Actual hatefacts to offend everyone

OR
Nevermind, your fear is completely justified.

Feel free to make your own.

So let’s talk about the Red Pill, shall we?

This little red pill where any group is magically exempt from criticism… almost like a privilege. Offense is “how dare you imply my demographic is morally fallible!”

Shall we?

 

The Sexual Revolution had nothing to do with politics

Because which sexual strategy would benefit from this?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/17/girl-aged-11-to-become-britains-youngest-mother
Plenty of outlets are covering this. I’m linking them because they report it like it’s a nice thing.
https://www.rt.com/uk/381135-pregnant-youngest-mother-girl/
The fornication is fine, it’s good for you goyim…
You’re definitely not going to Hell because we said so.

Call it right. Call it consensual, I fucking dare you.

Think rabbit, think-

Is the Left’s push of Sexual Revolution narratives a ploy to destroy age of consent?

All this Milo nonsense is raising questions.

Namely, why are they suddenly in shutdown, denial mode?

Was something, some legal challenge, brewing in the next victim group, rising?

When the likes of Salon did those pro-pedophilia articles?

reminder

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-sexual-revolution-and-children-how-the-left-took-things-too-far-a-702679.html

I won’t go into detail on this … thing.

Monsters.

take it from M Greyland

Now for all well-meaning people who believe I am extrapolating from my experience to the wider gay community, I would like to explain why I believe this is so: From my experience in the gay community, the values in that community are very different: the assumption is that EVERYONE is gay and closeted, and early sexual experience will prevent gay children from being closeted, and that will make everyone happy.

everyone is damaged
useful excuse to an abuser
there is no rape
useful excuse for rapists

If you doubt me, research “age of consent” “Twinks,” “ageism” and the writings of the NUMEROUS authors on the Left who believe that early sexuality is somehow “beneficial” for children.

Lock/key is a poor analogy

It doesn’t prove anything.

Except the degeneracy of fornication.

The premise is unintentionally hilarious. What’s the prior here? Logically?

Women are supposed to limit themselves, as if reproduction is a sin (Bible says No) and men can do what they want (Bible says No). Angels fell for fornication. It’s up there with rape. In fact…

If women are supposed to keep their legs shut for their ‘owners’ (husbands), any man who beds a woman and doesn’t marry her is a rapist.

The Bible does imply this too.

It used to be on the law books as things like Breach of Promise. Aka it used to be illegal to defraud/lie to get sex historically too. Rape by fraud would be traditional to reinstate.

She is incapable of consenting except to be wed, in a church, with her previous owner’s (father’s) permission.

They’re implicitly arguing against the Sexual Revolution. A feminist event that allows them to sleep around. Because they defend their ‘right’ to sleep around… (not endogenous, not a right).

Fallacy of Poor analogy.

They’re implicitly saying that all fornication is rape and sex is otherwise stolen from women by criminal men. We’re helpless. As in, we can’t consent to the guy using the metaphor either. It’s an argument to female hypoagency. Also sexist to men, as all rapists and aggressors who only want one thing.

Today’s women, yesterday’s prostitutes

http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/08/05/todays-women-yesterdays-prostitutes/

I take issue with an over-reach regarding this topic. It’s rhetorical and makes us all look stupid.

Every time you hear an otherwise intelligent man discuss this topic, he will make a rare lapse and blame women. It’s trendy and edgy, they think.

i.e. the problem is women’s sexuality.

You can cut the woman part out, the problem remains.
They are discussing something where it literally takes two.

Unless they’re casually suggesting all men will suddenly turn gay?

I don’t think so.

Sexuality, period, is the destructive force. 

Anyone’s. In aggregate. Look at Africa.

Take a long, hard look.

Previous civilizations knew this. So you either bought in with marriage or forgo the benefits. Women don’t visit hookers. Which sex make up the majority of porn addicts? Perverts? Deviants? Sluts? Have you seen the paraphilia data? The STDs rising among young men, who pass it around easier for the same act, based on anatomy?
If you get to blame testosterone, well, women have that too. Some have naturally high levels. Does it excuse rape, because logically, if hormones rob you of agency I find that a rather sexist argument against your fellow man. To blame your body for the will of the mind makes a man into an animal, not deserving human rights. Women cannot attack men based on our hormones nor vice versa. If you are incapable of restraining yourself, you have no right to be beyond the confines of an asylum. The same could be argued of oestrogen but that hasn’t been linked to aggression as much as crying and craving chocolate, I think we’re safe.

History of Great Empires and their social decline?
The Greeks weren’t famous for screwing little girls.
The Romans did not have their most depraved orgies in women’s bath houses.

Which sex was at the centre of all these? The sex that to this day, holds the title of the Probable Sex Criminal? More paedophiles, at least? Can we agree that’s bad? Look at the crime data, the Right Wing say. Okay, we’ve looked by age, race, what about sex? Can we get some intellectual honesty here? Are the men involved less culpable for those crimes, as they demand female paedophiles be punished? [correctly] Does this not seem like a grand distraction to you? We have millennia of evidence on this one, unlike all other demographics.

If men (with power) get the sex they want, Empires fall. Lesson of ancient history.

You know what that means? You don’t get to blame the women. Especially since you also argue from the other side of your faces that women are weaker (physically true) and rely on men for protection (somewhat, historically, yes) – which makes women the victims of male power, logically?

You cannot argue two opposite things. They contradict, its impossible. Logic, invented by better men. Biology says men are the ones with the power, as does history. So if anyone is to blame, if either sex is ‘It’, men dropped the ball in the West. If there is an issue in the Sexual Marketplace, as the sexually dominant sex, that is the man’s responsibility.

This is not even complicated, logically. Moving on to details.

Cultural Marxism would’ve been impossible without the Sexual Revolution.

Why did the Sexual Revolution come about?

The Pill yes, but also to force women into the workforce while appeasing their men.

It was entirely economic. A quick way to make money Post-War. After all, millions of men workers had just died. Positions were available. Taxes were lacking to rebuild basic infrastructure.

Tradition, which is to say, Patriarchy, was more restrictive of male sexuality than female.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/patriarchy-discourages-all-promiscuity/

Nobody mentions this fact.

Nobody dare ask why.

So no, you don’t get to argue Down with Vagina, whatever your emotions on the subject from pure to bitter, but that everything from Tinder to porn addiction is fine because you like it. We are not F60.89 leftist hedons here. Is it wrong of me to expect some maturity, a defining trait of men previously, on this issue? Can they look past self-interest and their own throbbing…. opinions?

It’s either a bad behaviour for society, or not. They’re casually arguing that promiscuity damages women, but not men? From what? Where’s the biological evidence?

Please, post it to Nature. Science. Collect Nobel in Medicine for averting disaster.

Ask the mature question.

Is the behaviour bad for the individual, full stop? Long-term? aka The Future?

All the evidence thus far says it is.

Neuroscience is catching up to bad social policy.

yourbrainonporn.com

You are harming yourselves.

Like any self-harm, first you must acknowledge a problem to fix it.

For argument’s sake, let us assume every woman in the West shut her legs tomorrow.

Okay, what happens to male sexuality then?

It’s impossible to balance a one-sided equation.

Come on, you’re smarter than this.

Expression is fine. Let’s keep it social.
The political is very personal, but the personal is not political. Unless you trust future adminstrations not to restrict your sexuality, keep it out of public politics.

There’s nothing wrong with men and women voting (see UK GE 2015, Brexit, Trump).
There’s nothing wrong with either sex owning property. If you study real history, not the past 300 years, inheritance was quite common among widows, who outlived their husbands usually. Property went to the family, blood, disregarding sex. To say women didn’t hold property is a feminist myth, and they do this deliberately, as you can’t prove a negative, and many ancient societies held them in the family too. While the men were away fighting, guess whose job it was to manage those estates? The women. To this day, women run the home. It is our domain. Now tell me who ‘owns’ it.

However, arguing against the evidence of pair bonding damage, vital for successful marriage, and expecting nuclear families to blossom out of overstimulated Pajama Boys as if by magic?

https://www.amazon.com/Hooked-Science-Casual-Affecting-Children/dp/0802450601

Doomed.

Random OT, sorta

Aside from strawmen, over-reactions and non-sequiturs…

Cosmetics were used by both sexes until recently, including rouge. Like today, they are medicinal. Many modern formulations are good for the skin, at least providing a UV barrier to make skin cancer less likely. Actually, men invented high heels, men wore tights/stockings first, and French poofs wore blusher and lipstick first in the West. Men also wore restrictive clothing, to suck in their guts, including corsets. Corsets (old clothes) and togas (very old clothes where breasts were exposed) are sexier than jeans and hoodies (modern clothes).
Just because a bad person does something doesn’t make it a bad idea e.g. plenty of bad people donate to charity.
The red lipstick thing had nothing to do with America, get over yourselves. It was our Queen, I covered this in detail. You followed us, America.

Birth control – for whom?

A minor point on this.

Birth control takes away control from women. The feminists lie.
Men invented birth control, men prescribe birth control, men tell women they need to be on birth control. (So they can use us like whores, only whores used to require birth control/chemical abortions, if a man tells you that you need to be on it, he’s calling you a whore and that any child he conceives with you must be destroyed in shame because while you’re valuable for sex, he doesn’t want to provide in return, still want to fuck him?)

How, exactly, is all this the woman’s choice?

And for the feminists saying they’re pro-choice, well, which industries do they profit from? Sex-positive (slut) and abortion (anti-natal) taking the option of motherhood away from other women and wiping their wallets while doing it. The competition (pretty women, usually) have less children and see no rush to get married in their physical prime, a great incentive to r-types promoting it to the enemy, who also want to keep the number of nuclear families down.

Controlling the life or death inside another woman, or even whether that woman has a life growing inside her in the first place. Doesn’t sound like personal empowerment, but social, medical control.

The fewer mothers, the fewer conservative women, this is a known connection.
The more unhappy sluts, the more self-help bullshit they read blaming the Other (men).
Gee, sound like any belief system you know?

They say: You need this.

They mean: You need us.

It’s drug addiction. What do addicts do? They take the drug longer than maximum (the Pill is only ‘safe’ a few years, tops), they self-medicate with reckless behaviours (sex) and self-destruct emotionally because a core part of their feminine identity (the Mother) has been stolen from them. Result? They feel stuck. Perma-childhood.

Finger the villain.

They say it was a Sexual Revolution.

It was, in fact, a Maternal Destruction.

Listen between their lies.

Motherhood is bad and you’re bad for wanting it. You want to be a housewife? Why? Oh, you’re a mother, what a waste. Mothers are wasting their lives, it isn’t an ambition or a valid one to want a family, like a man who wants a legacy. Those father figures are losers, how dare they love you enough to want to provide for you until they die. You have all the time in the world but don’t do it now, put it off forever. Parents are uncool, you want to be hip, I can tell. You think you want kids, but you don’t really want those ugly, smelly ungrateful things you’d have made, do you? Children are always terrible and the fact they don’t like me proves it. You should be ashamed to side with your family instead of strange women who seem very unhinged and want you to take up their unhealthy habits. If you want a cuddle, buy a dog. Human purpose isn’t genetic, that’s so Darwinian. Parents aren’t superior or I would be one. Nobody wants to marry me so you shouldn’t settle down either because I’d be all alone. There are so many exciting men who’ll be happy to use you until your looks go, why are you depriving them their fun? (R-types stick together, as you can see with the manwhore pick-up artists and slut-positive feminists who both align only to protect Promiscuity Culture).

If this sounds backwards, because it’s a media Big Lie to blame the victim, think of it like this.

Why are there mothers and boyfriends grinding up birth control into an adult woman’s food?

Where is your ‘control’ there?

Why does the father (and they are a father if there is conception) get to order an abortion in someone else’s body, of the child he consented to create in consenting to the act of sex aka procreation?

(The two can never be divided, sex is making babies and making babies is having sex, biology 101; the drugs give us an illusion, or one method would work 100%).

Why were men on board for giving it to women they would never, ever marry?

It allows men to control a woman’s body and her most feminine aspect – her fertility, to use her for his pleasure until he can discard her with no consequences or investment (the masculine side of the sexual bargain).

Is that in any woman’s best interest?

well leaves nope no go leaving

For balance? This is also bad for men in general. Aside from the chemical sterile angle.
As the men opt out of the duties of an adult male, hard-won as a rite of passage, birth control is also anti-Patriarchy. On a fundamental level, it ruins their daughters for their odds of a happy marriage, allows their wife to cheat without being found out, allows their son to waste his time chasing tail instead of building the family business and getting serious, and they probably wouldn’t become Patriarchs in the first place, revoking their masculine power to found a family too and hard-won possibility of a legacy denied to many men who can’t find or earn a good spouse (but usually, modern men are dumb enough from anti-family propaganda to encourage their women to go on the stuff too, only to complain their woman has lost interest in starting a family, because he’s drugging her to think she already has one).

Modern lechery

modernlechery

The anti-feminists fail when they fail to see crime as a problem when the perpetrator is male and their excuse is hedonism.

There’s salacious and then there’s inhuman.

You’d think the so-called traditionalists would be anti- these things because they are all the byproduct of a heavily sexualised culture. Alas, hedonism lies.

For example “forced to have sex” = rape. Coercion obviates consent.

These are the fruits of the sexual revolution and they’re all rotten to the core.

Psychologically, any man with a willing woman in front of him who wants to stick it in the other hole is kidding himself about his sexuality and doesn’t get to use any evolutionary argument regarding women, ever. It’s an exit, not an entrance.

Men have no respect for women anymore but it began when they lost respect for themselves. It’s projected onto women. For example, if you ask for nudes, you don’t get to bitch about the acquiescence to your request.

The harm of pornography will take decades to understand in any… depth. Sorry. And porn is cheating according to none other than The Bible (viewing with lust).

Women, if he says differently, watch gay porn. All the time. At breakfast. In the bedroom instead of sleeping. In the garden, volume turned right up. Nothing to be ashamed of, right? No addiction here. These men also love anal so they can’t object, right? You’re watching the experts at work.

Modern women are so disrespected they’ve lost sight of the difference between pleasing a man (feminine) and being controlled by a man (who isn’t even their husband so they owe him nothing, also it’s abuse).

The manosphere doesn’t help itself by portraying all women’s issues are shrill hysteria.
No wonder regular people switch off when they try to wield the rhetoric of male abuse when they laugh at that of women. The behaviour is evil, the prevalence determines the examples used. Welcome to English.