The Conservative wrote:You are insulting women...Martin Hash wrote:The Party of Women and men who act like women.
Why? The manginas and beta orbiters wouldn't exist if women didn't actively try to create them. They are responsible for it.
The Conservative wrote:You are insulting women...Martin Hash wrote:The Party of Women and men who act like women.
Those aren't women, those are Feminazis...Speaker to Animals wrote:The Conservative wrote:You are insulting women...Martin Hash wrote:The Party of Women and men who act like women.
Why? The manginas and beta orbiters wouldn't exist if women didn't actively try to create them. They are responsible for it.
The Conservative wrote:Those aren't women, those are Feminazis...Speaker to Animals wrote:The Conservative wrote:
You are insulting women...
Why? The manginas and beta orbiters wouldn't exist if women didn't actively try to create them. They are responsible for it.
Those aren't women, I keep telling you that. Any female that does that is nothing better than a two cent slug.Speaker to Animals wrote:The Conservative wrote:Those aren't women, those are Feminazis...Speaker to Animals wrote:
Why? The manginas and beta orbiters wouldn't exist if women didn't actively try to create them. They are responsible for it.
No, I am talking about the average female I see every day who enjoys keeping her betas in the friend zone, constantly policing men for one reason or another, and making irrational demands of men in general that even they find repugnant.
Have to disagree there, you just hang out with women who like making pussy men, and men that allow it.Speaker to Animals wrote:No, they really are average women. Women doing what women have always wanted to do, but were restrained by social norms and obligations. It's not like women just got together one day and collectively voted on whether to emasculate half the male population. They don't benefit from the outcome either. It's just what they do naturally without even considering the consequences.
This stuff began in earnest with suffrage. Most of the prohibitionist stuff was from them. They were the ones who criminalized prostitution.
Even before then they went out of their way to try to break up clubs where men would go that would not allow women inside.
It's just in their nature to be controlling of us. It's in our nature to be controlling of them. But we don't have the government and culture weaponized to that end like they do.
Think about it like this: a woman is attracted to a masculine man and marries him. She then proceeds to emasculate him of the traits she initially found attractive. She takes over his home and then proceeds to take over his life. Eventually he is totally overwhelmed and she loses respect for him. Divorce follows because he's just not the man she married any longer. This happens a lot. They really don't see what they are doing.
For that matter, I am sure we do a little of that ourselves. It's difficult to see when it's coming from you.
Talk about victims. That is a candidacy built to win the popular vote but lose the EC by 150.TheReal_ND wrote:
Meet the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.
Dem donors buzzing about Kamala Harris
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/34 ... ala-harris
Mayhaps you've detected a party meme here, philly?clubgop wrote:Talk about victims. That is a candidacy built to win the popular vote but lose the EC by 150.
No, if she was the same way she wouldn't of respected demand.Speaker to Animals wrote:So you are saying your wife is exactly like that, but you were smart enough not to surrender. That's not disagreeing with me..