64 comments on “Why Won’t White Vagina Worshiping Nationalists Go In For The Kill?

    • I listened to this entire video. It’s excellent, and I can’t argue with the majority of it. (I had to read everything Adorno and Marcuse wrote for my master’s thesis — and I studied under one of Marcuse’s pupils who himself was at UCSD for many years.) You have a very solid understanding of this stuff.

      I’ve had these exchanges for years now, and they never go anywhere. People like their scapegoats. The irony is that the Frankfurters really had no political influence in the USA. Very few people actually know their work (as you point out). The conspiracy theorists are correct that they could loosely be called Marxists, but they were anti-Marxist-Leninists and were very critical of the USSR (see One-Dimensional Man for a scathing rebuke of the east bloc). The conspiracy theorists always conflate these movements.

        • “Tell me what you think?”

          I watched your video shortly before I wrote that comment with male and female nature here, and it’s pretty much what I think, too. This whole idea of women just being harmless little children is so wrong and dangerous.

          Children, for instance, lack impulse control and the ability to delay gratification; it takes a while until a child is able to make long-term plans. Women on the other hand are ruthless manipulators that can groom and manipulate an entire office and an entire country.

          Also, your discussion in the comment section reminded me that Hitler once said, “Why should we need to socialize the banks and factories? We are socializing the people!” And why should women dominate the banks and factories when they dominate the men working there?

          In the Nazi Party, there were some who originally argued for a Marxist approach to economy and some who argued for more of a Keynesian approach with deficit spending, government contracts, etc. but both groups still had exactly the same goal: ensure to build a war machine and finance it somehow, no matter what.

          And it’s the same with women: there are some who want to dominate banks, media, the STEM field, etc. (maybe from poorer backgrounds like the Indian women in your example or the lesbians, the ones who openly identify as feminist), while others (the “I’m not a feminist, but…”-feminists) “only” want to dominate the men working in these fields and ensure that women will benefit from what the men are doing there.

          And these men are like leashed dogs then: barking, looking threatening and being violent towards other men but effectively still neutered pets on the leash of their Mistress. (This is also why I hate these silly BDSM guys who think that they’re the shit because they “dominate” some slut in the bedroom. They are still slaves to women, exactly like dogs and without any actual power. If anything, these men are like children here! Like children who think that they are real cowboys when they put on a costume.)

  1. Good post again.

    Additionally, I think another reason why they don’t go in for the kill is that they see “neomasculinity” and the “philosophy” behind PuA as a gateway drug to white nationalism and the “alternative right.” And they aren’t even that wrong about it.
    Exposing him as a fraud might result in destroying the number one “gateway drug”.

    • That’s definitely true, especially when it comes to young men. One of the many problems white vagina worshipping nationalists have is that they can’t deliver anything. Why would a young man, even one predisposed to believing in a racial ideology, join up when it won’t generate any benefits for him? Obviously, he won’t. However, if they can throw out the carrot of getting laid, then they can use that as bait. Of course, game is nothing but a scam so it doesn’t work in the long term. Also, Roosh (& Roissy) are the only options that the white vagina worshipping nationalists have for this. Non-manuresphere PUAs want nothing to do with them.

      • I joined the Klan in my youth. It was not because I was hoping for jobs or graft or anything, I wanted to be part of a movement in opposition to the forces which were destroying the very foundation of our civilization.

        • “Opposition to the forces which were destroying the very foundation of our civilization”.

          Of course women and the self-serving elite have nothing to do with this.

          Half of me is convinced that these are troll posts, however.

    • Exactly. An effective and obvious way to lure men into violence or action is to create propaganda centered around the enemy having their with the native women.

      Its so pervasive that it’s been done in the World Wars (before and during the conflicts) and even in older 60’s/70’s radio and movies afterward (where the ‘foreigners’ in this setting were alien invaders/monsters). I’m sure there’s countless other examples. Essentially, it runs off of the inclination for society to hold women’s sexual power above all else. There are countless accounts and stories that speak of women making false rape allegations or otherwise getting men to perform bloodshed on their behalf.

      In this case, I’m convinced that the intent is not so much to get men riled up and fight anyone in particular but to instead work as a scapegoat that distracts and obfuscates the issues they should really be concerned about, which is the women and government themselves.

      • That’s true. Overcoming other men to save or steal a female and to then claim her as one’s own, is a deep-rooted fantasy in many of us. Which reminds me, maybe its time for us to talk more about male nature anyway.

        In our circles here we talk so much about female nature, about hypergamy and so on, but little do we talk about our own nature and how to make the best out of it.

        For example, there seems to be more variability amongst men: great artists mostly male but “reading is for faggots” dudebros also mostly male; people with an exceptionally high IQ mostly male, people with an exceptionally low IQ also mostly male; funniest comedians male, super serious, humorless preachers and depressed poets mostly male. There are many men who are sexually into older women (“MILF”), who are into chubby and fat girls and who are into “FemDom” or into “femininity” rather than into “females” (and i.e. including “shemales”), whereas women seem to be almost exclusively into taller, sexually dominant men of high/er socio-economical status.

        And if the greater male variability hypothesis is true, then you have to be more careful or “liberal” with other men than feminists have to be with other women. Otherwise you inevitably alienate a good deal of men, and you might end up like all these groups who start with “No women’s suffrage” and end with “Only land owners should be allowed to vote.”

        Another example is the concept of neotenous protection (children, puppies, women triggering protective instincts with big eyes, etc.) playing into the illusion that women are merely harmless, innocent children who are just blown around in the wind by whatever influences them.

        • “That’s true. Overcoming other men to save or steal a female and to then claim her as one’s own, is a deep-rooted fantasy in many of us. Which reminds me, maybe its time for us to talk more about male nature anyway”.

          Its yet another way men’s nature is used against us. The method of using other men as a scapegoat also provides two other advantages: 1) It turns the men against each other, preventing any sort of opposition to the female collective and 2) related to 1, it absolves women of any responsibility or potential wrongdoing (particularly easy because most men by default with assume a female’s innocence).

          Western-anglo societies take this to an entirely different level with their inherent female worship, gynocentrism and misandry to the point where is considered nearly unthinkable to prosecute a woman for a crime and even in cases they are, the sentence is always laughably disproportionate to males. In fact, it is considered all good fun and humor to mock males who are abused by females. This is not a new concept, either.

          http://www.purplemotes.net/2013/01/27/charivari-sex-inequality/

          “And if the greater male variability hypothesis is true, then you have to be more careful or “liberal” with other men than feminists have to be with other women. Otherwise you inevitably alienate a good deal of men, and you might end up like all these groups who start with “No women’s suffrage” and end with “Only land owners should be allowed to vote.””

          While men being more individualistic is true, I disagree that its necessary for one to be more cognizant of stepping on toes in discussions with the majority of men. My experience has shown me that men are far more likely to tolerate and invite critiques, criticism and opposing views while remaining on amicable terms with the other party.

          Shutting down all discussion and opposing arguments, particularly those based on facts are far more likely to be done by women.

        • “While men being more individualistic is true, I disagree that its necessary for one to be more cognizant of stepping on toes in discussions with the majority of men.”

          Yeah, but this is not what I meant.

          What I had in mind was, for example, the kind of men who didn’t even want to find a “traditional” girl and a “traditional” relationship in the first place. Not men who are divorced, not men who found out that women aren’t sweet and nurturing and “feminine” or whatever, but men who never even wanted something like that.

          I mean, even in all these MRA and MGTOW circles (inb4 no true scotsman), there often is an obsession with “masculinity” and “femininity”, with making men more “masculine” and women more “feminine” again.

          But in my experience (and given greater male variability), a great many men didn’t even want that in the first place. And variability also implies that men have a greater range of abilities. But you sometimes meet people whose “libertarianism” borders on social darwinism and who seem to be more concerned with making things worse for women than making things better for poor men, low-status men, non-masculine and non-traditional (etc.) men.

  2. Have you seen Rocking Mr. E at all? Check out this recent video. He talks about the main groups of the manosphere. At the end, he says how PUA with the help of the Return of Kings is promoting traditionalism, neo-masculinity, entrepreneurship and etc. His talk of the PUA starts at the 7:00 mark onward. The video is about 9 minutes long.

    This article reminds me of this Roosh V where Rocking Mr. E speaks positively about him. I believe Rocking Mr. E is a white nationalist.. He is now also obsessed with the communist/Marxist boogyman. When I saw a few of his videos in the past, I agreed with a fair amount of his points. But now, he has become just like the rest of the manosphere, blaming everything on “weak” men.

    • What entrepreneurship? I have not seen a single manurespherian start an actual business unless you count scams selling game bullshit as a business. As someone who actually runs a (one man) business, I find the idea that the manuresphere has anything to do with entrepreneurship insulting and offensive.

      • I remember Rocking Mr. E was having an argument with someone. At the end, Rocking Mr. E said, “well, he has a girlfriend so he can’t be a misogynist.”
        (Of course, based on so much more from the mansophere.) So, as long as you have a girlfriend and/or getting laid, you can’t possibly be a misogynist?????
        So if you are making love to women, you must have love for women?????
        So if you are a lover of women, you must love women????
        I guess that explains the popularity of Aaron Clarey.
        What I don’t get is. How come MGTOW are accused of being misogynists if they are making love to women??? Is it because of the label? Is that what makes them different from PUAs?
        (Note I am not necessarily supporting/standing up for MGTOW)
        I hear so many contradictions on what MGTOW is. Rocking Mr. E (and mansophere guys) claims that they are trying to stay as far away from women as possible; they are virgins not contributing to pro-creation. Suddenly, he turns around and claims that they are pumping and dumping women in an attempt to excuse the behavior of the PUAs like Roosh V. I guess MGTOW and others are virgin rapists (as you have talked about in your articles Black Pill)
        I remember on YouTube I questioned this guy about him being a PUA pumping and dumping women. He changes the subject to “You should check out MGTOWs.” Yet I have seen him say MGTOWs are virgin losers like Elliot Rodger who can’t get laid.

        • “I hear so many contradictions on what MGTOW is. Rocking Mr. E (and mansophere guys) claims that they are trying to stay as far away from women as possible; they are virgins not contributing to pro-creation. Suddenly, he turns around and claims that they are pumping and dumping women in an attempt to excuse the behavior of the PUAs like Roosh V. I guess MGTOW and others are virgin rapists (as you have talked about in your articles Black Pill)
          I remember on YouTube I questioned this guy about him being a PUA pumping and dumping women. He changes the subject to “You should check out MGTOWs.” Yet I have seen him say MGTOWs are virgin losers like Elliot Rodger who can’t get laid”.

          You mean like how feminists and women in general say they are for equality and the rights of men while making no attempt to give up any of their privileges or perks?

          An elephant claiming its a mouse is still an elephant.

        • What they are doing is tying themselves into knots in an attempt to make the just world fallacy work. They can’t fit MGTOW in the box of loser virgin rapists who can’t get laid, but they won’t stop trying.

      • I remember in a comment’s section on one of his videos, Rocking Mr. E said something that does not make sense. He says that the divorce rate is only 1%, and this was based on a study where marriages that haven’t lasted for at least 20 years don’t count.
        Whenever I bring up high divorce rates, the manosphere says it is mostly the black community doing it and having babies out of wedlock/abortions.
        While it may be higher in the black community, I don’t think the difference is significant.
        It feels like Rocking Mr. E (and many others of the manosphere) are trying to rewrite the definition of marriage.
        What I strongly feel, an official marriage is when a man and a woman have consent sex with each other. Once the leave each other, and have sex with another person, that is officially a divorce. A marriage doesn’t begin at a church with wedding bells ringing through the air. It does not begin with slipping on a wedding ring on your finger. It begins with sexual intercourse.
        I have read how sex causes a piece of the other person to be with you forever. I have read how women have been found with a male’s Y-chromosome within their blood. I might post the article(s) if I can find them again.
        On YouTube, a feminist laughed at the idea that sex is sacred and a piece of the other person will be with you forever.

        • In the USA from memory the divorce rate is 55% in the black community an about 28% in the white.

          More than 1 in 4 is pretty shitty odds.

        • Blacks barely get married in the first place so I don’t know what you mean there.

          As for out of wedlock rates, blacks are far ahead at 70%+ while whites are over 50%. I forgot hispanics, although they’re probably somewhere in between.

        • It’s funny how feminists laugh that sex is sacred,
          say “men are not entitled to sex”,
          but “women must have a fairytale wedding”.
          Well … in time to come they’ll be paying for it themselves, and maybe marrying a house or a bridge (google it).

          No hymen, no diamond …

  3. Why didn’t we “go in for the kill?” Well, you may think being called a rapist is worse than being called a fraud. In any case, that’s not what the counter-currents article claimed. It called him a rape advocate, which is true whether or not the passages in the books literally occurred. I can’t speak for Greg Johnson, but I think the “Roosh is a fraud” angle is rather unproductive. It’s very hard to prove his sexual encounters are made up, though I strongly suspect it.

    WN run by women? Well, they certainly fooled this long time member of the Ku Klux Klan!

    • “WN run by women? Well, they certainly fooled this long time member of the Ku Klux Klan!”

      Just because a group has men in leadership positions or is predominantly made up of men, doesn’t mean that men (men in general or men who share the same race, religion, culture, etc.) will benefit from its policies.

      For example, the leadership of the Catholic Church is exclusively made up of men, and yet Catholicism is utterly gynocentric, a maternity cult based on male disposability and embracing more and more elements of modern feminism. It combines the worst of both worlds, the worst of “tradcon” feminism and of “liberal” feminism.

      • The KKK was pretty much run by women, anyways. Let’s not forget how the group would lynch at the drop of a hat based on a white female’s word alone.

        No due process, No investigation, No fair trials or evidence necessary. White woman said it, that’s good enough for us!

      • “Just because a group has men in leadership positions or is predominantly made up of men, doesn’t mean that men (men in general or men who share the same race, religion, culture, etc.) will benefit from its policies.”

        Perhaps. But Black Pill didn’t say it was run in the interests of women, he said it was run by women, which is so self evidently ridiculous it reveals a pathological obsession with teh wimmens. It’s like someone who was molested by priests becoming convinced that all the evil in the world is done by some cabal of priests. He needs to recognize the real enemy.

        • So by your “logic” PETA mst be run by animals. You retarded cucks must be sad at the back to back victories of our glorious leader Donald J Trump. America will be great again, and we’re going to take your coats!

  4. I have no problem with individual White nationalists, but I try to steer clear of them. I could probably be called a nationalist, and I’m certainly White, but I’m not a White nationalist. I hang out with Blacks and Asians who would probably also be called nationalists, but they aren’t Black or Asian nationalists. Being concerned about your municipality and wanting your own political leaders to advocate for your interests (as opposed to corporate interests) is not irrational.

    Most White nationalists I talk to on the internet are really very similar to the SJW types. They’re usually naïve and young. A large minority of them, however, are losers who have accomplished nothing in their lives. They look to race or ethnicity to fill the gaps that real-world achievement usually satisfies in a normal person. Those in the first subset will likely mature out of their affinity. Those in the latter are just losers and nutcases that are better ignored. As blackpill points out, it’s crazy to think that they will ever accomplish any of their goals. If they had a history of accomplishment, they wouldn’t be attracted to fetishizing race.

    • I don’t disagree but many white and black nationalists I come across on the internet or real life are actually older. For these types, they usually cite studies for their reasoning which has tend have some at least some objective reasoning behind it.

      However, it all falls to the wayside when they start discussing women – it then becomes clear its based more on a tribal mentality revolving around perceived sexual jealously. A prominent example is Roissy’s website, where articles are commonly posted about how black people are really low in the sexual pecking order and the comments section proceeds to have a circle jerk about how, yes, those filthy blacks are indeed hated by white women and other ethnic groups of women alike. No need to worry, those man-apes aren’t getting any! But yet, they continue to obsess over it.

      It was taken to the extreme elsewhere. As I mentioned in a post elsewhere, there was an article covering a case of a ‘neo-nazi’ beating a black male to death. He was afterwards approached by a black female who complimented him on giving one of those black males their ‘just due’ and propositioned to sleep with him (which he accepted). Which pretty much pointed out to me the above, and also that “racism” is something really only directed at males of other ethnic groups. If its an attractive female, all notions of ‘racism’ are conveniently forgotten. This is further brought home by studies about a particular race’s appeal to other groups, such as these by isteve :

      http://isteve.blogspot.ca/search/label/interracial%20marriage

      The comments section in each article is packed with commentary over the supposed low value of black females and the high value of asian females. The obvious takeaway there that if these guys found more black women sexually appealing their ‘nationalism’ would be irrelevant. You also never hear these types protesting racial purity when white males pick up asian females.

      Black nationalism is just as bad, if not worse and subject to the same hypocrisy. Many of these “Black Panther” types will speak of how other ethnic groups supposedly can’t hope to ‘tame’ the black woman and whatnot but naturally these men have no qualms with sleeping with attractive members of other races whenever they get the chance. Likewise black women will shame and insult black males about interracial dating as “betrayal” but pat each other on the back for dating males of other races as being “open minded” or finally rising above the oppression of the filthy nigger men.

      White/Black Nationlists are really just extreme forms of tribalism centered around preventing ‘their’ women from breeding with other groups while being just dandy with having women from other ethnic groups available to them. They can keep the bullshit they’re peddling.

  5. Roosh makes for an interesting comparison with another Persian-American, the YouTube “personality,” if you could call her that, and self-professed “sex educator” Laci Green. (Laci’s Iranian immigrant father converted from Islam to Mormonism and married her mother, a white American Mormon woman, as unlikely a pairing as that sounds. I wouldn’t have known from Laci’s appearance that she has Middle-Eastern ancestry, and many Persians do look within the range of white Mediterranean people.)

    Laci, if you can stand to watch her videos, relates how she has struggled with depression and how in her late 20’s she still hasn’t formed a stable relationship leading to marriage, despite of, or perhaps because of, her “sex-positive” promiscuity. She sounds like a female version of Roosh, in other words.

    Given their similar backgrounds and obsession with sex, both Roosh and Laci seem to illustrate white identitarian concerns about how immigration and race-mixing result in rootless, alienated and often dysfunctional people who have trouble finding a sense of meaning and belonging in the modern world, unlike people who grow up in organic tribes and communities. (Look at Elliot Rodger for another example.) Instead they have turned to sexual hedonism to fill their respective voids.

    I suspect we’ll see more and more individuals like Roosh and Laci in the coming years as this massive and damaging social experiment – pushing incompatible tribes together into one big mass of fungible human meat – runs its course.

    • You can’t build a stable society that men are willing to defend unless you can give them some guarantee of de pussy.
      By talking up Abrahamic faiths but not delivering on the women, priests are complicit in fraud.
      On the flip side, what does anyone expect of child molesters (ref: Spotlight)?

      • I wish it were so, but it isn’t. Ours is pretty stable, and there were plenty of men who signed up to fight in the Iraq war.

        I don’t know much about Catholicism, but do priests ever “promise” women. It’s not like they could “deliver” even if they wanted to.

        • Aren’t the priests the ones who set up or approve of single’s clubs in churches?
          Then, they’re implying their club will be a success (e.g. people will pair off).
          That’s a promise.

    • He’s an interesting character. He’s actually half Persian and half Armenian, meaning he’s even more “rootless” than a typical ethnic Persian in America. He also demonstrates the non-participation in the workforce that has become so common among youngish men. When they revealed he was living with his mother I wasn’t surprised at all. How else was he supposed to live off of a fringe website?

      You may say he’s a “loser,” but It’s understandable why someone would want to live that kind of lifestyle. You only live once, why waste your days behind a desk doing thankless work? In the past, people were motivated to work because they wanted to support a family, but with the kind of women we have now, why bother? Though I am very found of my three children, I nevertheless sometimes regret all the days I spent as a youth working my ass off, only to be on the receiving end of the kangaroo “family court” system.

      • Almost every ideology seeks to shaft men … or makes the pretense of putting men first (initially, to get the recruits) … then shafts them.
        dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3463515/Egyptian-blogger-trial-insulting-nation-s-women-suggested-30-wives-cheat-husbands-chance.html
        Egyptian blogger to go on trial for ‘insulting the nation’s women’ because he suggested 30% of wives would cheat on their husbands if they had the chance
        Taimour Subki runs a Facebook page called ‘Diary of a Crushed Husband’
        But during a live appearance on TV, he said 30% of wives would cheat
        He claimed the reason they did not was because they hadn’t had a chance
        Subki has since been arrested and charged with disturbing public peace

        The Abrahamic faiths … which are conservative … created and support the feminists … by demanding men do the hard yards … without demanding women keep their legs shut.

        • I’m still trying to understand why P Ray gives a damn about who women sleep with. Demand they keep their legs shut? Who cares?

          You seem to be more concerned about how society should be managing women and their availability of sexual access then about the erosion of your rights as a male. Or are you saying that the draconian laws and gynocentric culture are acceptable to you as long as you get a virgin?

        • I dunno man, do you even internets?
          See this to stop believing that the current hierarchy cares about you
          (Even omega virgin revolt agrees – look at the top to see him tell you about how the church is going about things, the section, “The Christian Dating Advice Industry”):
          https://dissention.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/monotheism-leads-to-misandry/
          P.S. If I’m pussy begging how come I’m saying that women are unreasonable? Hmm. Maybe you just want things to go on as usual.

          The erosion of rights as a male … goes hand in hand with the ability of women to find protectors and providers everywhere.
          If they can rely on gubmint, they don’t need you, DURRR.
          And if they can rely on Chad Thundercock + you/government as a provider, they don’t need you either …

        • Women are just ‘unreasonable’ he says. That’s not only the understatement of the year, its implying women actually are reasonable creatures to begin with.

          Look, I don’t care about women fucking ‘alphas’ or whatever it is. The only thing I care about is women leaving me alone. I don’t care to have a woman ‘forced’ to be with me due to support or lack of options. Not for her sake, but what does that do for me? I desire the laws to be changed, but at the same time I will never entertain a relationship with a female who desires my financial capacity – which is really the only way I would get sex since i know I’m a boring guy personality wise and I rate -1 on a scale of 1-10 on a good day. Unlike you, I can accept that and I find that I’m happier being alone.

          You are so desperate for a woman you have thrown away any sense of self respect. I have seen you post countless other places and I know you know better than this.

        • You are so desperate for a woman you have thrown away any sense of self respect. I have seen you post countless other places and I know you know better than this.
          The moment someone points out that they can shop if they choose to, they have no self-respect?
          Again, I have to ask if you think large quantities of single men who believe they have no solution … is going to be a safe place for you to be around.
          In the absence of a civilisation, men prey on men … and alphas direct them towards men that are a threat to the alphas.

        • @ Ergeniz, tamerlame:
          Please take a moment to comment why you have better ideas than dissention … if you actually do.

          Otherwise, I’d say it’s interesting that you have a fantastic idea of society that won’t eventually pander to women.

          In my opinion, a crusade without an outcome … is just wasted time.

          P.S. bashing me won’t change women’s nature, or the men that enable them (and I don’t) …

        • “In the absence of a civilisation, men prey on men … and alphas direct them towards men that are a threat to the alphas”.

          Even in our supposedly ‘enlightened’ society men only prey upon men and women are given free passes for any crime they commit. Additionally women prey upon men, either directly or by proxy of men.

          So if what you say is true in an ‘uncivilized’ society than it would be an improvement.

          And me, a fat, hideous black guy a threat to the “Alphas”? Right, because I have just been getting laid and pounced on by women left and right being a virgin nearing his 30’s. Yeah, I’m a real chick magnet.

          I have no beautiful ideas about a society that doesn’t cater to women. I think all societies place women on a pedestal in some fashion or another and expect men to sacrifice and ultimately pay for sexual access to women. I think until women’s natural advantages of social guile and reproduction is taken away nothing will change. I take a very pessimisstic view of it all and think after a collapse men will simply forgive women as they always have and allow women to slowly manipulate them more and more till the cycle comes full circle again and again.

          My solution is to minimize the damage from women to myself by avoiding them when possible and keeping what interaction I have with them extremely limited. My looks and race has actually worked to my advantage in this regard as women in general are too disgusted at me to occupy any their attention for any good length of time.

  6. “No one should be surprised by this since white vagina worshiping nationalism is completely controlled by white women and their agenda.”

    COMPLETE CONTROL!!! HIDDEN AGENDA!!!

    Pretty rich coming from someone who squawks that every accusation of wrongdoing more serious than jaywalking is a “conspiracy theory”.

    Face it, nigger pill, women are your Jews. You and WN are two sides of the same coin.

        • Of course, we know how you talk. There is a steady stream of you imbeciles who come here and fail spectacularly to convert us to your ideology. We all have Ph.Ds in how you fucktards talk.

        • Who says it is an agenda mental defect? It is just people acting psychological impulsive’s .

          Google the women are wonderful effect.Humans are biased towards women.

    • “Face it, nigger pill, women are your Jews. You and WN are two sides of the same coin”.

      The amount of control and privileges females have in western society is literally enshrined in law and can be observed in day-to-day social interactions and media. Its literally impossible to miss, and no attempt is made to hide this reality.

      Your analogy is nonsense.

        • They are desperate to label anyone being critical of women as fraudulent, a common logical fallacy.

          As I’ve always said, even if someone DOES hate women (and I do) it doesn’t mean what they’re saying about them is wrong whatsoever.

          I don’t see how being a misogynist invalidates an argument. Just a shaming tactic intended to shut down debate.

        • It’s not “seen out in the open” if it’s only seen by (((you))) and a small number of your fellow (((crazies))).

        • These people are so desperate to engage in denial that they’ve long since passed simple delusion.

          Its almost impressive, in a sick sort of way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s