Posted on 01/14/2017 5:49:05 AM PST by Crucial
They lost control first. Remember Queen Vashti?
Hear, hear !!!!! As a woman myself I agree. Women are catty, bitchy, fickle, unpredictable. Have one great woman friend. I also had female boss who admitted she tended never to be satisfied. They have over emotionalized the logical order created by men and it has ruined this fine country. Viva a man’s man, President TRUMP!
A woman agrees to share your life but really wants to control it and run it. Bad for any relationship. As woman with sex laws of today I would as man never trust any woman. Imho date rape is usually buyer’s remorse and guilt next day.
One of the indications I had was when I was second in command, and the male boss went away for a few weeks, leaving me in charge. When he returned, I told everyone that the boss was back--and they all acted like he wasn't, and still kept coming to me for their employee issues. Some of the employees flat out told me that they preferred me over the actual boss. People outside of our division were sometimes surprised when I told them that I actually was not the boss.
He has since been transferred to another division, and I'm the actual boss now.
The author is falling for the fake news/fake media.
He describes almost half of women. But half of women, maybe more than half, are not as he describes. They are too busy flipping burgers, answering phones, coding apps, yelling at their kids.
“It was never about equality or bringing women up, like all other Leftist ideologies it’s about bringing someone down.
In this case men, and ultimately the western Judeo-Christian family structure.”
Breakdown the Judeo-Christian family structure first, then demonize the concept of patriotism or nationalism, and then it’s just one more small step to institute a new global order where “everybody is equal”. (Except of course for the ruling class) This has been the plan and goal of elitist New World Order Socialist/Globalists for a very long time.
Even though I’m complaining about their beliefs, men aren’t in very good shape either. The Left and its victim cultur has thrown society out of balance and it does this through fostering victimization.
“While inspired by Communists (literally: the Soviet Union tried to abolish the family and had to reverse course quickly as it nearly destroyed Russia, check the the article from *The Atlantic* in 1926 which details this)... The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage”
Thanks for posting the link to that article. Very educational. The last paragraph was interesting:
“In the second place, it is now pretty evident that the widespread circulation of revolutionary ideas on the desirability of abolishing the family has not by any means eliminated old-fashioned passions of love and jealousy. The police records are full of cases, some of them very terrible, of murders and assaults and suicides committed by women under the influence of jealousy. One such case may serve as an example. A peasant left his village wife and began to live with a working woman in the town. The village wife kept coming and making scenes before the second wife, until the latter, irritated beyond endurance, poured benzine over her rival, set her on fire, and burned her to death. Such elemental outbursts of jealousy are condemned by the Communists as ‘relics of bourgeois prejudice’; but they continue to occur nevertheless, and even Communist women have been known to commit suicide because their husbands’ attentions were diverted elsewhere.”
From the 1926 article linked to in post 34. Think Romneycare/Obamacare was bad? Leave it to a feminist to come up with this, how about “Kollontaicare”: marriage insurance. It sounds a whole lot like the libtard mantra of the “it takes a village...” bs.
“Madama Kollontai, Russia’s foremost feminist leader and first woman ambassador (to Norway), offered an interesting contribution to this discussion. She opposed the bill because she did not think women could collect alimony, especially if their husbands had two families. She was against registration and altogether in favor of free love. As a solution for the vexing problem of children she suggested a scheme of ‘marriage insurance,’ to be financed by an annual levy of one dollar on every adult citizen of the Soviet Union. This would provide a fund of about sixty million dollars a year, enough to provide for all the babies who might be born as a result of free-love unions. She also remarked that, although the present-day Russian youth is accused of dissipation and loose living, it is often forgotten that prostitution has largely disappeared. (In this connection there is a widespread saying that amateurs spoil the profession.)”
How much of this is rooted in feminism? Do many of these “feminine” responses to real world experiences sound like hysteria? Check out this website tracing the history of the term, indicating that it is Greek for “uterus”: http://academic.mu.edu/meissnerd/hysteria.html
What is interesting is that being a woman, I can easily attest to the fact that sometimes, my emotions get away with me. But I recognize it and do not act on those overwrought emotions. . . well most of the time ;)
A great deal of what we are seeing in the deterioration of modern society looks to me like women’s emotional tendencies are being given equal footing with or taking precedence over actual rational thought. There are many good things about feminine emotions when they are employed wisely, but to impose them where they are destructive is another matter entirely.
Add to this the insistence of feminists that the difference between the sexes is merely a “social construct”, they actually believe that men respond to circumstances the same way that they do but just won’t admit it. You see, society has conditioned them to “suppress” their emotions and they need to find and express their “feminine” side.
What we have is the complete “infantilization” of society. Now, “infantilization” is a term used by feminists to describe what women think sexists do to them when they don’t take their hysterics seriously, i.e., treating them like children. But they are the ones infantilizing everyone by insisting that no one has the ability to deal with setbacks, criticism or anything short of unicorns and rainbows.
How can I take someone seriously when they engage in temper tantrums when they don’t get their way? In computer programming, we call this an infinite loop. It runs endlessly and will eventually fry your computer. Let’s not let this happen to our civilization.
As for my personal experiences in the workplace, I’ve worked either temporary or contract for most of my career and have worked for somewhere between 75 and 100 different companies.
I’ve worked for and with some wonderful women and I’ve worked for and with some very destructive women. The difference is competence. Women who are competent in their fields are a delight to work for as are competent men.
Incompetent men and women in the workplace are always a nightmare. But, percentage wise, fewer incompetent men get into positions of authority because there are no government rewards to put men into positions of authority. I think this government intrusion into the workplace is distorting our views and undermining success as all inappropriate government intrusion always does.
And out come all the standard feminist boilerplate complaints, irrespective of the original post, or much of anything else, really.
Here's a clue. If a woman has had sex with multiple other men before getting married, her ability to bond to her husband uniquely, drops off precipitously. Her amount of likely baggage has exponentiated; and she'll have a much greater chance of always secretly pining for "the alpha that got away."
How on earth any of that translates to a "sexual fantasy philosophy" is beyond me: except that modern women like to pretend they can sleep around (say, on overseas trips or "it doesn't count because it was only a blow job") or whatever.
The standards as far as available women are putting on offer, have dropped off staggeringly during that time: I made it just before the door slammed shut, apparently.
Scripture says that a woman should submit -- not to *men*, which is what feminism falsely claims, but to her *husband*.
In particular, giving the example of Sarah and Abraham.
I do feel like I’m in an infinite loop because of these ideological feminists.
The problem stems from women wanting to be more like men and wanting men to be more like women. We were made male and female by our Creator. When we try to neutralize the sexes, we chip away at what God intended. American women (and men) need to be grateful for the privileges they enjoy. When women are content with being women, men can in turn be men and not these girly types that seem to be everywhere right now. We need strong men in this nation who will protect and provide for their families. This is what God intended and His way is always best.
Absolutely right.
I’ve seen the *Red Pill* stuff promoted here before.
The poster is no longer with us.
And how about men sleeping around? They all want to marry a virgin but how many of them care if the woman marries a virgin as well?
Oh sure, marry a virgin under 24 etc......
You know. life doesn’t always work out so neat and tidy. Sometimes the person doesn’t meet the right other person until later in life. Happens you know. That’s reality, not what you are pushing.
You don’t have any useful or realistic advice about women. Nothing that’s going to help a man, for sure.
AMEN!!!
I don’t know how to reply to your post. I don’t know if you are being literal or employing sarcasm.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.