I sometimes seriously wonder if all young women subconsciously prefer to mate with criminals rather than law-abiding men. It’s apparently more exciting to date a bad boy than a nice guy. This would explain why so many women are constantly trying to hyper-regulate male behavior. If every single man becomes a criminal, because there are too damn many stupid laws to remember much less obey, then every young maiden gets to date an exciting lawbreaker, instead of a boring law-abider.
It’s almost as if our entire society has been turned into a collective massive shit test by the feminists, and men have failed, so they want to import our replacements.
This preference of women of breeding age for bad men is why they have rarely been allowed to choose their mates freely by the vast majority of all societies. They will systematically breed all of the nice guys who keep the lights on out of existence, and then curse men when they find themselves sitting in the dark. Older women understand this well, so they were allowed to arrange marriages in the distant past. Today all restraints are gone, and all bets are off.
Feminism isn’t just anti-male. It’s anti-child, anti-marriage and anti-God. No wonder it is always the predecessor of unsustainable birthrate declines.
For those parents, grandparents, guardians, and mentors looking for some assistance in guiding their children through this morass, I recommend Wild at Heart (2001) by John Eldredge for boys, and the companion book Captivating (2005) by John and his wife Stasi Eldredge.
Together, the books form an interesting litmus test. Many women who embraced Wild at Heart for helping them with their sons, vehemently rejected Captivating saying “that’s not me, that’s not what I want, that’s not what I want for my daughter.” Many of those are divorced mothers trying to raise their children with limited assistance from the father.
I used to help run a “tea party” group with two other guys. You do remember the tea party movement, don’t you? Our group was willing to pay taxes if we took in income. All the others tried for 501c 3 tax free status, which they should have been able to obtain but for Lois Learner, head of Obama’s IRS.That left the playing field open so we grew to over 50,000 members. The model was that we sent out political essays to members and members participated in a discussion board on the topic at hand. Anyone could submit essays for distribution but the three of us independently got to pick which ones everyone were sent in their email. So in the run ip to Trump’s first election I sent out 50-60 million emails with my name as sender, Dr Arthur W Carpenter.
Now to the point, I used to send out a lot of population control information. In my mind, if we could control our numbers we could each have as much space to live in as we wanted. Exponential growth puts us into a China or India, yuck! If we limit ourselves to one child per family, in 500 years there will be two of us left. I do like children!
Everybody is for population control, especially progressives. Right up the point that they study the Western Roman Empire in the 4th through 6th Centuries AD.
Short form;
The Roman bureaucracy, designed to govern an Empire stretching from Britain to the borders of Persia, could not be reduced in size, especially with many posts that were essentially hereditary. After the split with the Eastern Empire (the richer part), Rome was trying to maintain everything on less than half the total GDP.
Taxes were increased. With less money to support families, the birthrate fell. In the next generation, there were fewer taxpayers, but the bureaucracy still needed feeding, so taxes were raised again. Wash, rinse, repeat.
In four generations, it was all over. The Sack of Rome by Alaric’s Goths in 476 wasn’t a barbarian raid. It was the hired mercenaries who guarded the Eastern border with what is now Russia, who hadn’t been paid in a decade, taking their back pay out in kind to feed their starving wives and children.
(Moral; When you hire mercenaries, pay them on schedule.)
The Western Empire died by its own hand as it bankrupted itself trying to keep its government running.
Progressives of the “Just enough of me, way too much of you” sort are all-in on “zero population growth” or even “culling Humanity to the carrying capacity of holy Mother Gaia’ (they reckon about 50 million humans total, worldwide)-
Right up to the point where someone asks, “So, who are we gonna tax to pay for our Utopia?”
Because they sure as Hell don’t want to foot the bill for it.
At my age I think if we end up through our “governments- state and city” keeping us from just killing those that need it; and all the invaders killing us, they would get their “Handmaidens” reality. Known as Bend Over Here It Comes again. Probably what they want.
12 Comments
Saw it coming. The leftie beta males dating other leftie beta males, where does that leave Affluent liberal white woman?
They’re dating Franzia.
I sometimes seriously wonder if all young women subconsciously prefer to mate with criminals rather than law-abiding men. It’s apparently more exciting to date a bad boy than a nice guy. This would explain why so many women are constantly trying to hyper-regulate male behavior. If every single man becomes a criminal, because there are too damn many stupid laws to remember much less obey, then every young maiden gets to date an exciting lawbreaker, instead of a boring law-abider.
It’s almost as if our entire society has been turned into a collective massive shit test by the feminists, and men have failed, so they want to import our replacements.
This preference of women of breeding age for bad men is why they have rarely been allowed to choose their mates freely by the vast majority of all societies. They will systematically breed all of the nice guys who keep the lights on out of existence, and then curse men when they find themselves sitting in the dark. Older women understand this well, so they were allowed to arrange marriages in the distant past. Today all restraints are gone, and all bets are off.
Feminism isn’t just anti-male. It’s anti-child, anti-marriage and anti-God. No wonder it is always the predecessor of unsustainable birthrate declines.
In nature when there becomes too
many of a species, something will
happen to curtail more of them;
war, disease, Feminism, etc.
We are animals after all, just
smarter….well.. maybe that`s
debatable.
Just sayin.
Reminds me of the ol’ Toyota commercial…You asked for it you got it… Toyota!
https://truthsocial.com/@TulsiGabbard/posts/115114242672237640
For those parents, grandparents, guardians, and mentors looking for some assistance in guiding their children through this morass, I recommend Wild at Heart (2001) by John Eldredge for boys, and the companion book Captivating (2005) by John and his wife Stasi Eldredge.
Together, the books form an interesting litmus test. Many women who embraced Wild at Heart for helping them with their sons, vehemently rejected Captivating saying “that’s not me, that’s not what I want, that’s not what I want for my daughter.” Many of those are divorced mothers trying to raise their children with limited assistance from the father.
Your mileage may vary (YMMV).
I used to help run a “tea party” group with two other guys. You do remember the tea party movement, don’t you? Our group was willing to pay taxes if we took in income. All the others tried for 501c 3 tax free status, which they should have been able to obtain but for Lois Learner, head of Obama’s IRS.That left the playing field open so we grew to over 50,000 members. The model was that we sent out political essays to members and members participated in a discussion board on the topic at hand. Anyone could submit essays for distribution but the three of us independently got to pick which ones everyone were sent in their email. So in the run ip to Trump’s first election I sent out 50-60 million emails with my name as sender, Dr Arthur W Carpenter.
Now to the point, I used to send out a lot of population control information. In my mind, if we could control our numbers we could each have as much space to live in as we wanted. Exponential growth puts us into a China or India, yuck! If we limit ourselves to one child per family, in 500 years there will be two of us left. I do like children!
Everybody is for population control, especially progressives. Right up the point that they study the Western Roman Empire in the 4th through 6th Centuries AD.
Short form;
The Roman bureaucracy, designed to govern an Empire stretching from Britain to the borders of Persia, could not be reduced in size, especially with many posts that were essentially hereditary. After the split with the Eastern Empire (the richer part), Rome was trying to maintain everything on less than half the total GDP.
Taxes were increased. With less money to support families, the birthrate fell. In the next generation, there were fewer taxpayers, but the bureaucracy still needed feeding, so taxes were raised again. Wash, rinse, repeat.
In four generations, it was all over. The Sack of Rome by Alaric’s Goths in 476 wasn’t a barbarian raid. It was the hired mercenaries who guarded the Eastern border with what is now Russia, who hadn’t been paid in a decade, taking their back pay out in kind to feed their starving wives and children.
(Moral; When you hire mercenaries, pay them on schedule.)
The Western Empire died by its own hand as it bankrupted itself trying to keep its government running.
Progressives of the “Just enough of me, way too much of you” sort are all-in on “zero population growth” or even “culling Humanity to the carrying capacity of holy Mother Gaia’ (they reckon about 50 million humans total, worldwide)-
Right up to the point where someone asks, “So, who are we gonna tax to pay for our Utopia?”
Because they sure as Hell don’t want to foot the bill for it.
clear ether
eon
At my age I think if we end up through our “governments- state and city” keeping us from just killing those that need it; and all the invaders killing us, they would get their “Handmaidens” reality. Known as Bend Over Here It Comes again. Probably what they want.
There is no “probably” about it.
The femynysts just think they will be the ruling queens, and males will be the breeding stock in the red outfits.
Yes, there’s a good bit of plain insanity involved that has nothing to do with pharmaceutical interventions.
clear ether
eon