As I noted the other day, the latest incarnation of ugly feminism is women claiming to have dicks. The BBC has jumped on this trend with an article titled Big D*ck Energy: one woman’s guide to getting it
Challenging this ever more open rebellion by women is terrifying to Conservative Christians, who instead respond to women celebrating their (imagined) big dicks by asking:
What happened to our men that our women are forced to have such big dicks?
Related:
- Fathers are jokes.
- Step up, so they don’t have to (part 1).
- Step up, so they don’t have to (part 2).
- Christian goddess worship; we are not worthy!
- Maybe in a thousand years.
H/T: S. Chan & Jones
Abdication of our responsibility leads to this rebellion. And we have rebellion everywhere
I’m doing my part.
Stay single my friends. These wimminz DESERVE nothing less.
Re the video:
It is not true that God held Adam responsible for Eve’s sin. God held Eve responsible for her sin (eating, disobedience) and Adam responsible for his (listening to and following Eve instead of listening to and following God).
It’s not men’s fault that women are getting knocked up and then aborting their pregnancies. Men’s fornication is on men who fornicate; but women’s fornication and murder is on the women committing those sins.
We can’t have a world or social system or marital model where men are responsible for their own conduct AND for women’s conduct yet have no authority; and women are responsible for nothing and have all the authority. That just won’t work.
Having a big dick implies both authority to use that big dick and the responsibility for how said big dick is used.
But women want all the authority that goes with having a big dick (i.e. being a man) but none of the responsibility. “Let me do whatever the Big Boys do, but I’m not responsible for anything I do! You can’t make me take responsibility! That’s not fair! I might have a big dick but I’m still a girl, so you can’t hit me! Don’t Hit Me I’m A Girl (but I have a big dick)!”
“We can’t have a world or social system or marital model where men are responsible for their own conduct AND for women’s conduct yet have no authority; and women are responsible for nothing and have all the authority. That just won’t work.”
Hey man, you need to go read Doug Wilson, he’ll set you straight, everything is the man’s fault. Don’t you know the man is the captain of the ship?
Pingback: What happened to our men that our women are forced to have such big dicks? | @the_arv
Decries machismo while talking like a woman.
Says men need to lead and provide; as if most men don’t go to work every day.
Tradcuck.
I bet if you dug into the details you’d find he actually means in practice: servant-lead and man up and marry those sluts.
That neckbeard in the video is a good example of how the most precisely anti-male laws came into being through cuckservative efforts.
The current CS laws are extremely punitive, and reflect the cuckservative belief that abortion only happens because the man MADE the woman do it. Hence, they believe the way to stop abortions is to punish the man.
Always remember : It takes a cuckservative to destroy the family.
In Sweden, joint custody is assumed, so there is no forced, massive wealth transfer at gunpoint. ‘Joint custody’ is actually what you would expect secular lefties to invent. The weirdest, most brutal, and most precise misandric laws against husbands and fathers could only arise from cuckservatives.
Speaking of women behaving badly, I was listening to this discussion on dangerous personalities…
and I thought of Dalrock’s prior posts about churchian marriage councillors recommending women break things and throw tantrums to get their way. They are literally teaching women to engage in cluster b psychotic behaviour.
“We have to start honoring women again”
So *that’s* what society has been doing wrong all this time – not honoring women enough. I am so glad he cleared that up for us.
Dear Dalrock, and dear community in the comments, a read for thee.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6004239/High-flying-career-women-refusing-marry-despite-struggling-Mr-Right.html
All these women talking about Big Dick Energy just revitalized the entire psychoanalytic field.
Re the video again –
Abortion is legal because of the loss of masculine and feminine.
It’s men’s fault that men are not masculine. It’s men’s fault that women are not feminine.
Women are not at fault for anything. Women are not to be judged. Women are not to be held to any standards. Women are not to be held responsible for fornicating with men. Women are not to be held responsible for fornicating with men and then getting pregnant. Women are not responsible for their decisions to abort their illegitimate pregnancies.
If a woman fornicates, gets pregnant and then has an abortion, it is a man’s fault – first for tricking and duping her into sex; and then for forcing her to make all the decisions like whether to keep the baby or abort. It is always a man’s fault.
As to the posted video, physiognomy is real.
White-Knighting, pedestalizing doofus bleats about masculinity while trying to look hip and vaguely effeminate, with elevator-grade-processed-pseudo-jazz music underneath his fact-free monologue.
When did Babylon Bee start making vids?
Anon,
Sweden is doing so well these days. Importing lots of muslims is not helping them either. I agree that the modern child support model is very broken, but substituting another broken system is not the answer either.
> It’s not men’s fault that women are getting knocked up and then aborting their pregnancies. Men’s fornication is on men who fornicate; but women’s fornication and murder is on the women committing those sins.
However, it is men’s fault that we tolerate these systems, especially in allowing abortionists to legally operate.
It may be a bigger problem than any individual man can tackle alone, but it is our collective responsibility.
Here are some thoughts from St. Jerome on women’s accountability for their actions: “Some women, when they have sensed that they conceived through crime, exercise the poisons of abortion, and frequently they themselves also having died are brought to the lower world as defendants against three accusations: murderers of themselves, adulterers against Christ, and killers of offspring not yet born.” (Letter 22.13).
Evangelicals have higher divorce rates than society at large.
You need to read Rachel Held Evans
She makes a point of pointing out the absurdity of gender roles and the ignorance of science
All of you guys saying things like Honeycomb are laughable
“I’m doing my part.
Stay single my friends. These wimminz DESERVE nothing less.”
You are staying single because women don’t want you
The first instance of this meme that I can think of is in the film “G.I. Jane”.
It’s one of the funniest fantasies I ever saw outside a Mel Brooks movie.
But, to the sort of man who wants to posture as the Only Godly Man in the Room, it wasn’t funny. To them It was the heart’s cry from a woman who was forced to take up arms because combat, like roofing, is just “another job American men won’t do anymore”. It may have appeared to us losers that she was forcing her way in for no reason but outsized arrogance and derangement, but don’t let your lying eyes fool you! Godly Men know that SEALS are too busy escorting their playthings to abortion clinics to actually do their jobs anymore. G.I. Jane is a celluloid Deborah when you really think about it.
As for the content of the video: Everything is carefully calibrated to make sure that whatever he says cannot be construed as having said women should be obedient to the fathers and later their husbands. Women can follow when they want, but they are never to actually submit and obey.
Greg Bluster sez ..
From my perspective .. Almost ALL American Wimminz are 500 pounds over-weight .. 400 pounds of that is in Bad Attitude.
Feel free to continue to Cuck yourself into destruction.
Men and women received difference consequences from God for their sin…however Adam was held responsible for sin and death entering into the world.
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. Romans 5:12
However the flip side is a man is also responsible for our salvation.
But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many! Romans 5:15
http://thermidormag.com/the-whore-enthroned/
“We have made clear on numerous occasions that the male and female spirit are bifurcated along lines of virtue. For the man, the virtues of the warrior and the priest. For the woman, the virtues of the lover and the mother. Notice that all four of these virtues has a black mirror, an inversion that represents its nadir. For the man, the evils of the coward and the hedonist. For the woman, the evils of the adulterer and the child-killer. These represent the explicit rejections of the virtues attainable to men and women.
It is worth noting that as with the virtues, the vices for men are independent of the opposite sex, while the vices for women are dependent on the opposite sex. A man can be a hedonist when he seeks endless pleasure in food, drink, drugs, gluttony, violence, or any number of activities that do not require women, even while sexual vices are common. A woman however cannot commit adultery except with a man (lesbianism is not considered to be real sexuality in this context). Similarly, the man can demonstrably be a coward independent of women, when he is on the battlefield, even while submission to his wife is a form of cowardice. A woman however, cannot kill her child unless she is given that child by a man.
If you’ve ever wondered why religions tend to speak more harshly about the adultery of women, this is the reason. Not ‘sexism’ of the infantile kind that is proposed by scholars today, but an understanding of how nakedly evil adultery is in women. The significance of being a child-killer is also underlined by the fact that while murders, in general, are usually committed by men, the one subset of murders in which women routinely supersede men, is the murder of children in the primary years of care (this does not factor in abortion).
Civilization exists to punish cowards, hedonists, adulterers, and child-killers. If these necrotic influences are unchained, they corrupt the hearts of men and speed society to its quick destruction. The numeric account of the death of civilizations is wholly inadequate, for it is quality which has reign over quantity in every sphere that is not the perverted mind of the Modern. Men are in every case the lawgivers and prime movers of society. Due to dependence, they not only decide upon the restraints of their vices but upon those of womankind as well.
Support for abortion is de facto support for the sexual freedom of women. There is no getting around this point, for when a child is killed, the mother is free from the responsibility of having to actually be a mother. Regardless of her reasoning, the result is that her sexual activities pass without consequence. The hypocrisy of the modern ‘pro-life’ movement is that it opposes abortion while being completely unwilling to make any statement regarding sexual freedom.”
AnonS sez ..
https://www.yourtango.com/2018315613/i-regret-having-my-child-because-i-miss-life-i-could-have-had
“Greg Belser”
Evangelicals have higher divorce rates than society at large.
Do you have anything to back that up? Cite, please.
You need to read Rachel Held Evans
Hmm….kinda busy right now. Could you summarize for us?
She makes a point of pointing out the absurdity of gender roles and the ignorance of science
Huh. So she rejects both the Bible and science? Must be a feminist.
You are staying single because women don’t want you
How old are you? Maybe “single woman aged 27 1/2”?
@SirHamster
This is true, but we must face up to why men are allowing abortionists to legally operate. We are terrified of telling women they can’t have the abortions they desire. We are terrified of telling them “no”. This is the problem with the video in the OP. They are terrified of telling women “no”, and will do whatever it takes to avoid it.
Hence why I think the only way to stop abortion is to ban contraceptives. If you support seperating the action of sex from the possibility of procreation…you support women’s sexual freedom from consequence.
Spokesman for The Lift ….new Christian themed craft beer
Pingback: What happened to our men that our women are forced to have such big dicks? | Reaction Times
The video in the OP is also an example of why 99% of people, including cuckservatives themselves, actually think the GOP is ‘against feminism’. It takes a tremendous level of red-pill knowledge to see that they are anything but against misandry, they just want the form of slavery to be very different (one man enslaved by one women with government assistance) rather than the aggregate of men paying for the aggregate of women.
So, as “women achieve more in life”, their “expectations have failed to adjust”, and “they may find it more difficult to find a spouse”. A possible solution would be for men to meet those expectations, but the sad(?) reality is that men aren’t doing this, causing me to suppose that men consider the prize of marriage to these “high-flying career women” to be insufficient for the effort required. I would think a far easier solution would be for women to adjust their expectations, but I don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.
Earl
Hence why I
thinkbelieve the only way to stop abortion is to ban contraceptives.You’re just emotional and ignorant. Go read the original Hippocratic Oath. What years did Hippocrates live?
OKRickety
I would think a far easier solution would be for women to adjust their expectations,
That Brit article is another data point demonstrating the existence of Hypergamy in women.
Hypergamy doesn’t care what you think. Or what I think.
Still sticking with that huh?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/women-having-abortions-contraception-doesnt-work/
So I take it you support women taking contraceptives?
@OKRickety
I personally don’t think this is what we are seeing, at least not directly. I think this has more to do with the way delayed marriage changes young men’s incentives to prepare to signal provider status. By the time the high flying career women are ready for men their age (or a few years older) to “man up”, the men can no more go back and dedicate their teens and 20s to education and career than the women can go back and dedicate their youth and fertility to their husband. The efforts to tilt the playing field to achieve feminist goals doesn’t help either, but it is more of a compounding problem than the primary one.
A possible solution would be for men to meet those expectations, but the sad(?) reality is that men aren’t doing this, causing me to suppose that men consider the prize of marriage to these “high-flying career women” to be insufficient for the effort required.
I think men saying “I just don’t want to work that hard for a career gal” is only part of it.
The most direct driver of these women’s inability to “marry up” is that women price themselves out of their own markets by increasing their educational levels and earning capacities. They just aren’t attracted to the men who are willing to have them, and so they avoid or rebuff those men. They can’t snag the men they are attracted to for anything more than short term. These women make themselves too “expensive” for the men who would have them; and not “enough” for men with options.
Nick Mgtow says:
July 31, 2018 at 12:05 pm
Dear Dalrock, and dear community in the comments, a read for thee.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6004239/High-flying-career-women-refusing-marry-despite-struggling-Mr-Right.html
Good comments on there. Especially the one where it says when men marry a woman with less income and education (Liberal arts, wymyn’s studies, are not considered education as they are useless) it is not called “marrying down”. Men with equal income don’t want to marry a man with breasts. Most know the divorce laws, or prefer a woman who will stay home and raise children as a second income isn’t necessary.
thedeti on July 31, 2018 at 4:19 pm
The most direct driver of these women’s inability to “marry up” is that women price themselves out of their own markets by increasing their educational levels and earning capacities. They just aren’t attracted to the men who are willing to have them, and so they avoid or rebuff those men. They can’t snag the men they are attracted to for anything more than short term. These women make themselves too “expensive” for the men who would have them; and not “enough” for men with options.
The Deti : correct, correct. I listened to a woman’s story from Redpill Germany.
And, the woman had a man who wanted to marry her, but she pursued her career, and expensive lifestyle comprised of travels. A decade later, ready to marry *cough* settle down with a man that would make twice her income so that she could stay at home and raise kids and struggling to find a man that met her expectations, she checked to see how her former courtisan was doing, and he was married with a stay at home wife and two kids, just like he had offered to her… 10 years earlier.
RE the Daily Mail article:
The Old Order fed hypergamy by making almost every man UP from every woman by limiting her economic freedom.
The New Order gives women freedom but starves hypergamy.
[Pause for a moment to savor/mourne the self-defeating nature of corporate feminism]
BIG QUESTION: which do women value more – Freedom or Hypergamy?
Best response to women claiming that: “oh we got a little shemale here folks! Come say hi to the tranny!”
Hi Dalrock, it’s me again ^^ I remember you wrote once about a woman talking back to her street harasser.
Look how it went!
@TheDeti,
Trudat. I have said many times that the true purpose of feminism is to maximize women’s freedom of action while minimizing their responsibility and accountability. At the same time, by design, it does the reverse for men: minimizimg men’s freedom of action while maximizing their responsibility and accountability.
Nick mgtow,
I don’t know why the chick in that video is complaining. She was enriched by some vibrant diversity. Which is exactly what the female voters in the West have brought about.
Karma is a beeyotch.
You’re just emotional and ignorant.
Earl
Still sticking with that huh?
I prefer to stick with the truth. Who was Hippocrates? When did he live? What is in the original Oath of Hippocrates? What form of contraception was common in Hippocrates day? Are you intelligent enough to figure these questions out?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/women-having-abortions-contraception-doesnt-work/
Is this supposed to be news? What does it have to do with your emotional assertion that you could ban abortion by banning contraceptives?
So I take it you support women taking contraceptives?
You still laboring under the delusion that “contraception” is only accomplished via hormones, or that abortion is a modern invention? I corrected both those errors two or three years ago, in a comment thread on this site. Did you forget?
Contraception and abortion are the same thing Anon Reader…they are methods of taking the procreative result out of the sexual act.
Now tell me how that’s wrong.
Now do you support or are you opposed to contraception and abortion, Anon Reader?
My Admin 4PM yells to me in my office: “Jay….ummm…Office Max just dropped off my copier paper, can you lift it into the cabinet under my desk for me?”
My Reply 4PM. I stand, walk to the front desk area and say: “Ms. Leavenworth you’ve got it, do what you did last time, open the box, take the paper out and put it under one ream at a time.”
My Admin: “But you’re already here, just do it for me, and I can’t break the box down and I’m sooooo busy to take it to the recycle room.”
My Reply: “You and I are both busy Ms.Leavenworth, looks like you got it…and I came out because I don’t like staff yelling across rooms and lobbies here. Make a note of it.” I smiled, nodded and walked back to my office.
I heard her mutter “*sshole” as I walked away.
I asked
Earl
Contraception and abortion are the same thing Anon Reader,/i>
So the answer is “no”? You are not intelligent enough to figure those questions out. My apologies for overestimating your intelligence.
…they are methods of taking the procreative result out of the sexual act.
In an abstract sense this is accurate, but it is meaningless in detail. Your emotional argument still fails. Ban contraception all you want, you won’t ban abortion. As the Hippocratic Oath clearly demonstrates, for those persons able to use a search engine.
Now tell me how that’s wrong.
Your emotional, ignorant claim is counterfactual, reality shows it is false. Abortion existed long before any of the modern methods of contraception. As I already told you years ago.
Now do you support or are you opposed to contraception and abortion, Anon Reader?
I already answered this years ago. Perhaps you should pay attention when people reply to you? If you have memory problems, there are treatments for that.
Men are responsible for the mess that feminism has made because feminism could only come about by men over the generations handing over their God given authority to women.
Props, Jason.
“I heard her mutter “*sshole” as I walked away.”
The sweet sound of freedom!
Big D*ick Energy = Freudian Female Penis Envy.
Feminists and their shock troops – sluts and lesbians – constantly tell us how men are pigs. Okay, so why do they consider the above phrase hip and cool?
Men are envied because being born XY not only gives us male genitals, but the testosterone we get dosed with gives us strength, power, stamina, and a binary mind. Those things combined can be a destructive influence, but they have built empires and civilizations.
As for the guy in the video clip, well, like most Christians, he’s half right. He’s half right because Scripture tells us to honor our sexes. Where he gets it wrong is he has a massive blind spot for women’s sin. He hasn’t seen those placards that say, ”My body, my choice” – wrong because the unborn child is genetically different from the mother. The soft hipsters he describes aren’t the ones who impregnated Princess Precious. They are simply the orbiter cucks that accompany her ”to help her in her time of need” in the hope she will sex with him in the future. Chad and Tyrone are the ones who did the deed.
Kudos to him though, for calling abortion murder, which is what it is. 1.6 BILLION of them since 1976 and counting. We have a demographic problem of aging population, shrinking tax base, need for high levels of immigration, all because we want to enshrine a woman’s right to murder her own children.
hey….I am the one who does her performance review…..she’ll suddenly remember that when variable pay (bonus) and raise times comes……guaranteed she’ll crank up the niceness a month or two before….happened at IBM to me as well
Figures that the advertisement on the video you linked to is a campaign video for Stacy Adams, a black democrat running for governor of Georgia.
Jonathan,
Huh? We have plenty of hypergamy now, or at least attempts at it. Not making women be faithful will enable hypergamy, not make it go away.
I heard her mutter “*sshole” as I walked away.
You should have responded with “Thank you! Compliments like that make my day!”
There are som e people in whose eyes being an asshole is a sign of righteousness.
Best response to women claiming that: “oh we got a little shemale here folks! Come say hi to the tranny!”
To the extent that I pay them any attention at all, I treat most women not my wife or close female relatives as “trannies/shemales” since they insist on acting like dickless men.
hey….I am the one who does her performance review…..she’ll suddenly remember that when variable pay (bonus) and raise times comes……guaranteed she’ll crank up the niceness a month or two before….happened at IBM to me as well
She’ll probably wind up getting a pay raise anyway, even if she’s a lazy incompetent who winds up getting your employer sued by a client for her incompetence. Employers have completely caved in to even the threat of discrimination/sexual harrassment law suits and will pretty much give women anything they demand in order to avoid trouble from them.
You can be sure that if your bosses give this woman an unearned pay raise, one of your competent and deserving male colleagues won’t get one. It’s ALWAYS a zero-sum game.
Re the OP, I am reminded of an old joke about Hillary Clinton.
Q: What does she say when she gets really mad at someone?
A: “Oh, s*ck my d*ck!”.
Re super-hypergamous career cunts complaining about no (sufficiently high-flying economically) men for them to marry, I’ve long thought that telling them this would be apt, if change nothing:
“What did you expect? You took your would-have-been husband’s job!”.
For the post-Wall regretful spinsters, of course, the best answer to “where are all the good guys?” question remains:
“Back in your 20s where you left him. He figured you weren’t interested in marrying him, so he either married some other chick, or gave up on the whole idea.”
Saddest cartoon ever re abortion (all the more effective for its subtleties):
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/391/966/a2b.jpg_orig
feeriker,
You can be sure that if your bosses give this woman an unearned pay raise, one of your competent and deserving male colleagues won’t get one. It’s ALWAYS a zero-sum game.
Yes, but the rising cost of sinecured twats ensures that more holistic, permanent disruptions happen, such as the replacement of women in the workforce by Artificial Intelligence. If women become increasingly more expensive relative to output generated, then they are where the highest cost-savings from AI come into manifestation.
Anon sez ..
Why wait for AI .. we have the Kiosk tech now .. replace all of the make-work (worthless) wimminz at the DMV and Tagging Offices.
Savings in state pensions alone is worth it.
Gotta start somewhere .. the fact we haven’t just shows there is NO Political Will to buck the current status of drama queens.
Related:
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360 (2015)
National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track
“The underrepresentation of women in academic science is typically attributed, both in scientific literature and in the media, to sexist hiring. Here we report five hiring experiments in which faculty evaluated hypothetical female and male applicants, using systematically varied profiles disguising identical scholarship, for assistant professorships in biology, engineering, economics, and psychology. Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced), with the exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference.”
Spacetraveller — “I cannot bring myself to believe that this lovely-loooking woman with a nice smile is DELIBERATELY and WILLFULLY and INTENTIONALLY leading young woman astray.”
The fruit looked good. I mean, really really nice. [Redux a zillion and one.]
“Whilst I believe that her hearing God’s voice is nonsensical (and in contrast to you, I overlook this issue as ‘peripheral’”
Lying about hearing the Voice of God, and publishing those lies for personal aggrandizement, is peripheral? Wendy and her fellow-travelers — legion — degrade the prophets and apostles when she deems herself fit to transmit the Word of God to this planet. She mutes the mouths of the prophets in order to generate page-hits and market-shares, and to sell books.
Apparently Ms. Griffith is an anchor for the Christian Broadcasting Network. Yeah they’re broad-casting for someone all right, but it ain’t Christ.
Interesting:
Feminists Lose It Over ‘Violent’ App That Removes Women’s Makeup
November 17, 2017
https://www.dailywire.com/news/23719/leftists-lose-it-over-violent-app-removes-womens-amanda-prestigiacomo
Apparently Ms. Griffith is an anchor for the Christian Broadcasting Network. Yeah they’re broad-casting for someone all right, but it ain’t Christ.
My South American-born wife was amazed at the plethora of “Christian” TV stations in the U.S. – until I warned her that almost ALL of them are the province of money-grubbing false teachers. I had her watch random programs on both TBN and CBN as “instruction.” She no longer needs convincing.
You can see what Wendy Griffith looked like in May 2017, in photo number 8: https://www.pnj.com/picture-gallery/news/2017/05/27/family-beach-fest-at-pensacola-beach/102244634/
Photo taken outdoors, without benefit of soft studio lighting.
Ms. Griffith is way past her expiration date. The milk has long spoiled. And yet she still expects to marry an Amazingly Awesome Apex Alpha, because the voices in her head tell her so.
Wendy looks like a nice stay at home mom, but unfortunately will probably have to settle for a divorcee who’s getting raped by his ex wife for child support. Good thing she has a Big Girl Career “TM” to help support her future husband. If only she could have decided to look for a husband sooner. The old wise women talked about in the bible were apparently not present in her church to help guide her. Her father also probably encouraged her to wait until she was settled in her career at 28. Well here we are, folks. Thanks, Dad! Now my mixed family will include children with autism since I forgot to freeze my eggs.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/dcad938a07383ace51e215f97f6ce765016731b9/c=82-0-4119-3035/local/-/media/2017/05/27/Pensacola/Pensacola/636315044401468042-Family-Beach-Fest-8.jpg?width=680&height=510&fit=crop
I honestly just feel bad at her, but we must poke fun at these false teachers. She’s the one who decided to go down the advice-giving train and publicize herself, and misguide young women in her books about how great their future spousal selection options will be. She didn’t mention the alcoholism and broken-hearted despair that is likely to meet each one of the young women as they contemplate their choices at 35 with a glass of wine in one hand and their cat sopping up their tears in their lap.
@Nick MgTow
Sean Connery said that it was alright to ‘schlap’ a woman.
@Jason
She is hot for you.
I had a girlfriend and on more than one occasion she fantasised that she had a dick – but as to its length I could not quite determine. That was several decades ago so this latest feminist fantasy – I believe the term of art is pegging – is perhaps not quite so recent.
“What happened to our men that our women are forced to have such big dicks?”
Men lost their big dicks and didn’t say “No!” to women when they were pushing it.
I have to say that appreciate this blog more and more for revealing this stark reality for all to see – the degree to which the Christian faith and its more devoted followers have lied to themselves, and are in total abject denial as to what has transpired over the last 50 years with men, women and family and the current field of play. That field of play is now a minefield.
But what is perhaps most astounding is to witness your average American Christian’s complete failure to recognize and grasp their own hands in this outcome. Christians hate men and want to see them subjugated, on their knees and miserable. And for what?
Christians arrive on this scene late enough to agree with colorful Biblical commentary that…. yeah, the patient on the gurney is surely going to die. But they remain woefully ignorant, out of touch or just indifferent toward the patient’s actual pathology.
Female contraceptives which kill the fertilized egg are a form of abortion. Condoms which prevent fertilization are not. /my opinion.
Ray,
“Lying about hearing the Voice of God, and publishing those lies for personal aggrandizement, is peripheral?”
Yes, I can see now that this was MONUMENTALLY stupid of me! I have to admit, I was rather enchanted by Wendy Griffiths’ wholesome and lovely image (heh, so, men are not the only ones charmed by beauty, lol) but this last photo that two commenters have posted here, has cured of me of that awe-struck stupor I seemed to have fallen into.
Whoa! I must admit, I have never seen a similar photo of her where she looks like this… ooh la la. What a pity about this. I am quite shocked…
So now, tail between the legs, I have to throw in the towel…and say, sorry about my poor judgment about her. It seems I was fooled by her ‘carrot’ of chastity, so I was blinded to… well, everything else.
And now, I am just really really sad for her…
O how differently things could have turned out for her…!
It is well beyond tragic. But like I said in the previous post (and in total agreement with FH on this), if her goal was to deliberately mislead young women so they end up like her, then I shouldn’t feel sorry for her at all.
(But I am not a fan of ‘Schadenfreude’, so I still cannot shake off the overwhelming sadness I feel for her…).
And there were certainly crude forms of contraception back then too.
https://www.bustle.com/articles/72266-the-6-craziest-birth-control-methods-in-history-from-weasel-testicles-to-crocodile-poop
But you’ve convinced me of one thing…now I say ban all contraceptives and abortions.
Where do you stand? And I don’t remember you telling me a long time ago…so refresh my memory.
Women love equality until they don’t love equality.
@Dalrock
Regarding men’s preparation for careers: “I think this has more to do with the way delayed marriage changes young men’s incentives to prepare to signal provider status. By the time the high flying career women are ready for men their age (or a few years older) to “man up”, the men can no more go back and dedicate their teens and 20s to education and career than the women can go back and dedicate their youth and fertility to their husband.”
This may vary by geographical location but in my location (SF Bay Area) I don’t see many churchgoing men failing to prepare to be providers. Rather, they go to school, earn their technical degrees or diplomas, and then can’t get jobs in their fields of study due to hiring preferences for women and foreigners. I know more than a few good Christian men with advanced degrees in Engineering and Computer Science who work in retail or food service for near minimum wage, including those who once had good careers and were replaced by H1B visa holders.
Logically, younger men who observe the plight of these men ought to choose a life of slackerhood but given the incessant drumbeat of the need for STEM education most of the young men I know in my area are still lining up to get their STEM educations. Mileage may vary by location, but I don’t observe a large drop in young men preparing to be providers. I do observe a lack of positive feedback (both in the job market and in the marriage market) for those who pay the price to earn their credentials. I postulate that there is not a significant drop in male education rates, but rather a very large increase in female credentialing, leading to a skewed ratio (and thus inflated expectations of females) compared to historic norms.
We don’t need more female worship, as men we need to stop giving into what women demand. We have to say, “No!” Until that happens, nothing we change.
Fixing my typos…
We don’t need more female worship, as men we need to stop giving into what women demand. We have to say, “No!” Until that happens, nothing will change.
The data referenced here show that the percentage of US men who have earned college degrees is steadily increasing: https://www.statista.com/statistics/184272/educational-attainment-of-college-diploma-or-higher-by-gender/
The story these data tell very clearly is the wholesale abandonment of traditional roles by women to pursue education and careers, not a failure of men to “keep up.” The corollary is that the unhappiness of women is a direct consequence of their own choices, demonstrating once again that hypergamy is insatiable.
Men wanted sexual access to women without having to make a long-term commitment, so they went along with 60s feminism and the Sexual Revolution. Conservatives like to blame the Sexual Revolution on the pill, but the pill wasn’t sufficient for the Sexual Revolution to claim victory. Attitudes toward sex also had to change. The stigma associated with loose women had to change. That’s why feminists have been pushing against the shaming of women for promiscuity. So the baseball-cap-on-backwards Christian is right even if he doesn’t quite make that connection.
This is why most of these “self-improvement” guys who lie in wait over at Roosh V’s forum are feminists. If you’re of the view that women should be held to traditional standards of modesty and chastity, they pop up and accuse you of being the reincarnation of Elliot Rodger. According to these guys, the only thing that’s wrong with women today is their weight and the only thing wrong with feminism is its bending and twisting of the word “rape” (and other impediments to manwhoring). Otherwise, there’s nothing wrong with modern women but there’s something wrong with men for thinking there is. Manwhores are feminists because they know what they’d have to give up if society returned to tradition.
I wouldn’t call this guy a tradcuck or a conservative, because conservative men today are hot on “strong womyn” BS from the 90s, which is in line with the penchant of conservatives for picking up trends retroactively from 20 years ago. He is clueless however for thinking that “honoring” women will change anything.
‘We don’t need more female worship, as men we need to stop giving into what women demand. We have to say, “No!” ‘
Much like Jason’s example. In fact a simple no does more than an explanation.
“I don’t know why the chick in that video is complaining. She was enriched by some vibrant diversity. Which is exactly what the female voters in the West have brought about.
Karma is a beeyotch.”
I’m not going to lie – I can’t help but feel a little schadenfreude when Lefties like that, Tamara Cincik and Corrine Mehiel get what’s coming to them. They need men like fish need bicycles? Let them prove it.
@Earl – I don’t know how you can ban all contraception. Men can always pull out or perform coitus interruptus. Also, the rhythm method is a type of planned contraception.
Does the Church still hold to the Thomist idea of all married sex should be for procreation, or do they ok sex for maintaining the marriage bond too?
Spacetraveller — “So now, tail between the legs, I have to throw in the towel…and say, sorry about my poor judgment about her. It seems I was fooled by her ‘carrot’ of chastity, so I was blinded to… well, everything else.”
We’re all blind in this place. Satan’s place. Just a matter of how much. It hurts to open our eyes and nobody is exempt.
Well-done to you for opening yours, if just a little. Make a habit of it. The King we worship is named Truth.
Damn Crackers, would you rather have your country to oppose abortion as it’s the case in Poland and have a high natality, homogeneous population, or would you rather have them free abortion as in France, and welp, have the locals enriched by non peaceful immigrants?
feeriker — “She no longer needs convincing.”
That’s pretty good — at least she has some power of self-correction. Just needed the nudge.
But, yeah, ‘Latin American’. Splains a lot. Females are females, but as I said elsewhere, there is still wide variance in enculturation globally. There are places in Latin America, for example, where relatively unspoiled females certainly can be found, and without great effort. Now, taking them back to Total Feminist nations to live . . . that’s a risky deal. They hear the Call of the Herd, and gradually blend in, because that’s typically what females do.
The old wise women talked about in the bible were apparently not present in [Wendy’s] church to help guide her.
They’re not present in any woman’s church. As I constantly point out, such women are all but extinct (which is why Lori Alexander must feel incredibly lonely).
Her father also probably encouraged her to wait until she was settled in her career at 28. Well here we are, folks. Thanks, Dad! Now my mixed family will include children with autism since I forgot to freeze my eggs.
And this is why the absence of “Titus 2 women” is probably just as well under today’s circumstances. Odds are that what few such women there are are married to cucked mangina churchian husbands who would undermine all of their attempts to set even their own daughters on the straight and narrow path.
btw….I have had this behavior around women for well over twenty years….they are not “in awe” of my masculinty, nor are they “intrigued” by wanting to get to know me, or date me, or be around me, so when “game” says “tell her no, she will find this hot / attractive / and manly” I don’t buy it at all
“Rather, they go to school, earn their technical degrees or diplomas, and then can’t get jobs in their fields of study due to hiring preferences for women and foreigners.”
I can second that. Since two years there have been a considerable amount of Chinese women being hired by our company. It puzzled me until I heard of the (somewhat hidden) HRM agenda to reduce the number of white men, in preference of women and foreigners. As our company critically requires technically qualified people, they at least were sensible enough to hire CHINESE women, covering both categories in one go. I heard they did this because they were afraid of more strict government rules in the future that would enforce “equality”.
It’s totally insane, and frankly, terrifying.
Maybe it’s time white men start changing their gender to “black woman” on their IDs in masses.
We get it Jason, you don’t like/agree with game. Give it a rest.
@Nick Mgtow – “Damn Crackers, would you rather have your country to oppose abortion as it’s the case in Poland and have a high natality, homogeneous population, or would you rather have them free abortion as in France, and welp, have the locals enriched by non peaceful immigrants?”
Why are you asking me this question? I don’t support abortion. I was asking @Earl a question about Church doctrine.
As our company critically requires technically qualified people, they at least were sensible enough to hire CHINESE women, covering both categories in one go.
Chinese women are still women. I can also tell you from direct personal experience they’re really not significanly more competent in STEM fields than any other race or ethnicity of women, either. That’s an enduring myth that PC refuses to allow to die a natural death.
‘Does the Church still hold to the Thomist idea of all married sex should be for procreation, or do they ok sex for maintaining the marriage bond too?’
It’s understood as both unitive and procreative….and what we got now is trying to seperate the two through contraception and abortion. That doesn’t mean everytime the act happens, it results in a pregnacy because there are times of the month a woman is infertile and that’s how her body works…but it means you shouldn’t do things that artifically prevent pregnancy.
I go bold to get the conversation rolling.
The rhythm method follows natural law because there are times a woman’s body is infertile….the church I attend (Catholic) does allow spacing of children for good reason.
I was asking the sister-in-law of a former crush whether the older of the two children of an ex-gf was in fact mine. She who has never even met my ex-gf said she was not in a position to say. I then thinking I could work it out from her information bumped into my Room-Mate a certain Dr Watson who was saying goodbye to his friend Mr Holmes. Then I awoke – that was last nights’ strange dream. As for that ex-gf the last time I saw her was six months after we last had sexual intercourse (which was decades ago) and she certainly was not pregnant then. I breathed a sigh of relief. The past like a werewolf chasing one down continues to haunt ever more strongly.
I have always thought that the rhythm method (however it works) would be just too risky a form of Russian Roulette and would be giving me even worse dreams. A bit too much theological wiggle-room there too for my puritanical liking.
OT: Doug Wilson with words of wisdom (!!) on the Pence (formerly Graham) rule:
https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/when-aimee-met-harry-and-sally.html
The key paragraph, for me:
“So long as men, including Christian men, are regarded as guilty simply on the basis of an allegation alone, they are not being treated as brothers. And if they are not being treated as brothers, you cannot be surprised at the consequences for the sisters. If heads is up, then tails is down.”
@feeriker
My point was that Chinese women count double both as foreigner and as woman. Therefore they can afford to keep enough white men in place while satisfying percentages “requirements”.
It might start making people realize once again that procreation can sometimes happen from the marital act. Because plenty of evidence is shown even artifical means trying to prevent it doesn’t always prevent it.
It’s not to throw cold water on intercourse…it’s telling the full truth about it. Sometimes a child is the result.
what do the smart girls get ? cats mostly and lots of pointless degrees that they will barely use if that.
feeriker says:
”Chinese women are still women. I can also tell you from direct personal experience they’re really not significantly more competent in STEM fields than any other race or ethnicity of women, either. That’s an enduring myth that PC refuses to allow to die a natural death”.
I work in the scientific field, and am aware of the PC myth about Asian an specifically Chinese workers, especially women. They are extremely good at lying, dissembling, playing the victim. What many interpret as “focussed on work” is actually selfishness, where you will have to do all of the hard tasks because they ”do their work” , whereas you will have to do your work and the dirty aspects of theirs.
ANYONE thinking that Chinese or Asians have a good work ethic or a moral center the equivalent or better than Western people, again especially women,is extremely naive or hasn’t worked with them for any length of time. Honest, hardworking Individuals? Yes. Honest hardworking races and identities? NO!
I once had a girlfriend who liked to pretend she was an airhead. Although I found it strange that she would pretend to be dumber than she really was, I found that to be far more endearing, than people who pretend to be smarter than they really are.
@earl
Don’t want to go into recreation/procreation debate on sex again right now, but just a remark on RCC teachings on contraception: Natural Family Planning is an acceptable method of contraception. A good way is to use both calendar and symptoms to monitor the (few) days a wife is fertile in a month. Use it to promote or avoid pregnancy (99.86% effective).
Just for good reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning
“If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 (when the encyclical Casti connubii was promulgated), in 1951 (Pius XII’s address to the midwives), and in 1958 (the address delivered before the Society of Hematologists in the year the pope died). It should likewise have to be admitted that for a half century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now be declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved.”
and
According to a nationwide poll of 2,242 U.S. adults (2005) 90% of U.S. Catholics supported the use of birth control/contraceptives.
“(Natural) Family planning proponent Stephen D. Mumford claimed that the primary motivation behind the Church’s continued opposition to contraceptive use is the impossibility to make changes without spoiling papal authority with regards to papal infallibility.”
primary motivation behind the Church’s continued opposition to contraceptive use is the impossibility to make changes without spoiling papal authority with regards to papal infallibility.”
That’s pretty much the motivation behind all of the Roman Catholic Church’s positions.
The tragedy isn’t just that the protestant church is becoming so corrupted, it’s that it’s just following the same horrific path as Roman Catholoicism.
Of course the difficult theological question the RCC has to answer: if papal infallability is really a true and essential dogma of the Church, why was it accepted as late as 1870? Was the Church wrong on this issue before 1870? If so, what gave the RCC the authority to declare the dogma of papal infallability?
The ONLY dogma declared ‘ex cathedra’ (i.e. claiming papal infallability) is the Assumption of Mary, that is, the bodily assumption into heaven of Mary after the course of her life (death or alive is not defined).
It is explicitly declared that: “Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which We have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.”
So, if you do not believe the body of Mary ascended into heaven, you cannot be part of the divine and Catholic (Christian) faith. According to the pope. Who spoke infallably. Acccording to the RCC. After 1870.
Now show me ONE single bible verse that shows any connection between Christian salvation and the belief that the body of Mary ascended into heaven.
Bad catechists. Humanae Vitae points out explicitly why the church is against artificial contraception.
Does dalrock have a futanari fetish? I don’t get the fixation on chicks with dicks.
Again, the interesting question is: what about all the people who lived and died before the declaration of the dogma of the Assumption of Mary: if they did not believe it during the course of their live, does the dogma extend to them as well? Does that mean that by declaration of the dogma, people who before that time were considered good Christians, now suddenly are declared to have fallen completely away from the divine and Catholic Faith? After their deaths?
https://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#6
It was always implied, Vatican 1 gave it a name.
‘1. That apostolic primacy which the Roman Pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This Holy See has always maintained this, the constant custom of the Church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it.
…
9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.’
@earl: you slipped in ‘artificial’, why?
Because if you read Humanae Vitae it talks about why the natural methods are acceptable.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html
‘Recourse to Infertile Periods
16. Now as We noted earlier (no. 3), some people today raise the objection against this particular doctrine of the Church concerning the moral laws governing marriage, that human intelligence has both the right and responsibility to control those forces of irrational nature which come within its ambit and to direct them toward ends beneficial to man. Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.
If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained.
Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the later practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the later they obstruct the natural development of the generative process. It cannot be denied that in each case the married couple, for acceptable reasons, are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children and wish to make sure that none will result. But it is equally true that it is exclusively in the former case that husband and wife are ready to abstain from intercourse during the fertile period as often as for reasonable motives the birth of another child is not desirable. And when the infertile period recurs, they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another. In doing this they certainly give proof of a true and authentic love.’
@earl: “If so, what gave the RCC the authority to declare the dogma of papal infallability?”
“It was always implied” “That apostolic primacy which the Roman Pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching.:
No it was not always implied, that’s just convenient to state. If it was, the Eastern church would accept it, which it doesn’t. Furthermore, it was the apostle Paul himself who rebuked the apostle Peter openly, and it is even recorded in holy Scripture.
@earl: re: artificial.
The choice to label e.g. condoms as artificial and symptom-based abstinence with the aid of e.g. an artificial thermometer as somehow non-artificial seems completely arbitrary to me.
Actually the reason why it was encouraged to be declared a dogma of the faith was because a lot of the faithful already believed it.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-xii_apc_19501101_munificentissimus-deus.html
‘3. Actually God, who from all eternity regards Mary with a most favorable and unique affection, has “when the fullness of time came” put the plan of his providence into effect in such a way that all the privileges and prerogatives he had granted to her in his sovereign generosity were to shine forth in her in a kind of perfect harmony. And, although the Church has always recognized this supreme generosity and the perfect harmony of graces and has daily studied them more and more throughout the course of the centuries, still it is in our own age that the privilege of the bodily Assumption into heaven of Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, has certainly shone forth more clearly.
….
15. The innumerable temples which have been dedicated to the Virgin Mary assumed into heaven clearly attest this faith. So do those sacred images, exposed therein for the veneration of the faithful, which bring this unique triumph of the Blessed Virgin before the eyes of all men. Moreover, cities, dioceses, and individual regions have been placed under the special patronage and guardianship of the Virgin Mother of God assumed into heaven. In the same way, religious institutes, with the approval of the Church, have been founded and have taken their name from this privilege. Nor can we pass over in silence the fact that in the Rosary of Mary, the recitation of which this Apostolic See so urgently recommends, there is one mystery proposed for pious meditation which, as all know, deals with the Blessed Virgin’s Assumption into heaven.
16. This belief of the sacred pastors and of Christ’s faithful is universally manifested still more splendidly by the fact that, since ancient times, there have been both in the East and in the West solemn liturgical offices commemorating this privilege. The holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church have never failed to draw enlightenment from this fact since, as everyone knows, the sacred liturgy, “because it is the profession, subject to the supreme teaching authority within the Church, of heavenly truths, can supply proofs and testimonies of no small value for deciding a particular point of Christian doctrine.”(10)
17. In the liturgical books which deal with the feast either of the dormition or of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin there are expressions that agree in testifying that, when the Virgin Mother of God passed from this earthly exile to heaven, what happened to her sacred body was, by the decree of divine Providence, in keeping with the dignity of the Mother of the Word Incarnate, and with the other privileges she had been accorded. Thus, to cite an illustrious example, this is set forth in that sacramentary which Adrian I, our predecessor of immortal memory, sent to the Emperor Charlemagne. These words are found in this volume: “Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself.”
If you don’t get the difference between checking body temperature to figure out if the woman is in a fertile period or not and overtly putting something on to prevent conception…I can’t help you.
Sharkly says:
August 1, 2018 at 9:52 pm
I once had a girlfriend who liked to pretend she was an airhead. Although I found it strange that she would pretend to be dumber than she really was, I found that to be far more endearing, than people who pretend to be smarter than they really are.
Sjarkly: as a reader of the book “The 48 Laws of POWER” , it makes a person like her MORE dangerous. Because no one suspects their true motives.
I’m making time to return to this thread from a previous point, without reading recent comments, in order to clear up Earl’s gross factual errors.
Commenting again with correct formatting.
I’m making time to return to this thread from a previous point, without reading recent comments, in order to clear up Earl’s gross factual errors.
Earl
And there were certainly crude forms of contraception back then too.
Which were unreliable. But congrats on finally using a search engine in some fashion, it’s better than your usual fact-free handwaving.
Earl, your claim is that banning contraception would end abortions. This can be tested easily with historic facts. When were the various forms of contraception invented? Diverse forms of hormonal date to the 1950’s, as does the IUD to my knowledge. Spermicides are about the same time frame. The diaphragm / rubber pessary dates to the late 19th century. Condoms date to shortly after Columbus.
https://infogalactic.com/info/History_of_condoms
So everything you want to ban didn’t exist before 1500. Now, what about abortion?
Hipporates was the father of medicine in the Western civilization. He lived (460–370 BC).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath
Key phrase from the Oath:
It is obvious that methods of inducing early labor / miscarriage / abortion existed in 400 BC, approximately 2,500 years ago, because Hippocrates required those who followed him not to do that. This predates the earliest remotely effective contraception (condom) by about 1,900 years. By the way, infantcide was common in the ancient world across multiple civilizations (Greece, Rome, Egypt, the Phonecians, etc.) which tells a thinking person how reliable any contraception was.
You are wrong. History clearly and conclusively shows you are wrong.
Hippocrates was opposed to mercy killing his patients, too. Would you be so foolish as to claim “I can stop euthanasia , just ban poisons!”? I hope you would not be. But who knows?
Earl, it is long past time that you started doing your own fact checking. Stop expecting other men to do your work for you. The next time you are about to post some emotional, fact-free comment try thinking instead. Perhaps I offended your pride by pointing to evidence that contradicted your position, but that’s how adults often converse, and men tend to deal in fact rather than emotional fantasy.
More abstractly, you are very foolish in ascribing human behavior to objects or processes. In Bible terms, you are blaming the sin of men and women on objects. That is close to superstitious animism, the idea that evil spirits inhabit objects such as totems, and so forth. It’s just dumb, like prohibition of alcohol to “make men be good”. If you really believe that objects cause humans to act badly / sin, then you are ignorant of your own religion and in serious need of education.
Check your facts. Remember facts other men show you. Curb your emotions. Put your pride down. Those are my suggestions to you.
Oh so they have to be reliable? Even modern methods have ‘failure’…hence abortion as a backup, which is the case in most reasons for an abortion.
I already said before (which you might not have read because you were just wanting to reiterate the emotion part)
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/07/31/what-happened-to-our-men-that-our-women-are-forced-to-have-such-big-dicks/#comment-280154
The commonality between both contraceptives and abortion is separating the procreative part from sex. Now that we’ve got the ‘wrong’ part out of the way where do you stand on contraceptive and abortion?
After females start unashamedly referring to themselves as “guys” we see…
“…the latest incarnation of ugly feminism is women claiming to have dicks.” (Dalrock)