>>303676>Sorry if you are actually reprehensible?
I would be, yes.>I don't pay much attention to (((ids)))
Nor do I, although there's at least two of us that appear to be switching them decently often enough within this very thread, and it's not all that hard to pinpoint someone's persona if you look close enough.>>303692>Remember, a simple series of shortcuts can bring up a notepad window. Win + R, and then type "notepad" and press enter.
I really should make use of the added real estate of a second monitor, it's just that the terminal looked so 1337 next to /mlpol/. There's really no need for it to take up all that space, though. Splitscreen it is.>One of the things about Feminism at it's core is the rejection of the idea that there are innate differences between men and women. From that perspective, we can say that Feminism led to trans stuff.
Oh yeah. There's been a quote floating around of a Roman intellectual saying something about the day women and men are equal is the day that men are subjugated. It's not too hard to see why that's true, I think. Mental gymnastics come really easy to women, they break the rules of logic whenever it suits them, jump from one ill-begotten idea to the next, and wedge in a bunch of passive-aggressive insults to boot; it's really more like a war of attrition against a tireless opponent where if you
fuck up they'll point out the flaw in your logic but they
are able to just dance around and flaunt it before your eyes and act like it's cute or something (it goes without saying that it's very much not, it's actually very grotesque). It's really never in a man's best interest to argue with a woman; he has to tell her what she wants to hear and then do whatever needs be done anyway, and they'll forgive him later for it (or better yet not need to because they're none the wiser) if he pulls it off.
The problems to come out of this mistake (taking a bite out of the apple) being rather predictable for a logical mind to see; God smacks us all upside the head and metaphorically banishes us out of the Garden of Eden for the nth time. The women trying to fix something, and all else involved, are destined for disaster, because they have not a clue what they're doing and end up fucking everything up and trying to claim everything's fine when it's clearly not. Women are focused on appearances, men on actions. That must be why we get men undergoing HRT and surgery, because all these naggy feminists are telling a man he needs to change so much that he finally tries to give them what they say they want, which is in effect the exact opposite of what they desperately need in spirit. The accelerant sweetness and nagging above and below their standards, respectively, is really strong, I think. You either "cut it" in their eyes, or you don't, and they'll either try to massage your ego or beat you over the head with passive-aggressive comments and behaviors ruthlessly based upon that simple classification. The latter being even more pronounced, however, since they never quite learn to stop trying to push a boundary and shit-test, for lack of a better term.
As far as the rejection of innate differences goes, I think the feminists know what they're doing when it comes to destruction of men and simultaneously want a man to put them in their place; but since they've been so damaged and gotten so good at nagging pretty much no man's gonna "cut it" for them, not that really any man would want to. Despite (indeed, because of) having all the facts they try to reject reality as much as possible as a way of calling out for help that won't come unless they turn to God first, work on their problems, and stop being naggy bitches that appear to permanently be on their "time of the month.">I also heard a good video from TheFourthAge (link) about how he traced the origin of Feminism to Nietzsche-ian philosophy.
The link 404ed, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least. We're living the nightmare that Nietzsche predicted would happen all those decades ago, and as such there's been a massive shift to the practice of his proposed solution by all. The only problem I see being that the solution was deeply flawed; I haven't read enough of Nietzsche's works to back that claim up with a philosophical analysis, at least to my satisfaction, but that's the general intuition that I've gotten from it so far. It would probably be something along the lines of the rejection of God leading to men understanding existential concepts, with women being shielded by their own hubris and ignorance, and the resultant weakening of men by dread and "strengthening" of women, for lack of a better term, in taking control of things that they should never have gotten their (previously) delicate hands on.>even the most feminine normal man back in those days were still far, FAR more masculine than even the most masculine woman
I know reminiscing for a past you know or don't know won't get you anywhere, but it would be really nice if they could learn to shut their mouths once in a while. I think that might be where God can come back into people's lives. If they can trust that He's going to take care of them, they might hold their peace a bit more. And, if men don't have to worry about his woman constantly thinking about the next best way to cuck him, he can get to focusing on more theoretical constructs and pull society forward, the way he always has. Feminism has really never done anypony any good, and I think (((they))) know that better than anybody.