1975 06 Dalsland V…
Time Anonymous 234023
During what period were scrotes at their best and at their worst? Was there any benefit of being a woman in the past compared to today? I get the feeling that modern scrotes are not as genuine as they were in the past. They were very open about being manipulative and controlling assholes but nowadays everyone puts on a fake smile in order to appease women and tell them how feminism is good.
It was infinitely worse in the past. The further back you go, the worse it gets and the more violent they are. In the 1800s not only could you not get a credit card, or have a bank account, you couldn't even go outside unchapperoned, it wasnt that different than the middle east. You frequently had arranged marriages and if you were poor it was even worse. Beating your wife was not considered amoral anywhere it was considered moral. The worst thing though was if you were poor, and marital rape was normal. There was no bc. You couldn't avoid getting raped impregnated up to 12 times. Half your babies would probably die. And worse you probably couldn't do anything about it or divorce if he pissed all your money on gambling and alcohol or some other retarded fucking thing. History was horrific, go read accounts of women trapped in poor marriages. They're worse than anything.
Plenty of women became nuns and weren't forced into marriage. Instead they devoted themselves to charity and orphanages.
that's nasty why did it take so long for feminism to take off?
Care to elaborate? Is it because of polytheism versus monotheism?
women still had their freedom restricted and their only purpose was to serve others
shes larping like she is /his/ and saying things she actually knows very little about
Rome had slavery, arranged marriage and rapist soldiers pillaging villages
Renaissance had some wealthy educated women. Plus Christianity gave women an alternative to marriage. Women could become nuns and work in orphanages or the church. Devoting themselves to helping the sick and needy.
You're delusional. Even fifty years ago, THERE WAS NO WAY FOR YOU TO KNOW WHAT MEN THINK AND NO WAY TO EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THEIR MANIPULATION TACTICS. You couldn't pull up 4chan or reddit or an incel community or pick up community or facebook.
No birth control. No credit cards. No property. No sex education. No pregnancy tests. No college degree. No occupation. No car. And no pants, of course. Also you let a guy kiss you on the cheek and now the whole town thinks you're a whore.
Oh wow im supposed to be fucking imprwssed?????? Get out of here with that bullshit it's just another kind of moid-driven prison.
Here look I don't want to be in a marriage prison here, so ill just throw myself into a religious prison. Bitch who the hell wants to live as a shitty fucking nun?? Do you have any idea how shitty their existences were ??? Its not even worth bringing up. Worst joke in this entire IB.
kinda unrelated but there were a lot of cute yuri romances that happened in convents in history
I'm just in absolute disbelief you didn't realize how fucked it was.
You seriously never watched Angela's Ashes ? In the past men were 10x more drunk, entitled, stupid and power obsessed than they are now. Poor men were filthy drunken gambling rape slobs, ALL of them.
And there was no way in hell you could get out of marriage to get away from one because your income would have been shit, even if you found a job. You would have been beaten. Men were pure unadulterated filth rape apes. We have it GOOD with them guzzling so much porn and staying the hell away from us instead of being born into this.
But think about it they bred their degenerate ass ugly genes and rapeape shit into the gene pool for generations and generations. This is the number one reason I don't believe in pursuing men seriously in rationships to be honest. That and seeing what my mom put up with in one.
That's fantasy, FANTASY. Do you know how oppressed real lesbians would have been IN most convents??? Come on you're talking about the kind of Christians that still try to send their kids to gay conversion therapy. Only more puritanical because back then people had nothing better to do tan go watch executions and go to church. You would live in terror with it because if it got out there would be a monestary-wide witch hunt in most places. People used to be extremely puritanically religious for most of human history.
Please pick up a history book. Anything that catches your eye. Something fun to read. Then another one. You can't be this ignorant, it already impacts your decision making, and it's going to bite you in the ass really bad down the line. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.
And when I say drunk on religion I mean it. They were like Christians are in Africa now, who still believe in witches. I don't know if you realize but in a lot of places in Africa, that 3rd world, they will call ANYONE they want a witch and it can destroy lives pretty easily. Yes this is actually still a thing even in 2023. Say you have an extremely lucrative business canning and selling vegetables. It is not uncommon for a struggling community to fire up a witchhunt in jealousy. The same goes for gays, highly educated people, etc. Well it wasn't that different only 150-400 years ago. Especially for women. It didn't matter whether it was Rome, Venice, Utrecht during the rennaissance, or even the 1800s. It was all equally dominated by religious ignorance, and terror. Because when you're stupid and religious and go to blame everything on either the paranormal, demons, curses, and/or simply believe religion is the only answer … you don't have calm sensible communities you have a ton of fear-indoctrinated punishing lunatics.
Ontop of that, my god life was just incomprehensibly hard before electricity, plumbing, sanitation, running water. People were paid lower than they are now for harder more backbreaking work, because they had much lower expectations for quality of life. And the vast majority of the population lived hand to mouth, in squalid conditions, surrounded by a lot more death and disease than we can wrap our head around now. They were pent up with stress fear and impotent rage which they commonly just passed down on down to easy targets They loved a scapegoat more than we can understand today, beause they were so stressed. Most of those scapegoats and targets were women. Trapped in marriages, without bc, without help, a voice an education. Just fucking religion. Nothing was usually like it is, portrayed in period movies or even books. Unless you watch something like gangs of new york or perfume the story if a murderer. Most people scraped by and women had horrific trapped existences. They didn't develop feminism for ages because they had no time for it and they sure as hell had no voice. Feminism only gained poplarity when women had time away from slavery thanks to elecricity, education, appliances, that made housework easier. But still most of your women would have been illiterate in most places until the middle of the 19th centry.
There were certain benefits but only if you were part of the nobility. If you look at ancient Egypt there were plenty of female rulers.
I used to watch Flying Nun on TV. It seemed like a fairly wholesome lifestyle. Plus you had musician Nuns like Sister Irene O' Conner who played for the children.
This is a fucking TV show. Who bases anything off of what they learn on tv
I was raised Christian and spent time participating in church activities. Mostly charity stuff and holiday events. They were genuinely fun and a great way to make friends. I don't really go to church anymore. After I moved away from Christmas Valley I lost interest.
The Renaissance was incredibly hostile to women, it was an era of misogyny. >>234042>slavery>arranged marriage>rapists
So basically every society at some point. Also becoming a nun isn't as great as you think it is. They could also still be raped by the priests and deacons. >>234154
I dunno, at least the nuns in my area were/(are?) expected to live almost ascetically; simultaneously, the priests live in big beautiful houses, own expensive cars, and honestly several times walking past the priest house I've smelled weed.
Anyway scrotes were never at their best, as far as anyone can tell. At least not as a whole. I will answer OP differently
>best time for women
>>234042>Renaissance had some wealthy educated women
Why are you taking few as an example of what life was life for the many? Most women were not educated aristocrats and did not have any opportunities and were subjected to misogyny. Please.
In Mesopotamia women could own businesses, slaves, buy and sell land and initiate divorce. Of course not a feminist society but still better than Islam.
Some day you'll learn the hard way you're sorely lacking braincells
Talk about lazy and ignorant as fuck
The ancient sumerians and Babylonians also had fucking wife auctions, full of 10- 15 yr olds which were no different from slave auctions. Also I think you're confusing them with the Romans.
Women were recorded as landowners, business owners, administrators, bureaucrats, doctors, scribes, clergy, and in rare cases, even monarchs in Mesopotamia. We're talking about a society that predates the Romans so it is kind of weird.
Hunter gatherer times might have been the best
Which Era in Mesopotamia though? Sumerian or Persian or.. ? There were so many cultures that rose out of Mesopotamia and then evolved or blew away
when women were raped regularly with no consequence, their men killed and then taken as trophies and raped some more? No thanks.
Do men face consequences for rape now? at least back then women could experience the joy of hunting and gathering and now we don't even have that
rape was way more prevelant and there were no laws protecting women. Men weren't afraid of committing rape because it wasn't even viewed as wrong, womens rights weren't even a fucking thought. If you want to go fucking hunt and gather than go in the woods, nobody is stopping you. You can do that now just like you could then except its way less likely some gross moid will jump out of the bushes and rap you. I can't believe you're this dumb.
I mean… you can still hunt and gather… also men seldom hunted, most of a hunter gatherer’s food intake was gathered by women. So men were lazy shits back then, too.
Would you release a domesticated animal to the wild? No, it can't survive on its own. For that reason I can't just go and just hunter and gather right now.
Who the fuck wants to do that compared to living with Grocery stores, ac, videogames and electricity ?
Honestly this was often also true. Women did most of the planting, harvesting and gathering. But think about it hunting was the FUN gig and usually women didn't do that. Men took all the fun roles and dished the shit put to women. Fuck them all with cactuses. ;/
Foraging for edible plants is really easy. Even dandelions, nettles and cactus pads are edible. Fishing is also easy if you live near a lake or pond.
Just say you want me to get poisoned and die
>>234277>I-I'm so scared to go outside>fuuuug the world is terrifying
Go pick flowers somewhere in the fields. Strawberries, maybe. You give off the learned helplessness vibe.
Best: WWII when all the scrotes were killing each other.
Kek just don't pick any mock strawberries while you're out there
Yes these exist. Yes the plants look almost exactly the same to the untrained eye.
Please stop trying to spook the city child.
I'm not. It's true, they're real, google them. Potentilla Indica.
Not the same nona, but as far as I know women had plenty of rights during both periods.
Women had more rights in Babylon than in ancient Israel.
Despite the Asian romance soap operas. China has historically awful treatment of women.
Pfft but most of chinese courts were a nightmare for women. Even her feet would have bound which is just fucking barbaric.
She was in the right place at the right time and incredibly incredibly lucky. Lol notice how she punishes everyone standing in her way almost with vengeance and fury. It's almost completely unsurprising, given what court life would have been like for most women. She was selected as a concubine as a teen, and happened to produce the first son. She would have been in competition with dozens of other concubines for the emporors favor, in the Chinese court. All of their feet would have been bound. But she was one of the extremely lucky ones China was a particulary shit place for women.
If you call being killed for adultery having rights? May have been better than other cultures but anything from the BCs and long after would have had pretty horrific human rights in general.
Still … women get executed for adultery, while men got a slap on the wrist fine ???
Men could also be executed for adultery. I think you try to trivialize the fact that couples fell in love during those times and that, although not perfectly equal, there were laws in place to ensure society would not devolve into anarchy and people doing whatever they please. Keep in mind that this is over 4000 years ago so all kinds of anachronistic interpretations are useless. Human rights in themselves are arbitrary and could be anything you ascribe value to.
>>234348>babby's first attempt at critical thinking
Men were "executed for adultery" when someone with power wanted an enemy killed and adultery was a convenient crime.>Human rights in themselves are arbitrary and could be anything you ascribe value to
And as a society who values our current understanding of human rights, we find their lack thereof abominable. Hurr durr le anachronism is only relevant in academic settings, in real life people are more than right to judge different time periods according to their current values.
It’s like I’m on Reddit.
>more than right to judge different time periods according to their current values.
Everyone can have an opinion but you argue like an emotional teenager. Just sayin’.
But she was a terrible empress. She led to the decline of China. Wu Zetian is leagues better.
This. Unfortunately moids haven’t really improved as a whole but trying to judge people that lived 4000 years ago is childish. Look at it this way: if women, throughout all the ages, all cultures and all peoples, were regarded as indeed inferior or having lower intelligence then scrotes wouldn’t have to enforce laws against women because it would be like trying to communicate with an animal of some sort. Instead the actual reality is that moids fear women and know what women are capable of. Just look at Elizabeth Báthory. All of the rumours about her swimming in the blood of virgin girls were politically motivated.
I wonder what prehistoric moids were like, compared to their modern counterparts.
Some people claim patriarchy to be a consequence of the agricultural revolution and the advent of private property. While social capital in hunter-gatherer societies is based directly on your contribution to the common good, civilised societies usually equate social capital (and therefore power) with property and wealth. Ban women from owning property in such a system, and you essentially ban them from holding any kind of social influence whatsoever.
In prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies, that sort of thing would have been impossible. Everyone had to contribute in order for the group as a whole to survive, even the pregnant and nursing. We know from the few remaining modern hunter-gatherers that women gather, fish and hunt smaller animals in order to feed the tribe, same as the men. They are not completely equal, even in the most egalitarian of tribes, but the lives of female hunter-gatherers was likely still far better than those of women in pretty much any other time period until the mid-20th century.
Besides the lack of private property as a catalyst for patriarchy, moids in prehistoric tribes would have had to be social and cooperative in order to not be kicked out by the others. In a tightly-knit tribe of maybe 15 people, acting like a raging psychopath would have been a death sentence.
Interestingly, hunter-gatherer women also tend to have less children overall than civilised women, despite the lack of any kind of birth control (probably due to their diet and high levels of physical exercise). Considering that childbirth has been the number one killer of women from the dawn of mankind until maybe 100 years ago, and still is in some places today, this is quite a significant advantage.
Other than prehistoric hunter-gatherers, I also think that the earliest civilised societies were overall better places for women to live than those that would follow. Women in ancient Mesopotamia (provided they weren't slaves) were able to own and sell land, run businesses, divorce and live independently. Free women in ancient Egypt had similar rights.>>234213
They also had widespread slavery, including slavery of women. Every society is a product of its time and conditions. The morals of a modern industrialised society are not applicable to a society that existed thousands of years ago.>>234252
For most of history, laws were supposed to do the exact opposite of protecting women. The existence of laws and states was what allowed women to be universally excluded from holding social power in the first place. Artificial hierarchies based on property and power never protected women, especially not historically. A women is far less likely to be raped or killed in a small tribe where everyone is needed for survival.
Yes you can. Hunter gatherers had to learn which plants to eat on their own but you have the luxury of guide books and the internet to be 100% certain whatever you are eating is edible. You have lethal weapons that make hunting incredibly more efficient. No one is asking you to move to a cabin in the woods and fend for yourself but if you want to experience "the joy of hunting in gathering" you are perfectly capable.
Whining about wanting to return to monkey while complaining about actually going outside aounds like edgy teenage anarcho-primitist larping. Let me guess, you just read Unabomber Manifesto last week or something?
They probably were like
Ooga booga, me smash rock
Ooga booga, me smash wife
Ooga booga, me rape and take no responsibility
I'm pretty sure they used women like they did cattle, trading them around, giving their women over as gifts and gestures and taking them as war booty from hostile tribes. They would had been orderly and civil, yes, but only to eachother, not to women. The only reason they wouldn't rape a woman would be out of respect for other men, like the father, or the husband/owner, not out of respect for the woman. Prehistoric society is, well… prehistoric. No one really knows because it is not recorded, it is lost to time. But historically that is how it has always been up until relatively recently
tribes that had been relatively isolated from the outside world and remained primitive but eventually studied showed almost all of them were patriarchal in some regard, whether it be the normalization of rape or normal for men to beat their wives or women just treated like breeding machines.
>>234371>All of the rumours about her swimming in the blood of virgin girls were politically motivated
I don't know, nona. Some historians say there were plenty of testimonies supporting the claims. Do you know about the scrote Gilles de Rais? People in the nobility can do pretty fucked up things when they're bored.
>>234502>In his own confession, Gilles testified that “when the said children were dead, he kissed them and those who had the most handsome limbs and heads he held up to admire them, and had their bodies cruelly cut open and took delight at the sight of their inner organs; and very often when the children were dying he sat on their stomachs and took pleasure in seeing them die and laughed”
Typical scrote savage.
In sumeria men were not executed for adultery only women were. In any case who the fuck wants to be part of that kind of society ? Adultery should never be punishable by death its fucking degenerate and backwards.
It's really interesting how they learned to cure olives with brine, so they could be eaten btw! It's all thanks to some person who found olives dropped from cliff shrubs into the Mediterranean sea.
>>234524https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1277&context=jclc>-Adultery among the Babylonians was solely the crime of the wife. The wife, if caught in the act, was punished by strangling, together with her paramour.
It says here that her paramour (lover) also gets executed so clearly men could be punished for it.
The Babylonians arrived almost 2000 years after the Sumerians. Kek wow they really progressed as a culture though didn't they?
The Code of Ur-Nammu states that if a man sleeps (not rape) with the virgin wife of another man he gets the death penalty. Pretty much the same legal system
feet binding is genuinely terrifying. I read somewhere that it was done, in part, to make women more dependant on their husbands by making them disabled.
>>234540>virgin wife has sex>lover dies
Good. Moids are not entitled to sex.
Margaret Theresa of Spain
Weakened due to six pregnancies in six years (which included four living childbirths and two miscarriages) and four months into her seventh pregnancy, Margaret died on 12 March 1673, at the age of 21.
Men were (and still) are SHEER FILTH. I don't care how nice some of them are I don't want to be touched by these vile fucking animals
I would rather ram stakes through their eyes and tongues than ever marry or date one. Or even remotely cater to the disgusting male gaze. History is what they were and still are. History of force breeding with these slobs turns me off to any of them around in modern times. It doesn't matter how attractive they are either. They're always pure cruel indifferent filth. They're not even human to me.
One thing that is so strange about this law is how highly valued virginity is among moids in the Middle East. It is as if they are afraid that women might compare their sexual performance with other males and determine that they are worthless in bed.
>>234619> History is what they were and still are.
This, I don't understand how could a woman willingly enter a relationship with a man knowing that not so long in history he could've either bred you to death starting from your teen years, had a right to beat you or your children (sometimes to death) and had the power to make the state stone you on his behalf. There's practically nothing a man could do that would make me ignore their vile history.
Millions of women died both on the battlefield and in concentration camps during WW2 you moron.
Do not forget the Gulag archipelago.
we can see how it works in africa. ive heard stories where men being naturally strong just force their wives to do all the fucking work - yes even the farming. they just laze around and do nothing except occasionally raping their own daughters
definitely the worst life imaginable
Fun fact: did you know that the burqa, a garment worn by muslim women, originates from Judaism? The whole Middle East is extremely influenced by Jewish misogyny.https://www.newarab.com/opinion/egypt-lawmaker-calls-total-ban-jewish-burqa
>>235074>She added that this part of Jewish law became entrenched in pre-Islamic Arab tribes of the Arabian Peninsula and then spread throughout the Middle East with the Muslim conquests.
Interesting! Judaism is one of the most (if not THE most) hateful religions when it comes to women. There are Jews that seriously think that if a woman is menstruating she can make flowers wither and die by touching them. So bizarre.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29558268/>Narcissistic men that engage in out-of-control extra-marital sex can be challenging to treat when their cultural background reinforces their misogyny and sense of entitlement, as it does among ultra-Orthodox Jewish men. A case study illustrates the challenges for a female clinician helping an unfaithful, married, narcissistic ultra-Orthodox Jewish male refrain from seeing prostitutes. He devalued the approach of his female therapist and the client had to learn that he was not entitled to women's love and respect, but that he needed to earn it by transcending his egocentrism and demonstrating empathy rather than contempt for women.
Not even this, before the "poor marraiges" of the 19th and 20th centuries, most people were slaves. Like prior to the US revolution roughly 90% of human beings in the old world were de facto owned as property by nobles, with only some notable exceptions such as Japan.
Whoops, even in Japan people were serfs, they just abolished outright slavery, even though the few had few practical differences..
Women in Japan had a really shitty existence during medieval times.
>>235078>hate women>sucks on bleeding baby penis
jews are closet gays
>>235228https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6047840/>The study also revealed that 24% of high-functioning individuals with ASD engaged in paraphilic sexual fantasies or behaviors including classic presentations of paraphilic disorder such as pedophilia, voyeurism, and sadomasochism>Silva et al. made an association between ASD and sexual serial homicidal behavior. Many sexual serial killers have a high prevalence of deconstructive paraphilia.>This case details the history of an 18-year-old Caucasian male, with a past psychiatric history of ASD>These fantasies included being aroused by "anthropomorphic animal characters" and were self-described as "furry". He had a self-reported history of having a violent sexual fantasy in which he "had sex with a girl and then cut off her head."
I can guarantee that almost all nasty and vile scrotes thoughout history were autistic. There is a clear tendency for autistic moids to be mentally deranged to the point of doing anything.
The "Jewish burqa" they reference is only worn by a sect of ~100 people out of 15 million Jews.
Yeah, but Judaism has influenced Islam a lot. In Islam it is forbidden to have idols because it is considered idolatry and that is also a Jewish custom that got incorporated into Islamic societies because of Jewish converts.
Everyone should be a Jain
What other religion knew about the existence of micro organisms, time, matter, the universe and space thousands of years ago? Jainism is science.
Spread this post far and widehttps://watchdominion.org/
Sometimes I wish that autism would lead to autodestruction. Genghis Khan probably was an ultra autist.
Or Ivan the Terrible. Super sperg deluxe.
Anyone who says women had it easier in the past is a moron. To be honest…if you could be a housewife during the 19th century then your life was pretty much secure and comfortable but on the other hand you couldn't vote.
That probably is the only benefit of being a woman back in the days. Moids do all the work while you sit on your ass.
You'd have to do even harder, more disgusting and unpaid work, idiot. You'd live in society where you cheating on a scrote is worse than actual bad things. How retarded you have to be to not realize that living like a loyal dog is humiliating?
Woah, calm down. No need to be so anal-retentive about everything.
And scrotes had to obey their monarch/emperor/leader etc. There is always a hierarchy, nona.
I'm talking about relationship loyalty and being a virgin. Moids shouldn't have that guaranteed in a woman.
I think that moid conduct was different back then. They weren't exactly saints but more akin to gentlemen and had some kind of manners. Nowadays all you see are dude bro douches that flaunt their money and success like it's a personality trait.
This. Scrotes are boring today. Everyone of them wants to be Tony Montana.
Any time before now.
Pretending like they were any better ever is just delusional.
They were just as cringly and larpy as they are now.
They literally killed themselves to mimic a book character.
They acted like that (on paper) because they had guaranteed virgin child brides by their community. Now they don't, so they're getting neurotic. But not all moids are from redpill hivemind, so you can easily find a provider with soul who additionally doesn't have pedophilic standards.
You have only the idea of previous moids from movies directed in recent decades and shit created by women how they wish it was, only using aesthetics and not facts.
what are some accounts that are particularly horrific?
But killing themselves to mimic a book character is based, moids don't do cool shit like that anymore
True, but scrotes not controlling their emotions and neuroticism is even worse.
Anyone who has read "The Romance of the Rose" knows that chivalric behavior was the norm during medieval times. Moids had dignity at one point but then it got subverted by renaissance ideas later on. Romance died a tragic death.
Good god you sound sheltered and ignorant beyond belief. How did you remain that way for so long???
>>236673>Anyone who has read "The Romance of the Rose" knows that chivalric behavior was the norm during medieval times
Anyone who has read "Harry Potter", knows that there is a secret society of mages living in the UK and they had a wizarding war in the 90s.
Nona, if you're going to shitpost about a subject you have no insight into then please don't post generic fedora tier Reddit responses. Believe it or not but Le Roman de la Rose is a good example as to why cultural influences can degrade a society over time. I doubt you would prefer to be treated as a sack of potatoes (scrotes grabbing your ass or sending you dick pics 24/7) instead of actually experiencing a moid putting in some effort in courting you platonically.
We all hate scrotes here so I'm just pointing out the obvious.
The Romance of the Rose had a huge cultural impact both inside of France and outside of it. It influenced writers hundreds of years afterwards so I beg to differ. It hardly can be considered fringe literature.
i can't believe i have to say this but
FICTION IS NOT REAL LIFE
FICTION IS MADE UP
holy shit, are you like 8 year old? do you think modern love burgers with Dominant Alpha Male Billionaire courting reader's self-insert character reflect reality in any way whatsoever?
Nothing you just posted made any sense.
Okay, you're actually scaring me. Go read a history book. Go outside. Jesus.
NTA but please get out lmao. Go back to 5th grade and get your head out of your deranged 19 yo steeply uneducated ass.
I like juvenile fantasy from time to time as much as the next nona but good grief
I don't even think it's real, I think we're just getting trolled.
They shoot up shopping malls because they think they're the Jokar.
The plot is a means of conveying a vast mass of encyclopaedic information and opinions on a great variety of contemporary topics. Even if you don't like the poem (or scrotes) it is undisputably a document of the time it was written in so to say that it doesn't represent the medieval mindset is false.
Do you want the bitter truth? This is the best they've been. For all the talk of how gentlemanly men of the past were, they treated us like objects. Even the kind of men who you think would have the social pressure to act kind towards us would still be vile sexist pigs who would literally think that women had the same amount of intelligence as a sheep. They used to think you shouldn't be able to vote because, in addition to a whole host of other reasons, they believed that you would be too easy to manipulate.
Don't get me wrong, things aren't good. They're still fucking terrible. But they would have been so much fucking worse.
>>236697>FICTION IS NOT REAL LIFE
Another nona posted that scrotes started killing themselves to emulate Werther who is a character in a book. Usually when you talk about literature it is about the themes that are brought up. Contemporary issues and subjects are woven into the story itself and can have profound relatability. To dismiss everything as fiction doesn't mean anyting because people aren't as rational as you might think.
You're absolutely right but scrotes are still larpers.
You can't prove an idiot they are indeed an idiot because they can't comprehend your explanation. I give up.
>>235078>think women are whores>buy sexual favours from prostitutes
Jewish scrotes must be on another level of hypocrisy.
Judaism has influenced literally every abrahamic religion a lot, given it's the first abrahamic religion - Christians and Muslims all worship the Jewish god.
While all religions serve as a """moral""" justification for patriarchal control, I think it's disingenuous to say that Judaism is somehow especially worse than others, especially when it's basically integrated into the religion that it'll change with the times due to their focus on oral traditions. Plus unlike every other religion I've read about, the succession comes from the mother - a jewish father with a gentile mother makes a gentile child, while a jewish mother makes a jewish child. Does this make up for all the other misogynist traits? No, obviously not, but at least they don't have the obsession with 'male heirs' common in moids to this day
The fact that Jewishness comes from the mother is about excluding gentiles from their ranks. There is a story in the Old Testament about it where Jewish men married non-Jewish women.
Books, believe it or not, can affect people mentally so your own argument is self-defeating.
I think scrotes nowadays are better than before. Unfortunately I would like more chivalry in this day and age but you can't get everything you wish for.
Doesn't the absence of chivalry today contradict your claim that yesteryear's scrotes are inferior?
Chivalry to me is a manifestation of systemic misogyny
Also due to lack of medical knowledge it wasn't uncommon for a woman to be repeatedly raped into pregnancy then die during childbirth. As for OP, now is the best time to be a woman simply because we can see through moids true nature and are no longer obligated to to be their live in slaves. It's funny seeing scrotes being so fragile about losing slavemaster status that they invent their own sad little movements over it instead of just living their lives out.
I doubt you can call it misogyny. Genuine affection does exist and has existed in the past unless you have this weird notion of always looking at the world as some dystopian nightmare where everyone is just faking every emotion and reaction just to play mind games. What I do believe, on the other hand, is that moids tended to be overprotective and treat women as frail creatures that should be watched and surveilled because they can't be held responsible for their actions and because women were seen as on the same level as children. Compare Middle Eastern medieval times and Europe. Chivalry was non-existent in the Islamic world in terms of wooing a woman.
It's not exactly misogyny but it's related. It's better now. There are many men now who are raised to see women as human beings and equals. Past conditions are unknown or incomprehensible to them as well so they think nothing of it. Just because not considering women to be children or possessions to protect and look after is removed by this doesn't mean it's worse overall. Yes it's probably worse for romance and especially marriage. It's only more conservative men who impose certain expectations on themselves who are most suitable. But that also means they may impose expectations on you, and be at odds about it. As well as ultimately considering you their possession or wouldbe possession, no matter how respectful, supportive, romantic, etc. It is better to not be thought of as a lesser other by society even if it means a lack of treatment based on it.
"Misogyny" in the sense of being prejudiced and infantilising women, yes. And it's nothing to want back. More careful historical studies suggest knightly chivalry was largely applied only in myth and legend.
One of the most chivalrous acts in modern times was men letting women board the Titanic lifeboats. And it was used as a club to beat the feminist movement with. Some feminists at the time even were annoyed at how women just let themselves be shepherded onto the lifeboats.
example of attitudes i was going to posthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Owl_and_the_Nightingale>The Owl and the Nightingale is a twelfth- or thirteenth-century Middle English poem detailing a debate between an owl and a nightingale as overheard by the poem's narrator. It is the earliest example in Middle English of a literary form known as debate poetry (or verse contest).
being treasure is a desirable condition for me personally. Some men even go to the next step by throwing their life away just for you. I mean that is not really tied to mysogyny but more to love and feelings.
>>238159>in myth and legend
I don't mean to be rude but that's just speculation.
It's more like the other way round. The idea that knights were always, or even usually, chivalrous is speculation. Most instances of chivalric behaviour comes from stories like King Arthur. There are specific instances of chivalric knights like Richard the Lionheart. But actual historical records show that the period had it's share of knights raiding, pillaging, slavery and so on, which caused a lot of death and misery for peasants. In itself we can see many aspects of chivalry were not upheld. For example knights are supposed to have no love of material wealth, yet they often hoarded immense wealth from their serfs (or from pillaging) in the form of castles, tapestry, jewellery, armor, etc. Often this was even sanctioned because they had a very twisted morality. It's quite messed up in that sometimes even rape was OK
>His code of knightly honour maintained that a knight cannot rape a woman travelling alone, but a knight who fights and defeats a woman's male escort 'would be able to have his will of her without incurring any shame or reproach'. (Stolen Women in Medieval England)
There was extensive white washing of knightly behaviour after the collapse of the feudal era. Eventually chivalry became known largely for it's treatment of women. But historical reality suggests at best chivalry was occasionally adhered to, in ways very different to what modern people think.
>>238175https://www.bl.uk/medieval-literature/articles/love-and-chivalry-in-the-middle-ages>For the nobility, almost all marriages were arranged by the couple’s families, often when the bride and groom were no more than children. But the Church insisted that the sacrament of marriage was only valid with the full, willing consent of both husband and wife. So we can see another cultural purpose to this literature, which is full of love at first sight, love as recognition of beauty and status which are always combined with virtue and loyalty.
It's not whitewashed at all. Reality isn't black and white, nona.
If you read the background you'll see it almost always refers to literature as its sources, not historical records. It seems to be a paper on literature of chivalry.
Your argument is about how chivalry has to be practiced flawlessly when, like I said, reality isn't black and white. You dismiss chivalry as mythic because you have this idea that you need 100% empirical verification for something to be historically true. That's an autistic standard of success rate.
>>238157https://origins.osu.edu/review/knighthood-it-was-not-we-wish-it-were?language_content_entity=en>Moreover, as chivalry became more stylized, women were increasingly restricted in their behavior because any deviation from the chivalric ideal of the passive, beautiful female was gradually more unacceptable. The higher the pedestal, it seems, the harder the fall.
I agree with what you said about the frail creature that has to be surveilled because essentially that was the ideal woman. Moid chivalry only extended to women that were the embodiment of the fair maiden.
I prefer the idea of female chivalry, which isn't talked about much but referenced throughout history.
Say what you will about St. Olga, but she sure loved her man. Nothing more chivalrous than murdering hundreds of men for them :)
She wanted revenge for the death of her husband. Burning people alive is pretty hardcore.
I wonder if society would benefit from scrotes turning down Twitch streamers that flaunt their boobs and instead go for ‘maidens’, so to speak. Everything is oversexualized to the point of being ridiculous.
>Still … women get executed for adultery, while men got a slap on the wrist fine ???
>Deuteronomy 22:22 - If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.
This is a misconception. Both were meant to be put to death, also, Fornication is out of wedlock, adultery is cheating. It's reasonable to say that cheaters should be put to death regardless.
A modern day maiden would be to have actual standards. It would mean that moids have to clean up their acts and put some effort in being real human beings and not just looking for boobs and butts everywhere on the Internet.
I wonder how often it was enforced. Jewish society was extremely patriarchal and there are numerous exceptions for men in the Talmud.
I read about how they allowed sex with minors back then and I don't think there is any other culture on this planet that would condone that 3 year old girls have sex with adult men.https://www.sefaria.org/Ketubot.11b?lang=bi>An adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old has done nothing, as intercourse with a girl less than three years old is tantamount to poking a finger into the eye.https://www.sefaria.org/Yevamot.57b?lang=bi>A girl three years and one day old can be betrothed via sexual intercourse
Patriarchy on steroids.
no this is characteristically talmudic logic
Scrotes have never been good to anyone, not even to each other
Do you know who Lina Medina is? She is the youngest mother recorded in modern times because she had been raped and gave birth when she was 5 years old. She was an anomaly because of precocious puberty. There is no actual purpose for being a mother at that age and when you compare that with religious authority saying it is okay for Jewish men to have sex with 3 year olds, most of whom can't possibly enter puberty that early, it becomes obvious the culture itself is perpetuated by sinister pedophiles that are severely fucked in the head.
Do you think the men who fought in the frontlines in ww1 "loved" war? Im pretty sure most people hate it.
I would say it has nothing to do with race. Islam also promotes pedophilia through child marriages and it is still a problem today in many muslim countries. Calling it racebait is to avoid the issue.
I think the biggest suffering was among the women that had to see their husbands and sons die and then be left alone because some moid ruler decided that war was necessary.
Am I wrong? Moids don't have the same level of empathy for others so I doubt they would suffer the same way women do.
if we are going to talk about chivalry we can't forget joan of arc
Suffering? What are you blabbering on about? I would feel no greater joy than in that moment I learned that more XYs would no longer terrorize and be a blight on the world.
I dunno read All Quiet on the Western Front. But yeah women suffer through war as well. And plenty of women were and are involved in fighting; not so much in the first world war though. >>238888
But in wartime they literally are terrorizing, and then they return home and are homeless or expats so what’s the point
Joan of Arc was more chivalrous than any moid.
And she was probably the most famous tomboy ever.
Was there a place and time, somewhere being born a woman wasn't purgatory, hell?
It's weird how you never hear about female rulers to the same extent as male ones. Scrote historians are biased.
And the massed strategic bombing on urban centres, the starvation and lack of supplies in many fronts, and the silly little scrote soldiers who had very funny ideas about the value of human life and female consent in their captured territories - and guns.
>>236070>The king has declared war on France for the 273rd time due to disputes over a piece of land the size of your backyard>Lord Bartholomew van Woothenhorten has levied every male in his territory, your spouse included>Looks like while hubby dearest dies of dysentery for the glory and honor of the King and his buddies, you'll have to tend to both the needs of your land before industrialisation and its benefits, and your family of 7 children - or face starvation.>Oh, and you're pregnant>Hopefully this one survives to the age of 5
Does anyone else remember reading about all those old-timey family poisoners who kill 8 husbands in a row and all their kids? The more time passes the more I understand them. Family life sucks enough today, but at least it's easy to live on your own free of men and children. Back then you'd have no choice but to get married and be perpetually pregnant and stuck with a bunch of brats who would all be sick and have nothing to entertain them but being devils to you and each other. And your husband would be some illiterate alcoholic who expects sex all the time because there's nothing else to do, and he'd probably be fat and gross because there are no gyms or self care products and he has no sense of hygiene. You'd be lucky if he even bathes once a week. Imagine the smell.
true. well apart from the fat thing, moids didnt have access to fast food and usually the types ur mentioning had to do manual labour, so they were just wirey gross alcohol heads
have you seen pictures of old timey men? they were still fat. they may not have been eating fast food, but they still had shitty diets. there were even fat clubs picrel
Victorian food, hell most older diets were really insanely unhealthy. Everything soaked in butter. Eating nothing but slabs of fat and biscuits for lunch (pioneers)
People actually had a very limited concept of nutrition. Go read some 19th century recipes and you will be gobsmackdd
Nona, I think she means housewives. Objectively speaking, women didn't have to engage in hard manual labor during the 1940's.
Except for laundering clothes, rugs and sheets, which involves hours of hard, vigorous churning, scrubbing, hauling and whacking. Also hours of bulk food preparation, involving manual handling of bulk condiments and preservatives, before the actual cooking could begin, involving managing multiple fires and their bulk ashes. Oh, and vigorously scrubbing above your head on every surface because lamps left atrocious soot stains on the walls and ceilings. Can't forget the fact that all this required buckets upon buckets upon buckets of water, all drawn and hauled from stiff pumps a distance from the house. Yeah, no manual labor at all…
NTA but im sure domestic violence, marital rape and having 5 kids to look after is more than equivalent.
I dont want to be mean but it feels like you're moidposting rn.
comparing moids with women is wrong too because it's obvious we're not the same and don't have the same abilities
Childbirth and coal mining are not comparable.
i feel bad for them because their religion is so messed up
Most men performed exhausting labour in hazardous conditions for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, and finished their days with drinking, games and sex. Women performed difficult labour in unsafe conditions for 10 hours a day, 7 days a week and finished their days with a glass of sherry and servicing their husbands. You're right. Apples and oranges. >>249446
Interesting statistic: In the same period where <3 in 1000 men died due to mining accidents and related conditions, >8 in 1000 women died due to childbirth and related conditions.
try coal mining while pregnant
I dunno, I just can't get past how easy it is for moids to access the craziest porn. It mindbreaks them. I don't think moids are better now than they were, but it is different. Chivalry doesn't exist because males are brainwashed by other males to think that being chivalrous will get them accused of rape. I also think males are intimidated by women because they witness how capable women actually are, in school for example. They are becoming increasingly aware that they are useless and not le great logical protectors they were taught they are. They cope with porn.
Men are becoming less chivalrous partially because of those latent homosexual manosphere guys like fresh n fit or Andrew Tate.
As Western men turn away from Christianity, they will adopt a pastiche of Roman and Greek culture, which includes the horrific misogyny from that period. As much as Christianity can lead to male chauvinism, at least it was better than what can before (or after) it.
Jesus you post like a biased and ignorant moid. Greek and Roman civilization were not the only ones to precede xtianity.
Homosexual?? Were you born on the fucking moon? They're as extreme rightwing and toxic masculine as they come. All these posts reek of dumbshit psyop moid
Women would never get into the porn industry if there wasn't money involved. I read about a mom who started doing Onlyfans and became wealthy but all her friends ostracized her. She claims it was worth it but I don't believe her.
sounds like when the village prostitute got shunned by everyone during medieval times
i feel bad for women who get tricked by moids to do porn for money because they all regret it later in life when they're older
There are numerous passages in the Bible that promote slavery. I don't think Christianity has the moral high ground here when talking about equality.
Don't forget about Deuteronomy 22:29 and Exodus 21:7. Women had to marry their rapists and daughters were sold like slaves because they were considered to be property.
>>250204>marry a rapist
so basically the average scrote
they're not really tricked, they can consent to these things. they are adults, they arent forced, they just want money. Which is fine, but they dont invest it construct a fixed income for the long term
To be fair: the old and new testament has so much wacky shit in them that you can't possibly take them seriously. https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Ezekiel%204%3A12>And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man in their sight
The misogynistic scrote god wanted his followers to eat shit bread. To me that sounds like mental illness manifesting itself.
In context it's about rationing for war and spreading your resources thin by using dung as fuel for the fire. Still not hygienic but the Hebrews were having a rough time.
Most religious texts are weird if you don't look at the historical context. I hate people who use them to justify misogyny and racism when the history surrounding them is more important. Leviticus is a big one, Christians have always held the belief that Jesus superseded the old Jewish beliefs and Jewish people themselves would tell you that the Mosaic Covenant is oftimes misinterpreted by the lay person. Pulling ancient out of context quotes to justify beating your wife is stupid.
People have the ability to choose to follow whatever set of religious docterine they believe but most of the important broad strokes of each major world religions boils down to treating others with dignity and respect. If you can't follow that maybe you need to rexamine your relationship to your chosen faith.
It's about the dick tip tax which basically seals the covenant. For some reason there was a substitute ritual performed
>>250925>using dung as fuel
It says the bread itself should be made of human poo, not used as fuel. "Bake with" refers to using ingredients. Other translations say it should be used as fuel but not that one.>>250931
It sounds more like foreskin blood magic. If your god can be persuaded into not killing you by touching your feet with a piece of penis skin it has to be the most hilarious religion out there.
You have to put this in a broader perspective. It is based on the belief that their followers have been chosen by the one and only true powerful God who for example overpowered the most dominant deities of their enemies like the egyptians and no matter what the chosen ones do this choice can't be undone. If you read the torah or the old testament as a whole you will notice how the chosen ones act against God's will over and over again and still their bond with God will never break. So this all powerful being can't do anything in his power to break away from the chosen ones. It's pretty narcissistic to receive such a level of attention.
obsessing over foreskins has to be the most bizarre moid derangement
Those african tribes you're talking about aren't hunter gatherers.
you know scrotes think their dicks are important when a god cowers in fear because it sees some mutilated flesh
Is this the part where I try to explain that it isn't a matter of fear and the Israelites chopped it off because it was an important part of themselves they were sacrificing? It's a covenant, a promise to dedicate themselves, it isn't supposed to be easy.
A bunch of fat MRA activists throw a tizzy over this and use it as an example of how "oppressed" they are and it's laughable every time, nowhere near as nasty as the female genital mutilation that occurs in Islamic practices. Though circumcision itself is probably outdated for most non-Jewish people? I don't have a dick, don't know about health benefits. >>234023
1920s is when they dressed the best, I'd say 1960-1980s is a good period of time where most men we're forward thinking without the frat house mentality of the 90s.
Modern times has a lot of good people who a more informed about social injustices but the radicals on both sides are so much more pronounced and crazy I hesitate to consider it the best.
The joke is that an almighty creator, with the power to destroy anything in this universe, the maker of planets and stars who also created humans, somehow is so deeply invested in a tiny shred of cock skin that you can stop his wrath with it.
It's so retarded it's funny.
This was when the ancient Israelites were wandering in the desert for 40 years after fleeing Egypt with unreliable access to clean water, just from a practical standpoint they should probably cut it off if they can't clean that area for 40 years
now we know god's kryptonite: foreskins
scrotes are only good if they are
mindful, take care of others,
and perform to the best of their ability
there is no other option for scrotes
Absolutely horrific. Everything from wife beating to silicone tits shilling.
Wife beating is in every decade though I most heavily associate it with the 40s and 50s, at least the hippie movement of the 60s and 70s helped a new generation of politically minded youth pave the ways for new waves of feminism and lgb acceptance.
Which decade would you pick,
Old Testament law does not apply to Christians. New Covenant.>>250046
Well, obviously, but the post is about what models of behaviour exist which make men at least civilized. Which pre Christian civilizations were better for women, exactly? And don't say Minoan please.
The 60s to 80s were easily the point where men were worst nona. So much horrible creepy shit during that era, huge push by pedophiles too to make their acts legal. Terrible time.
>>251083>Which decade would you pick
Pre-civilization. When there was female fertility worship.
>>251087>Ferility worship >Basically ammount to orgies and brothels
Gross, I'd rather not be used as a fuck toy in the name of some sex goddess.
I meant last 100 years.>>251086
Again I feel it's has some strides socially that is lost in the 2000s and way better than the turn of the century sexism that was commonplace where it took a war to even get women working along-side men. There are snakes in every decade, pedophilla is still a rampant issue made trival by online communication I don't know how you can say it was worse back then.
>>251089>Basically ammount to orgies and brothels
nona, you know that isn't true
I actually did. What are their practices like then? Skimming wikipedia I see animal sacrifice and "phallic worship" which I'm reading as orgies.
Is there a specific goddess who's adherents treated women particularly well?
>>251287https://jarm.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/jarm/article/download/4952/4146/4820>Inanna-Ishtar"…was the most important female deity in Mesopotamia in all periods" (Bienkowski and Millard, 2000: 156), and her origins go back deep into pre-history. From around 3000 BCE, the beginning of history in Sumeria, Inanna wielded immense power, but in a male-dominated pantheon. Her labelling as a fertility goddess has tended to obscure her complex nature. Alone or jointly with a male god, she controlled a number of elements, both natural and cultural, that were important to Sumerian society, among them, storms and rains, the harvest storehouse, warfare, morning and evening stars, and sexual love, including prostitution (Jacobsen, 1976:135-139). She also controlled the me, "the gifts [or attributes] of civilization" (Williams-Forte, 1983: 176). In addition, Inanna was central to maintaining the fertility and prosperity of the land, and, in connection with its maintenance, she conferred the right of sovereignty on Mesopotamian monarchs (Stuckey,2001: 94-95; Fryrner-Kensky, 1992: 27). Kingship was one of the me (Wolkstein and Kramer, 1983: 16).
Isn't that goddess known for the "sacred" prostitution in her temples. Sounds like religious sex trafficking to me.
Female priestesses had to be celibate so I doubt they were prostitutes.
>>251290>She also controlled the me, "the gifts [or attributes] of civilization"
lmao, scrotes can't have a proper society by themselves without women showing them how
moids overestimate their own importance as purveyors of culture
Scrotes were best during Antiquity. Everyone was running around naked and contemplating useless shit.
>>251366https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/>The central distinction in ancient Greek sexual relations was between taking an active or insertive role, versus a passive or penetrated one. The passive role was acceptable only for inferiors, such as women, slaves, or male youths who were not yet citizens. Hence the cultural ideal of a same-sex relationship was between an older man, probably in his 20s or 30s, known as the erastes, and a boy whose beard had not yet begun to grow, the eromenos or paidika. In this relationship there was courtship ritual, involving gifts (such as a rooster), and other norms. The erastes had to show that he had nobler interests in the boy, rather than a purely sexual concern. The boy was not to submit too easily, and if pursued by more than one man, was to show discretion and pick the more noble one. There is also evidence that penetration was often avoided by having the erastes face his beloved and place his penis between the thighs of the eromenos, which is known as intercrural sex.
Greek moids were very weird. Penis between the thighs? LOL
"The hippy movement" did not make anyone politically minded.
The hippy movement was where spoiled college-age kids existed unproductively off of their parents money until they ran out of it, usually even faster than the boomers to follow.
The feminists of the 60s would have told you that hippies were dumb and smelly same as the conservatives would have.
Once upon a time, raccoon-sized and gecko-sized moids coexisted peacefully with females.
i wonder why scrotes obsess over greek society in those days? it was full of pederasts and yet it's supposed to be the cradle of the "civilized" world
Everything is a competition in the mind of the moid. Biggest house, most amount of money, fastest car, the most expensive shoes etc. Same thing with civilization. Autistic need to wave his dick in the face of another scrote.
what kind of stupid idea is this?! why not ask for a handjob? moids are hilarious
Scrotes will put their dicks in anything. Between a pair of tits, feet, thighs, armpit or any other body part. They even go so far as to put their genitals inside of fruits or animals. It's quite hard to imagine what compels the average moid to be as disgusting as he is or why his whole existence revolves around his penis.
all wars are penis wars because scrotes want to fuck the world
Scrotes were better during the 1930’s. Not because of all the misogyny but because there were no manchildren back then. The youth movements/cultures during the 1960’s have been awful for moids.
the LSD phase of the 1960's was a big social junkie experiment
The 1960's were pretty messed up. This scrote (Allen Ginsberg) is probably one of the more disturbed ones that voiced his opinions on a number of topics.
michel foucault would be proud
Why is it always moids that want to remove the age of consent completely? You never see female pedophiles advocating for sex with children because they know it's wrong while scrotes want everyone to have the "right" to fuck kids. We need a 9mm solution to the child sex question.
I'm actually terrified that Michel Foucault wanted to abolish the age of consent so scrotes could have sex with infants (yes, it's true, look it up. Literal toddlers).
>hurr bro, she's pretty much a woman at age 6, why u hate durr
Scrotes in France defended a moid who had sex with a six year old girl. That should tell you all you need to know.
Moids showing their true colors.
what makes scrotes attracted to childish features? the only reason has to be mental illness
sadism, lust for power. children, especially girls, are inherently powerless. the more helpless you appear the more arousing it is to these monsters.
That moid gives me some creepy John Money vibes.
Because feminism only became a big thing with democracy, first you allow women to vote, then you support them, guaranteed 50%+ of the votes.
john money was worse because he was also a tranny enabler
He was interviewed by some pedo journal and said that if a 10 year old boy is attracted to a man in his 20’s or 30’s then it’s not pathological.
I hate scrotes so much it’s unreal.