22 comments on “Women Are Oppression Thieves

  1. Recall that nonsense quote feminists used to peddle:

    “Women are the niggers of the world” or some such drivel. Becomes even more baffling when you remember that feminism was started mostly by bored, psychotic upper-middle class white women and continues to benefit that group more than any other.

    • And those bored psychotic upper middle class women got everything they wanted just by asking. Men fell over themselves giving women everything they wanted. It’s not like a war was fought to free women unlike African-Americans.

    • It was John Lennon who said, “women is the nigger of the world” — which was quite ironic and hypocritical, considering how he was known to physically abuse women and children in his personal life.

  2. ” To make themselves look oppressed, women steal oppression from actual oppressed peoples and make it about themselves.”

    Or, in their own language, women ‘colonize’ other people’s oppression.

    • I guess one of the saddest things a man has to face and realize eventually, is that his own mother is also a woman. And that there aren’t “all women except my mother” but simply … women.

  3. “Clemson University just banned Harambe memes. (Harambe was that gorilla that got shot when a boy fell into the gorilla habitat in the Cincinnati zoo.) Clemson gave two reasons for what they did.

    That Harambe memes are racist
    That Harambe memes are rape culture

    Both are wrong, but the racism argument isn’t completely divorced from reality. One can understand how someone can not be insane and come to the conclusion that Harambe memes are racist even though they’re wrong.

    On the other hand, believing that Harambe memes are rape culture is completely insane and totally divorced from reality. There was nothing sexual about what happened to Harambe. Also, don’t forget that it was a BOY that fell into gorilla habitat. Nothing about Harambe has to do with women, yet, women are trying to steal this situation from the actual victims with their lies about “rape culture””

    Seems to me like the “googles” are doing the exact same thing. This is very common, feminists will complain that X is sexist and blacks will complain that its racist, both with the same evidence: none. Why do you make excuses for it when the googles do it? A question you’ll have to answer, if only to yourself.

    • Both groups complain, not out of a sense of legitimate wrongness but out of a sense of entitlement and an eagerness to hijack any situation for the oppression olympics.

      Both groups jump at the chance to claim victimhood because there is a high probability of getting free stuff. At the very least it allows for a chance at shaming, which equals more social power.

  4. To women victimization is as important as the air they breathe. So just as a destitute criminal would rob a bank if given the opportunity and means, so would women coopt other communities victimization for themselves.

    During the 2008 primary Mark Steyn narrated a humorous anecdote that he overheard in a college campus between a black male and white female student. The black guy said that his ancestors arrived in America in chains and hence Obama should get to be the President. Pat came the chicks response- we came into this world in our periods much before you were in chains so Hilary is our next president.
    Both arguments are ridiculous on the merits. Though I did find it funny on SNL while Hilary supporter Tina Fey shrieked” Bitch is the new black” to which Tracy Morgan responded “Yeah,well black is the new President ,bitch!”
    Nowadays that would be considered hate speech!

    Coming back to the main point, the problem is with womens passive mindsets! This especially activates when they find themselves in a sticky situation

    I hate to quote a WN , in this F Roger Devlin but in this narrow instance, why not

    ” Shalit recounts an incautious 1 a.m. visit of hers to a summer camp counselor’s bedroom when she was a tender 15: “One evening, I suddenly found myself [my emphasis] one floor above the room in which I usually slept. This room, as it happens, was the bedroom of my instructor. I don’t recall exactly the circumstances under which I had alighted there….” (RM, pp. 184-85) A man might be tempted to point out that it probably involved putting one foot in front of the other. I do not wish to be too rough on a girl of 15, but when thousands of adult women complain about “finding themselves” in bed with men who have no interest in marrying them, it is harder to be indulgent.

    The problem with a passive mindset is that it involves an abdication of personal responsibility. Shalit wants our sympathy for the way her female interviewees are treated by their boyfriends, but she carefully avoids mentioning how the men got to be their boyfriends. In every case, it happened because the women chose them. The rule of nature is that males display while females choose.

    Now let us consider in some detail one of Shalit’s unhappy-woman anecdotes which seems to me particularly instructive:

    A friend of mine had an affair with her professor when she was 21. She was in his class at the time and madly in love with him; he had no intention of doing anything other than using and summarily disposing of her. I was struck, not that what had happened to her [my emphasis] had deeply upset her, but that she felt she had to apologize: “this is going to sound really cheesy but, um … I mean, for God’s sake, he took my virginity!” (RM, p. 11)
    Much as I hate to spoil the effect of the touching melodrama the author conjures up for us here, I believe some comments and questions are in order. First, loss of virginity is not something that simply “happens to” a woman. Both author and interviewee speak as if the man “took” his student’s virginity like a pickpocket depriving an unwitting victim of a wallet. How exactly was this young lady’s attention occupied while the unspeakable defilement of her innocence was taking place?

    let us consider the assertion that the professor “had no intention of doing anything other than using and summarily disposing of her.” While I do not wish to approve of professors fornicating with students, it should also be pointed out that most men do not rub their hands like nickelodeon-show villains and cackle: “Heh, heh! I’m going to use this girl to sate my wicked lusts and then abandon her to heartbreak and ruin!” Going into an affair, a man, like a woman, may not even know precisely what he wants or intends. But experience indicates that whenever a love affair does not work out to a woman’s perfect satisfaction (which in practice means always), she will be inclined to foist a tendentious and self-exculpating interpretation upon the events: she “loved” him, while he was “just using” her.

    As far as I can see, if we are unwilling to hold women strictly accountable for their actions, we have only one logical recourse available: a return to the ancient Roman legal doctrine that a woman is a perpetual minor. This would involve an end not merely to contemporary “women’s liberation” but to an entire legal tradition that has developed within Christendom over centuries. For starters, it means women could no longer be permitted to hold property or enter into contracts. Although demeaning to women and inconvenient even for men, such a system is at least internally consistent.

    • Like I said, Oppression Olympics.

      Both sides are clamoring to ‘demonstrate’ which one has less advantages and are victimized more than the other. Of course, it all complete nonsense.

      This is why I don’t care for the presence of most women, nor most blacks.

      Unless you have a concept of personal accountability and lack of entitlement, I want nothing to do with you. This is another reason I cut of all contact with my mother. She is utterly incapable of accepting responsibility for her actions; I’d long grown tired of hearing her drivel.

      I think one of the hardest things I had to accept as a man was that my mother in the end was just another woman.

    • I find all this rather absurd. It is no secret that this bozo had such views of women. Why exactly was this shocking? There are myriad of reasons as to why this malignant clown shouldn’t be president but this type of thing was baked in the cake.

      BP earlier wrote about how Roosh is the perfect adversary for MRA and MGTOW bashers. Similarly Trump is a total caricature of a conservative opponent and he just happens to be running against a woman who he is friends with and voted for. I am not much for conspiracy theories but do we need one. It seems pretty obvious. All I can say is- well played Hilary Clinton you evil goblin. A revolting candidate like her could only win against someone like Trump and she now acquired the presidency. May god have mercy on us all.

  5. Pingback: Why The Attempt To “Roosh” Trump Failed | The Black Pill

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.