Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 87: Taxreformers: Age of Extinction

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qw3Lhc_zt8
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

https://i.redd.it/evwnvtslwkty.jpg

That is so fucking savage.

gay...
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/22/students-avoid-making-eye-contact-could-guiltyof-racism-oxford/

So if you're really shy you're actually just a super racist person. Good job, libs.

that's fake news, ignore it.
---

Liberals already blaming Russia for the French elections. It couldn't possibly be all the terror attacks recently.

Oh and nice job feminist groups for protesting a female running for president and proving you don't actually care about women's rights. Called it told you so and so forth.

UltiXX posted...

Oh and nice job feminist groups for protesting a female running for president and proving you don't actually care about women's rights.

What is this sentence.
---

feminists care about feminist values.

le pen doesn't.

therefore, they do not support le pen.

this isn't rocket science.
---

Is Ulti so sexist that he thinks if a feminist doesn't vote for a women then they're not a feminist?

How out of touch can one guy be?
---

Ulti is the kind of man to get mad at women for voting for a woman, as well as for not voting for a woman.

Gee, it's almost like women actually do just want equality and aren't voting like simpletons. Might they be human?
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Ulti is the kind of man to get mad at women for voting for a woman, as well as for not voting for a woman.

Gee, it's almost like women actually do just want equality and aren't voting like simpletons. Might they be human?

"Human" is not a real thing
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

Feminist groups in France are protesting Le Pen for various dumb reasons that I don't have time to get into since I'm leaving in a few seconds. But as I've said for years, these people don't care about women. They only care about leftist values.

Then why do they put on the facade?
---

Historically, feminists and socialist women (by which I mean, socialists in the socialist party sense, i.e. leftists whose focus is on labor issues) actually didn't see eye to eye. Because they disagree on what the axis of oppression actually is -- is it based on gender or class? But modern feminism is more intersectional; I'm not an expert on French politics, but I would imagine that if feminists don't support Le Pen, it's probably because her policies are bad for women (which they are).
---

How's this for a shocker

The culture of sexual harassment at Fox News was so bad that even SARAH PALIN is speaking out against it now.
---

Kenri posted...

Historically, feminists and socialist women (by which I mean, socialists in the socialist party sense, i.e. leftists whose focus is on labor issues) actually didn't see eye to eye. Because they disagree on what the axis of oppression actually is -- is it based on gender or class? But modern feminism is more intersectional; I'm not an expert on French politics, but I would imagine that if feminists don't support Le Pen, it's probably because her policies are bad for women (which they are).

In all fairness, some of her policies are bad for everyone!
---

Jakyl25 posted...

How's this for a shocker

The culture of sexual harassment at Fox News was so bad that even SARAH PALIN is speaking out against it now.

I'm astonished she is capable of speaking...
---

Rasmussen Trump approval down to 47% from 51% yesterday.

Big shift for one day
---

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/25/politics/michael-flynn-house-oversight-committee/index.html

Not looking great for Flynn

And the White House has denied requests for documents on him? That's peculiar.
---

Both feminists groups and Donald Trump con working class men. I hate both, slight more towards Trump
---

Jakyl25 posted...

How's this for a shocker

The culture of sexual harassment at Fox News was so bad that even SARAH PALIN is speaking out against it now.

It's good to know she only supports sexual assault and not sexual harassment too, I guess.
---

https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/856922942307008513

Cernovich is learning from Ulti on how to deflect big shot claims that turn out to be provably false.
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

Gee, it's almost like women actually do just want equality and aren't voting like simpletons.

Feminists do not care about equality.

Which is why they are treating LePen as an equal to a man and either voting or not voting for her on merits other than her gender?
---

Metal_DK posted...

Both feminists groups and Donald Trump con working class men. I hate both, slight more towards Trump

How do feminists con working class men?

I'm not trying to be confrontational, btw. I'm just curious what examples you use to support this statement!
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Metal_DK posted...

Both feminists groups and Donald Trump con working class men. I hate both, slight more towards Trump

How do feminists con working class men?

I'm not trying to be confrontational, btw. I'm just curious what examples you use to support this statement!

By milking them for their sperm on mars obviously.
---

Well I meant besides the martian sperm factories, OBVIOUSLY.
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

Gee, it's almost like women actually do just want equality and aren't voting like simpletons.

Feminists do not care about equality.

It's the literal definition of feminism.

You are so out of touch with reality.
---

Remember when this was a funny joke and not the terrifying reality in which we all live?
---

Eddv posted...

Remember when this was a funny joke and not the terrifying reality in which we all live?

If the people making that a reality actually watched Mythbusters, it might be a bit better.
---

I too remember being in middle school

Suprak the Stud posted...

Metal_DK posted...

Both feminists groups and Donald Trump con working class men. I hate both, slight more towards Trump

How do feminists con working class men?

I'm not trying to be confrontational, btw. I'm just curious what examples you use to support this statement!

A major part of feminist theory is "once women have better jobs the wealth will trickle down and be able to marry for love". Childless millennial women outearn millennial men in almost every major city except silicon valley. The reason why things switch when they reach their mid 30s/40s/50s is because these are different generations of people. Gen X men outearned Get X women in their 20s (80s and 90s). Same with Boomers when they entered the workforce as well.

You are not seeing women date/marry men younger than them, make significantly less than them, less educated than them, etc. It happens, but very very rarely. It happens about as much as when Reagan said "give the wealth to the rich and theyll make more jobs!". What happened was that for every couple businesses that actually did that (which some did), most just pocketed the money in some offshore bank account (or some other shady crap). Because of this, the rise of pick up artists, mgtow, red pills, etc are all rising to prominence. Men need to have some sort of "game" or "strategy" to get date/romance/sex. But having these things is also sexist according to feminists. Or is it just talking about these things? Either way, its really absurd.

Women who are doctors want to marry men who are doctors, lawyers, business executives, etc. Men who are doctors are very happy marrying women who are nurses, teachers, or even shift managers at department stores. This is because (and something feminists get right) men value women for their bodies, not for their money. Most well off women, when given the choice, choose to be single and alone than with a low income/uneducated man. Men, when given the choice, choose to be single and alone than be with a obese woman.

Feminists are lying to these men when they say women will date/marry these low income men and that wealth will trickle down. Most won't. Not all, but most. Its extremely unproductive to men to say this to them, its giving most of them false hope. It doesn't mean vote for Trump, or women shouldnt be allowed to be the president/CEO, or dislike and harass people making a ghostbusters movie starring women, or whatever dumbass thing in this weeks social media world. But the feminist movement is lying to a lot of men, and working class men probably don't know how to articulate themselves very well so they go the route of trump/gamergate/ghostbusters

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/24/childless-women-in-their-twenties-out-earn-men-so/#5b7d937ba82c
---

Metal_DK posted...

Men need to have some sort of "game" or "strategy" to get date/romance/sex.

or they could treat women like human beings and maybe better than themselves until they're actually fuckable, but that's just so much work
---

Metal_DK posted...

stuff

This is more or less accurate. One legitimate Men's Rights thing that is going on right now is that, while the degree to which men objectify women is discussed extensively, the degree to which women objectify men is discussed rarely despite happening just as much, and when it is discussed, tends to be dismissed as not important. This obviously stems from the Women's Rights movement that's been going on for decade, while Men didn't need to think about that sort of thing nearly as much until now.

Problem is the Men's Rights movements that have popped up were instantly commandeered by ridiculous & offensive extremists, but that unfortunately seems to be par for the course.

Kenri posted...

or they could treat women like human beings and maybe better than themselves until they're actually fuckable, but that's just so much work

Please read the whole post and not pull some small out of context snippet. Also men bettering themselves would mean they have more wealth/power/influence would it not? This would then mean "compete in the patriarchy and succeed", which is in fact the patriarchy.

The main reason why we still live in a patriarchy, now that the western workforce is mostly office jobs, is because women want a man whose in that environment. Millennial women are doing just as well if not better than millennial men in many aspects. Yet things don't seem to be changing. A patriarchal society is not entirely men's fault. In fact, is it time we start talking about women's contributions to it?
---

Kenri posted...

Metal_DK posted...

Men need to have some sort of "game" or "strategy" to get date/romance/sex.

or they could treat women like human beings and maybe better than themselves until they're actually fuckable, but that's just so much work

There is no guarantee that you'll get a girl you like by being a better person or by treating women as humans. Like, that's the prerequisite to being a passable human being, let alone being dateable. While I understand what you're going for, this line of thinking is what inevitably leads to upset 'nice guys' who are upset when they aren't rewarded for following standard human being protocol.

To actually succeed in the dating sphere some sort of strategy is required. You need to better your appearence, practice conversational skills, think of romantic gestures that would be well-received, ect. It is, at it's heart, a game and a competition. And as long as you're not taking advantage of people, that's fine. Stuff like gaslighting is horrible but if you plan to do something romantic for someone in the hopes of making them happy (and making them like you more), that's normal and beneficial to everyone involved.

You say this but I am going to a wedding in a few weeks for a woman who is like an executive is marrying a mechanic.

They met two years ago when she was getting her csr fixed. She thinks hes funny and to his credit he always returned her calls.
---

Eddv posted...

She thinks hes funny

Sounds like he had a winning strategy :^)

Regaro posted...

Eddv posted...

She thinks hes funny

Sounds like he had a winning strategy :^)

I mean, you joke, but but being funny is probably the #1 most important thing for a guy being 'dateable'. It's right up there with being rich and/or having a high status.

There are of course many exceptions to all these generalizations, but on average, yeah.

Jacen_SoIo posted...

To actually succeed in the dating sphere some sort of strategy is required. You need to better your appearence, practice conversational skills, think of romantic gestures that would be well-received, ect. It is, at it's heart, a game and a competition

This is largely true, but it's true for EVERYONE. Not just men.
---

Eddv posted...

You say this but I am going to a wedding in a few weeks for a woman who is like an executive is marrying a mechanic.

They met two years ago when she was getting her csr fixed. She thinks hes funny and to his credit he always returned her calls.

Do you really think thats the norm though? Also is there more this mechanic in terms of income/inheritance/etc? I don't think all women are gold diggers, im not saying this. But do you really think this "shes a doctor/executive/high ranking person" and hes a plumber/mechainic/etc is really happening that often? Marriage rate decline, birth rate decline, and overall decline in the respect men and women have for each other seems much more prominent.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Jacen_SoIo posted...

To actually succeed in the dating sphere some sort of strategy is required. You need to better your appearence, practice conversational skills, think of romantic gestures that would be well-received, ect. It is, at it's heart, a game and a competition

This is largely true, but it's true for EVERYONE. Not just men.

Fair enough, but due to the fact that men have to initiate, while women can but don't very often, its much more important for men for men to have "game" than women.
---

Well i mean when you say strategy that calls to mind like PUA/redpill stuff.

When in reality there is basically no substitute for being funny and interesting. Except for maybe money and good looks. But i dont see the issue there.
---

Jacen_SoIo posted...

Regaro posted...

Eddv posted...

She thinks hes funny

Sounds like he had a winning strategy :^)

I mean, you joke, but but being funny is probably the #1 most important thing for a guy being 'dateable'. It's right up there with being rich and/or having a high status.

There are of course many exceptions to all these generalizations, but on average, yeah.

I'm only taking the mocking/joking tone here becauseholy shit why are we even having this conversation

Metal_DK posted...

Eddv posted...

You say this but I am going to a wedding in a few weeks for a woman who is like an executive is marrying a mechanic.

They met two years ago when she was getting her csr fixed. She thinks hes funny and to his credit he always returned her calls.

Do you really think thats the norm though? Also is there more this mechanic in terms of income/inheritance/etc? I don't think all women are gold diggers, im not saying this. But do you really think this "shes a doctor/executive/high ranking person" and hes a plumber/mechainic/etc is really happening that often? Marriage rate decline, birth rate decline, and overall decline in the respect men and women have for each other seems much more prominent.

I dunno i dont study this shit. I know the women i went to school with all mostly make a ton of money and all mostly married blue collar guys if they didny marry someone from school.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Jacen_SoIo posted...

To actually succeed in the dating sphere some sort of strategy is required. You need to better your appearence, practice conversational skills, think of romantic gestures that would be well-received, ect. It is, at it's heart, a game and a competition

This is largely true, but it's true for EVERYONE. Not just men.

Yup.


Eddv posted...

When in reality there is basically no substitute for being funny and interesting.

If you're not funny or interesting naturally (most people aren't), then becoming so is definitely a strategy. And takes efforts.

Most people are interesting and funny to someone.
---

Metal_DK posted...

Feminists are lying to these men when they say women will date/marry these low income men and that wealth will trickle down.

Your post follows logically from this premise, but I have a ton of doubt that this premise is true.

I don't think most feminists give a crap about men's anxieties about still being able to get dates enough to even bother with this concept.

Also why do you think men are particularly inarticulate?
---

Regaro posted...

I'm only taking the mocking/joking tone here becauseholy shit why are we even having this conversation

What's so bad about this conversation? Gender disparity is a very popular political discussion & focus these days.

Like this reaction right here is the problem with all of the Men's Rights groups are horrible. Their very existence makes it impossible to have these conversations without people getting touchy. I'd love to have rational discourse about the way that men are objectified in today's society but it's actually hard because it brings up mental images of the disgusting redpill types.

Metal_DK posted...

stuff

Thanks for responding!

Women in their 20s without children out-earn men by as much as $1.08 to every dollar, according to some estimates.

Do you know which study he is citing? I don't see sources. Is it childless women vs. all men? That seems like an intentionally unfair comparison. What is childless women vs. childless men? Or even single women vs. single men. I'd assume those that dedicate themselves to their career over having a family would indeed earn more, so I'd want this to be a direct comparison.

Also "some estimates"? Is this representative of the typical estimate or the most exaggerated value they are using to prove their point somewhat disingenuously? A common complaint I often hear is "that 77 cent statistic is the extreme end of the estimate" which, fair enough, but then it is very disingenuous if this person is using the same technique to try and prove their point.

Because of this, the rise of pick up artists, mgtow, red pills, etc are all rising to prominence. Men need to have some sort of "game" or "strategy" to get date/romance/sex. But having these things is also sexist according to feminists. Or is it just talking about these things? Either way, its really absurd.

I would argue there isn't really a "rise" in this. It is a relatively small number of sexually frustrated men looking for some external way to focus their inadequacies. "Oh it isn't that I'm fat/ugly/socially awkward/kind of a creep it's that women have to high of standards so we need to try and game the system!" Whenever I see men that subscribe to this kind of system, it isn't hard working or successful or good looking or at least generally pleasant and good natured men (you know, the kind of traits women like) that are doing it. And it certainly isn't mainstream dating strategy.

Women who are doctors want to marry men who are doctors, lawyers, business executives, etc. Men who are doctors are very happy marrying women who are nurses, teachers, or even shift managers at department stores.

Do you have statistics that back this up? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I do not know if the statistics actually bear this out.

Feminists are lying to these men when they say women will date/marry these low income men and that wealth will trickle down. Most won't. Not all, but most. Its extremely unproductive to men to say this to them, its giving most of them false hope.

I don't know if this is something feminists ever got together and promised >_> "Hey you scrubs we'll date you if we can get good jobs". I don't remember that in their charter. Nor are they required to tbqh. Most of the men that complain about how mean women are about dating aren't exactly good catches themselves. This isn't a thing normal men complain about, at least in my experience.

All of this doesn't sound like a con to me. All of the women I've talked to that you would probably consider to be extreme on this issue don't secretly believe it is equal between men and women. They aren't like "haha suckers they are going to give us better jobs even though we know things are equal!" They genuinely believe that there is wage discrimination or that the playing field is uneven. Now, you can certainly say they are wrong and debate them on what you perceive the facts to be. But it certainly isn't a con like you had initially said, unless I'm missing your point.
---