[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]

/b/ - Random

Name
Email
Message

*Text* => Text

**Text** => Text

***Text*** => Text

[spoiler]Text[/spoiler] => Text

Verification
Image
Direct Link
Options NSFW image
Sage (thread won't be bumped)

Use REPORTS. Posting 'Mods pls' achieves nothing.
Check the Catalog before making a new thread.
Do not respond to maleposters. See Rule 7.
Please read the rules! Last update: 09/13/2020

1514508913083 (1).…

A world without males Anonymous 22715

Let's pretend men don't exist and we could reproduce on our own!

How would things be like?

Do you think the world would be less violent? Less capitalist? Are any things you think that would be worse? What would be better?

Anonymous 22716

>>22715
Hmm, hard to say. There would probably be less violent and sexual crimes.
A lot of women world leaders do pretty good, Merkel for example. But there are some bad ones, too, like the Myanmar leader.
A lot of modern technology was made by men, but one could argue that women have been discouraged from academic pursuits because of the patriarchy. I know that may sound overtly SJW, but it's worth entertaining I think.

Not really sure what kind of conclusion to draw.
Regardless, I like duality in my life currently. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anonymous 22717

anatole.jpg

I know I say I hate men a lot and I still do, but the world would be really boring without men. How about a world without ugly men, or a world where all men are enslaved instead?

Anonymous 22718

>>22717
How would we enslave them though?

Anonymous 22719

Instead of men there would be butch lesbians and nothing would change

Anonymous 22721

Screen Shot 2018-0…

>>22718
We would have to keep the male population low for it to be viable. A good way to reduce the male population while keeping the female population high is having a mandatory male draft and inciting war. However, the change of power would need to occur relatively quickly, as within a few generations, the ratio of men to women would steadily return to 1:1. I won't get into how to start a war as it is something that would naturally occur without our intervention. The main point is taking advantage of such a situation, so let's assume for now that a war has begun. How do the women in the warring territory gain power? The majority of change would need to occur silently. We would need the passage of laws supporting women over men while there were significantly less male voters.

Anonymous 22723

I would think the world would be much more peaceful. Much less crime. However we would probably advance more slowly due to being less competitive. With too much peace things become stagnant.
I dislike men and avoid them for the most part, but at the very least I can appreciate them for the things they've made.

Anonymous 22726

it would be a cool world some r9k bloke would probably get off to being his fetish

Anonymous 22728

If all men suddenly disappeared the first thing that would happen would be billions of women following them into death as all the infrastructure of modern society falls apart with no men to maintain it.
After that I think the few surviving women would form primitive tribes. The centers of these tribes would be women who know how to hunt and forage and otherwise survive on their own. These capable women would basically become the new men, leading and taking care of other women. Only, I'm not sure women would want that role. Men were happy to be a tribe leader and take care of a bunch of women because it meant he'd get to have sex with all of them. But on I don't really see that same motivation working for your average woman.
If the tribes do manage to survive, assuming they managed to form at all, things would probably then be pretty boring for the rest of time as the women don't really build or create new things, just survive day today. Until some global eco shift or huge scale natural disaster rendered the Earth inhospitable for humans and killed off the last of them.

Anonymous 22737

>>22728
Amen.


I don't understand this hate for men.
A world without them would have a fast ending for the most of us.
The survivors would die out because we need men.

Wanting man entslaved or their numbers forcefully hold down is terrible and makes women who want that not better than the redpill guys.
I met as many bad men as i met bad women.

Anonymous 22738

>>22715
“Less Capitalist”
Hoo, boy.
“Less violent”.
It would be worse. Girls bully girls relentlessly; women sabotage each other in the workplace constantly - if all the social capital and prestige was solely among women it would intensify by at least an order of magnitude. I have many brothers and while they are much, much more physical they fight much less.

Anonymous 22739

A bit off-topic, but I want everyone to die out.
We are all awful and there's no point being here. I'd kms if I wasn't a coward and a fellow human addicted to the sensory interest generated on earth.

Anonymous 22742

>>22721

Maybe some kind of highly infective smallpox or influenza strain with virulence factors somehow activated by male specific features like presence of an SRY gene product

Anonymous 22743

>>22739
Who are you to decide whether I'm awful and deserving of death?

Anonymous 22745

>>22739
My mama is a saint!

Anonymous 22747

>>22719
laughed in a library from this

Anonymous 22748

>>22738
Pretty much this. There would be a much stricter hierarchy that is decided by social status (basically a huge popularity contest). A lot of people forget that girls can be cruel and judgy even the ones that claim that “everyone is beautiful just that way theyare and we shouldn’t judge them!”. Although I think there would be a lot less competiveness and obsession over looks. Lots of girls dress or do their make up a certain way to appeal to guys, but now that men are gone, they have no reason to unless they just like dressing like that for themselves.

Anonymous 22752

If I lost the men in my life I'd literally jump off a bridge the same day. I don't get this hatred for men.

Anonymous 22753

>>22752
Me neither, I think a better question to ask would be "what would life be like if we didn't have to reproduce" I think that way a lot of bad things about men would disappear

Anonymous 22754

>>22728
>all the infrastructure of modern society falls apart with no men to maintain it.
>women don't really build or create new things,
You sound male and/or idiotic, sorry.

Anonymous 22756

Can this thread be deleted, it's full of LARPers.

Anonymous 22758

>>22756
Ok point out the LARPers then

Anonymous 22761

>>22759
I didn't bring up feelings, I said you sound male and/or idiotic. It's not a "feeling" any more than saying "The sky is blue" is. It's a very simple observation. I think this lack of nuanced thinking is a much larger issue.
I'm sorry about whatever feelings must have consistently blocked you from Googling "female inventors", "women and agriculture", or "women and labor force" for so much of your life, but as someone who believes in self-determination, I believe that you can do it if you just push yourself hard enough. It must be hard not having your biases confirmed, but I believe in you. If you disagree with consisted, documented history, please feel free to post your counter-evidence for the world to see.

Anonymous 22765

>>22761
A small number of women with skills and experience in some of these industries isn't going to be anywhere near enough to stop the massive chain of problems caused by all the men disappearing.

Anonymous 22767

>>22765
The source of those massive problems would be the sudden disappearance of half of the world population.

Of course there would be a difficult adaptation period when people have to be retrained for jobs.

I wouldn't assume things would be automatically better or worse, just different. And not based on shallow stereotypes like "wow how can women run the world if they're too busy being bitchy"?

This hypothetical is honestly boring.

Anonymous 22770

>>22767
No, because men would survive just fine without women. Assuming the same reproductive power is given them.


You really underestimate how much work goes into maintaining all the modern conviniences that keep you comfortable and alive if you keep dismissing it as "oh we'd just learn to do it ourselves"

How? Who's teaching you? How are you surviving while you try to learn? How many women will even be physically capable of some of these jobs even if you survive? Have you thought through any of these steps with any level of depth or do you just picture it happening in your head with no details because you think "men aren't so special. We can do all that too".(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)

Anonymous 22774

I can't compete in a Stacy World and I'm not a lesbian so I'd probably go be a nun and join a hermitage with other social outcast women for platonic company. Could be comfy.

Anonymous 22775

>>22770
>men would survive just fine without women

idk why incels and woman haters take this proposition for granted. a hellish lord of the flies type scenario seems just as likely under such circumstances

Anonymous 22776

>>22775
All that would happen is the sexbot industry would explode.

Anonymous 22783

prison_yuri.png


Anonymous 22786

>>22770
>No, because men would survive just fine without women.

lol there are literally online communities of men who mentally destroyed themselves just because they never got a hug from a woman. Best part is they insist they're doing fine or that they no longer wish/desire to interact with women

males = original tsunderes

Anonymous 22807

>>22770
>men would survive just fine without women.
that is not true, it is like saying women can survive just fine without men.

Of course a group of one sex or another can survive. It is not witchcraft, but i think it has a reason that we have two sexes.

Hell yeah, men are idiots and just giant babys and women are crazy and emotional, no sex is better than the other.

Women and men are different, in many ways, but I believe that is made from years of evolution so we can complement each other.

I hope you guys get my point.

Anonymous 22813

monjas-usa.jpg

There are communities doing that just fine. (With strict discipline)

Anonymous 22814

>>22813
being a cloistered nun sounds like it would be very chill tbh. i'm 100% for this idea.

>>22770
i know grown-ass men who can't even operate a washing machine, you really think those guys would be 'just fine'?
when my granddad's wife died he ate out for the next thirty years because he refused to learn how to cook. his elderly (female) neighbor felt so sorry for him that she would come over every week to clean his house because he refused to do it. yeah, sure, men will be fine on their own. just let their stubborn asses live in filth, ill health, and misery.

Anonymous 22818

Kneipe_Corps_Suevi…

>>22814
The point is that without any women enforcing privacy, the lowlife men would just be swept up by other men who have their shit together. They'd be used as literal minions and probably enjoy it because they don't have to worry about much and are taken care of.

Men in a nutshell. It only needs a handful of tricksters/schemers/"wizards" who have oversight and some others who are bold and charismatic.

Around here we also have some concepts like that where "homeless" University students are swept up (and given a cheap home) by fraternities who are more or less civilized but teach them how to function at least in basic concepts, until the older ones graduate and get own homes and then teach the young ones in occasional meetings.

I guess if it just was one house with everyone living in it forever it would become the epitome of barbaric, but at least it would work somehow

Anonymous 22821

1946._SX360_QL80_T…

>>22818
idk where you live, but where i'm from, fraternity brothers are regarded as scumbags. they're arrogant, inconsiderate, throw loud parties and don't clean up after themselves, and they bully the younger members of the frat.
plus, most of them don't learn to function even in those basic concepts, at least not in the long run. they get their degrees, marry their girlfriends, and then go straight back to being as messy and lazy as they want because they have a domestic servant to take care of them again.

like the frat communities that you're describing sound fine to live in, but i think you're really underestimating the number of pic related that exist. those lowlife men are lowlifes usually because they have no skills, social or otherwise, and i find it hard to imagine that the other men who have their shit together would pick them up and transform their lives without them being able to demonstrate some sort of value.

Anonymous 22827

The thread topic seems to have slid towards a men-only planet.

Men without women would create some sort of cannibalistic human sacrifice oriented culture where dying in war is considered ideal and funerary customs involve turning their skins into war drums and where human bone scrimshaw is the most common form of art. On the plus side there would be personal jetpacks and flying cars, on the downside there would be no license restrictions or insurance for either, fuel efficiency would be considered a cowardly concept and seatbelts would not exist even as a concept. Even our current world has detonated more than 2,150 atomic bombs, mostly more or less safely in test sites. In Man World, and I'm reasonably sure no man on earth would disagree, they'd have easily tripled that number, but a nontrivial percentage of those would not have been tests. Only 4 United States presidents have died by assassination in the current world, 2 shot by far right conservatives (Lincoln and Garfield) and 2 shot by far left communists (McKinley and Kennedy); only one of those was shot after women gained the vote. We can probably quadruple that number for Man World, and without women's civilizing influence on radical leftwing politics illegalism and Propaganda of the Deed such as assassination would be much more common political activities. The Cold War would have gone nuclear and surviving nations would have functioning Orion nuclear engine spaceships, which they would use in their resource wars where they struggle to get control of the solar system's remaining fissile materials so that they can win the next set of nuclear wars. Feminine concepts such as restraint and public order are the only reason there are stop signs, speed limits, and blood alcohol level restrictions on the roads. The whole nightmarish scenario would look a lot like Warhammer 40,000, but with everyone acting like Orkz. I mean heck that's the whole idea of Warhammer's Orkz, there's a reason Orkz are asexually reproducing fungi, men without women and without biological restraints.

Physically, if men still needed a male partner to reproduce with, I don't really know. Men are much more attracted to pale skin than women are, and much more attracted to blue or light colored eyes. They'd probably be larger and have tougher bones and stronger muscles due to the constant personal warfare of all against all that is the natural state on their planet. And since they'd be cannibals they'd probably have better digestive adaptations to drinking blood.

So basically gay vampires with jetpacks.

Anonymous 22828

>>22827
Good post tbh

Anonymous 22829

>>22827
i think you just really like warhammer

Anonymous 22834

>>22827
Man World sounds fucking badass

Anonymous 22835

>>22834
bear in mind it would also be extremely gay in a prison kind of way

Anonymous 22836

>>22835
How so? Are you sure? Men are actually more empathetic than women in terms of morals and ideals, for example all great moral undertakings have come from men (ending slavery, rule of law, etc). Women are pretty vicious and don't really care either way. I think a world consisting of men would be highly moral and just. If Man World has the same demographics as now, Europeans would just dominate the Earth and without women to impede them they would never let their empire fall. I don't think it would be as warlike as you claim because one tribe or group would quickly pull ahead of all others and maintain stability, much like in our world (Pax Britannica and then Pax Americana).

Anonymous 22843

>>22836
>men are more emphatic and have better morals because they ended slavery.

That's not how it works, there were and still are plenty of men that didn't want slavery to end. It's not like woman we're be able to end slavery anyway because they had no power to do so.

Anonymous 22855

>>22716
>Merkel
>a good leader
thats funny m8

Anonymous 22864

>>22829
Warhammer is a direct reflection of the male soul. To create a perfect male android we could build a sexbot and train its neural net on Warhammer source materials and pornography, and the result would be functionally indistinguishable from a biological male. The only question is why on Earth anyone would want to do that.

Anonymous 22893

>>22855
>muh muslims
Germany is objectively one of, if not, the most economically successful European country.

Anonymous 22897

>>22893
Solely because of the German people, and not because of their leadership.

Anonymous 22901

i work in a female-dominated industry (i'm surrounded by women and talking to women all day) and overall it's a very pleasant environment with little to none of the backstabbing and gossip-mongering that men imagine would happen in a world without them. if anyone is unpleasant it's usually in a way that's stand-offish rather than outright bitchy.
then you have male-dominated spaces such as fraternities like >>22818 mentioned which produce some of the most obnoxious and rude specimens of humanity that i've ever encountered.

uncanny coincidence, huh

Anonymous 22915

>>22897
I'd like to see you explain how Germany is an Anarchist utopia, Anon. Also haven't all the leaders of Germany been German people? Yes, yes they have.

Anonymous 22956

>>22915
>random ridiculous strawman
Ok retard.

As long as you at least somewhat harness the German people's industriousness, you will have a successful country. The particulars of their leadership is irrelevant and they would obviously be a billion times better off without Merkel and with someone who instead was NOT trying to slowly genocide them.

Anonymous 22960

>>22901
i don’t think backstabbing and politics and gossip is a male or female thing, it’s a shitty internal culture thing. we’re too quick to attribute shittiness to what people are rather than who they are, i think

Anonymous 23219

>>23218
>it was men that decided slavery was bad
http://spartacus-educational.com/REslaveryW.htm
>it was men that decided world wars should probably not continue
it's also men who started said world wars, what's your point?

Anonymous 23220

>>22915
Hitler was Austria tho

Anonymous 23229

>>23220
Austrians are, in fact, Germans.

Anonymous 23230

>>23229
True.
t. double citizen

Anonymous 23231

>>23229
Saupreißn/German dichotomy.

Anonymous 23232

>>23229
Alright, von Bismarck

Anonymous 23639

>>22786
lol, that's a good point

Anonymous 23641

It would be the most miserable place ever.
What a horrible thread.

Anonymous 23646

I think a new gender binary would form around masculinity/femininity and it'd be much the same as it is now, only not as based in biology.

Anonymous 23649

>>23641
I agree. This thread was probably made as b8 to make the site look bad

Anonymous 23652

>>23641
>>23649

Do you actually believe that?
This site is built around not having men post here. Why would you intentionally seek out an online society without males if you think a real world society without males would be miserable?

Anonymous 23656

>>23649
it isn't bait, i made it because i was bored and the chan was slow. i don't hate males but i agree with >>23652

Anonymous 23658

I like boys too much, I enjoy their company and I think they are cute

but all the alpha males and incels and "nice guys" can die off thX

Anonymous 23660

>>23652
Not her, but just because I like to post there doesn’t mean I have a desire for all men to disappear. Posting here is something temporary, then I go back to reality.

Anonymous 23665

>>23658
What about the nice guys without the quotes?

Anonymous 23666

smile.gif

>>23665
is this even a real question lmao

Anonymous 23667

>>23665
well no, i appreciate actually nice people…

Anonymous 23670

>>23669
uh well im (>>23666) not even >>23658

Also.. what the fuck is this. lmao, reported asf.

Anonymous 23671

>>23669
Uh I'm not the same person and no, I don't like kids. I like adults. What the fuck? How did you get this from what I posted?

Anonymous 23672

>>23670
how tf do you report lmao

Anonymous 23673

>>23672
click drop down arrow at the top right of the post you want to report. you'll get a little boxy at the bottom that says "file-delete" and "reason:(text box) - report". Type in the reason you are reporting (or dont if its obvious!) and click report! ta dah!

Anonymous 23736

>>23652
Yeah, I believed it until OP stepped in to correct me. I didn’t specifically seek out this site because it’s female-oriented. I found it off lc and thought there’d be like-minded people here (there are).

I agree with >>23658 , I’d miss the company of qt guys. and making sweeping generalizations is dumb

Anonymous 25223

>>22893
Because Germany had the richest country in history rebuild it and dump money into it as a bulwark against the Eastern Bloc
bing Marshal Plan

Anonymous 25227

>>22716
Aung Suu Kyi did nothing wrong

Anonymous 25323

>>22721

I think a better solution would be to have a more or less polygamous society, where you and your girlfriends share one really really hot guy and the rest of the men work manual labor jobs somewhere far removed from society. That would keep just enough men around to keep things interesting but not too many. They wouldn't have any political power obviously.

Anonymous 25328

>>22715
I think less sex crime would happen but battery and murder would skyrocket without men to vent on.
Maybe less war, but I have no real evidence myself to suggest why that would be true.
Traffic would be worse.
I think mostly everything else would be cool though.

Anonymous 25344

>>25328
>murder would skyrocket
Wh-what?
Men are responsible for the overwhelming majority of murders right now.
http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf
(p. 136)
Although in the Virgin Islands it's 50/50, so we might want to stay away from there.
What do you mean by men to vent on? To get angry at or abuse? Are we sure most women beat their husbands? I have doubts.

Anonymous 25349

>>25344
When I have a problem with other women I can't vent about it with other women because they'll gossip about it and I'll get shit on down the line about it so I talk to a guy friend or bf about it since they barely care about it.
A world without men is just a time bomb of escalating frustrations, our murder rates would match men's in a short amount of time

Anonymous 25350

>>25349
the men i know are the ones who spread the most gossip, but then again, I hang out with mostly men, and they are very bitchy types of men

Anonymous 25353

>>25349
It sounds like you just know unhealthy women and have a healthy bf lmao
>>25350
Most men I know are also backhanded and into gossip and drama. I worked with mainly (straight) men for a few years in a fast food restaurant of all places places and the backstabbing was unreal. I didn't expect it.
Anyway it's more an unhealthy-person thing than a woman-thing; men betray each other to get ahead all the time. Men can also be manipulative.

The cure for this is to just be honest about your distaste for an individual when it's safe to do so. If it's a boss or something, complain to someone not employed there so they can't ruin your job. ez

Anonymous 25354

>>25353
>backhanded
I meant underhanded obvs kek
Before I get called out for stupidity.

Anonymous 25356

>>25353
Just seems to be a tendency no matter where I go. Not to say its always that way, but more like a rule of thumb

Anonymous 25543

idk op, life without a power grid, indoor plumbing and mechanised agriculture sounds kinda uncomfy, maybe deadly

as much as I hate to admit it, they kind of run things around here

Anonymous 25544

>>25543
Not for long.

t. aspiring tradeswoman

Anonymous 25546

>>25545

mind = blown

Anonymous 25558

>>25543
How do you think things functioned while men were fighting during the world wars? Begone, robot.

Anonymous 25560

The world's population would return to a sustainable number. Women would have children when they were ready, instead of being forced into marriages (child marriages, arranged marriages, shotgun weddings) and then the societal expectation that once married, they have to start having kids. They would be able to enjoy their youth/careers and wouldn't think about children until later in life when only one or two children will be possible anyway. The quality of life for those children will be vastly, vastly improved as older mothers will already have large savings and houses purchased. Older mothers will also be more mature, therefore superior to younger mothers and only very serious mothers would go through with carrying a child. There will be no accidental children as mothers will have to go through an artificial insemination process. They won't have to suffer from rape and the pressure religious organisations and families put on them to birth and keep the child. People wonder why women in impoverished countries "keep having children" when they can't afford them, but they never seem to ask why their fucking trash husbands keep impregnating them and making them suffer more. With a reduced world population, the lives of everyone will greatly improve because we will have more food, better access to essential facilities and we would be doing less damage to the earth via climate change, deforestation, pollution etc. It would also be a much safer environment for women to raise children in. Imagine letting your kids play on the street until dark because you don't have to fear kidnappings, murderers or paedophiles as much as the majority of violent crimes are committed by men.

People who wonder "B-But what will we do without big, strong, handsome men?" are men who feel threatened by the idea. Just like they're threatened by feminism and the concept that women can live, work, travel, have kids, make decisions etc. without them. It fucking terrifies them that something they desire to control so much, can actually survive just fine without their influence. Actually, thrive since women who don't marry are happier and less stressed. Do people honestly think that men are the only group of people who can climb a telephone poll or plunge a toilet? Sorry, but society without men would be a utopia and if it bothers you, maybe try to be a more useful member of society or treat women better if you want people to start seeing it as a dystopia.

Anonymous 25561

>>25560
Older parents are more likely to produce children with genetic or chromosomal abnormalities, and screening tests for such defects aren't perfect. We're getting better at it of course but they aren't perfect.

Anonymous 25562

>>25561
Older as in early 30s, not 40s.

Anonymous 25563

IMG_8126.PNG


Anonymous 25564

>>25563
The average age to have a first child in my country is 31.

Anonymous 25567

>>25565
For the record, this poster is not me.

My posts:

>>25561
>>25563

Anonymous 25568

>>25564
This is pretty characteristic of Western Europe I think. When you stratify the US population by graduation from a four year college, you arrive at a similar mean value for the age of women at the time of their first child's birth.

Certainly I believe women must possess reproductive autonomy, but in order to make informed decisions we must also recognize that our biology is optimized for a different sort of life history than those common in wealthy post-industrial societies.

Anonymous 25569

>>25563
Don't people on (the functional end of) the spectrum often gravitate toward STEM careers? We'd need more STEM girls in this world, so that's fine. This study also didn't seem to mention severity of the disorder, although I only skimmed over it.

Anyway, if that table is right and say every woman has a baby in the 30-34 range with older male sperm even, so ~14/1000 babies had autism…that's only 1.4% of people having autism. Right now it's 1/59 people (in the U.S.), 1.7%. Things wouldn't be too different.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm

Anonymous 25572

>>25565
>>25568
So what, "older" women who are emotionally prepared to have children and actually want them would know those risks, and even if their kid did have autism or whatever, they'd be better fit to parent them than some 21 year old who got knocked up.

Anonymous 25662

>>25560
The world would be so much safer. It's hilarious when guys try to use the b-but we protect you excuse for why we would need them. Protect us from what? Other barbaric male thugs?

Anonymous 25836

>>22814
>i know grown-ass men who can't even operate a washing machine
This is dumb though because I can reverse that and say i know women that can't even operate a nuclear power plant. Teaching that halfwit man to using a washing machine takes like 5 minutes, but teaching that woman how to operate a nuclear plant isn't going to be quick. In OP's scenario, men would outlast women because they already dominate almost every field, even the ones that are majority female.

Anonymous 25841

I'd honestly rather live in a less scientifically advanced society than one filled with violent psychopaths.
Just weighing the pros and cons of each society, for me personally this is what I'd prefer.

Anonymous 25853

>>25836
>This is dumb though because I can reverse that and say i know women that can't even operate a nuclear power plant.
this is such a horrible comparision, anon, a nuclear power plant takes more than one person to run unlike running a load of laundry, kek

>Teaching that halfwit man to using a washing machine takes like 5 minutes, but teaching that woman how to operate a nuclear plant isn't going to be quick.

nta but…like…that's the point…the simple task of laundry can't be completed by a man. once again, a power plant isn't run by a singular person, kek

Anonymous 26179

>>22715

okay, I know I'm going to take everyone's hatred here.
I just want to clarify some points.

Many of the social networks have been invented by men, but in the end those who use them most are women.

For example Instagram, a platform to share your lifestyle, and suddenly a group of girla just want attention through likes.

Would you really like to live in a less technological world but without the need to be dealing with the problems of men?

I also believe that most of the problems in the world are caused by men.

I am not against anyone's opinion, you are all right in everything.

Anonymous 26181

>>26179
Exceedingly few of the problems in the world are caused by people.

Anonymous 26398

>>22807
I like this answer best. :)

Anonymous 65467

Glubb women.png

Heres your "female paradise" lol

Anonymous 65470

>>65455
A both only one sex society would operate like trash. The sexes clearly operate based on their unique functions. Moids are too dirty and lazy but are capable of doing heavy duty jobs even though they sleep a lot and dont give a damn about their hygiene.

Women can raise children, be natural food providers, are resolve diplomatic issues easily and they are the reason why the tribe is formed actually. Moids barely have anything to protect without us. This is asumming they are more reasonable moids of course, but thats the natural job of the moid.
Thats why feminist law must exist, it makes the police (mostly moids) have our backs in a reasonable manner.

Anonymous 65474

We should live like elephants. Elephants are based. Female only tribes who raise kids except young males are kicked out at a certain age to live with older dudes and far away from us. We meet only a few times a year to fuck the fittest male. Problem solved.

Anonymous 65477

>>65474
Moids think they are more important to a society than us but that is not true if more women flew to other societies because they didnt like their own that society would collapse and would be unable to keep new generations going. They underestimate the unique power of women which is one of the strongest ones if not the strongest in biological physical existence.

We can make a society resurge with 30 women and 2 qt racoon moids if we wanted. But they can't maintain the opposite 30 moids and 2 women, they would go apeshit and start killing each other. Women are naturally more valuable scientifically proven.

So I think an anti-feminist society should get killed by their own women. Muslim women should emigrate more to better societies for them than Muslim moids. And let the muslim world and indoctrination die by womanly disinterest, they wont be capable of making new generations if they fly out thats the best punishment you can bestow on shitty societies. Death by loneliness.

Anonymous 65486

>How would things be like?
I think that stronger women would take on the male roles in society (e.g., leading other women). And also the care of the babies would be shared.
>Do you think the world would be less violent?
Absolutely. That would be the best part. If men disappear, so does violence.
>Less capitalist?
Yes, men are the ones who like to compete with each other and accumulate wealth (power). A world without men would be more cooperative.
>Are any things you think that would be worse?
I think women lack ambition and therefore a world without men would develop more slowly.
>What would be better?
Less violence and more cooperation.
>>65474
It is like this in almost all the animal kingdom.

Anonymous 65491

284617063754.jpg

>>65486
>If men disappear, so does violence
Violence will exist as long as there ere living creatures capable of suffering. Animal kingdom is filled with violence, as humans became the apex predator we escaped the struggle for survival, but not suffering.

Anonymous 65499

>>65491
I doubt that stuff like raping infants to death will still exist without males but ok.

Anonymous 65538

>>65486
This is the realistic answer.

Anonymous 65550

>>22715

the world would become more sanctimonious as seen in
>>65486
post

Anonymous 65552

>>65499
Rape is (mostly) a very specifically male type of violence, so I agree I don't think it would exist anymore. Don't get me wrong I think violence would go way down without men, especially sexual violence and other awful kinds, but I don't think it'd disappear altogether.

Anonymous 65560

As in they just vanished, rapture style?

Get ready for every non-European nation to completely collapse and swarm the last bastions of technologically advanced civilisation who had at least some women trained and educated in fields necessary to maintain and develop core infrastructure.

We have practically entire continents where women are unable to drive, sail or fly, so all transportation shuts down. Food, energy and materiel stops moving entirely for almost the entire planet.

Hundreds of millions die from starvation as farms come to a halt and their produce cannot be distributed more than a week's journey by foot away.

Yet more die to disease as, again, entire continents with a handful of women trained in medicine. The grand exodus from Africa and Asia carry diseases wiped-out in the West and epidemics spread.

Strategic reserves of fuel deplete as oil fields burn out of control or simply sit idle and it becomes a race for a handful of scientists, engineers and machinists in European countries to train a massive workforce to fill the gaps in gas, solar and turbine manufacture.

Hundreds of thousands of women choose suicide, rather than suffer through the loss of fathers, brothers, sons, husbands ect.

Militaries, border patrols and even police are entirely depopulated without enough women with the disposition to fill even the higher ranks required to field much more than local forces.

By the time Western nations start to recover, mass columns of refugees from the world over start entering their undefended borders. In a few months all resources are drained and millions more die.

In the end anywhere connected by easily traversable land and sea connections is overrun and eventually decays into semi-nomadic tribes. The few sufficiently advanced civilisations to survive will be in places considered too cold or difficult to reach by hordes of desperate refugees - perhaps Switzerland, the Faroe Islands, northern Norway and Finland, Siberia, Iceland, Greenland, parts of Canada and Alaska.

Anonymous 65662

>>65560
We need a containment board for femcel shit.

Anonymous 65663

>>65662
You consider that femcel?

Anonymous 65675

>>65673
Id probably be the same, losing half my family, about a quarter of my friends, and my boyfriend all in an instant

Anonymous 65684

>>65662
If you don't like it, you can hide the thread. It's not that hard.

Anonymous 65687

>>65560
Good, there are too many people anyway. We need a good soft reset.

Anonymous 65780

1553479579797.jpg

>>22716
>Merkel for example

Anonymous 65781

>>22723
>things become stagnant
Nothing wrong with that. Progress is destroying us and all the other inhabitants of this planet.

Anonymous 65783

Lisa.jpg


Anonymous 65790

>>22827
God, you are ridiculous.

Anonymous 65807

png-clipart-black-…

>>22836
I- just- wow. I-

Anonymous 65816

>>22721
That wouldn't work. The "war to drastically reduce the male population" thing already happened in Russia, and it's fucked up female gender relations ever since. Women are forced to dress up like sluts in order to attract the few remaining viable men who aren't alchoholics

Anonymous 65873

>boyim larping thread

Anonymous 65876

>>65816
That also happened in Paraguay 1864-70, basically 90% of men died and Paraguayan catholic church de facto legalized polygamy after war

Anonymous 66190

Kek fuck scrotes and handmaidens on this board.

Anonymous 66208

>>66190
While it’s annoying, I think it’s proof that women are inherently better than men because we at least disagree whether our lives would improve if we kill/enslave all men. All moids, weak and strong, have a desire to brutalize women, only making exceptions for “the good ones” to essentially be their slaves.

To get back on topic, I think an all-female world would be more socialistic. UBI, subsidized childcare for single mothers (as everyone who chooses to have kids would be one), college and healthcare for all. Taxes would go up slightly, but not too much due to a reduction of defense and police force spending. Crime would go down, especially rape and child molestation, with prison reform following close behind due to a smaller pool of convicts to rehabilitate and a genuine interest to actually help the criminals. Other than that, it wouldn’t be too much different from many countries today. There would still be inequalities and conflict, but there would be much more quality-of-life improvements as society would be set up for us.
I imagine this scenario happening over time in the not too distant future. Men would slowly die out as women have access to genetically modified sperm to have children with no comparable equivalent to men. Men would have no desire to mate the typical way due to hyperrealistic VR porn and wanting to epically dunk on feminists by going MGTOW.
Once the order is established, I foresee males still being born in this new, female-dominated world, but they would be rare due to sex-linked genetic diseases and social stigmas around raising a son (less than 10% of the babies born). The ones who make it to adulthood likely would become either sperm producers in a lab or work in “adult entertainment” to produce a boyfriend experience for the straights. And yes, very wealthy women may have their own sigh “raccoon moids” but they would be very expensive to purchase and it would considered somewhat eccentric to have one.

Anonymous 66387

exs me.jpg

>>66190
Imagine thinking society wouldn't collapse if half its population suddenly disappeared

Anonymous 66388

>>66387
Imagine thinking society isn't already collapsing.

Anonymous 66401

>>66388
Which way western woman?
Autistic boys or "feminist" moids? or raccoons?

Anonymous 66423

>>66388
Imagine thinking the creation and continuation of society is not just a continuous collapse of nature.

Anonymous 66478

>>66387
What if it wasn't a overnight thing? Men slowly dying off over the years allowing women in the society to adapt.

Anonymous 66479

88998.gif


Anonymous 66481

>>66478
Depends on how the replacement dies. If more and more moid babies result in miscarriages, then you would see severe economic downturn and possible societal collapse as result, since a reduction in citizens destroys a democratic economy. If the moids, instead of just dying out as time goes by, but instead replaced with a higher number of female births it should be fine theoretically.

Anonymous 66485

>>66484
Yeah its not like it hasn't been tried before.

Anonymous 66486

>>66485
What is this in response to?

Anonymous 66495

>>66486
anona said we can survive well enough, heavy duty work would be harder sure but not impossible with modern tools. Life would just be less violent and more simple without moids in this hypothetical OP's scenario.

Anonymous 66533

bun.png

>>66401
It is objectively better to chase boys literally than it is to chase them figuratively.
From this line of logic, it can be deduced that one of these options is objectively superior.

Anonymous 66540

>>66481
Lower male to female ratios in society lead to a increases in violence, wouldn't be surprised if this in combination with less farmers, construction workers, and engineers is what collapsed society.

Anonymous 66543

>>66540
I mean it would cause women to pick up farming, construction and engineering. Why do you assume women aren't in those field already? And with a decreasing male population there will just be more women in those fields.

Anonymous 66582

>>66561
I feel like more women are going into engineering and stem job regardless if men existed or not. In America already 40% of Farmers are women. Although it mostly immigrant woman being taken advantage of. I will admit the construction and more manual labor jobs would be harder to fill. Especially trash collectors, sewer workers.
There's always going to be someone desperate enough for any job.

If this is a distant future where artificial wombs are a thing. We can have robots to do it all.

Anonymous 66588

>>66582
>tfw ywn live in a futuristic society of only women where no one ever even has to get pregnant
SIGH

Anonymous 66617

>>66593
Scandinavian countries aren't egalitarian utopias though, you have to take into consideration how parents, media and society treat boys and girls and how it affects their development, including views from outside the country. If a demographic is encouraged from a young age to be social and caring and is not given enough toys and tasks that induce logical thinking is it any wonder they will end up choosing nursing over computer science? especially when male dominated fields are known to be intimidating and treat women badly?

Anonymous 66643

Women need twice as much protection from cops than moids and need to be believed twice as much more too.

Cops existence should be mainly to protect women first then moids second because we are more valuable naturally than moids who are significantly more disposable.

Anonymous 66707

>>66643
I really hate to break it to you, sweetie, but modern (70's/80's) feminism has gotten us pretty close to true equality, this includes making us just as worthless as men. We aren't able to cash in on chivalry anymore, so we wageslave in dingy mcdonalds/ford factories just as hard as the men, we arent special anymore, we've rejected our intrinsic advantage of being pampered but dependent homemakers in favor of the independence to slave right next so our beloved (and reviled) male counterpart in true equality. Instead of lobbying to smash the patriarchy the radfems on here should lobby for destroying fatcat capitalism. (And stop blaming men for being shutin incels just like the MGTOW scum), then again most of the radfems on here are just tranny moids, so shrug

Anonymous 66708

>>66640
No it really is a trend. The richer and more egalitarian, the less women in STEM and physical jobs.

But i don't agree the social factor is removed at all. In my view i think there are simply more options to go into positions that pay less and align with gender roles due to more social security. Why would a woman who is taught from birth to be social and caring (in almost all societies) choose to go into electric, which is more dangerous and has a godawful culture with how many older men control things, instead of nursing when earning power enough is not an issue? how many even consider woodworking as a viable career for a woman at any point vs how many boys? Take banking and accounting, if women are just biologically meant to not be interest in maths, why are these fields mainly even by gender? Why would farmers and chefs be mainly male if biology and hard wired behaviour is the issue, not the workplace and worldwide views on women?

I say this as someone in STEM and who considered electrical and hvac careers but dropped them due to the culture, the problems that make women stay away from these fields are still there, they are just hidden behind a mask of girl power, but the men controlling these industries are still there and the conditioning from birth at what women should be good at is still there. And i'm not saying that we would have a 50/50 split in most professions, but i don't think extreme rates like close to 0% of men being doctors assistants and an even split in being actual doctors is exclusively biological.

And keep in mind that equality like this is a recent thing even in the best countries, in switzerland for example a womans mother could have not been able to vote, it's naive to think the way of thinking from that time won't pass on even a little to the next generation.

Anonymous 66710

>>66707
Triggered handmaiden detected.

Anonymous 66755

>>66710
That's a whole ass man.

Anonymous 66790

>>66755
>anyone who has a single nice thing to say about men IS a man
Go outside.

Anonymous 66792

>>66790
if you're really a woman, lemme tell you men will never reciprocate the sympathy and devotion you have to them, they don't even see you as human

hope you get picked tho

Anonymous 66793

>>66707
I'd rather work in a gas station and live in a shitty apartment than to spend a single day being a cheating moids slave

Also isn't it convenient how when succeed past men on the average nowadays to the point where men literally think they're oppressed for flunking out of high school?

Anonymous 66794

>>66707
Also housewives were far from pampered, most of them were depressed, suicidal, and abused. Only pickmes and moids who don't do research before they speak think being a 50s housewife is some luxurious thing evil feminists destroyed

Anonymous 66796

>>66792
Go outside, incel
>>66793
You too, and learn to TEAR APART a man's brain before you let him anywhere near your naked body
>>66794
>what i was told by media portraying a past through it's modern feminist lens is exactly what happened
I mean, im sure there was a problem, there's still one noe, but i'm also sure that you watched American horror story and took 30% of your bias from their asylum season (or equivilent media)


Also of note, as was mentioned here before, the more egalitarian the society becomes, the more of us opt to stay home anyways.
God i hate the fucking pinkpillers here, they're just as bad as those militant incel moids, purely a genderswap

Anonymous 66797

>>66707
If you really understood radfem theory you'd know that patriarchy preceeded capitalism, coming later only to reinforce women's oppression that already existed. Thus, destroying patriarchy foremostly is reorienting the whole system and weakening capital relations.

Socialist regimes hated women just the same, because they had men in charge, and they enable patriarchy in whatever shit they do. You know that, right?

Patriarchy is the most pervasive, longest slavery system in our entire history and it reflects on every other social, economic, political dynamic we've ever had.

Anonymous 66798

>>66796
This is ridiculous. Stop trolling and find something else to do.

Anonymous 66807

>>66561
It would not be an "egalitarian society", it would be a single-sex society. We would have to see how women behave without the presence of men and their ideas about femininity.

Anonymous 66811

>>66809
it's simple, if everyone in America magically became white, there'd be no more racism, but classism, sexism, homophobia wouldn't go away

Anonymous 66816

>>66809
What I mean is that there are many factors that influence women's vocational decisions, such as even the very presence of men (there was a study about this, I'll see if I can find it). That's why you can't just say it's natural and that a society of women couldn't sustain these fields… Do you understand?

Anonymous 66834

>>66833
one of these factors is biology, imo. it doesn't make sense to want to do hard physical work when you're low t.

Anonymous 66837

>>66833
>There is a preference towards more personal and human care work

Is that not because they are very much encouraged to pursue those fields? I mean, this can include very early on as well. Exposure to women always being in those careers, and down to toys where girls are given to feed babies, communicate with their dolls, etc.

Anonymous 66838

>>66837
This, I still see that parents give toys that are more intellectually stimulating to boys and girls get mostly dolls

Anonymous 66839

>>66809
Sorry if it was confusing, i'm saying that it does happen and i agree with you that this is fact, but i disagree that the main reason is that women are biologically aversed to most fields dominated by men. Even in these countries a woman will have a harder time with the culture in carpentry than in cleaning work for example, and that is when she ever even considers being a carpenter as a possibility due to the way women are raised and how the world, including outside countries, views them. When even in the most egalitarian countries you could go back two or even one generation and still find women being treated like subhumans you can't say this won't carry on and have effects on present day girls and their career choices.

You can't just say women being the majority in idk secretary work is biological because even nordic women are not raised in a genderless vacuum with no history. And that goes for choices like mostly girls liking pink, skirts, long hair even in these egalitarian countries: none of these are biological, just the result of gender roles being pushed.

But at the same time, i agree that biology would end up playing a role too in an utopia like an all women society. I think physically demanding jobs would be harder to fill, along with ones based on competition, i just don't believe the huge disparity we have today in fields that have nothing to do with these is purely biological.

>>66837
>>66838
Yes, this is one of the things i meant. I'm lucky i was able to play with my brothers stuff and develop an interest in technology or i probably wouldn't be in the field i am today.

Anonymous 66840

>>66837
And more and more women are becoming physical laborers as well as tech, we already see women filling out the higher end of medical and business positions now that boomers are dying off and younger men are getting lazier and lazier, even when men want to go into tech, most of the time they want to just do something relating to video games or digital art and wonder why they can't find a job when five million other scrots are all trying to go for the same few positions open in that field

Anonymous 66852

>>66840
do you have anything to back it up or is it just your prejudices talking?

Anonymous 66854

>>66840
kek, right? i swear, every male that goes into programming goes into it because of video games, then they realize what a pipedream that is

Anonymous 66861

>>66852
hmmm, someone's triggered
couldn't fulfill your juvenile dream?

Anonymous 66864

>>66861
I miss the times when we had actual discussion here

Anonymous 66883

>>66854
It's not bad in theory but it's just the fact almost all males getting into tech all want to do the same few things, plus most video games are just becoming copycats of one another so what's the point? You'd think with all the scrots in the video game industry there would much more creativity

Anonymous 66948

>>66947
Western women are also bullied and harassed out of STEM too, including by hiring managers being judgemental, in middle eastern countries women can do tech stuff but it's shitty office jobs that pay low that they're practically forced to in order to get by

You also forget America or western countries are the worst examples of inequality

Anonymous 66952

>Western women are also bullied and harassed out of STEM.
In my experience, this is a meme pushed by people with arts degrees.
t. Biomedical engineering student.

Anonymous 66956

>>66952
Trying finding and keeping a job.

Anonymous 66957

>>66952
>Biomedical engineering student
use you magic words to grow us bfs

Anonymous 66978

Not >>66947 but I wanted to add the example of the kibbutz, where they raised kids as gender neutral as possible and mostly separated from parental influence.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/350481?seq=1
https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/kibbutz

Anonymous 66982

>>66952
>I haven't experienced therefore it doesn't happen
Sure, because computer dudes are totally able to be around women and act stable about it

Anonymous 66983

>>66952
I don't know such cases personally but I remember reading posts on lolcow written by two women who resigned from STEM for this reason. Am I supposed to think they were lying? They seemed pretty informed. Just because you haven't seen it personally doesn't mean it doesn't happen

Anonymous 66985

>>66952
This.
I've never really run into any harassment to myself or others purely for being women. Of course it exists, but there's a difference between isolated incidents and a systemic issue. I can't really put faith in this everlooming boogeyman that wants to rape my guts out at anytime if I never see any of the effects it has.

Anonymous 66989

>>66985
It still exists whether or not you’ve paid any attention to it. Many women can speak upon it.

Anonymous 66990

Honestly it would be sustainable as long as we keep the sperm banks. Women can live with each other and when new women need to be born just use the dead moids sperm. Abort all males before they are born. Men have literally out lived their own purpose on this planet and we could survive without them

Anonymous 66991

>>66947
The gender equality and STEM gap has been corrected, and said to missing of the complexity of gender issues.

Anonymous 66992

>>66990
Based. I wish it was possible but handmaidens will never let it happen

Anonymous 66996

>>66992
get rid of the handmaidens first then

Anonymous 67000

>>66990
You saw it here. Women saying that if men disappeared they'd kill themselves. They would gladly off themselves and die with their own enemies and terrorizers. Lmao

It'll never happen, unfortunately. Even if there was a purge that wiped males or something, women would do anything to spare them, or ever sacrifice their own lives to their moids.
It's depressing.

Anonymous 67002

I hate most moids, but they are necessary for certain laborious shitjobs that i don't think women would do without being straight up forced

Anonymous 67003

>>67002
How so?

Anonymous 67008

>>67002
Depends, I see more and more women participating in labor work, especially construction and factory work, one of my closest friends is a welder, on top of that we are most definitely seeing growth of women becoming EMTs, firefighters, police and other sorts of public service. Obviously it's not like we are just gonna wake up tomorrow and all physical labor fields are going to be dominated by women by denying the growth that's happening is just false

One of the funniest things about moids is the fact that they can't comprehend why women would be willing to go work in factories or be a truck driver to support themselves rather than be their personal house and sex slaves, they are literally that narcissistic

Anonymous 67009

>>67002
Just because women in your circles don't work in male-dominated spaces, doesn't mean there aren't women out there that do. I studied computer science so I know hundreds of female computer scientists, engineers, physicists, mathematicians, biologists etc etc etc because we hung around in the same circles.

Anonymous 67013

>>67009
>computer science, engineers, biologists
Um how are they laborious? I'm talking about coal mining, warehouse jobs, construction work etc

Anonymous 67016

China-female-migra…

>>67013
Damn anona, you really living with your head on the sand
Women aren't as weak as we tend to think. When there's need, women do the job. We might need more arms to counterbalance the labourious jobs, yes, but we would do it just fine given the need.

Anonymous 67017

>>67013
If we switched to solar power the need for coal would be very little, not to mention most coal mines call for people to live in specific places, most of which are religious rural areas where women are encouraged to stay home or do caregiving work. Also anyone's who's worked in a warehouse know many women work in there, in fact I helped run a job fair for a huge chain warehouse in my area and about half or maybe more than half of the people who went are female, there are bias against different gendered warehouse workers though. As for construction a lot of women are getting into construction. Obviously it's not half and half before anyone claims I'm saying labor fields are half and half but it's getting more equal by the minute
https://www.nawic.org/nawic/Statistics.asp

Not to mention the pay gap, women make less for doing the same exact job when they are in construction
>In b4 moids or handmaidens start screeching at the meer word pay gap without even reading the article

Anonymous 67022

>>67013
Yeah, I know. Sorry I don't have many builder or coal miner friends but I didn't want to speak for a field I'm not involved in. But if women can work in fields where they've been told they don't have the mental capacity to, I'm sure we'll manage to figure out how to operate heavy machinery and women who aren't traditionally "feminine" will step up to the plate. I'm sure they'd love to work in these fields but aren't taken seriously at the moment.

It wasn't too long ago we believed women couldn't drive cars or ride in a train either.

Anonymous 67034

>>67022
True, the only issue is the fact that if women want to work in these fields in order to even be considered for a job at most of these places they expect big burly dykes, they expect women to drop their femininity and attractiveness in these fields. Men aren't needed for physical labor no more especially since so many machines and various intentions have been made to reduce effort needed, not to mention most men who take up these fields are only in it for money, not that there's anything wrong with that but women do get paid less in these fields so why would women take up physical labor jobs when they're paid less and the only reason why most people are in the field is money? No one wakes up one day and claims that they want to pipefit or move things around on a forklift in a freezer, it's supposed to be a transition job that you use for money now but men will sit down and box up chocolate all day and act like they're doing the entire world a favor and everyone should bow down to them, I've never seen a woman act like a mediocre job is changing the world, meanwhile men could be bussers at olive garden and act like they're high and mighty

Anonymous 67036

It's kind of fun to think about but in all seriousness I think it would be miserable. Classism isn't going to just disappear, and pretty soon the true loyalties of supposedly woke rich women would become obvious and spoilers, it isn't to their 'sisters'

Anonymous 67122

>>67120
The men who are saying that though either have monkey jobs or no jobs, all while telling women it's their fault and it's stupid to not want to be their slaves. Very little scrot jobs actually use that much labor thanks to inventions, construction at most even then thanks to a lot of machinery it's okay. If labor jobs were as hard as scrots say then the vast majority of working men wouldn't be so damn fat, on top of that moids are literally so narcissistic that they think they're doing women a favor by making them live mediocre lives and having meh sex with unpaid housework, child care, child bearing, cleaning, cooking, therapy and so on for what? A shitty apartment? A small crappy house in the fuck middle of oklahoma? The only benefit from being a housewife is if you're a wife of a rich man and it ain't the moids spreading that shit

Anonymous 67126

>>67122
To calculate the costs
A prostitute for 2 hours a week would be 400 (we're being generous here and using the lowest cost possible)
Low end chefs make about 10/hr
Assuming you spend 10 hours a week cooking that would be 100 a week
Bussers make 8/hr
That's 80 right there
Housekeeping, including dishwashing would be another hundred a week
Assuming she picks up chores such as alternating and ironing clothes that's 200, and another 80 a week for child care, oh and don't forget to pay the 15k plus doctor's appointments during pregnancy like a surrogate would.
Now a woman would provide you with all these duties for FREE in exchange for housing, food and stuff everything else which would probably be less than 1000 a month on her end so "pampered" my ass considering the fact having a housewife is receiving at least several thousands worth services for free in exchange for sharing a bed, food, living space and a couple of bucks here and there for clothes and personal care

Anonymous 67131

>>67120
Progressive? But does the gender gap with STEM include the active gender roles in progressive societies, as well as more access than less progressive countries ?

Anonymous 67145

>>66983
They don't have to have been lying for their experiences to have been extremely unusual.

Anonymous 67150

>>67145
90% of lolcow stories are fake

Anonymous 67176

Screenshot_2020-10…

poltards posted this thread on /pol/
https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/285107408

Anonymous 67179

>>67176
I’ll summarize the thread for you without looking:
>look at this crazy idea wahman on this femcel forum have
>haha silly wahman they can’t govern anything and are too [blank] to govern anything besides muh dick
>some women hatefuel screenshot
>NOOOOO my trad based internet waifu would NEVER think this. We can redpill them, I promise!
>stfu simp
And the thread goes on like this until it dies

Basically, women can’t exist without men commenting on it lmao. Desperate much?

Anonymous 67180

>>67179
It's quite literally the greatest paradox of the manosphere's existence. MGTOW, despite being named after "going your own way," is more or less dedicated to incessantly whinging about women. Sure, sometimes they post a picture of their gym or whatever, but for the most part, it's just talking about how much they hate women. The same goes for TRP, MRA, whatever it's called. And, of course, these groups inherently attract the more virulent misogynist types because those losers see what's already going on and know they get to use them as outlets for their hate.

But the biggest lie they tell themselves on a daily basis is that we need them to survive. That a woman who doesn't end up marrying a man becomes miserable and kills herself because she hit the wall and can't find anyone anymore. That there are so many more men who can't get into relationships because they've "given up on women," lmao. Male delusion and narcissism is a hell of a drug.

Anonymous 67183

>>22752
I think its pretty simple.
Those women don't have any good men in their lives. =(
Good men can make life feel safe and exciting at the same time.
A terrible moid turns it into living hell.

Anonymous 67184

>>22754
Women aren't exactly lining up to be construction/sanitation workers. Moids can go play in shit, I'd rather not personally.
You really don't think things like highways/sewers/garbage collection wouldn't take a hit?

Anonymous 67191

>>67184
And why exactly aren’t they taking those jobs?

Anonymous 67193

>>67126
>Assuming you spend 10 hours a week cooking that would be 100 a week
You're also cooking for yourself though. You dirty the same amount of stuff, besides for the plate they eat off of.
>Housekeeping, including dishwashing would be another hundred a week
Also something you'd be doing yourself, adding 2-3 extra people isn't as big as you make it out to be, economies of scale and all that.
>and another 80 a week for child care, oh and don't forget to pay the 15k plus doctor's appointments during pregnancy like a surrogate would.
Assuming you'd like children this isn't something appropriate to bill for.

Anonymous 67194

>>67191
Because those jobs are objectively terrible?
Sweaty, smelly and no-one has the slightest bit of respect for you?

Anonymous 67196

>>67193
Either way even split in half it's tons of unpaid labor that men are getting for almost free

Anonymous 67197

Yeah but its clearly not several thousand in services.
You can make him iron his own shit too. And if he can't dress himself moderately, don't get involved with him.

Anonymous 67199

>>67197
It’s unpaid labor still.

And try saying him to do his own shit. Try it

Anonymous 67200

>>67199
>>67198
Yeah the moids need house training for it to be useable, but if you get a reasonable one its a great "job" if your goal is children.

Anonymous 67201

>>67199
>>67197
But that's the thing, as a housewife men are getting all these luxuries for almost free. It's the man's job to prove why it would be better for a woman to cook, clean, raise kids and to live with him, rather than just get a job doing something similar and halfing her own work while being able to live in peace and not have to clean up after an adult man. This especially applies if a man is out expecting the cooking skills of master chef, the sex skills of a porn star, the cleaning skills of a Ritz Carlton housekeeper. If you're a mechanic at walmart or warehouse workers, unless you're making serious bank you have to prove why women should give you insane amounts of free labor, whether it be her own allowance or the fact in order to keep decent women around you have to be decent yourself

Anonymous 67202

>>67201
>This especially applies if a man is out expecting the cooking skills of master chef, the sex skills of a porn star, the cleaning skills of a Ritz Carlton housekeeper.
I've found most men don't expect those things in all honesty. Especially the house keeper part considering they're all slobs. Doing a reasonable job cooking and a shitty job housekeeping is enough.
Then you have to find one thats not porn sick though.
And yeah the rest of what you said is a big problem these days. Why I said you need a reasonable moid. They seem to be much more rare these days tho.
If you can't find one you're completely right about the career instead.

Anonymous 67204

>>67202
>Why I said you need a reasonable moid. They seem to be much more rare these days tho
I mean, back in the day women just assumed the housewife position so moids didn't have anything to be butthurt about. Now they're unhappy because of feminism. It's not that suddenly men got more fucked up, they've always been like this, but women were always giving them what they wanted. Men who were ok with splitting housework were always rare.

Anonymous 67212

the world would be almost exactly the same because most people are mentally retarded no matter their sex or gender

it's a hopeless world out there

Anonymous 67244

>>67179
I just checked to see if you were right and there were like 5 posts in the whole thread, all of which were very boring. They were all:
>the would go extinct
>there'd be less rape but more doxxing because women are catty or something
>society would collapse
I have no idea why the other anon even linked it. It wasn't worth the time it took to read it. Even this post about it isn't worth reading. I've actually stolen precious seconds of your life from you.



[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]