[Rich]

It is because you do not get it unlike Igor. Feminism has ruined harmony of relations between men and women.

The pathetic fantasy world of the Conservatives. What harmony? Maybe you're just too young, but I knew plenty of people who grew up before feminism, before women had the vote and there was just as much if not more disharmony back then.

It was Patriarchy, that gave us the first world war. It was patriarchy that gave us Bolshevism and Nazism, I can tell you there were no women in the Nazi leadership and precious few in the Bolsheviks. In the First and Second world war, millions upon millions of men died before having a chance to get married and build a family. The only chance many had for sex was with prostitutes, which the traditional conservative patriarchal militaries provided or facilitated for their young men. The pious ones died virgins, so much for our whining INCEL movement.

Patriarchy whether in Britain or France, Japan or China came as package, all sorts of traditional beliefs that no one believes in any more, not even our modern day men's rightists, actually least of all our modern day anti feminists, with the likes of Stephan Molyneux, bleeting on about child abuse and not using violence against children. Try going back to pre WWI Britain and telling them that its wrong to hit kids. Patriarchy died in the West for same reason that the Soviet Union died - no one believed in it any more.

[skinster]

Here's hoping, Rich.

I think however, we can all agree that a few skills or actions can go a long way to prevent attacks. That's why we put locks on stuff. This isn't blaming a woman. It's empowering her.

When calling boys trying to feel up women "normal", "awkward" or "inarticulate" and saying girls shouldn't drink at parties, it sounds like you're apologising for bad male behaviour.

[Igor Antunov]

Ideally, the role of the father in a monogamous relationship is not to dominate, but to guide the family unit in the broader society and where necessary to seek counsel from the mother. The mother should be running the household. The center of attention should be the children until they are grown and independent.

But there is flexibility to this system in secular societies. Note this is all possible even if the couple have careers. One will just have to donate more time to the act of raising the children. Plus the responsibilities can flip occasionally. Dad can stay home and run the household. Mom can guide. Depends on their levels of useful education, job prospects, etc. If mom can get better jobs then makes less sense for dad to work full time. Note that this is less likely as women when given the choice tend toward working with people, and men are drawn to technical careers, the latter of which pay better. And that's OK. Nothing to fix here.

Either way the family unit is maintained and raising capable children is possible. What we have now is a broken polygamous clusterfuck that the welfare state and family courts PROMOTE. They are 100% set up to make the above impossible, or at the very best, highly precarious. This system has done the most harm to minorities in the west. Majority Black neighborhoods in the US have been gutted and destroyed since the 1940's. It is now starting to affect all neighborhoods. Single mother households are at a record high across all demographics.

although I would hope that Igor can point me in the direction of some data that proves his position that women in the West are today being uppity and love er....Islam.

Women's march leader, and big figure in western feminist movement...is a sharia advocate.



Conflate the symbol of western feminism above with the fact that feminists promote mass migration from majority Muslim states into northern and western Europe. 80% of these newcomers are conservative Muslim men.

To all neo-liberals who dream of integrating this culture into their society-grow up. One of my childhood friends is a secular, liberal Muslim from Bosnia. About as advanced in mindset and worldview as Islam will allow. Well, he still wants to exterminate all gays and still treats women like cattle.

[One Degree]

Why is it so hard to remember we live in a world of opposites? It is not a matter of male or female domination. We bring opposites to the table. We need to live within those opposites. Going to one or the other is destructive. We need the balance of the contradictions. We gain from both views. It gives us the versatility that is needed for success. Sometimes we need to be the authoritarian and sometimes we need to be the nurturer. We need both role models. Men and women can be both, but children need to learn it from role models. We should not hastily decide one is not needed.

[skinster]

Yes, Igor, there are some Muslim women in American politics now, but that proves Western feminists love Islam all of a sudden?

You have weird perceptions.

[Igor Antunov]

Why is it so hard to remember we live in a world of opposites? It is not a matter of male or female domination. We bring opposites to the table. We need to live within those opposites. Going to one or the other is destructive. We need the balance of the contradictions. We gain from both views. It gives us the versatility that is needed for success. Sometimes we need to be the authoritarian and sometimes we need to be the nurturer. We need both role models. Men and women can be both, but children need to learn it from role models. We should not hastily decide one is not needed.

That's right, men and women have complementary skill sets and mindsets. The ideal is for us to work together when it comes to something as critical (for society) as raising children.

This enforced equality of ability and degenerate gender-bender bullshit must end, or the west is finished. Equality of opportunity was all that was ever needed.

[Pants-of-dog]

It is because you do not get it unlike Igor. Feminism has ruined harmony of relations between men and women. This in turn has ruined family relations which in turn has destabilized society as a whole. As our society is founded on the family.

So, in order for you and me to have harmony and stability, we should have a relationship where you have no power and do whatever I tell you to do.

Ideally, the role of the father in a monogamous relationship is not to dominate, but to guide the family unit in the broader society and where necessary to seek counsel from the mother. The mother should be running the household. The center of attention should be the children until they are grown and independent.

Who is this ideal for? Why is it ideal?

But there is flexibility to this system in secular societies. Note this is all possible even if the couple have careers. One will just have to donate more time to the act of raising the children. Plus the responsibilities can flip occasionally. Dad can stay home and run the household. Mom can guide. Depends on their levels of useful education, job prospects, etc. If mom can get better jobs then makes less sense for dad to work full time.

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself. If a woman can guide the family, then it is not the role of the father.

Either way the family unit is maintained and raising capable children is possible. What we have now is a broken polygamous clusterfuck that the welfare state and family courts PROMOTE. They are 100% set up to make the above impossible, or at the very best, highly precarious.

This seems like an MRA conspiracy theory.

Women's march leader, and big figure in western feminist movement...is a sharia advocate.



Conflate the symbol of western feminism above with the fact that feminists promote mass migration from majority Muslim states into northern and western Europe. 80% of these newcomers are conservative Muslim men.

This seems like a BS statistic.

Also, one woman does not equate to most feminists.

[Igor Antunov]

So, in order for you and me to have harmony and stability, we should have a relationship where you have no power and do whatever I tell you to do.

Let me phrase it better; in order for a unit to have any chance of winning a battle, it has to have cohesion and leadership. A family unit may not be a company of marines, but you'd be surprised how applicable and effective this philosophy is in all things remotely similar from family to workplace. As an interesting aside relevant here, women actually prefer male leadership in the workplace. Look it up.

Who is this ideal for? Why is it ideal?

The offspring, and by extension the couple who will have somebody to look after them when they grow too old and feeble to be independent anymore-instead of relying on strangers forced to pay taxes to an increasingly corrupt regime.

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself. If a woman can guide the family, then it is not the role of the father.

No, I'm not. Roles are like gloves. They typically have a specific fit, but there are outliers. If a woman has big hands (and some do), then let her wear the big boy gloves.

This seems like an MRA conspiracy theory.

This seems like a comment devoid of argument.

This seems like a BS statistic.

This seems like a comment devoid of argument.

Also, one woman does not equate to most feminists.

One woman that leads 500,000 women in a march, can be said to wield influence over a movement organized by feminists. She does not equate feminism, but she is a feminist with considerable influence in a movement that promotes open borders and mass non-vetted migration.

[skinster]

lol, Igor is scared of Linda Sarsour.

I'm not even a fan of her or her liberal politics but I find it funny whenever I see her come to my attention; usually from alt-reich and/or zionists complaining about her.

[Igor Antunov]

Not afraid. she's merely a useful tool to work with; helps me highlight how and why modern feminism in the west is infiltrated by so many apparent contradictions - since it is designed to destroy societies from within.

[skinster]

Citation needed.

[Igor Antunov]

Ok. See last 100 years for reference.

[skinster]

If you can't prove the weird stuff you post, you just have to say.

[One Degree]

The feminist movement has been infiltrated by those who wish to destroy our society from within.
You may quote me as a source @Igor Antunov to make @skinster happy. I know she is not picky about sources.

[skinster]

The feminist movement has been infiltrated by those who wish to destroy our society from within.

Citation needed.

[Albert]

So, in order for you and me to have harmony and stability, we should have a relationship where you have no power and do whatever I tell you to do.

We are both men Pants.

@Rich
Feminism began at earnest in 1850s. By WWI there were already countries where women could vote. Marriage laws and status of women had been already altered significant by the turn of 20th century. Plus no one is blaming all the ills of the world on feminism here. It is however I think the most destabilizing social movement that exist today.

[Pants-of-dog]

Let me phrase it better; in order for a unit to have any chance of winning a battle, it has to have cohesion and leadership. A family unit may not be a company of marines, but you'd be surprised how applicable and effective this philosophy is in all things remotely similar from family to workplace.

So who is this ideal for? Is it ideal if families are supposed to fight against each other?

As an interesting aside relevant here, women actually prefer male leadership in the workplace. Look it up.

I doubt it.

The offspring, and by extension the couple who will have somebody to look after them when they grow too old and feeble to be independent anymore-instead of relying on strangers forced to pay taxes to an increasingly corrupt regime.

Please provide evidenfor this claim.

No, I'm not. Roles are like gloves. They typically have a specific fit, but there are outliers. If a woman has big hands (and some do), then let her wear the big boy gloves.

This is getting even more weird and unrealistic.

How domyou know any of this is true?

This seems like a comment devoid of argument.

Not really. The whole “courts are destroying families as part of a feminst agnda” meme seems to come straight from MRAs and other men who fail at relationships.

This seems like a comment devoid of argument.

Then provude evidence for your weird clam about immigrants.

One woman that leads 500,000 women in a march, can be said to wield influence over a movement organized by feminists. She does not equate feminism, but she is a feminist with considerable influence in a movement that promotes open borders and mass non-vetted migration.

I doubt it.

This seems more like a wacky thing cooked by misogynistic men who want to find reasons to hate feminism.

——————————

We are both men Pants.

It depends on how you define manhood.

By almost any definition of manhood, I am more of a man than you are.

So, I will accept your obedience for the sake of harmony and stability.

[Albert]

I would accept that if I agreed that you are more capable then I'm.

[Pants-of-dog]

Do you have a job? Children? Do you know how to build a house? Fix your vehicle? Ever been in a fight?

[Stormsmith]

When calling boys trying to feel up women "normal", "awkward" or "inarticulate" and saying girls shouldn't drink at parties, it sounds like you're apologising for bad male behaviour.

Sorry Skinster, but i'm with Drlee on this one. A boy trying it on is normal. If she is okay with it, no problem. If she isnt there might be consequences. he needs to know there are good ways and bad to approach women, and we're not cut by cookie cutters, and neither are The laws.

The trouble with teenage boys is that they're often akward and inarticulate. So are girls some times. There's far too much room for crossed wires. But boys need to be aware if they run around trying to feel up girls, they're facing getting kneed in the naughty bits if she is scared or offended.

Parents could do a lot to alleviate this. Girls need to know what they are potentially getting themselves into if they agree to be alone with a boy. They need to learn what to say to defuse (as politely as possible) a situation long before they're alone with a boy who has worked himself into a state. Boys need to know no means no, and paternity means monthly payments. She needs to be aware of videos and life online is the short route to immortality. And avoid alcohol at parties. 

I'm glad the only thing I had to worry about was pregnancy

It is normal for boys to try it on. Not all, mind you, but enough do. But I go on to point out it not nice and may be illegal. How is that an apology?
As for drinking at parties, to suggest a young girl refrain from drinking, or drinking moderately is prudent, esp if she's a minor and isn't used to alcohol like thee and me. Learn to drink at home first. And never set your drink down. Once your pic is up on the Web it's staying there. Is that what you want?

Teaching kids how to communicate, how to avoid getting mugged, how to negotiate etc are what parents should do, start with toddlers squabbling over toys. It's simply sensible to teach them more about sex than what to do when you get your monthly.