Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism

[Wrangler]

No, it's not Competitive Feminism.

Yes, it is Competitive Feminism! You claim we don't know real feminism. But we do. I read a book that explained the 3 types of feminism, only one of which is good.

All you got is denial of reality.

 

[Wrangler]

I DO have compassion for men.

You got a funny way of showing it.

Did WOMEN demand that this be done? No, MEN did.

You refuse to have any compassion whatsoever for the plight of men. The reason for this is you are so wrapped up in your victim mentality.

Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that men now make up a minority of college students and the immediate need for programs to fix this inequality?

1. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that they don't need harassment laws in the workplace because they don't need special accomodation and it is insulting to suppose strong and independent women do need such special accomodation? Sexual Harassment in Our Nation’s Workplaces
2. Where are the feminists marching in the street, demanding the sexist program WIC get absolished (or at least named to equally apply to both parents)?
3. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that there are sex restricted sports teams and demanding only "open" tryouts regardless of what sex the person is, abolish Title IX, etc?
4. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that men don't get custody 50% of the time or that joint physical custody 100% of the time is not the law of the land (unless special accomodation is called for), eliminating the archaic and sexist transfer of wealth payment system?
5. OR Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that men's transfer of wealth payments are not tied to an accountability system where the money "for the children" is actually spent on the children rather than the life style of feminists who are supposedly "strong and independent and don't need a man's" money to begin with?
6. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that men die earlier than women and we should be spending a proportionally more amount of money on men's only diseases and immediately end the sexist over-spending on women only (or predominantly) diseases?
7. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that men are the only sex that have to register for selective service and demand women be treated equally in this regard?
8. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that the retirement age is the same but women live longer so the retirement age should be sex based adjusted so each sex gets to enjoy an average number of years in retirement?
9. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that 92% of the people who die on the job are men and action should be taken so women are equally put in dangerous jobs to equalize this sexist statistic?
10. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that only 1 of 11 prisoners are women and the need to immediately change these sexist laws to achieve equality?
11. Where are the feminists marching in the street, angry that only 10% of the homeless are women and the need to immediately change these sexist laws to achieve equality?

Apparently, inequality is good when it does not benefit the Patriarchy. One sided accomodation for sex is OK, right?

These questions reveal the lie that feminism is about equality. Feminism disguises victory as equality, which explains why you never see feminists marching in the street for "equality" that does not benefit them.

 

[Wrangler]

Do tell....This I GOTTA see...

Coveting is the root of all such evil ideologies as feminism. You don't demand equality of responsibility or risk of death in war, police, prisoners, etc. Only demand equality of benefit. Pure coveting, along with blatant double standards.

Because you are in denial of the evil of feminist ideology, you cannot bring yourself to recognize the evil consequences or cause.

 

[Wrangler]

Are you kidding me????

Wow. Talk about a hatred for a perceived view of women!!!

Nope. Again, your pathetic replies show it is your hatred for women, using women as a shield for the evil IDOL you hold dear.

Love women​

Hate feminism​

Given your ideology, your lack the courage to carry it out to its natural conclusion. Given that the Patriarchy is bad and has no redeeming value, it follows that every society on Earth will forever be contaminated due to its Patriarchal origins. The only solution is revolutionary.

Rather than reject this evil feminism, all you can do is double down on victim mentality with multiple question mark and exclamation point sentences as if passion is a substitute for persuasion. You cannot bring yourself to admit there is any redeeming value in the Patriarchy as a reason to reject the revolutionary end your evil ideology implies. And this is just another manifestation of the evil. Unlike Christianity, feminism has no redemption narrative.

You foolish woman! Oblivious to the implications of the obvious observation:

Women did not die by the millions on battlefields over the centuries and put first on life boats because they got the short end of the stick.

Feminism is evil. It is built on a lie. Women have never been equal to men! They've always had a protected status in every human society thorughout history. But that's not good enough for evil doers, overcome with coveting.

You yawn and are bored with the rivers of blood that flow from feminist ideology, killing more people than communism and fascism combined! Dismiss the evidence before your very eyes with the mantra, "that's not REAL feminism." But it is real feminism, bloody and deadly real feminism.

And what of the surviving feminists who are women? Same disregard for their unhappiness! Your collective ideology falsely pits 2 groups against each other, men and women. Your evil ideology is made to order for the real enemy, the political elite. This "strong and independent" BS is made to order for their nefarious, global agenda. Now woman's labor is taxed. Women have to work 50 hours per week out of the home. And your evil ideology of "you can have it all" directly led to a psychological condition that is epidemic in the west, Hurried Woman Syndrome.

Again, you yawn and are bored with the hate-filled consequences against women of evil feminism, dismissing it as not REAL feminism. It is real feminism. I remember the lie that implementing feminists policies would make relationships between men and women better because it would take the financial burden off men. Wrong!

Feminism has inspired women to act like promiscuous men. Now, so many are so run through that they are incapable of pair bonding. They learn too late, when they hit the wall in the sexual market place that they've been lied to all their lives. Educate yourself on how feminized women in their 20's treat men as disposable, never learning how to be in a relationship with real men (not the submissive to feminist ideology they've been taught of a gyno-centric, one-way street interaction). See over 500 vids on this topic below.

The Reason why Men are Walking Away from Dating (Ep. 505)

Because of the sin of coveting, it is so sad to see women staunchly advocating for their own destruction and misery.

 

[Wrangler]

This vid includes the anti-feminist YouTuber, Pearl. Her condemnation of feminism destroying marriage, destroying the bedrock of society is spot on.

Her opponents make it personal, asking if she could live up to the commitment of marriage. Pearl laughed and said it is about choice. Once you make the decision, it's not about your happiness but the children. Profound.

Then she goes on to challenge feminist who want equality, telling them to go be equal. Take an equal responsibility for the jobs that are needed to make our society run like oil rigging, plumbing, carpentry, building, engineering, construction, etc. Her position is until feminists take an equal responsibility for society, they should not vote. Allowing women to vote splits the family, she says. Wow!

 

[Wrangler]

A brilliant short.

 

[Wynona]

Wynona, I started to respond to your post last night/this morning. I went back into your OP and realized that I want to come at this from a different angle than where I started.

Might take me a good part of the morning, but bear with me!

No worries. I look forward to it.

 

[Mink57]

This vid includes the anti-feminist YouTuber, Pearl. Her condemnation of feminism destroying marriage, destroying the bedrock of society is spot on.

Her opponents make it personal, asking if she could live up to the commitment of marriage. Pearl laughed and said it is about choice. Once you make the decision, it's not about your happiness but the children. Profound.

Not profound. Her view doesn't include OLDER couples who can no longer HAVE children. While she mentioned SOME of the vows, she left others out...like the vow to "love, honor and cherish". She seems to put MORE weight on the "...till death do us part" rather than give equal weight to ALL of the vows. Interesting that NONE of the vows mentions anything about 'happiness' or 'children'. Hmmmm...

Then she goes on to challenge feminist who want equality, telling them to go be equal. Take an equal responsibility for the jobs that are needed to make our society run like oil rigging, plumbing, carpentry, building, engineering, construction, etc. Her position is until feminists take an equal responsibility for society, they should not vote. Allowing women to vote splits the family, she says. Wow!

May I remind you that during WW1 women DID enter the workforce to take the jobs that men couldn't do because they were overseas? Women WERE in oil rigging, mining, plumbing, carpentry, building, farming, engineering, construction, etc. And no, they weren't only acting in menial jobs in those industries, like being a clerk and sorting mail. WW1 ended in November 1918. It would take TWO MORE YEARS before women were allowed to vote NATIONWIDE. So, Pearl ought to do a little more research in history before making such a blatant statement that says that until women "take an equal responsibility for society, they should not vote." The women involved with war efforts of WW1 DID take that "equal responsibility" then, and they STILL weren't ALLOWED TO VOTE.

And in WW2, nearly 6 MILLION women--married and single--joined the workforce back. Several hundred women served in combat roles, in addition to flying planes, both military and commercial. They served as truck drivers, electricians, hauled hay to grain elevators and plowed the fields. They BUILT ships, aircraft, hand weapons and the very bombs and munitions used in them. They built vehicles and served as SPIES for the Office of Strategic Services. They operated stamp presses in machine shops, drill presses, lathes, punch machines, riveting guns and welding irons. They worked as mechanics and radio operators, etc. Several HUNDRED women also worked on the Manhattan Project. That's right, the project that built the atom bomb.

All those jobs were traditionally male jobs. The women in those jobs were being paid about 56% of what their male counterparts received. And once the war was over, most of the women in those positions were FIRED, not because of any wrongdoing but in order to 'make way' for the men returning from overseas. It was expected that the women would return to their 'duties' as a wife and homemaker after the war.
(I'm willing to BET those women weren't told that when they were hired.)

But why did they HAVE to? These women obviously PROVED that not only could they do a 'man's job', but that they could do the job AND take care of the kids, the house, etc.

Fast forward to today.....

Women ARE in the fields mentioned. They're not in them in droves, but feminism paved the way for women to enter those fields IF THEY CHOOSE...just like MEN have the freedom to choose if they want to be Stay-At-Home-Dads. Do you frown on SAHD's because many are no longer CHOOSING to be on oil riggs, carpenters, plumbers, etc?

Funny that Pearl mentioned "in sickness and in health." Does that mean that a woman should take care of a man when HE is sick. What about when SHE is sick?

Many men BAIL on their wives when it comes to their wife's sickness. I'm good friends with a man today whose wife is terminal. Does it make him LESS 'masculine' if he takes care of his wife at home? If he takes care of the day-to-day activities, such as laundry, cooking, shopping, paying the bills, making beds, doing dishes, cleaning whatever messes she makes?

 

[Wrangler]

Not profound. Her view doesn't include OLDER couples who can no longer HAVE children.

Seeking an exception does not make the rule. Pearls profound point was not about fertility but sacrifice; a wife ought to sacrifice her happiness for her husband, first, and the new family they create by the act of getting married with him as the head of the family.

(Though it need not be said, I’ll say it anyway. He, likewise, is expected to sacrifice for her happiness). And both are expected to sacrifice for any children that come along.

Obviously, your self-glorifying IDOL, the evil ideology of feminism, sought to destroy marriage - AND HAS in the West.

 

[Wrangler]

She seems to put MORE weight on the "...till death do us part"

Yea, because that is the part that feminists have destroyed in practice via "No fault divorce."

 

[Wrangler]

May I remind you that during WW1 women DID

False equivalence.

 

[Wrangler]

Women ARE in the fields mentioned.

But not equally in the fields mentioned. As Pearl says, if you want equality GO BE EQUAL.

 

[Wrangler]

What about when SHE is sick?

Many men BAIL on their wives when it comes to their wife's sickness. I'm good friends with a man today whose wife is terminal. Does it make him LESS 'masculine' if he takes care of his wife at home? If he takes care of the day-to-day activities, such as laundry, cooking, shopping, paying the bills, making beds, doing dishes, cleaning whatever messes she makes?

Man-hating, Competitive Feminism on display. Women initiate 80% of divorce. Do you have any facts that back up "Many men BAIL on their wives when it comes to their wife's sickness" in comparison to feminists doing the same?

 

[Wrangler]

In a blatant rejection of equality, feminists in UK are equating misogyny to terrorism. Do you know what is NOT equated to terrorism? Misandry.

 

[Wrangler]

Sad that one of the most powerful feminists in the world plays the victim card to justify threatening a man with death.

 

[Wrangler]

This is pretyy sad. Women want men to pay child support who are not even the father. Guilt by accusation.

 

[Wrangler]

A great analysis of Woke Go Broke in film in comparison to how to cater to men and women the right way (as measured by profit).

 

[Mink57]

This is pretyy sad. Women want men to pay child support who are not even the father. Guilt by accusation.

This film clip has nothing to do with women wanting men to pay child support who are not even the father.

 

[Mink57]

Man-hating, Competitive Feminism on display. Women initiate 80% of divorce. Do you have any facts that back up "Many men BAIL on their wives when it comes to their wife's sickness" in comparison to feminists doing the same?

Man-hating? Hardly. I REVERE men who step-up to the plate and live through their vows!!

Here's a statistic about men bailing before women do:

A 2009 study published in the journal Cancer found that a married woman diagnosed with a serious disease is six times more likely to be divorced or separated than a man with a similar diagnosis. Among study participants, the divorce rate was 21 percent for seriously ill women and 3 percent for seriously ill men. A control group divorced at a rate of 12 percent, suggesting that if disease makes husbands more likely to split, it makes wives more likely to stay.

Why Are These Men Leaving Their Wives?

Husbands are more likely to leave a seriously ill spouse than the other way around. But there are proven ways to pull through together.

www.oprah.com

Men Are Far More Likely to Abandon a Seriously Ill Spouse

Men Are Far More Likely to Abandon a Seriously Ill Spouse

www.discovermagazine.com

As for how many feminists are in that 3%, I couldn't tell you, but I'm sure it's a 'few'.

 

[Mink57]

Sad that one of the most powerful feminists in the world plays the victim card to justify threatening a man with death.

Why are you labeling ALL feminists in with those 'few' who are RADICAL feminists?