Why is Feminism much worse than Cancer nowadays that is caused by women which keeps most men single?

[Daze]

Coming from someone who believes women are more easily susceptible to following Satan and going to hell . . . forgive me for not taking your comments too seriously. Self righteous hypocrites like yourself are doing a fine job of representing the devil's heart for people and I'd rather not take up your business.

Do you know what hypocrite means? Please elaborate how it applies here.

Once again, who does the luciferian here agree with, me or you? Lets take a look at the likes.

 

[Drifter]

Do you know what hypocrite means? Please elaborate how it applies here.

Once again, who does the luciferian here agree with, me or you? Lets take a look at the likes.

You are a hypocrite. You rattle on about women being more easily led to hell but refuse to acknowledge who runs the charge on what you would refer to as degeneracy. Who runs most of the shitshow today? Who consumes most of the filth? But no, women are the spiritually weaker sex, not because they form the majority rapists, murderers, abusers and thieves, not because they form the vast majority clientele for the sex work industry, not because they're the gender more given to violence . . . But because they like the idea of being considered full human beings with a right to agency. You dont have the capacity to acknowledge the horrors that came with unilateral male rule and authority but you're so quick to discount feminism as evil. Do you really think before feminism that life was better for women?

Are you serious? So because people can agree on certain points with others regardless of general beliefs, they have to be agreed in everything? Some critical thinking would be nice. Your reactive reasoning is devoid of logic.

 

[KoncreteMind]

I actually have done in depth research into the Hebrew and Greek terms in key passage used by misogynists to subjugate women. I'll answer your question if you answer why black people pale in comparison to whites when it comes to innovation and achievement. Is it because of inherent inferiority or is it because of removed opportunity? Because the last time I asked that, you rattled off about a whitewashed history you couldnt prove and then conveniently decided not to apply that same brush to women.

Lol sure you have.You've done deep research but I guess need more time to research what neged can mean?

Yes the people in power whitewashed history. Go to the white supremacy thread in the den if you want to discuss that: it doesn’t apply here because men didn’t go around destroying the achievements of women or the communities women built. They did do that with black people. Any further discussion on that is off topic which is probably why you asked In the first place...

 

[KoncreteMind]

Well first off humanity exists because women birthed every single human being alive and dead.

Well at least one woman said motherhood. And that’s the greatest contribution you can name that women as a unit provide to society. Now that that’s out of the way what else can you name another thing they have provided AS A UNIT not as an individual)?

Women also invented a hell of a lot of things

Gotcha. Though this is another deflection I’ll go with it and pick one andsee if you didn’t just copy and paste a list (which you most likely did) and can provide proof for the claim. Ummm... I choose....

- car heater

Proof?

Women might have contributed more but seeing as women of all social standings were banned from reading, writing and even thinking for themselves then how were they to contribute? It's funny how women's inventions and innovations skyrocketed once women were given opportunities.

Also I'll point out. Civilisation is likely to have began due to women. The evolution from hunted gather to farmer. Likely happened due to women as women did the cultivating.

You gotta take how Europeans rule up with Europeans. Are you sure civilizations around the world were banning women from reading and writing?

All those contributions are built off what men already started. What are women as a unit contributing now that doesn’t involve men?

 

[Daze]

You are a hypocrite. You rattle on about women being more easily led to hell but refuse to acknowledge who runs the charge on what you would refer to as degeneracy. Who runs most of the shitshow today? Who consumes most of the filth? But no, women are the spiritually weaker sex, not because they form the majority rapists, murderers, abusers and thieves, not because they form the vast majority clientele for the sex work industry, not because they're the gender more given to violence . . . But because they like the idea of being considered full human beings with a right to agency. You dont have the capacity to acknowledge the horrors that came with unilateral male rule and authority but you're so quick to discount feminism as evil. Do you really think before feminism that life was better for women?

Are you serious? So because people can agree on certain points with others regardless of general beliefs, they have to be agreed in everything? Some critical thinking would be nice. Your reactive reasoning is devoid of logic.

Let us begin by defining hypocrite.

hypocrite
[hyp·o·crite]
A hypocrite preaches one thing, and does another. (source)

Perhaps you have a different definition? Because i have always maintained that God gave us each our own roles. This does not mean one is submissive to the other. I do believe getting women to fulfill mens roles is a satanic agenda and I have backed this up before. Same goes the other way. Men acting like woman fulfill the same agenda. Distorting what God has revealed. While God has cursed the man who acts like a woman and vice versa.

Problem is you are sssssssssssooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo opressed and you MUST rise up.

Have i mentioned nearly every pious woman speaks out against Feminism? I wonder why this is?
There are actually alot of God fearing woman here so don't take my word for it. Ask one.


That fact that i highlight most feminists are not connected to God is pretty much key. But me mentioning this somehow makes me a hypocrite? Since when have i done the opposite of what i preach? One of us needs to work on their understanding of the English language.

Whats sad is many (certainly a few here) feminists are damaged. Mentally and have been deceived. Go ahead and put your laugh emoji because its all a joke to you.


Fact is the majority of the anti-christs followers will be woman while I"m far from being the first to say this.

If this is difficult to understand, simply re-read this thread. Feminism is only one of his tools, while its pure coincidence that a follower of Alister Crowley likes nearly everything you say.

Good day sir. (I'd say ma'am, but I'm sure that would offend you because its oppressive.)

 

[Drifter]

Lol sure you have.You've done deep research but I guess need more time to research what neged can mean?

Jess already gave you the basic rundown of the entire phrase translated to "helper". I doubt you'd care for any actual linguistic discussion considering you prefer to stick to the poorly translated English versions.

Yes the people in power whitewashed history. Go to the white supremacy thread in the den if you want to discuss that: it doesn’t apply here because men didn’t go around destroying the achievements of women or the communities women built. They did do that with black people. Any further discussion on that is off topic which is probably why you asked In the first place...

No, put here just a single link of proof. Dont make spurious claims without evidence. Women didnt have a chance to build any kind of civilization. But they had a part to play in each one. So where are the present day successful black civilizations? Where are the hordes of black achievers now that slavery has been long abolished? It's very much on topic considering sex is also a genetic marker that was used to oppress women.

 

[Orwell's mentor]

First things first. The OP obviously hasn't had cancer yet

Secondly, they make a single post, light the feminist blue touch paper and 27 pages later you're all still going at it.

How many of these feminist v misogynist bullshit threads do socks have to start around here before the lights actually come on?

Smh. Boys v girls bollocks.

Apparently, not enough. Since you've posted this, five pages have been added. I haven't read any of them, but briefly glanced through. The motto in them appears to be, "Tear another another one down to feel better about oneself".

Ahhh well, it is what it is...

 

[Drifter]

Let us begin by defining hypocrite.

hypocrite
[hyp·o·crite]
A hypocrite preaches one thing, and does another. (source)

Yes, that applies to your ramblings about women as a collective vs men as collective.

Perhaps you have a different definition? Because i have always maintained that God gave us each our own roles. This does not mean one is submissive to the other. I do believe getting women to fulfill mens roles is a satanic agenda and I have backed this up before. Same goes the other way. Men acting like woman fulfill the same agenda. Distorting what God has revealed. While God has cursed the man who acts like a woman and vice versa.

Except that these roles have ALWAYS led to women being subjugated by men. Feminism wouldn't have found an affinity with women if their contributions werent being belittled or even used against them.

Problem is you are sssssssssssooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo opressed and you MUST rise up.

I've spoken about how women have been oppressed throughout history yes, as anyone even vaguely familiar with it would know.

Have i mentioned nearly every pious woman speaks out against Feminism? I wonder why this is?
There are actually alot of God fearing woman here so don't take my word for it. Ask one.

And?

That fact that i highlight most feminists are not connected to God is pretty much key. But me mentioning this somehow makes me a hypocrite? Since when have i done the opposite of what i preach? One of us needs to work on their understanding of the English language.

Because you're so quick to point the finger at women for following "godless" feminism but dont acknowledge the evil men did to push them toward it. Unless you dont actually believe the way women have be treated was something bad.

Whats sad is many (certainly a few here) feminists are damaged. Mentally and have been deceived. Go ahead and put your laugh emoji because its all a joke to you.

Fact is the majority of the anti-christs followers will be woman while I"m far from being the first to say this.

So even though men are the majority of people committing acts of abuse and violence and indulging in lechery and decadence . . . women will most follow the anti Christ. Got it.

If this is difficult to understand, simply re-read this thread. Feminism is only one of his tools, while its pure coincidence that a follower of Alister Crowley likes nearly everything you say.

So let me ask you: do you think women were better off before feminism?

Good day sir. (I'd say ma'am, but I'm sure that would offend you because its oppressive.)

For a grown man you respond with all the maturity of a bitchy teenager lol.

 

[Daze]

Apparently, not enough. Since you've posted this, five pages have been added. I haven't read any of them, but briefly glanced through. The motto in them appears to be, "Tear another another one down to feel better about oneself".

Ahhh well, it is what it is...

Maybe that's my problem, that I"m reading some of this brain rot and sadly engaging with it.. Feminism seems to bring out the absolute best in people.

 

[Daze]

@Drifter I've had my fill of brain rot. Good day sir.

 

[Drifter]

@Drifter I've had my fill of brain rot. Good day sir.

No shame in running with your tail between your legs. All you have is fear mongering and cheap parting shots that wouldnt impress anyone beyond elementary school level humor.

 

[Daze]

No shame in running with your tail between your legs. All you have is fear mongering and cheap parting shots that wouldnt impress anyone beyond elementary school level humor.

 

[KoncreteMind]

dude, you literally identify as an incel. Someone talked abt incels and you came onto this thread talking about how their shaming didn't affect you even though they didn't even mention you.

Cap.They tried to make certain stances the stances of incels. And I said their shaming isnt going to work anymore. So far I’ve had the gay shaming, the “you don’t get women” shaming, the “you don’t get laid” shaming all thrown at me. The only one I haven’t got yet is the “you must have a small p*nis” shaming lol. I was just pointing out that the shaming is becoming less and less effective because men are onto it and don’t care. And I don’t mean all or even most men. But that number is growing

You just can't handle the fact that women have gained independance and "equality" comes off as oppression. And it's not even equality at this point, women don't even have any real power, but it's still enough to make you feel inadequate.

When you understand the ending then it really doesn’t matter what’s going on. The only time I care is when it comes to building families. Other then that I just ignore feminist talk and have my fun with them then be on my way.

Because you can do what you want in this luciferian society (“do what thou wilt” remember?). When it falls tho? It’s back to reality lol. You don’t have the same purpose as me in reality no matter what these simp luciferian feminists have convinced you of.....

 

[Drifter]

View attachment 59072

 

[Orwell's mentor]

Maybe that's my problem, that I"m reading some of this brain rot and sadly engaging with it.. Feminism seems to bring out the absolute best in people.

From my perspective, the question, especially in this thread is, "What is it solving, or eradicating?" Evidently, not too much as it's another mud-slinging thread.

 

[KoncreteMind]

I'm pretty sure hes luciferian. Its kinda obvious from some things he's said in other threads.

Its intereting how feminists and luciferians agree, isn't it? Its kinda like the devil only has one enemy.

Yea and the bigging up of Crowley in this thread as well. Its all the same stuff this website exposes Hollywood of being on. But because they can identify as whatever (do what thou wilt) he has no obligation to come out and stand for what he believes. So all we can go by are the fruits I guess...

And when you tell a feminist on here that luciferians were behind the movement they usually don’t have much to say after that.

 

[Daze]

From my perspective, the question, especially in this thread is, "What is it solving, or eradicating?" Evidently, not too much as it's another mud-slinging thread.

Exactly, neither side is even considering the other sides points so why keep feeding it.

 

[Cintra]

I suppose that's one way of looking at it. Beauvoir has another perspective in her introduction of the Second sex
This quote sums it up perfectly:
No subject posits itself spontaneously and at once as the inessential from the outset; it is not the Other who, defining itself as Other, defines the One; the Other is posited as Other by the One positing itself as One. But in order for the Other not to turn into the One, the Other has to submit to this foreign point of view. Where does this submission in woman come from?
[...]

Refusing to be the Other, refusing complicity with man, would mean renouncing all the advantages an alliance with
the superior caste confers on them. Lord-man will materially protect liege-woman and will be in charge of justifying her existence.
Along with the economic risk, she eludes the metaphysical risk of a freedom that must invent its goals without help.
Indeed, beside every individual’s claim to assert himself as subject—an ethical claim—lies the temptation to flee freedom and to make himself into a thing: it is a pernicious path because the individual, passive, alienated, and lost, is prey to a foreign will, cut off from his transcendence, robbed of all worth. But it is an easy path: the anguish and stress of authentically assumed existence are thus avoided. The man who sets the woman up as an Other will thus find in her a deep complicity.

I have a trans woman friend who quotes Beauvoir all the time.
Beauvoir who had long term relationships with men.

I suppose as a transwoman yourself you would know more about being a man than most women.

Also we are all made of man juice and woman gloop.
We are all half male and half female.
Neither can exist without the other.

Therefore you are a little bundle of hate with a pink ribbon on top, and this whole convo is ridiculous.

 

[Aero]

If people aren't going to join some goofy crusade against feminism, it doesn't make them Luciferian. It's more likely; there's no logical reason to join that crusade. Everything has flaws, and if that's a good reason to start a Crusade, then you are setting yourself up for a grueling never-ending battle against everything.

A bunch of man-haters didn't start feminism. Like it has nothing to do with any inherent flaws of men. It has to do with group psychology and how groups in power especially can become like a speeding train with no breaks. So the train starts running people over, with no thought or conscience.

If we don't intervene on the speeding train, it is criminal, immoral, and shortsighted to say the least.

 

[justjess]