are explicitly anti-Christian.

The women aren't the ones with the power. They are just way more impressionable and easier to manipulate. And ((they)) knows this.

This is really the only to be determined part, from the postscript. The reality is, the choice must be taken away from them somehow.

…but how?

Harems do form, it's been recorded in our genetic legacy as well as online dating statistics. Both match up strongly.

Copied from another thread because you cucks are so completely fucking wrong about r/K it's pathetic.

r/K is a white knight theory that ignores women's mating strategy in favour of blaming everything else around it.

Too bad christians are still zionist.

Too bad they’re not, you fucking retard.

Don't tell it to me. Tell it to your christian brethren, you faggot.

To bad they are.

Women are the only ones who can lead anything not pro-feminist. If a man tries to lead he's labeled a sexist, racist and is dismantled before he can get any where. That is why women are the only option to put in the way of leaders in many countries.

Farage and Trump are more the exception than the rule but look at all the shit they got and now see why it's better to use a female mouth piece.

Fucking kill yourself.

Are you five years old? Kill yourself.

Chrizis are not Christians.
Chrizi being the term I’ve come up with to delineate the heresy of “Christian Zionist” as though the words aren’t oxymoronic. They’re not Christian because they don’t follow the Bible or the tenants of Christianity. They fellate kike cock and blindly ignore their own self-interest. They’re not Christian, so they shouldn’t be called such.

In the same way that Keynesianism isn’t capitalism and marxism isn’t Holla Forums, HERETICAL SECTS that call themselves Christianity are not Christianity. It’s that fucking simple.

Capitalism is defined by a set of situations and behaviors.
Holla Forums is defined by a set of situations and behaviors.
Christianity is defined by a set of situations and behaviors.

Is communism capitalism? Of fucking course not. Why? Because in communism, the market doesn’t dictate such and such, you know?
Is marxism, direct democracy, supporting the ‘personhood’ of corporations, feminism, and faggotry Holla Forums? Of fucking course not. Why? Because we were created to get away from that bullshit and restore our culture to its traditional values.
Is zionism Christianity? Of fucking course not. Why? Because Christian doctrine explicitly says that kikes are demons, have no right to the Holy Land, and that supporting them does not support God.

It’s literally that fucking simple, and any anti-Christian D&C sack of shit can be disproven this easily.

Just copy and paste.

As long as people follow his leadership, does it matter what he's labeled?

No one gives a fuck.

Are you four years old?

You smell like intl. Should I just report you now?

...

Marine Le Pen became the leader of the french right wing party by betraying her father. Because he was "too right". Right wing men in Europe are completely destroyed. If not by leftists, then by their own daughters.

That's why I'm starting to worry about Ivanka Trump and all the power she has over her father's campaign.

WTF? Did you just make up your own fucking word? You are retarded, even by Bible thumpers' low standards.

It doesn't matter as long as people follow, but it's harder to get it off the ground. I think a male leader is better and is better long term, but short term it's a useful tool.

Which is not what I said you faggot. I explained the situation. I didn't say if it was good or bad.

This thread sure has gone places

Reported.

Do you want to try again? I notice that neither of you faggots can refute anything that was said. Thanks for proving my copypasta true.

It’s EXACTLY what you said when you started whining about men being labeled with derogatory terms. No one gives a fuck about labels, and no woman can lead.

I read your post. I wasn't impressed. Nobody is. You are a retard that makes words up as you go along. You even admit it.

With WOMEN HAVING THE VOTE all the cucked so called nationalist parties feel they need to MUH PR to get the female vote.

Fuck, I remember you. You're the retard that keeps reporting people when they disagree with you. You still keeping up this shitty attitude?

Fukken saved.

...

No, we get mad when fucktards like you come in and are all "everything is fine goyim". Things are turning around because of how Holla Forumsacks are, not despite them. You argue from a point of neutrality, like a libertardian, as if people are good at heart.

People are evil as fuck. People are turning to God because they know man has failed them. The era of man and secularism is behind us. Boomers were the peak of that era, and we Gen Y are the end of it. We'll do away with it, but we'll probably also suffer the most for it, and hope that are children are not so stupid as to just throw away what we may accomplish like the Boomers did.

our children*

Okay, you’re mentally defective. Thanks for admitting it.

Okay. So stop FEELING that way and start operating on fact.

Confirmed for intl. Report all posts.

To a lot of people, especially pro-whites who are only looking in the places that get talked about a lot, white women seem to be causing a lot of problems. White fertility and white marriage have dropped so much in the last several decades, but that's because white women are taking part in the white women sex strike against White Genocide, #WWSSAWhiteGenocide.

The women don't talk about this so much because it's hard to do two things at once, both go on strike or go making the strike a hot political topic, but however, some have told me so in private. White women don't want to be intimate with white men, a group that they've correctly stereotyped as sick and self-hating, white anti-white traitors. If you stop to think about it for a while, O.P., it makes sense. Why would anyone want to risk taking a chance on a relationship with somebody who likely holds something against you for your race?

No, white women are pushing back against White Genocide (the bringing in of hundreds of millions of third-worlders to every white country, and the forced "assimilation" set to destroy the white GENOtype). They're pushing back by using the power that they know best, that of what's in their hearts and also what's between their legs, and refusing to be intimate with white men, who come across as anti-white as a group. It's causing white fertility and white marriage to decline, a lot of rips in the social fabric, but this is making a very strong point while it's happening.

It's the white women sex strike against White Genocide. #WWSSAWhiteGenocide

You're the guy that thinks the theory of evolution is bunk, right?

Does no one ever actually read the link?

at the bottom of the article it literally says 'we don't have any data to support this, this is just the opinions of two left-leaning intellectuals'

who's dressing anything up? Of course we're scared of women, and take precautions. They're parasites who've specifically evolved to exploit men - not being wary of them would be as stupid as swimming around in a pool full AIDS-infected blood. You might not get infected, but you'd be a fucking moron to try it.

MRAs /= PUA

multiple dating sites have released statistics on their membership showing that about 80% of the action.

this is backed up by a huge amount of archaeological research showing that it was commonplace in the ancient world to slaughter the males and spare the females. There have been thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of years worth of natural selection favouring women who can get over losing their males and have babies with the people who killed them.

mixed-race is the fasted growing racial category in the UK and the second-fasted growing in the US. If they're low in absolute numbers it's only because interracial marriage only became a thing extremely recently (in the US because of laws, elsewhere because of the lack of minorities). But when you look at the genetics of African-Americans, you find that about 30-40% have some degree of white paternal ancestry, and hence could classify themselves as mixed race.

Not an argument, and nothing I ever said.

Alright, Molyneux.

...

There was an interesting reply to the suffrage aspect of that video.

And statistics have shown that in the two party system of the U.S. voting has little to no impact on results given larger societal trends at play and that people only get what they want when there's overlap with the wants of elites.

Pick one

Pick both.

The ancients knew about this shit.

Cuntification of society = collapse.

Doesn't mean Jews like polytheists either.

jcpa.org/article/neo-paganism-in-the-public-square-and-its-relevance-to-judaism/

lol nice find

Reported for intl.

MGTOW go away.

...

Femanon, grown ups are talking. Stfu

Probably a man or goon.

I've noticed some men dislike MGTOW because they think they're discouraging men from fucking.

I swear that girl is an undiagnosed retard. That facial structure, that slurred speech, that apparent inability to understand anything which is going on, that egocentrism… She has a legit medical condition and she never got diagnosed.

Holla Forums never ceases to astound me. You have brilliant political discussions on one side, and the other has stormfags and retards who think women are subhuman.

Oh man, I haven't read the replies yet, but I bet it caused a lot of butthurt and the most eloquent replies were to call you a jew.

You’re a stupid fucking piece of shit who doesn’t know what words mean.

Reported for obvious intl.

...

It's nice to see that you'll use the theory of evolution to defend your points while at the same time insisting Christianity is the only truth.

This isn't even cognitive dissonance, it's downright doublethink.

The kike's worst enemy is the kikette
The dindu's worst enemy is the dinduette
Therefore it should come as no surprise that the white man's downfall will be brought upon by nobody else than the white woman.

The people on here who scream MGTOW! the loudest fall into four groups

1) asshurt femanons
2) Holla Forums trying to derail
3) whiteknight, fedora-tier pussies
4) asshurt married guys who have buyer's remorse about their marriage and are jealous of men who aren't beholden to pussy 24/7/365

Feral refers to a domesticated animal which has escaped human husbandry and returned to the wild.

Women are not animals. Well, okay, they are, in a biological sense, just as we are. But pretending they're on the level of livestock isn't merely stupid, it's evidence of a warped mindset.

It described Communism before Communism was even defined. Based Greeks.

Heard this one a while back and it's my go to when people pull that "you just hate women in power" bullshit.

Sure feels like a lot of kike-dyke matriarch worshipers in this thread.
You do know which religion is matrilinear and gives the woman undue power in the family right?
Also, along with the DNC leak, how many matriarchs are running the show behind the Democrats?

No evidence, no rationality and heavy on the shaming. All these problems you observe? Nuh uh… don't exist. Why? Cuz I say so. Don't believe me? You're a horrible person! You should be ashamed!

Women always use emotional appeals and shaming to get their way. Like the woman who wrote this post.

From the great volume of wisdom named "random stuff I just pulled out of my ass," we get the following gems:
Really now? Are they really projected? By who? You?

Well now. I guess all our observations about what is going on are out the window here. Two leftists vaguely disagree with us. That's settled then.

But yes, divorces are going down… Because less people are getting married. This isn't the 50s where pretty much everyone was expected to, and did, get married. Logic dictates those who do now are more serious about it. And even then, we are now at a point where the 80s and 90s kids are starting to get married. Who knows if their marriages will last or not, much less when it comes to millennials. I guess this is more "projections."

The real answer is, who the fuck knows… but from where we sit and observe it doesn't look good.

Which is an idea that have gained prominence because it's fucking happening. Just take a moment and look at this lady's argument against it. It's fucking pic related. The whole argument… people who believe this are pathetic muhsoggyknees and probably gay lol. Meanwhile we got NEET guys sitting in every bunker all over the west, dick in hand, posting on imageboards, observing it happening around them.

For a rational man, it's a revolting way to have an argument. Think about it and you will remember it from… every time a woman wanted to convince you of anything, starting with your mother.

Know the formula and contemplate for yourself why women should have no say in anything important… and also why everything that is happening is men's responsibility and failure.

Here, fixed that for ya.

Don't repeat yourself Schlomo.

The women are having more sex with fewer men, I.e apex mating.
Female promiscuity is at an all time high, which is why std rates are soaring.
You are right that the video is an appeal to the mgtow audience, BPS is first and foremost a profiteering shill who works with the likes of Renegade and Stormer to cover both sides of the "debate" I.e together they tap into both sides of the income stream.

Now how would men revoke the rights of women is the question. After laws are passed the whole force of the State is on their side and trying to revoke them in Congress would be political suicide for anyone since women can vote.

wat do

COUP D'ETAT
O
U
P

D
'
E
T
A
T

D
'
E
T
A
T

Hardly possible if people are not starving.

Millennials are LESS likely to get married AT ALL.
pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/
If you don't think previous divorce rates and modern sexualized culture have anything to do with that you are stupid beyond any help.

It's not even just marriage
It's dating as a whole that's rapidly dying off

archive.is/vCQTM

...

Bullshit. Go read the communist rules for revolution and realise freemasonry kikes did this through subversion

Most spastic post I've ever read

Hi Sinead

daily reminder that there are still women who want to have babies and get married. You need to kill that Disney meme of happiness ever after, with a qt3.14. Aim for what you can hit. vet your woman , play the odds and raise superior children. thats all you can do when it comes to this particular problem. this video is meant to black pill you so you will fall into a demoralizing pathological projection along with the other NEETS posting here. you are doing exactly what they want.

I think you missed the point. BPS is propaganda tier.

The overall point raised by others is that you shouldn't settle, and should be very careful of certain aspects to maintain a relationship.

Being conscious and aware of the pitfalls can save you from a messy breakup.

Also sexual market value of a man isn't at its height until his 40's when he's making an income that can support a family.

Going full-MGTOW is one choice, but it's not the only choice that community's insights present someone.

Unless you buy into the PragerU myth that a man won't ever attain any success unless he's married with a family beforehand.

I'll practice sexual continence for a year and reich another plane of existence.

I think that what happens is, women fail to support men in society. They become disconnected and self indulgent. Men, who see their unappreciated efforts as futile, give up and become depressed, and thereby disconnected and self indulgent.

The problem is that the ((media)) have told women for decades that no man is good enough for them. So, they've abandoned those men for non existent simulacrums, short sighted hedonism, and attempting to immitate the unobtainable standard of what they see on television.

The thing is… we can't turn them back now. I think it's too late for a couple generations. You aren't going to get a danger haired problem glassed cultist out of her cult. Nor are you going to get a single mother slampig to unfuck the nigra dick from herself. So, while there are a small minority of women who are capable of doing better…

chances are that you aren't getting one. And if you haven't locked one down by 25, you are definitely not getting one.

Don't forget to make dinner for your wife and her son for when she gets home from her date with Tyrone.

Its a bot

...

Somewhat related to the video is this, that I stumbled across recently. Women really are more disposed to tolerating being shared in a harem by someone they see as powerful.

instagram.com/kimwestlatex/
instagram.com/p/BEef5JPpGQr/?taken-by=kimwestlatex

Reported for intl.

Reported for intl.

Well Islam is a religion

Women prioritize their own comfort above all else.

If the harem provides them with more material comfort than other available options, they will do any and all necessary mental gymnastics necessary to talk themselves into it.

In a manner of speaking, it makes sense. A woman in a harem will be married to a wealthier man who she will benefit more in material comfort from than she will have to provide him in intimate and personal attention.

How many CAPTCHAs are you going to fill out for this thread?

Are you trying to say, user. that most white men aren't anti-white?? If the opposite were true, that most white men were pro-white, that would probably mean that White Genocide (massive third-world immigration, combined with policies that "assimilate" the white GENOtype with the third-world and destroy the white racial genotype) would not be happening.

But as White Genocide can be seen happening, that means that, in fact, most white men are anti-white. And, why would any white woman want to risk going out and dedicating herself to somebody who probably resents her for her race, as he is probably self-hating himself for being white?

No, white women wouldn't risk that. In fact, they'll use the power that they know best, that of their affections, to punish this group of anti-whites, white men. That's known as the white women sex strike against White Genocide, or #WWSSAWhiteGenocide.

White Genocide continues, and the sex strike continues. At least, that's what they say, user.

excellent video OP

Liked + favourited

Another one:

youtube.com/watch?v=Cx70YbMxetY

Atheism is failing us.

The only way I see us getting out of this mess is a return to christian values.

We won't be able to "sell" those idea to our society.

I don't believe in god but trust me, I'm willing to fake it.

I personally honor the Roman Gods. Modesty and sexual virtue was something seen with good eyes in Early Rome.

Based Aristophanes. He was a Holla Forumsack way before the kikes. His other play, the clouds, is pretty good too.

you're in the wrong place shlomo.
>>>/MGTOW/
>>>/cuteboys/
>>>/gaschamber/
>>>/oven/

Women are inferior to men in every single aspect except one single thing - childbirth. If men could give birth, women would quickly become extinct. They are nothing but unintelligent and emotional baby factories.

these are the absolutely the most fucking retarded graphs I have ever seen. You are literally attributing war debt to women's suffrage. You should kill yourself immediately

...

whores

Not even this place is safe from /r9k/ and /lgbt/ faggotry and shilling

Sad

Yes Schlomo, women never voted socialism and welfare and an increase in govt taxation and spending.

Kill yourself autistic ugly permavirgin faggot redditor mgtow shill

so he has a white bull?

You know, it's retards like you that do a great job of ensuring that pol will never be more then a fringe. Can't dispute something? It's dem jewssssssssssss.

Exactly. We all know what the problem is and it isn't women. Its the jews, its always been the jews. They're a contamination of society.

Women are the best thing ever, and beta jews try to get us to hate them because their goal is to break up the christian family unit.

Fuck off whiny MGTOW loser. Women will follow strong men. If women do stupid things it's because modern men in the west are weak. Fix the men and you'll fix the women.

You're a moron.

Abundance makes r-selection the dominant pattern. This causes all the errors in society.

More like feral like children can be. Ever heard of feral children? Women are like children. Their brain stops maturing at age 14. They have a stunted brain in comparison to adult men.

Women have great qualities, sure. They are, however, fallible to certain things. Emotions, for one. Men are prone to following women to a degree.

Source? This is most interesting.

Remember this is what the Jews are trying to break up, because they know the strength of White People lies in family, which is at the very core of society.
Don't let them do it.

As long as you lack the proper resources to work with (in this case uncorrupted females), stating something like that is pretty pointless.

I'm sorry but if you want to retain the purity of our females you must fight for it. You can't be lazy and whack off at home to digital chicks with dicks, hoping somebody else does it for you.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing right now? Why should I, as third party, take responsibility for the personal shortcomings of women? And more importantly: how do you envision "fighting for it" would look like?

Be very specific please.

...

White knight or woman, what's the guess?

You forget about democracy and its enforced equality.
Now it's just about the greater number, nothing more.

Did you watch the video and read a synopsis of the book, you fucking retard?

jstor.org/stable/30026099?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Tell me what this paper says. Do not reply with anything else. You will tell me what this paper says, and then you will never contest the point again. You will receive no response if you do anything but what I am telling you to.

Stop the hyperbole, faggot. It's not inaccurate. In the 20th c. a huge chunk of the bravest men in several generations in many countries was killed off, leaving room for the rabbits. It might be wrong, but it fits the facts.

This is also wrong. Empirically, women are highly loyal, so long as the survival of the tribe is not in question; in fact, they are hyperconformist, whereas men tend to take a looser attitude towards group norms and group welfare. But women are certainly treacherous, in that after the tribe is defeated they switch loyalties to the victor.

Again, wrong. The men include brothers, cousins, and sons whose welfare is important to them. Genes which put those relatives at risk needlessly will not. Additionally, the loss of paternal care that comes from demotion from wife to war-prize (not just for herself, but for her sisters and daughters) greatly lowers the selective fitness of her offspring.

Women have strong incentives to side with the invaders… AFTER the invasion has succeeded. Before that point, they have very, very strong genetic interests in avoiding any conflict. Their interests in peace are much stronger than their husbands', in fact, because while the genetic downside of a war is bigger for the husband (he is more likely to be slaughter), the upside is also big (he might get to rape his enemy's wife and daughters), whereas the tribe's women have a big downside and no upside.

This is stupid; other evolved mechanisms might create this kind of behavior, but this could never be selected-for for this reason.

No, they are in danger of being killed; thus Stockholm Syndrome, because women who don't switch loyalty to the conquer/rapist quickly enough are frequently killed.

In fact, the whole Stockholm Syndrome/falling in love with the rapist thing may be purely Eurasian, co-evolved with stronger Eurasian pair-bonding mechanisms (i.e. romantic love). Africans generally practice gangrape rather than individual rape, and murder or maim rape victims afterwards, suggesting that in Africa the evolutionary strategy of eliminating the genetics of rival clans completely has a stronger influence.

They rarely offer more protection (because they are rarely treating the warprizes as well as they treat their own wives) and only in unusual circumstances would there be a genetic difference between conqueror and conquered that made the conquest more likely and will affect the survival of the children.

For example, it's not crazy to imagine this mentality could arise where there was white imperialism: the average white IQ advantage is 10-30 points, so women who encourage wars (followed by rapes) are likely to have smarter babies by 5-15 IQ pts, which might be a strong enough advantage to spread the "female sabotage" gene. But frankly, there hasn't been enough time or enough opportunity for such a gene to become widely established even in the colonial settings.

This is confused. The rabbit (r) strategy for men is to have lots of children (potentially by many women) and not put much effort into raising or caring for any of them. Pair-bonding is a K strategy, producing stronger children with higher fitness.

Lol, I don't think you can even start to understand what you don't understand

There is some overlap here. Jewesses have some of the Eurasian genes for pair-bonding, but much more notably they have over-pronounced Afro-Semitic genes for promiscuity. I've never seen specific research address this, but I assume it has something to do with jews living in a disease-ridden urban environment for thousands of years, where most children died before maturity. Presumably starting immediately at menarche and having more of a rabbit-mentality helps increase total number of children; a higher willingness to be unfaithful might also get a diversified genetic basket so that when a new plague comes, a jewess can be sure her children don't all have identical immune systems and immune vulnerabilities.

The problem in 2016 is that a jewess in middle school is happy to do anything her boyfriend wants to (and sometimes, pushes him further than he wants to go), and by high school she can't wait to get on the cock-carousel at college.

That has a strong effect on white girls, even where jews aren't a big part of the population, because little jewesses can get any boyfriend they want by sucking dick while white girls are still nervous about their first kiss. Girls see what they have to do to attract the boys they have crushes on, they see what the high-status girls in their school (i.e., the ones dating the best guys) are doing, and, because girls are hyperconformist, they accept it as the "new normal", even if it feels wrong and makes them unhappy.

Politically incorrect study reviewed here:

theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/02/kevin-macdonald-race-bias-and-conception-risk-implicit-and-explicit-whiteness-in-action/

TL;DR:

Satan pls. You're never going to win you know.

needs less clothing

wew

Be careful with the vaginal jew, goyim, it may be your downfall.

good video thanks

Reported again.

BUMP

...

I've thought about this quite a bit, here's the best I've come up with so far:

You can't take women's rights away by force — I mean, you could try, but I don't think it would end well. Anything that can be framed as you being a racist, sexist opressor can be used as a justification to destroy you and liberate those you were oppressing. So it's got to be non-violent and voluntary.

But how do you get women to voluntarily surrender their "equal rights"?

You have to offer them something even better than having equal rights.

So you somehow start a new independent, sovereign nation where, for example, women can't vote.

The only women there at first will be a few wives that come with their husbands.

But being free of the burdens that come with women and nonwhites, this nation quickly grows and prospers — it's safe and has a high standard of living. Which is basically what all women want from a man, so the few women their are living the dream.

Other women see those happy women and want a happy life too, and eventually more couples and more single women will migrate there.

Soon, new generations are born who see this situation as good and normal just by having grown up in it.

Now your task is just to prevent your society from getting subverted again, and prevent outside influences from convincing your women that they would be happier if they had equal rights.

MGTOW kike pls go

The new ideology we form, the new Nazi party must revoke all women's rights and send them back to the stone-age in rights.

Harems for the survivors of the coming race war. An honorable burial for the dead. And death to all enemies.

...

>sit in your ivory tower NEET dungeon all day

Why the fuck are you making a new thread about a six month old video that contains nothing that not everyone on Holla Forums should already be fully aware of?

It's the oversexualized culture. I just learned that one of my students, who barely turned 16, might be pregnant. And she's a straight A student. Just look at the Instagrams and snapchats of modern teens and you'll see how fucked up things are. It's all about sex and booze. And even smart girls let themselves be influenced by this gross culture and peer pressure. It's sad, really.

Women are basically animals, only useful for breeding, which is why we need to keep them around. Don't give them any freedom or rights other than that to reproduce.

KHAZARS DESTROY NATIONS

PISS OFF YOU DEGENERATE SATANIST

Watch the video, you fucking tool.

This tbh