Quote# 139543

This is a very interesting observation. A divorce or abortion doesn't have to take place for people to suffer the effects of feminism. Every bond is weakened, every family relationship takes on a new and different nature. Even before it reveals itself in exterior manifestations, the invisible ontological reality of family ties has been transformed, from something permanent into something temporary, from something fundamental to our nature into something based on pragmatic calculations.

A specific example of this is the permanence of the marriage bond. That bond does not lose its permanence on the day on which one of the partners files for divorce. That bond always lacked the sacramental quality of permanence from the very beginning to the extent that divorce was ever an option. On the day when the couple stand on the steps of the altar and say "I do," they form a permanent sacramental bond if they enter into marriage with the understanding that divorce is never an option no matter what difficult circumstances they might encounter, and they form a different kind of bond if they

When you live in a culture of feminism and divorce the way we do, you can't help breathing the air around you. Everyone is affected by the society in which they live. Everyone is affected by the laws under which they operate.

The famous "Radio Replies" had a pamphlet on "Mixed Marriage" that they published in the thirties warning Catholic boys, "No matter how much that protestant girl says that she believes in the permanence of marriage and that she would never get divorced, her words mean little in comparison the fundamental reality which is that she can divorce you at any time and get remarried. You, meanwhile, will be stuck for life."

What was true back then for protestants is just as true today for Catholics. Anyone you marry can divorce you at any time, and they can get remarried without any obstacles from the state or from the Church.

Maximilian, Suscipe Domine 4 Comments [8/5/2018 12:03:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139544

But why is that? Because after sexual revolution and so called "liberation" of women men have no incentives to be husbands and start family anymore. In general, men will do what it takes to get sex, and sex drive is a huge factor behind met getting married. It is well-known that the traditional (pre 1960s) mating system required men to be reliable husbands and providers in order to marry, and marriage was by large considered the only legitimate sexual release (as it should be). In other words, women and society required men to become husbands and providers in order to get sex and satiate their sex drives.

This was also a moral solution in which sex was restricted to the confines of marriage, as it should be (sure, there were patologies, but I'm talking about the system in general). Also, women married in their early 20s, giving incentives to men to work hard and become candidates for husbands and providers. Fast forward to today. "Liberated" women are not interested in marriage untill their late 20s/early 30s, spending that time at various LTRs/casual sex with whomever they like. Therefore, women no longer require men to marry them and be reliable husbands and providers in order to get sex, so men don't do it, because they don't have to - simple as that.

It has also another layer. Sexual revolution removed all shackes on female sexuality. Women can now financialy support themselves and don't need to lock down a provider husband like they did before the 1960s. All social stigma was removed from fornication, therefore women are free to select their partners solely (or at least mainly) on the basis of sexual attraction. It is well known and proved by research that due to their hypergamy majority of women are sexually attracted only to top 20-30% men (alpha males) - these men get tons of casual sex and don't need to become husbands/providers in order to achieve that.

Other 70% men (mostly betas) receive little to no female attention in their early 20s (women will settle on them only later, when they can't lock down one of the top 20-30% for marriage), therefore they also have no incentives to do work to become reliable providers and husbands. Before the 1960s an average beta male had a good shot at marrying a feminine woman early, as he was in demand as a provider. Now, with "liberated" women supporting themselves and entering the workforce, a beta provider is no longer needed (women often settle for one in their late 20s/early 30s, since there are not enough alpha males to go around, but they are not happy about it, which results in 40% divorce rate).

Add to this terribly unfair divorce laws in the US which are heavily skewed in favor of women, including no fault divorce (70% of divorces are initiated by women - women can blow up marriage for any reason any time and be sure of getting cash and prizes), child support (imputed income, in some states men can go to jail if they lose a job and can't afford child support) and you have further disincentives for men to work to be husbands, again caused by feminism. Finally, husband's authority as head of family has largely been dismantled by the aforementioned unfair divorce laws, feminist propaganda, state education, popular culture, #MeeToo, etc.

Tl;dr - men will do what women and society require them to do in order to be selected as mates. After sexual revolution, advent of feminism and decline of Christianity and its moral values in Western societies, women rejected early marriage en masse, no longer requiring men to be husbands and providers in order to get sex, so men don't do that. Also, the authority of husband and father has been completely destroyed by feminism. Feminism started all of this and remains the main driving force behind this process. All of this is well documented and covered in Christian/Catholic manosphere by such bloggers as Dalrock and Donalgraeme.

Arvinger, Suscipe Domine 5 Comments [8/5/2018 12:04:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139538

This is a weird theory, but hear me out on this one. In our current sexual market place, hypergamy is at an all time high. We have 6 women dating and marrying 10 guys. We have 10 women basically hopping from guy to guy. Water is wet, I know. BUT, my theory is that 10/10 stacies will price themselves out of the market. Hypergamy will raise the price of pussy so high that no guy will be willing to go for a 10/10.

Largely because it isn't realistic to keep them without restricting their sexuality. Thus, if her sexuality is unrestricted, she will chronically go from guy to guy until she ages out. When she attempts to settle down with her 10/10 counterparts, they would've largely moved on to marrying an average women with less miles. I know, few women have "less" miles. However, the main point is that this process will take place for generations until hot 10/10 babes get mated out of existence. Your thoughts guys?

Robo Sapien, incels.me 1 Comments [8/5/2018 12:03:20 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139503

Women do not solve difficult problems, especially problems relating to proper behavior and discipline. This insanity is the product of feminism, which puts empathy for the perpetrator over responsibility and the necessity for everyone following rules of respect and decency. Women need to call men back to running institutions, and let them do the hard work, make the difficult decisions, and go through the physical confrontations of fixing the deteriorating attitudes of certain sub-groups within young America. This country was built by men, not women. Women create life, men create society. It has always been that way, and now that women are abandoning their part and usurping that of men, they are making a right hash of it. But of course, it's shameful to criticize women, so we must all find other reasons to blame for these horrible developments. Feminism is destroying the West. The choice is clear -- to be made by women as well as men: let those who can do the job best do it. That is men.?


Andrew Christopher , YouTube 2 Comments [8/5/2018 8:44:51 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139499

Everything she touched turned to ruin. I got tired of her losing the mail, so I built a two foot deep mailbox, because I couldn't find one big enough to buy. I built it, put a lock on it, and mounted it to the inside of the door. I cut a big hole through the door for magazine sized mail. She wasn't allowed to touch the mail. This is considered “abuse” by today's scumbag judges and lawyers, but they aren't the ones who get in trouble when the bills don't get paid, because your wife is a knucklehead who cannot even be responsible with the mail. Multiply this times a thousand and it describes my 18 years of marriage! I learned the hard way that there is the engagement ring, the wedding ring and then THE SUFFERING!!! After 10 years since the divorce, I'm still recovering.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 4 Comments [8/5/2018 8:37:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139494

When you take over the institutions, the real agenda comes out.



(Dingus_Incel)
Ever since the rise of Trump the far left in the West have pretty much revealed themselves for what they truly are. I'm not a huge Trump fan and have a lot of problems with him. But I'm glad his presence started panicking the elites so much they played their entire hand and just admitted what they have always wanted to do.

Feminism really was about female supremacy, racial equality was just anti-white, atheism was just anti-Christian, they really do want some type of weird quasi-socialst economy and open borders. They do genuinely have disdain for the West and its people and want to replace them. I used to think it was all a nonsense conspiracy but I was disappointed to find out there was a lot more truth to the "globalist agenda" than I thought.

(fuckbitchesman)
Liberals, feminists, SJWs and leftist media hate Trump so that's all the reason I need to support him.

(incelicious)
Well, foids are worth trillions to the economy the way they spend. And not only do they spend their own money, but they spend the money of all the men around them and the government’s money. Of course corporations are pushing for feminism. Men tend to save their money and invest, not blow it on handbags and vagina cream

(notreallymuch)
Feminism is more about female and Chad supremacy. They wouldn't like to see Chad losing his supremacy.

(homey-dont-play-dat)
Desdain for the west is so illogical, they are part of the west. Only thing I can think of are the zionist jews who want revenge on white europe for the holocaust. So they used all their influence to social engineer the west for the past 80 years. But that doesn'to make sense as well. George Soros admitted he sought out and delivered Jews to be registered and or deported. Many Zionists aren't even Jews. The Zionist Jews are mainly white Europeans and Czech. The rich Zionists were never at harm because they could buy their way to Israel when Hitler needed money to fund his war. Only thing I can think of are the zionist jews who just want to create chaos for the sake of chaos. Of from which "can arise zion". They are sick.

(incelicious)
She’s right. Let’s define feminism for what it really is: a movement by sub8 women to make 8+/10 Chads available to them, while making sub8 men better and more cuckolded orbiters, and wishing for the genocide of sub5 men.

(throwawayirl3)
To date, I haven't met a self-defined feminist that didn't get salty when I refused to call myself a feminist even though I made it clear I believe in equality.

Now I see why.

(The_Indigo_Man)
Well yeah obviously everyone deep down knows feminism is nothing more than an ideology based on female supremacy, entitlement and empowerment. Feminism is no different to ISIS. There primary end goal is to eventually begin cutting men's heads off.

some incels, r/Braincels 2 Comments [8/5/2018 8:36:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 139525

Chad

Chad is your high school bully. He is now the guy who works on Wall Street or who plays for a pro-sports team. Chad can get nearly any woman he wants based on his high sexual market value. He is not necessarily a male model. Since the inflation of hypergamy, we can reach the conclusion that Chads are the only male beneficiaries of the sexual revolution.

Women Flock to Him, Not the Other Way Around

Contrary to popular opinion, chad doesn't cockblock other men. He doesn't need to. Chad has women coming to *him*. He opens his tinder and finds dozens of matches and messages just in the last week. Chad can say nearly anything he wants to a woman on a dating app and within a few messages get her number and a place/time to be intimate. Sometimes the only difference between chad and an incel is a few millimeters of bone and fat on the face.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/308/145/4ab.png (use this pic)

PUA copers commonly state that you have to be confident to get women IRL. However this isn’t the case for Chad. If Chad doesn’t approach the woman who desires him, she will find a way to make her intentions known, or even approach him herself [1].

What makes a male a Chad?

A Chad from looks basically has an 8/10 PSL rating.

Common characteristics for a Chad include:

Above 6 foot in height, large frame, broad shoulders, 0-1 on the norwood scale, hunter eyes with little to no upper eyelid exposure, positively or neutrally tilted eyes, prominent high cheekbones, thick eyebrows, a large skull, compact midface, killer long chin, defined squarish jawline, long vertical ramus, gonial angle of approx. 120 degrees, forward growth of the mandible and the maxilla, a short straight nose, an ideal philtrum to chin ratio (with the philtrum being shorter), clean exotic skin, healthy bite with white teeth, and lastly, low body fat (below 15%) [2].

Common examples of Chads

Use pics and shit bro lol

Sources
[1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=-Z49ixqSFAE (section of the girl interviewed)

[2] https://youtube.com/watch?v=EFnJMPQow7A (last section)

Incel Wiki, incels.me 1 Comments [8/5/2018 8:53:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139488

Eating pussy is for betas. In fact I remember seeing many Craigslist posts of desperate betas offering "pussy eating service" it's literally just another form of alpha fux beta bux. Chad doesn't eat pussy, she sucks his dick and creampies it.

NotQuiteChadLite, incels.me 6 Comments [8/4/2018 4:19:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139489

@uninstall:
eating a pussy = cuck

but once is probably allowed just to know

but still

eating a pussy = cuck


@Creep:
The thought of eating pussy puts me off tbhtbh

Eh, I guess it's just something I really like. I drool when I see girls, so maybe I have an oral fixation.

Also I'm not grossed out by the human body; I revel in how disgusting it can be. I could fuck a girl's asshole while she's shitting, decapitate her head and fuck her eye-socket, or watch her turn blue as I strangle her with her own stinking intestines - what the fuck do I care?

Also... how can I say this - I like playing with women. I want to manipulate her psychologically and physiologically. I love the idea of bringing girls to mind-frying orgasms, but a close second is my desire to torture them til they go insane. Causing effect in girls is very satisfying to me; probably because I feel so powerless in my life!

:forcedsmile:

The End, incels.me 6 Comments [8/4/2018 4:19:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139487

eating a pussy = cuck

but once is probably allowed just to know

but still

eating a pussy = cuck

uninstall, incels.me 5 Comments [8/4/2018 4:18:59 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 138651

"Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them."

It's a common feminist quote thrown around that "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.".

Well, there are things worse than death. And if you are so scared, ladies, carry a gun with you. I don't mind.

It's offensive. The mere fact that women don't want to die pisses me off.

*edit* tried to write words better

(Emphasis original)

The End, incels.me 5 Comments [7/7/2018 11:03:33 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139257

The truth about braphogs

EVERY FEMALE IS A BRAPHOG.

Even the most beautiful ones that you've seen. It's crazy how most people don't get this. I had to go to school with these creatures and it was unbearable knowing that I had to breathe the air that they contaminated, not only with farts, but with bad breath and B.O. as well. Also, since the air from the restrooms doesn't stay there forever, I also had to breathe air contaminated with urine, feces, vomit, and period blood. My poor lungs.

One only has to use logic to know that a relationship would be suicide for your body, even with a 10/10. Would you want to hold hands with her? The same hand that wipes her ass? The same hand that changes her tampons? The hand covered with E. coli and specs of uterine lining? Sick.

Would you want to make out with her? The same mouth that reeks of halitosis and makes the air within a 2-foot radius of her unbreathable? The same mouth that shoots out these gross chunks of vomit? Careful, there might be a bit of acid residue in there.

Would you want to cuddle with her? Cuddle that body that sweats, sheds skin off her scaly feet, and reeks of B.O.? Never mind the fact that she'd be farting on you all night.

It's unfathomable why anyone would allow these horrid diseased vermin in their houses, never mind being intimate with them. Any rational person would keep them quarantined instead of letting their disgusting bodily emissions contaminate the air that they breathe, especially in their own residences.

WOMEN
ARE
DISGUSTING
VILE
PARASITES.


The idea of a relationship is idiotic.

Sadness, incels.me 7 Comments [7/27/2018 3:57:27 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Memento Moron Award

Quote# 136319

The Men Who Want to Live Forever

Would you like to live forever? Some billionaires, already invincible in every other way, have decided that they also deserve not to die. Today several biotech companies, fueled by Silicon Valley fortunes, are devoted to “life extension” — or as some put it, to solving “the problem of death.”

It’s a cause championed by the tech billionaire Peter Thiel, the TED Talk darling Aubrey de Gray, Google’s billion-dollar Calico longevity lab and investment by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The National Academy of Medicine, an independent group, recently dedicated funding to “end aging forever.”

As the longevity entrepreneur Arram Sabeti told The New Yorker: “The proposition that we can live forever is obvious. It doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it.” Of all the slightly creepy aspects to this trend, the strangest is the least noticed: The people publicly championing life extension are mainly men.

Not all of them, of course. In 2009, Elizabeth Blackburn received the Nobel Prize for her work on telomeres, protein caps on chromosomes that may be a key to understanding aging. Cynthia Kenyon, the vice president for aging research at Calico, studied life extension long before it was cool; her former protégée, Laura Deming, now runs a venture capital fund for the cause. But these women are focused on curbing age-related pathology, a concept about as controversial as cancer research. They do not appear thirsty for the Fountain of Youth.

Professor Blackburn’s new book on telomeres couldn’t be clearer. “Does our research show that by maintaining your telomeres you will live into your hundreds?” it says. “No. Everyone’s cells become old and eventually we die.” Ms. Kenyon once described her research’s goal as “to just have a healthy life and then turn out the lights.” Even Ms. Deming, a 23-year-old prodigy who worked in Ms. Kenyon’s lab at age 12, points out that “aging is innately important to us.”

What an immense waste of resources, which will only widen the already huge inequality gap. I sure don't want rich, power-hungry, abusive men...

Few of these experts come close to matching the gaudy statements of the longevity investor and “biohacker” Dave Asprey, who has told journalists, “I decided that I was just not going to die.” Or those of Brian Hanley, a microbiologist who has tested an anti-aging gene therapy he developed on himself, who claimed: “There’s a bunch of things that will need to be done to achieve life spans into at least hundreds of years. But we’ll get there.” Or of the 74-year-old fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who during a promotional clip receives injections of his own stem cells to reverse his aging while declaring: “Ponce de León had the right idea. He was just too early. That was then. This is now.”

I came across Mr. Nygard’s ode to human endurance three years ago while beginning research on a novel about a woman who can’t die, and watching that video allowed me to experience something close to life extension. As Mr. Nygard compared himself to Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin while dancing with a bevy of models — or as a voice-over explained, “living a life most can only dream of” — nine minutes of YouTube expanded into a vapid eternity, where time melted into a vortex of solipsism.

At that time I was immersed in caring for my four young children, and this paean to everlasting youth seemed especially stupid. I recall thinking that if this was eternal life, death didn’t seem that bad.

But now, as powerful men have begun falling like dominoes under accusations of sexual assault, that video with its young women clustered around an elderly multimillionaire has haunted me anew. As I recall my discomfort with the proclamations of longevity-driven men who hope to achieve “escape velocity,” I think of the astonishing hubris of the Harvey Weinsteins of the world, those who saw young women’s bodies as theirs for the taking.

Much has been said about why we allowed such behavior to go unchecked. What has remained unsaid, because it is so obvious, is what would make someone so shameless in the first place: These people believed they were invincible. They saw their own bodies as entirely theirs and other people’s bodies as at their disposal; apparently nothing in their lives led them to believe otherwise.

Historically, this is a mistake that few women would make, because until very recently, the physical experience of being a woman entailed exactly the opposite — and not only because women have to hold their keys in self-defense while walking through parking lots at night. It’s only very recently that women have widely participated in public life, but it’s even more recently that men have been welcome, or even expected, to provide physical care for vulnerable people.

Only for a nanosecond of human history have men even slightly shared what was once exclusively a woman’s burden: the relentless daily labor of caring for another person’s body, the life-preserving work of cleaning feces and vomit, the constant cycle of cooking and feeding and blanketing and bathing, whether for the young, the ill or the old. For nearly as long as there have been humans, being a female human has meant a daily nonoptional immersion in the fragility of human life and the endless effort required to sustain it.

Obviously not everyone who provides care for others is a saint. But engaging in that daily devotion, or even living with its expectation, has enormous potential to change a person. It forces one to constantly imagine the world from someone else’s point of view: Is he hungry? Maybe she’s tired. Is his back hurting him? What is she trying to say?

The most obvious cure for today’s gender inequities is to put more women in power. But if we really hope to create an equal society, we will also need more men to care for the powerless — more women in the boardroom, but also more men at the nurses’ station and the changing table, immersed in daily physical empathy. If that sounds like an evolutionary impossibility, well, it doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it. It is surely worth at least as much investment as defeating death.

Perhaps it takes the promise of immortality to inspire the self-absorbed to invest in unsexy work like Alzheimer’s research. If so, we may all one day bless the inane death-defiance as a means to a worthy end.

But men who hope to live forever might pause on their eternal journey to consider the frightening void at invincibility’s core. Death is the ultimate vulnerability. It is the moment when all of us must confront exactly what so many women have known all too well: You are a body, only a body, and nothing more.

Dara Horn, New York Times 17 Comments [1/29/2018 2:07:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139420

Why does the female species keep bitching and bitching for more?

First they had it good under patriarchy. Then they demanded sexual freedom, abortion rights, birth control, etc. Now they want to legally take action against sub8 men who approach them and disguise the whole EVIL act as “protection from harassment.”

These foids will keep bitchin’. They want this; they want that. It’s fucking insane how entitled they are. They even want to be able to date chad as landwhales and not be “body shamed.“ They cry about “muh we still need feminism” when they can easily sell their SHIT online, take feet pics in return for money, or just make an internet post for validation and help.

Seriously, fuck women man. They are nothing but a wicked and depraved species.

PhenomSkillz, incels.me 9 Comments [8/2/2018 6:26:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139424

I would like to debate moralfags.

Seriously, the lawcucklodry is getting out of hand.
Give me specific, logical reasons as to why:

1) grown men being sexual with teenage women is a bad thing
2) redistribution of the vagina (as a form of capital) is a bad thing
3) revenge and retaliation against normans is a bad thing
4) the rape of promiscuous women is a bad thing
5) the practice of white shariah law is a bad thing

PhenomSkillz, incels.me 10 Comments [8/2/2018 8:08:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139434

Dystopian Trans Future (feel free to contribute)

What will happen in the future, once "transwomen" are fully recognized as women?

-They will take scholarships and programs spaces away from women, because of course their struggle to identify with femininity is more oppressive than anything a woman experienced

-They will take political office spaces away from women

-They will take jobs away from women. Why hire a biological woman, who might get pregnant and reduce efficiency, when you can hire a "woman", fill in that diversity quota, and get more efficient labor?

-Men will finally be convinced that "neovaginas are better than real vaginas." Due to all the plastic surgery to make "transwomen" look like porn stars (huge boobs, facial reconstruction, injections, perfect levels of estrogen), men will find "transwomen" more attractive as well, because they fit the stereotype of what a woman is supposed to look like. They have the added bonus of understanding what it was like to be a man too, so men will choose to have relationships with them instead of real women.

-Real women, out of jobs and out of relationships, will now be left to do one thing - being paid to reproduce. Men in relationship with transwomen will come to women and pay them to be surrogates (whether "artificial" or "natural" - basically, a prostitute that you impregnate)

Once again, men will find themselves in power, and finally find a way to push women back to what they think is their biological purpose - to reduce and to serve men.

What do you think will happen in a dystopian trans future?

cherieblosum, r/GenderCritical 5 Comments [8/2/2018 12:58:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 139455

(Comments on Dystopian Trans Future (feel free to contribute)

(pekingnoodl)
We are going to get transracialism too, now, like it or not. Put it on the record that I called it and wait two years--nice, polite liberals will start listing "cisracial" as one of their privileges by 2020. Soon after that it will be a free-for-all and either identitarianism will collapse under the weight of its own bullshit and the left will start to rebuild, or some far worse form of backlash will render it all irrelevant.

(pekingnoodle)
I can't wait until people start wriggling out of accusations of cultural appropriation by saying they are transracial, and SJWs have to just sweat it out.

(BCSmith1971)
Women's sports will elbow out women. Identifying female biology as female will be forbidden. Public discourse will avoid the term "woman" (except when it applies to trans women), embracing instead a list of ungainly alternatives: nonmen, menstruators, bleeders, uterus-havers, and so on. No one will know whether female infanticide is happening anywhere, since birth statistics and census data will no longer indicate biological sex.

(Pajukilpi)
All medical research recognising sex differences is labeled as transphobic and unfunded. As a result female specific medical conditions will be left under detected and getting efficient treatment will be even harder than it's now. Also all future drugs will be less effective and even potentially dangerous for women.

(riseupladies)
Assertive, powerful, or otherwise badass women in fictional works, historical accounts, gaming, etc. will be retroactively deemed to have unknowingly been transmen all along, depriving an entire generation of girls of strong female role models.

(griffxx)
They already have been at revistiionist history for a while. Did you know Joan of Arc was a trans man. Trans historians have gone back through Women's History and trans-manned anyone who dressed in men's clothing. Not taking into account, that it was the only way women could find work. And Queer Historians have queerified LG Liberation Movement and History. Thus erasing the contribution to Liberation Movement. Especially frustrating since straight ppl are calling themselves Queer.

(LisaArouet)
nd tomboy/butch girls will be forced to take hormones at 7 to become men. Because if you wear pants and play sports you’re a boy.

(WrongToy)
Men win. There's already engineers at Google who upon transition got promotions, and "diversity posts." The first senior engineer evah. Oh, they were very much into a prostitution type Twitter thing as well.

Of course, they'll take jobs away from women for the reasons you state. Women will play the Marthas and the wives enabling this.

Politically, less likely. I'm honestly not voting for someone who insists on being a woman when he's actually a man.

A small subset of "straight" men have a fetish for passable TiMs with "fully functional" equipment. For neovags, not so much. The Madame Butterfly thins is a myth. In Transdystopia, TiMs will have each other, maybe one with a penis, one with the neovag.

Surrogacy will go offshore as it has been. Really, that's among the most ridiculous exploitation there is.

In transdystopia, TiFs get into San Quentin, raped, then miscarry.

In transdystopia, older women are unwomen, unless they're Caitlyn Jenner.

Under his eye.

Various TERFs, r/GenderCritical 4 Comments [8/3/2018 2:20:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139443

Honor really is a male abstraction, but not all men are honorable. The only difference is that women really have no need for honor and feminists work hard to ensure that remains the status quo.

A man without honor has to really walk a minefield to not have it all explode around him. Lies built on lies, schemes that could collapse any moment, dealing with loose ends, bullshitting answers at work constantly, etc. Hey, it's a skill learned like any other but there are MANY incentives for a man to walk life with honor rather than without (avoiding jail is a good one).

Women, on the other hand, have the pussy pass. This golden ticket allows them to do, essentially, whatever they want and the media/government just goes along with the ever-changing feminist narrative. It could range from crying her way out of a ticket to fat/slut shaming, paternity fraud for beta bux to false rape accusations, to the #MeToo phenomenon to cover up her dick-sucking interview skills. Such a pass kinda made sense when women had far fewer legal rights, but that time has long passed. Women are adults and children at the same time, whichever one benefits them at that moment.

rebuildingMyself, r/MGTOW 3 Comments [8/2/2018 3:09:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139446

I really don't know anymore. Yes, fads pass but this one is too much of a victory for patriarchy - access to women's spaces and resources, destruction of women's safety, ability to determine what is woman, reinforcement of gender roles (which had been in decline), feminism is dead cause now the most oppressed women are men, etc etc....

But, if it passes, my question is what does that mean to gender identity laws, that are quickly being adapted around the world? Will governments undo their politics of allowing men in women's spaces? Will they undo the laws that determine that self-determined gender identity overrules biological sex? I don't see that happening, like I said, it's too good for patriarchy to let go of.

soberwitch, r/GenderCritical 1 Comments [8/2/2018 3:14:37 PM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139447

Trans is not about men believing that they are women.

It is about men violating our boundaries, putting us in our lower place by reminding us that they hold our right to privacy, that they can revoke that right at anytime. That's why majority male governments are allowing men to violate our spaces. Men like to violate us.

In ten years, there won't be all of this upheaval from men LARPing as women. But the damage will have already been done. Men will have taken over everything that we gained for ourselves. I predict that men will take over our scholarships, teams, positions and they won't even attempt to look "feminine". It's being normalized. Men won't stop on their own and we won't stop them.

XXisBornFemale, r/GenderCritical 1 Comments [8/2/2018 3:14:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139409

If women were in charge I could walk down the street at night, because males would behave themselves. But no, I can't. Males have stolen the night from us. If women were in charge I would not have to deal with male fuckery day in day out.

I would not have to worry about sexual coercion during sex. I would not have to worry about being harmed or killed if I reject male sexual advances. And technological progress would have happened if women would have been in charge too.

Misanthropia, Feminist Current 3 Comments [8/1/2018 2:41:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 139410

Both the Guardian and Telegraph have been running a series on social media and the mental health of the young recently.

Both manage to (wilfully) miss the elephants in the room : 1) a pornsick generation of boys and young men demanding that they get to enact their sexual violence on women and girls plus the consequences of that for girl's and women's health and well being, and 2) the way that the transgenderists have created a cult that sucks in the most vunerable of these young women and then further abuses them by pulling them away from reality, denying them appropriate help and with the promise of glorious redemption by transing to their "true selves".

endthewoo, r/GenderCritical 4 Comments [8/1/2018 2:42:00 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 136307

As you can see, he actually claims that a woman reaches her peak sexual market value at the age of 23 (presumably, Tomassi thinks peak female fertility occurs at that age). This always struck me as complete and utter nonsense. A peak fertility of 21 or 23 (if that age is correct, and might not always historically have been so and is likely influenced by age of motherhood itself) means nothing other than it is the age at which women are most likely to give birth at after sex. It might say something important about likely female sexual strategy or preferences, it tells us little or nothing about what age a man would be expected to prefer in a sexual partner. In a society or culture in which some form of mate bonding is the norm, a man who is attracted to 15 year old girls will have a massive advantage over somebody attracted primarily to 23 year old women. Not only is the former choosing a female with far more reproductive years ahead of her, the 15 year old girl is of course far more likely to be a virgin. I’m not a regular reader of Rollo Tomassi, but I can assume he is aware of the importance of the ‘mummy’s baby, daddy’s maybe’ maxim in male evolutionary sexual strategies. Therefore, evolution has produced men to prefer young pubescent girls.

As the quote says, the most optimal mate seeking strategy for men would be to find a female who has only just begun ovulating, or is soon to start ovulating. In other words not yet pregnant, but about to be so (with your sperm if you can capture her heart (or father’s blessing) first). For most of human history, females would be impregnated as soon as they were able to be. On the male side, the winning reproductive lottery ticket goes to the man who is able to attract and keep a girl who is just starting puberty (and preferably other such girls too). Everybody alive today is the genetic result of our ‘paedophile’ sex predator ancestors.

theantifeminist,  Resisting the Rape of the Male - Real Men's Rights 10 Comments [7/8/2018 7:44:20 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: bubba

Quote# 139396

Women today who are quick to argue the issue of wifely obedience are brats, rebels and ought not be married lest they destroy some poor man's life. Police aren't there to serve and protect any more. That was 40-years ago. Cops today are hired to enforce the law, right or wrong. They're there to enforce the rights of everyone, including same-sex perverts, abortionists, pornographers, gambling casinos, boozers and other reprobates. They'll sell their soul for a paycheck. Many seek to be cops to abuse others. Cops are frightening these days because they often have no sense of decency, honor nor respect.

Every conversation about wifely submission always condescends into a hypothetical argument about abusive husbands. The truth is that the same feminist rebels who always bring up some elusive coat-hanger incident to justify legalized abortion, are the same women who always use abusive husbands as an excuse for wives to disobey their husband. No wife who doesn't believe in strict obedience to her husband can be a Proverbs 31 wife. It is sad that millions of people are being directed by K-LOVE and other apostate religious groups to Proverbs 31 Ministry that doesn't even teach women to OBEY their husbands. They are part of the feminist movement destroying America. People don't want an authoritative Bible anymore, so they throw away the precious King James Bible and use a homosexual New International Version instead.

David J. Stewart, God Loves People 7 Comments [8/1/2018 12:31:56 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139394

It´s now ILLEGAL to not be a CUCK in Europe


(In France, your wife can cheat on you and get knocked up by another man and there's nothing you can do about it. If you try to do anything about it you will be fined and sent to prison. Germany plans to institute the same law soon. Being a cuck is now law.

Fucking kek the West can't burn down soon enough. Literally more degenerate before the fall.)


Getlooksordie and Anonymous, incels.me 6 Comments [8/1/2018 10:13:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep