patrick.net

Eve is why women can't be Priests; they believed the snake and tricked Adam into eating it.

This is why any religion based on the Bible that allows Women Priests over Male Congregants is not following Biblical Teaching.

Run, don't walk, from any Female Rabbi or Pastor.

CBOEtrader says

Sex and city writer wishes she gathered her rosebuds while she could

She doesn't regret helping to lure millions of women into that trap?

#stupidcunt

HonkpilledMaster says

Men age like whiskey.
Women age like bread.

I heard it like this:

Women age like milk.
Men age like wine.

CBOEtrader says

Feminism is a lie. Period.

Of course. Men and women are very different physically, mentally, and emotionally. That is the fundamental truth that feminists cannot admit, and yet is obvious to anyone who has lived on earth for more than a couple of years.

Many women are very bitter about being women. I went to a meetup once about gender roles, and the woman running it asked how many of the women had ever wanted to be men. ALL of the women raised their hands. Then she asked how many of the men had ever wanted to be women. NONE of the men raised their hands.

I suspect that the majority of women have a deep dissatisfaction with the reality of human biology, especially extremely ugly women like Michelle Dauber, the Stanford law prof who got a good judge fired for being reasonable about a false rape accusation.

That deep dissatisfaction with factual human biology is what drives feminists to make provably false assertions daily, and have those assertion codified into laws we are all forced to obey.

And so, we will die out. The God of biomechanics does not negotiate.

Patrick says

and the woman running it asked how many of the women had ever wanted to be men. ALL of the women raised their hands. Then she asked how many of the men had ever wanted to be women. NONE of the men raised their hands.

I blame this on feminism as well. They diminish traditional female roles telling girls instead to aspire to male standards (poorly) rather than be amazing women.

These kinds of regrets are anti-Zen. I see people with kids chasing them around and bribing them to stay in their lives. A lot of kids just butter their parents up waiting for them to keel over to inherit their shit. Once in a while, there is a truly close relationship in which the kids would give anything to have their parents back, but that's the luck of the draw of many draws in life.

CBOEtrader says

I blame this on feminism as well. They diminish traditional femalen roles telling girls instead to aspire to male standards (poorly) rather than be amazing women.

I agree. The women who have failed at being women are taking as many girls as possible down with them.

If they can't win, they don't want anyone to win.

Men get into groups to compete with other groups

Women are individually competitive, but try to join groups of men to get resources.

I don't think they are bitter to be women. They are more bitter about the entire situation in which they are:
Women bear a disproportionate share of the burden of parenthood. In exchange of that they have a couple of things men want: sex and reproduction, so they go through life being mostly pampered by men. But as mothers, they are also dependent on men to support them economically and materially.

So
1 - they know they know they can get shit from men by complaining. That's why women complain all the time. Whereas men have nothing to gain by complaining except looking pathetic.
2 - What women resent is their dependence on men. This is why they talk of being strong and independent, ask for careers etc, while at the same time still using men to help them at every opportunity.
(1) + (2) explains feminism.
The lie is the belief they should be exactly equal, which is neither possible nor desirable, even for women.
Most women wouldn't like the harsh reality of men competitions.
Most women don't like the stress to be in leadership position and be responsible for everything while having to fight all the time to stay there.
Most women like to kiss babies feet - more than men anyway.

Yup, women always complaining no matter how good they have it or how many resources they have managed to cadge. This is just another woman complaining. If she had kids, she would be complaining about them and not having pursued her career.

Heraclitusstudent says

But as mothers, they are also dependent on men to support them economically and materially.

Now they have the government. They can drive men away, make them pay, and if they don't pay, Uncle Sam will pay.

Ceffer says

Yup, women always complaining no matter how good they have it or how many resources they have managed to cadge. This is just another woman complaining. If she had kids, she would be complaining about them and not having pursued her career.

Yup. Over the past 100 years, women were liberated from drudgery of hand washing laundry, stirring dinner over a huge iron cauldron or iron stove, constantly attending it, given disposable diapers, 100s of labor saving devices - almost 100% developed by males. Safer Streets, welfare for widows (now for hobags, too), etc.

And they STILL complain.

Grandpa was right - tune that shit out. Grandpa made a big mistake though, in liberalizing divorce and giving money to hobags. Consent or Fault, no more no-fault.

HonkpilledMaster says

Now they have the government. They can drive men away, make them pay, and if they don't pay, Uncle Sam will pay.

Not if they have a job. They need both the help and the extra money.
If they drive men away they get money maybe, if the man is solvent, but then they have to do a lot of crap alone.
Or on gov help, it's poverty.
Divorce is disastrous for mothers, as well as the poor sod sending the checks.

CBOEtrader says

Sex and city writer

She's actually a latter day version of Helen Gurley Brown. Born in 1922, she married as most of her generation did, but by the time she was in her 40's in the early '60s when she wrote the book Sex and the Single Girl she was a full blown advocate of the do your own thing that was becoming fashionable with the younger generation and made millions off of it. She was kind of a hatchet face and always resented younger, really good looking women. "Scanlon suggests that Sex and the City is "the most direct descendent of the sexual politics Helen Gurley Brown introduced in Sex and the Single Girl" and Jane Gerhard argues that "Sex and the City pays direct homage" to Sex and the Single Girl, as both present the "connection between women's financial independence and their sexual liberation.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://images.theconversation.com/files/14257/original/j9v86qfp-1344991534.jpg?ixlib%3Drb-1.1.0%26q%3D45%26auto%3Dformat%26w%3D926%26fit%3Dclip&imgrefurl=http://theconversation.com/death-of-an-editor-vale-helen-gurley-brown-8843&h=598&w=926&tbnid=RzvDTeGZDxFr_M&tbnh=180&tbnw=279&usg=AI4_-kQfwivkCdqcAy15lzqyVSOIthemkQ&vet=1&docid=9GC8voBeXlOX0M

Heh, Heh! It reminds me of the jokes from the day. You go to a psychiatrist to work out your problems, and you ALWAYS wind up divorced, because at some juncture you and the shrink agree that your SELF ACTUALIZATION is being impeded by your demonic spouse.

I enjoy the 'couples counseling' they sometime show in movies and TV where the couple goes to the female therapist. The therapist and the wife gang up against the husband and every time he says something they both jump down his throat, like he wound up with WifeZilla squared instead of therapy.

Heraclitusstudent says

Not if they have a job. They need both the help and the extra money.

A substantial proportion do not have a job. And many more work a menial work below their own station for "Flexibility" knowing supplemental gov't aid will make up the difference as if they had a better paying job without the flexibility. Also, in some states there is danger of child support/alimony being adjusted down if a woman makes more.

Imagine if there was no welfare and no no fault divorce. Imagine how much more valued, safer, better the inner city kids would be with two parents. Because Shanaynay needs Tyrone around.

P N Dr Lo R says

She's actually a latter day version of Helen Gurley Brown. Born in 1922, she married as most of her generation did, but by the time she was in her 40's in the early '60s when she wrote the book Sex and the Single Girl she was a full blown advocate of the do your own thing that was becoming fashionable with the younger generation and made millions off of it. She was kind of a hatchet face and always resented younger, really good looking women. "Scanlon suggests that Sex and the City is "the most direct descendent of the sexual politics Helen Gurley Brown introduced in Sex and the Single Girl" and Jane Gerhard argues that "Sex and the City pays direct homage" to Sex and the Single Girl, as both present the "connection between women's financial independence and their sexual liberation.

Thanks Doc, Good Read!

The effect of married fathers on child outcomes can be quite pronounced. For example, examination of families with the same race and same parental education shows that, compared with intact married families, children from single-parent homes are:

More than twice as likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime,[3]
Twice as likely to be treated for emotional and behavioral problems,[4]
Roughly twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school,[5] and
A third more likely to drop out before completing high school.[6]

The effects of being raised in a single-parent home continue into adulthood. Comparing families of the same race and similar incomes, children from broken and single-parent homes are three times more likely to end up in jail by the time they reach age 30 than are children raised in intact married families.[7] Compared with girls raised in similar married families, girls from single-parent homes are more than twice as likely to have a child without being married, thereby repeating the negative cycle for another generation.[8]

https://www.heritage.org/welfare/report/how-welfare-undermines-marriage-and-what-do-about-it

The most cost effective, best thing for children is to eliminate aid/cash/personal housing for single motherhood with Unwed Mothers Homes. You can get aid, but only if you move into a facility. Reducing the EITC for never-married women with children would also help.

Part of Socialism and Feminism is to compel and force the subsidization of unwed, single motherhood. It's a wealth redistribution scheme from hard working, mostly male, mostly White and Asian men, to Irresponsible Single Women of all races. End this racist and sexist policy now.

Ceffer says

Because Shanaynay needs Tyrone around

The 40% is for whites, for African-Americans it's 70% plus.

Heraclitusstudent says

Women bear a disproportionate share of the burden of parenthood.

So what? Parenthood is a gift and most often a joy and rarely also a pain, but net net it's great. What's to complain about? Modern-day men share the burden almost equally, minus the actual pregnancy. Motherhood is a gift - so is fatherhood.

mell says

So what? Parenthood is a gift

So women need men. And they know it.

So feminist see this as unfair, and often see motherhood as a burden to avoid. Seeking a right to the same independence that men apparently enjoy. "Apparently" because in reality men do need women for other reasons.

But at the same time women evolved to seek the help and protection of men. Even if they are rich and have helpers, they still 'feel' dependent.
Many women feel not that they should be independent but that they should be entitled to the help.

But especially in the modern world where families are spread out, so no grand mother to help, the financial and material help of the father is crucial.

HonkpilledMaster says

More than twice as likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime,[3]
Twice as likely to be treated for emotional and behavioral problems,[4]
Roughly twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school,[5] and
A third more likely to drop out before completing high school.[6]

Note that in birds, some species can find food easily from fruits. In these species the mother can and does raise the chicks without the father. The males don't have much to do except seeking females. The result is the females have a huge choice and the males get "peacocked" into fancy displays of colors and elaborate mating rituals. Most males never mate, as the top males get most females.

In other species, for example getting food from insects, it takes both parents to feed the chicks. The fathers are busy most of the time, and can't fool around as much. The result is that the economics of mating are far more balanced.

In the modern world where women work, families are spread out, with no grandmother to help, the financial and material help of the father is crucial. So humans are by far more in the second category.
But men shouldn't be too eager to be in the first. Feminism is one thing. Immature men reluctant to take on the yoke is an other.

Heraclitusstudent says

Immature men reluctant to take on the yoke is an other.

Blowback for males will be coming, just not as obvious... Yet.

Agree completely though. Casting off traditional gender roles will hurt men as well. In 10 years I expect men to be writing articles like, "I regret playing video games and ignoring my career until I was 32. Now I'm truly alone."

Heraclitusstudent says

Immature men reluctant to take on the yoke is an other.

When your wealth is redistributed to skanks, either via divorce or simply welfare to hoodlum hobags, why bother working hard to generate lots of it beyond a modest amount?

Many Men are no longer kings in their own home, if they are married. But are expected not only to carry their traditional burden, but contribute to far more household chores as well. It's not like you come home to food on the table and a clean house anymore. Pussy is widely available at little cost, and frankly not much effort.

HonkpilledMaster says

It's not like you come home to food on the table and a clean house anymore.

Same or worse for women. Whatever the reasons, it is what it is.
I also doubt that men were ever really "kings" in their houses. But yeah for a short while you could live on 1 salary.

HonkpilledMaster says

When your wealth is redistributed to skanks, either via divorce or simply welfare to hoodlum hobags

I share this feeling too: some of this is abusive. But some revenues have to go to children, if the mother is taking care of them. There is a core part here that is unescapable.

HonkpilledMaster says

Pussy is widely available at little cost, and frankly not much effort.

Reproduction should be seen as the most important task happening in the society. It's not taken seriously enough.
Just chasing pussies isn't enough.

HonkpilledMaster says

100s of labor saving devices - almost 100% developed by males.

Behold! The POWER of complaint!

CBOEtrader says

In 10 years I expect men to be writing articles like, "I regret playing video games and ignoring my career until I was 32. Now I'm truly alone."

Uh no, unless they’re hideous freaks, this doesn’t happen. Men only get more desirable to women their age as the years go by. For example, a very average to unattractive friend of my dad’s goofed off for basically all his life never getting a career or decent job. He did a lot of weed and other stuff while working just enough to get by until he was like 50! Then he married a late 30s single mom and popped out a kid of his own. She works too, and now so does he. They seem perfectly happy with the situation.

Heraclitusstudent says

Same or worse for women. Whatever the reasons, it is what it is.
I also doubt that men were ever really "kings" in their houses. But yeah for a short while you could live on 1 salary.

I think it's like Bumble. Women asking men was supposed to smash the Patriarchy. Instead,it pressure flipped rejection on Females, so they hated it.
Many women thought working outside the home was a fun adventure. Then it became a must.

Kind of like the way college 20-somethings in the UK view Europe: "If Brexit passes, I won't be able to get that Fashion Marketing Job at 100k Euros in Milan I know I will get after Graduation. No Romance with Mario, No living in a swank apartment, no espresso in the upscale cafe." When they don't realize they'll be lucky to get an AP/AR job at Midlands Office Supply for 30k Quid/Year.

Living on one salary was the norm for any non-farming family since at least the late 1700s until the 1980s.

Heraclitusstudent says

I share this feeling too: some of this is abusive. But some revenues have to go to children, if the mother is taking care of them. There is a core part here that is unescapable.

We can best guarantee resources are being spent on children and not 40s and Crack with Unwed Mother Homes, rather than trusting already demonstrably irresponsible young girls, most themselves the product of a welfare mother, to run an independent household. We know the kids are eating in the cafeteria, rather than getting nothing but 99 cent cheese doodle imitations from the dollar store because momma spent it all on Weed and Weaves last Thursday.

Why not "Child Support Cards" that reject swipes at Hair Salons for Adult Hair Coloring/Grey Away, Hand and Stone Spa Treatments, and so forth? There is no demand for it, because armies of divorced women would never stand for it.

That there are hundreds of thousands of Bureaucrats whose full/part time job it is to enforce male child support, but 0 whose job it is to enforce correct female child support usage (or enforce mandatory visitation) tells you we live in a Matriarchy.

Heraclitusstudent says

Reproduction should be seen as the most important task happening in the society. It's not taken seriously enough.

It definitely is not.

Heraclitusstudent says

Just chasing pussies isn't enough.

For young men the goal is to satiate horniness and to a lesser extent achieve some prestige/self-confidence by banging lots of pussy. Women want pussy to have high value, but at the same time give it up whenever they feel like it; and then the overarching inter-female competition --- the two are in conflict.

In any case, Single Mothers is both the most common and one of the worst conditions to plague a child's life, almost as bad as druggie/alcoholic parents yet far more prevalent, yet society takes it totally unseriously and puts up no barriers to the formation of such units; indeed it works to pull the last few actual ramifications of female personal choice to be one away. Such as freezing eggs so when a 30-year old becomes a 40-something partnerless women, she can become a single mom.

Another interesting point, why it's a waste of resources to shame males, or at least the "Players", is because of the "It takes Two" Fallacy.

We already know that hypergamous females are mostly attracted to only a minority of clearly above average men, and ignore the other 70-80% until they are too old/too lonely/realize their SMV has declined dramatically.

As explained by Dalrock's amazing "We are trapped on Slut Island and Trad Cons are Gilligan"

The tried and true approach: Slut shaming.

Assume we are starting off with 100 sluts and 30 alphas/players. The sluts are happily riding on the alpha (HM: Cock) carousel. Now we introduce slut shaming. It isn’t fully effective of course, but it manages to convince 15 of the would be sluts not to be sluts after all. This means an additional 15 women are again potentially suitable for marriage. This directly translates into fewer fatherless children. This also makes the next round of slut shaming easier. Instead of having 99 peers eagerly cheering her on her ride, each slut now has 15 happily married women shaming her and only 84 other sluts encouraging her. After the next round this becomes 30 happily married women shaming the sluts, and only 69 other sluts cheering them on, and so on. This process continues until all but the most die hard sluts are off the carousel. You will never discourage them all, but you can do a world better than we are doing today.

The Gilligan approach: Shame the Players.

Start with the same base assumption of 100 sluts and 30 players. Now apply shame to the players. Unfortunately shame is less effective on players than it is on sluts, so instead of discouraging 15% of them (4.5) in the first round, it only discourages three of them. No problem! says the Gilligan, at least there are now three fewer sluts now that three of the evil alphas have been shamed away, and all without creating any unhappy sluts! But unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. The remaining 27 players are more than happy to service the extra sluts. They are quite maddeningly actually delighted with the new situation. Even worse, the next round of player shaming is even less effective than the first. This time only 2 players are discouraged, and one of the other 3 realizes that his player peers are picking up the slack anyway and reopens for business. This means in net there are still 26 players, more than enough to handle all of the sluts you can throw at them.

But it gets worse yet. Now that the ratio of sluts to players is even less in the sluts favor, the sluts actually get sluttier! They now have to compete even harder for each player’s attention. Now we have 100 even sluttier sluts!

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/we-are-trapped-on-slut-island-and-traditional-conservatives-are-our-gilligan/