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

[justjess]

Thats great, but i have about had it with your rude and nasty hearted remarks. You spew deragatory names at me and men while proving with your own words that you are the one who has problems with how you treat people. Id appreciate it if you could go back to not conversing with me like you previously said you wouldnt, because im not interested in talking with people in this thread who cant be civil anymore.

I think it’s a bit rude and nasty to blame women - specifically women like me - for everything wrong with the world. Call it even.

 

[Maldarker]

If the crack epidemic was started by the govt then that mean the govt actively engaged in disenfranchising the black community.. Wanna go into that? You just said you’d take a Singapore stance on drugs yet Oregon said all drugs are legal. This being 30 years after this same country took the hard stance on drug use when they were pushing drugs into the black community. Wanna go there?

Of course not because left vs right is all you got. But that’s for the low levels to go back and forth about.And I’m not a low level so that convo is best directed to someone else.

I do ever heard of project pegasus...iran contra...war on weed anslinger & hoover.

Either it's racist motivated or its money & power u pick.

 

[Lyfe]

I think it’s a bit rude and nasty to blame women - specifically women like me - for everything wrong with the world. Call it even.

^ Blaming women for everything wrong in the world?

You say i am dense and yet you still cant even properly and fairly even represent my actual views.

 

[Drifter]

^ Blaming women for everything wrong in the world?

You say i am dense and yet you still cant even properly and fairly even represent my actual views.

To be fair to Jess, you yourself can't seem to properly represent your own views lmao.

 

[Lyfe]

Another pointless ad homenin. Lol... You guys are too much.

 

[Drifter]

Another pointless ad homenin. Lol... You guys are too much.

Aren't women supposed to be the sensitive lot Lyfe? You use the term "ad hominem" rather liberally.

 

[justjess]

^ Blaming women for everything wrong in the world?

You say i am dense and yet you still cant even properly and fairly even represent my actual views.

You blame everything you think is wrong in the world on women - specifically feminists. Just because you don’t say so bluntly and backtracking when confronted bluntly doesn’t mean you haven’t said so REPEATEDLY. You have.

 

[Lyfe]

Nope

You blame everything you think is wrong in the world on women - specifically feminists. Just because you don’t say so bluntly and backtracking when confronted bluntly doesn’t mean you haven’t said so REPEATEDLY. You have.

Nope,

and I am simply finished with your dishonesty. Later

 

[AshCash]

I'm a woman and like never got into the feminism thing like I never understood it but like whatever it's just me I just do my thang you know. I always heard celebs bragging about it but I never cared for it and I'm not the political type either since both parties are controlled by the illuminati it's all the same. But yeah I mostly actually hang out with boys but I root my females on you know

 

[weskrongden]

Here's an actual intelligent woman saying interesting and insightful things unlike very basic and typical minds who gobble down propaganda like Drifter

Front Page Featured | MRCTV

cnsnews.com

Katalin Novak, Hungary’s Minister for Family and Youth Affairs, said societies pursuing low fertility and arbitrary “families,” not the traditional nuclear family -- dad, mom, and kids – are “condemned to death.” She added that, “rejecting family values and promoting immigration go hand in hand.”

“The left does not believe in the role of nation and nation states or identity,” Minister Novak said in an interview with the Portuguese website Dies Irae, and translated into English by journalist Marco Tosatti. “They wish to replace traditional values and identity with a new identity, stripped of heritage. We have seen several attempts at this in history.”

“Rejecting family values and promoting immigration go hand in hand,” she said. “If family, childbearing, and common heritage have no value, then illegal immigrants do not pose any risk and mass immigration is just a matter of numbers required on the labor market.”

“Healthy families are no longer necessary because reproduction is of no importance and immigration can solve demographics,” said Novak. “It is a very materialistic view and we do not share this view.”

“If families and reproduction are no longer connected, then family, marriage and sexuality can be whatever you want it to be and are merely a matter of fashion and ideology,” she added.

Novak continued, “In Hungary, we believe our culture and heritage are worth protecting and transmitting to future generations, so we focus on building a society where marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, where families are defined by marriage or parent-child relation, and society values children and rewards childbearing.”

“That is why we have been building a family-friendly country since 2010,” she said. “The goal is to enable young couples to realize their family goals on one hand, and on the other, to strengthen families already raising children. We have built up the most extensive family benefit system in the Western world. [Our] central budget allocated to support families is two-and-a-half times higher than it was in 2010 and it amounts to 5% of the total GDP.”

“We have a family-friendly tax system that means that the more children you have, the less personal income tax you have to pay,” said Novak. “Mothers with at least four children are exempt from paying personal income tax for the rest of their lives. … In Hungary, mothers or fathers may choose to stay at home and receive a benefit until the child reaches 3 years of age. They will also receive the benefit if they return to the labour market.”

“Thanks to a new law, women will soon earn more than their net income after giving birth,” said the minister. “Good news is that the results are encouraging: fertility rate has increased by more than 20%, number of marriages is at a 40-year high, the number of divorces is at a six-decades low.”

In other remarks, Novak spoke about the importance of religion, which she believes undergirds the entirety of her nation.

“Hungarian statehood is deeply intertwined with Christianity,” she said, “even Hungarians who do not believe in God understand and recognize the deep connection between Christian identity, Hungarian identity, and Hungarian statehood.”

Because families “are the fabric of our society, if we undo this fabric, our societies as a whole will come apart,” the secretary remarked. “It is in the interest of society and therefore the duty of the state to help and defend families. A society where people do not want to have children, do not believe it is worthwhile to reproduce, is condemned to death.”

Moreover, traditional views of family affect gender-related and LGBTQ+ policy in Hungary. The country does not allow same-sex marriage and approved a law in December prohibiting adoption by gay couples.

“If families and reproduction are no longer connected, then family, marriage and sexuality can be whatever you want it to be, and are merely a matter of fashion and ideology,” Novak said in the interview.

The issue of gender transition has also become an issue in Hungary, especially in light of actions such as Portugal’s approval of legal gender change for people 16 and up and, more recently, President Joe Biden’s executive order banning any discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Biden also has ordered all schools that receive federal funds to allow transgender “women” (biological males) to play in women’s sports.

When asked about Portugal’s new law, Novak expressed concern. “There is a saying in Hungary for somebody who is completely lost -- does not even know if he is a boy or she is a girl. This also results that, for a child, one of the main points of security is his/her sex.”

“The mental and physical development of children is a very fragile thing,” and “teenagers are especially vulnerable to influence,” said Novak, making it clear that Hungary does not intend to allow gender change as is now practiced in Portugal.

Hungary faces scrutiny from the international community for these controversial gender and family policies, especially by rights groups.

“These discriminatory, homophobic and transphobic new laws are just the latest attack on LGBTQ people by Hungarian authorities,” wrote a representative from Amnesty International. The executive director at Transgender Europe announced, “we are deeply concerned for the health and safety of trans children and adults in Hungary in such a hostile climate.”

In response to such criticism, Novak said, “if we are attacked by the left, it must mean that we are not pursuing leftist ideologies but conservative values. This is what we were elected to do.”

“You must defend the truth and this is a fight worth fighting,” she said. “No one else will do it for you.”

Novak is the Hungary’s Minister for Family Affairs. Prior to this, she served for six years as the Secretary of State for Family and Youth Affairs. She also is the vice president of Fidesz (Hungarian Civic Alliance), the ruling political party in Hungary, headed by Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

Fidesz is a conservative political party that supports strong borders, a strong national defense, and Christian morals.

 

[lightseeker]

Nope


Nope,

and I am simply finished with your dishonesty. Later

Narrator voice over: he wasn’t finished

 

[Lyfe]

Narrator voice over: he wasn’t finished

I must say that im rather surprised that out of all the things said between me, drifter, and jess that you found my views to be the most disagreeable. You got Drifter saying that abuse and mistreatment ultinately define the history and relationship between men and women with the exception of a small amount of instances where men treated women good. Drifter who also says that a long term marriage in which the husband may have acted out anger and hit his wife once or twice rightfully and ultimately deserve to be regarded as an abuse marriage without exception. Even if the marriage in question lasted decades and the husband showed true remorse and regret for his actions and ultimately did exponentially more to benefit his wife than anything harmful, the marriage is still regarded as abusive.


Jess who says that men who dont pay child support are deadbeats and scumbags, but women who take their children from their father and vice versa in instances where no immediate harm to them was present have committed no moral infraction.

Its interesting that you find my views disagreeable and worth challenging, but dont find these notions to be equally worth challenging. I mean its these very mindsets and notions that are laying a precedence for all men. A precedence that will ultimately bite them in the backside one day if not challenged. Imagine your grandaughter coming home one day and being afraid of you as a man, because of what she learned in a bias new world order history class.

 

[lightseeker]

I must say that im rather surprised that out of all the things said between me, drifter, and jess that you found my views to be the most disagreeable. You got Drifter saying that abuse and mistreatment ultinately define the history and relationship between men and women with the exception of a small amount of instances where men treated women good. Drifter who also says that a long term marriage in which the husband may have acted out anger and hit his wife once or twice rightfully and ultimately deserve to be regarded as an abuse marriage without exception. Even if the marriage in question lasted decades and the husband showed true remorse and regret for his actions and ultimately did exponentially more to benefit his wife than anything harmful, the marriage is still regarded as abusive.


Jess who says that men who dont pay child support are deadbeats and scumbags, but women who take their children from their father and vice versa in instances where no immediate harm to them was present have committed no moral infraction.

Its interesting that you find my views disagreeable and worth challenging, but dont find these notions to be equally worth challenging. I mean its these very mindsets and notions that are laying a precedence for all men. A precedence that will ultimately bite them in the backside one day if not challenged. Imagine your grandaughter coming home one day and being afraid of you as a man, because of what she learned in a bias new world order history class.

Well I’d agree with drifter that a man who hits his wife is worthy to be spit on even if it’s just once or twice but people that have seen abusive relationships know that if someone is willing to cross that line it’s never just once or twice.
I agree with you that men can be destroyed in divorced courts unfairly, just based on what I’ve seen, but in those relationships the spouses were also very hostile so can’t say it’s all the courts fault.
I don’t pretend I’ve got it all figured out in these topics I just think a lot of what I read you say seems naive or purely theoretical and not practical. I don’t believe happiness within a couple is unattainable like you do so that’s my main disagreement, I think your views will prevent you from being happy in a couple though, why not make some compromises and humble yourself a bit, nobody likes having demands made of them what they should be or do so that just is a recipe for unhappiness

 

[Drifter]

Here's an actual intelligent woman saying interesting and insightful things unlike very basic and typical minds who gobble down propaganda like Drifter

Front Page Featured | MRCTV

cnsnews.com

Katalin Novak, Hungary’s Minister for Family and Youth Affairs, said societies pursuing low fertility and arbitrary “families,” not the traditional nuclear family -- dad, mom, and kids – are “condemned to death.” She added that, “rejecting family values and promoting immigration go hand in hand.”

“The left does not believe in the role of nation and nation states or identity,” Minister Novak said in an interview with the Portuguese website Dies Irae, and translated into English by journalist Marco Tosatti. “They wish to replace traditional values and identity with a new identity, stripped of heritage. We have seen several attempts at this in history.”

“Rejecting family values and promoting immigration go hand in hand,” she said. “If family, childbearing, and common heritage have no value, then illegal immigrants do not pose any risk and mass immigration is just a matter of numbers required on the labor market.”

“Healthy families are no longer necessary because reproduction is of no importance and immigration can solve demographics,” said Novak. “It is a very materialistic view and we do not share this view.”

“If families and reproduction are no longer connected, then family, marriage and sexuality can be whatever you want it to be and are merely a matter of fashion and ideology,” she added.

Novak continued, “In Hungary, we believe our culture and heritage are worth protecting and transmitting to future generations, so we focus on building a society where marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, where families are defined by marriage or parent-child relation, and society values children and rewards childbearing.”

“That is why we have been building a family-friendly country since 2010,” she said. “The goal is to enable young couples to realize their family goals on one hand, and on the other, to strengthen families already raising children. We have built up the most extensive family benefit system in the Western world. [Our] central budget allocated to support families is two-and-a-half times higher than it was in 2010 and it amounts to 5% of the total GDP.”

“We have a family-friendly tax system that means that the more children you have, the less personal income tax you have to pay,” said Novak. “Mothers with at least four children are exempt from paying personal income tax for the rest of their lives. … In Hungary, mothers or fathers may choose to stay at home and receive a benefit until the child reaches 3 years of age. They will also receive the benefit if they return to the labour market.”

“Thanks to a new law, women will soon earn more than their net income after giving birth,” said the minister. “Good news is that the results are encouraging: fertility rate has increased by more than 20%, number of marriages is at a 40-year high, the number of divorces is at a six-decades low.”

In other remarks, Novak spoke about the importance of religion, which she believes undergirds the entirety of her nation.

“Hungarian statehood is deeply intertwined with Christianity,” she said, “even Hungarians who do not believe in God understand and recognize the deep connection between Christian identity, Hungarian identity, and Hungarian statehood.”

Because families “are the fabric of our society, if we undo this fabric, our societies as a whole will come apart,” the secretary remarked. “It is in the interest of society and therefore the duty of the state to help and defend families. A society where people do not want to have children, do not believe it is worthwhile to reproduce, is condemned to death.”

Moreover, traditional views of family affect gender-related and LGBTQ+ policy in Hungary. The country does not allow same-sex marriage and approved a law in December prohibiting adoption by gay couples.

“If families and reproduction are no longer connected, then family, marriage and sexuality can be whatever you want it to be, and are merely a matter of fashion and ideology,” Novak said in the interview.

The issue of gender transition has also become an issue in Hungary, especially in light of actions such as Portugal’s approval of legal gender change for people 16 and up and, more recently, President Joe Biden’s executive order banning any discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Biden also has ordered all schools that receive federal funds to allow transgender “women” (biological males) to play in women’s sports.

When asked about Portugal’s new law, Novak expressed concern. “There is a saying in Hungary for somebody who is completely lost -- does not even know if he is a boy or she is a girl. This also results that, for a child, one of the main points of security is his/her sex.”

“The mental and physical development of children is a very fragile thing,” and “teenagers are especially vulnerable to influence,” said Novak, making it clear that Hungary does not intend to allow gender change as is now practiced in Portugal.

Hungary faces scrutiny from the international community for these controversial gender and family policies, especially by rights groups.

“These discriminatory, homophobic and transphobic new laws are just the latest attack on LGBTQ people by Hungarian authorities,” wrote a representative from Amnesty International. The executive director at Transgender Europe announced, “we are deeply concerned for the health and safety of trans children and adults in Hungary in such a hostile climate.”

In response to such criticism, Novak said, “if we are attacked by the left, it must mean that we are not pursuing leftist ideologies but conservative values. This is what we were elected to do.”

“You must defend the truth and this is a fight worth fighting,” she said. “No one else will do it for you.”

Novak is the Hungary’s Minister for Family Affairs. Prior to this, she served for six years as the Secretary of State for Family and Youth Affairs. She also is the vice president of Fidesz (Hungarian Civic Alliance), the ruling political party in Hungary, headed by Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

Fidesz is a conservative political party that supports strong borders, a strong national defense, and Christian morals.

You're so blinded by your own political handwringing that you aim BS at the wrong people from your soap box. You feel the need to spout unrelated statistics to support points no one was making. LGBT issues and immigration were not brought up in this thread, even though you if you went through my other posts on this forum you'd notice I actually fall under the label of a "TERF" because I don't support trans activism, especially when it becomes militant. You attribute beliefs and ideologies to people who never mentioned their stance on those topics but you're unable to defend your own points. It's actually rather pathetic, especially when you feel the need to insult others while making yourself look like a dumbass who doesn't read through his own links before posting. Get over yourself.

 

[Lyfe]

Well I’d agree with drifter that a man who hits his wife is worthy to be spit on even if it’s just once or twice but people that have seen abusive relationships know that if someone is willing to cross that line it’s never just once or twice.
I agree with you that men can be destroyed in divorced courts unfairly, just based on what I’ve seen, but in those relationships the spouses were also very hostile so can’t say it’s all the courts fault.
I don’t pretend I’ve got it all figured out in these topics I just think a lot of what I read you say seems naive or purely theoretical and not practical. I don’t believe happiness within a couple is unattainable like you do so that’s my main disagreement, I think your views will prevent you from being happy in a couple though, why not make some compromises and humble yourself a bit, nobody likes having demands made of them what they should be or do so that just is a recipe for unhappiness

The issue is that I gave both Drifter and Jess specific contexts in regards to these controversial things I mentioned and their sentiment was nothing short of bias and unfair. That is, within the context and spexific cirfumatences I mentioned.

In regards to my personal views on relationships. Before I rededicated my life to Christ and renounced worldly relationships I came to the conclusion that I no longer wanted to be in a traditional relationship. I figured that based off of my experiences, stasitics, and the reality they just werent worth the time investment, the financial investment, and emotional investment, because they just dont work out anymore. Whether your caring and attentive and invest all ur time and efforts on the relationship or simply selfish in a relationship it has little impact on maintaining a long term relationship. That is just by the numbers. I decided that I do enjoy women enough to have them in my life within a certain guideline, but not in the context of a tradtional relationship. Its only logical to not invest in a stock that has little promise. When I was in these traditional relationships I didnt have the mindset i do now. When you are in a relationship and things are goin ggood its great, but when it comes to an end ehich it inevitably in all probability will you become a statistic and regret investing much of what you did in something that didnt pan out. The shortest relationships I had were when I was attentive and committed. The longest ones I had where when i did the least and told my girflriend I didnt want to be together everyday or live with them and I wanted to set up times we could be together to hangout, hook up, and have fun and any time outside of that was time we should just spend on ourselves. I wasnt mean, but i surely didnt invest as much of myself as I used.

 

[Drifter]

The issue is that I gave both Drifter and Jess specific contexts in regards to these controversial things I mentioned and their sentiment was nothing short of bias and unfair. That is, within the context and spexific cirfumatences I mentioned.

In regards to my personal views on relationships. Before I rededicated my life to Christ and renounced worldly relationships I came to the conclusion that I no longer wanted to be in a traditional relationship. I figured that based off of my experiences, stasitics, and the reality they just werent worth the time investment, the financial investment, and emotional investment, because they just dont work out anymore. Whether your caring and attentive and invest all ur time and efforts on the relationship or simply selfish in a relationship it has little impact on maintaining a long term relationship. That is just by the numbers. I decided that I do enjoy women enough to have them in my life within a certain guideline, but not in the context of a tradtional relationship. Its only logical to not invest in a stock that has little promise. When I was in these traditional relationships I didnt have the mindset i do now. When you are in a relationship and things are goin ggood its great, but when it comes to an end ehich it inevitably in all probability will you become a statistic and regret investing much of what you did in something that didnt pan out. The shortest relationships I had were when I was attentive and committed. The longest ones I had where when i did the least and told my girflriend I didnt want to be together everyday or live with them and I wanted to set up times we could be together to hangout, hook up, and have fun and any time outside of that was time we should just spend on ourselves. I wasnt mean, but i surely didnt invest as much of myself as I used.

Everything @justjess and I mentioned was based on studies, historical records, experiences from women in our families who lived through those times. Why is it that you discount our observations as biased and unfair but yours as correct? Do you see how hypocritical you're being? Plus, if you're happy not pursuing traditional relationships then why don't you just focus on that instead of spending time decrying feminism?

 

[weskrongden]

You're so blinded by your own political handwringing that you aim BS at the wrong people from your soap box. You feel the need to spout unrelated statistics to support points no one was making. LGBT issues and immigration were not brought up in this thread, even though you if you went through my other posts on this forum you'd notice I actually fall under the label of a "TERF" because I don't support trans activism, especially when it becomes militant. You attribute beliefs and ideologies to people who never mentioned their stance on those topics but you're unable to defend your own points. It's actually rather pathetic, especially when you feel the need to insult others while making yourself look like a dumbass who doesn't read through his own links before posting. Get over yourself.

I already explained that to you lol. With feminism, higher education, and career oriented lifestyles on the rise women have only become more unhealthy mentally and physically. And yes men too, I don't think the culture is healthy for either. You can believe there is no connection (I don't attribute any one factor to explaining anti depressant use and health problems but I consider the lifestyles of many women as a contributing factor.) But at the bare minimum you would think all this "freedom" increasing for women would have those numbers dropping.

I'm a big statistics person, so when someone is a radical feminist I know what opinions they likely hold. Someone could be an exception (and yes trans is one area where feminists don't always align but I you're likely all for lesbians and gay marriage lol) but most radical feminists aren't going to have a very conservative world view because tradition and traditional gender roles are part of that view. And in the link I provided in by the Hungarian Family Minister she outlines the connection pretty well between a lack of family values and things like immigration. I've made this point numerous times in this thread but it always goes over your simple minded head, issues are connected. You're a fool if you don't think big capitalist interests put serious backing into feminist movements to get more women more focused on helping them get richer.

I hope you're relatively attractive because you're personality is very grating and unpleasant. It's fine to be average intelligence (most people are that's the way distributions work,) but it becomes an issue with people like you who have an over inflated ego and think they're actually smart and insightful. Imagine having to be the guy who has to listen your mundane talking points you heard in college over and over again, having to nod along and pretend it's interesting.

 

[Cintra]

The issue is that I gave both Drifter and Jess specific contexts in regards to these controversial things I mentioned and their sentiment was nothing short of bias and unfair. That is, within the context and spexific cirfumatences I mentioned.

In regards to my personal views on relationships. Before I rededicated my life to Christ and renounced worldly relationships I came to the conclusion that I no longer wanted to be in a traditional relationship. I figured that based off of my experiences, stasitics, and the reality they just werent worth the time investment, the financial investment, and emotional investment, because they just dont work out anymore. Whether your caring and attentive and invest all ur time and efforts on the relationship or simply selfish in a relationship it has little impact on maintaining a long term relationship. That is just by the numbers. I decided that I do enjoy women enough to have them in my life within a certain guideline, but not in the context of a tradtional relationship. Its only logical to not invest in a stock that has little promise. When I was in these traditional relationships I didnt have the mindset i do now. When you are in a relationship and things are goin ggood its great, but when it comes to an end ehich it inevitably in all probability will you become a statistic and regret investing much of what you did in something that didnt pan out. The shortest relationships I had were when I was attentive and committed. The longest ones I had where when i did the least and told my girflriend I didnt want to be together everyday or live with them and I wanted to set up times we could be together to hangout, hook up, and have fun and any time outside of that was time we should just spend on ourselves. I wasnt mean, but i surely didnt invest as much of myself as I used.

So what about kids?
You don't want them?
Or what?

 

[justjess]

Someone is jumping through a lot of mental gymnastics to justify just wanting to fuck

how biblical

 

[justjess]

I must say that im rather surprised that out of all the things said between me, drifter, and jess that you found my views to be the most disagreeable. You got Drifter saying that abuse and mistreatment ultinately define the history and relationship between men and women with the exception of a small amount of instances where men treated women good. Drifter who also says that a long term marriage in which the husband may have acted out anger and hit his wife once or twice rightfully and ultimately deserve to be regarded as an abuse marriage without exception. Even if the marriage in question lasted decades and the husband showed true remorse and regret for his actions and ultimately did exponentially more to benefit his wife than anything harmful, the marriage is still regarded as abusive.


Jess who says that men who dont pay child support are deadbeats and scumbags, but women who take their children from their father and vice versa in instances where no immediate harm to them was present have committed no moral infraction.

Its interesting that you find my views disagreeable and worth challenging, but dont find these notions to be equally worth challenging. I mean its these very mindsets and notions that are laying a precedence for all men. A precedence that will ultimately bite them in the backside one day if not challenged. Imagine your grandaughter coming home one day and being afraid of you as a man, because of what she learned in a bias new world order history class.

Never said that buddy. You might want to retake English 101.