If you ever want to debunk the ideology of SJWs and third wa

>>25897854
wtf she's saying women are forced into porn or that they go into porn thinking it's going to be an office job and then they are surprised as they get dicks in them.

>>25899069
They are surprised when they are gagged, choked, slapped, spanked if not outright beaten and told that it is normal or what not.

Yeah basically. Given the context the porn is presented as normal, as something everyone watches, in the media.

Just watch and get to the points she makes.

Of course this applies mostly on those with victim mentality, but just as women can be told and groomed into thinking they are only good for the sexual pleasure they can provide, people can be groomed to thinking that they are individuals and their rights are as important as the rights of all other people as group. Or they can be groomed into being perpetual victims, adopting the sort of slave mentality Nietzsche was talking about.

The conslusion is how to undo the pornification, and how to undo the victimization and how to make ordinary people into masters of virtue.
Or rather to start asking how to do it.

"Neoliberalism" actually means radical libertarianism. This is because of the use of "liberalism" in philosophy and social science, where it's descended from people like Hayek, who themselves come from the original liberal thinkers like Locke. The only wrinkle in that is Rawls, who calls himself a liberal but mainly wanted to upend liberalism.

>>25899217
So the point is what.

That no matter what it is called, it is used to explain and justify all inequalities and injustices as the fault of those affected by the inequality and injustice, and that they actually deserve it?

Not sure if anyone is interested in this, but I've been thinking about feminism a lot and it fascinates me. It is more like a cult than an ideology. I've thought about this for a while and I'm just going to give my 2 cents on what I believe this "movement" is all about in my time of thinking.

Onto my explanation. Feminists absolutely hate the traditional role of the female in western society. They encourage women to enter the workforce and absolutely loathe women who "give up" their youth to have children and start a family in a stable home with a good guy. Feminists hate women who cook and clean, my belief for this is because it makes they themselves feel undesirable. As men, in the end we desire women who can offer something to a relationship. We want women who have the ability to be homemakers and child raisers. This is why feminists hate women who take on this role. In the end, feminists realize by not learning these skills all a woman has to offer are her sexholes. Knowing that there are women out there who actually bother to learn ways to please men makes feminists feel undesirable. Feminism teaches men to not only not want a woman that has these skills, but to believe a woman who has them is a stereotype instead of a good choice for a wife.

Which draws me to my second point: The double standards. Feminism teaches women to avoid the traditional role and enter the work force, resulting in women whoring themselves around and turning 35-40 and realizing the genetic clock is nearing expiration. They then begin the "Beta Bux" race to find some idiot they don't even love to settle down with and have kids and possibly gain a little financial security in the marriage, as well.

Will continue in next post if any are interested

>>25899699
(Cont.)

Feminists will call men pigs for not wanting women who are fat/ugly, and being disgusted by women who whore themselves around. They even invented a term for the latter: "Slut Shaming". Feminists go out of their way to defend all of these women, in fact, a lot of feminists themselves are fat/ugly/whores. Feminists are basically calling men pigs for having any standards, at all, whatever they might be. Whether you don't want to have sex with a fat whore, or you won't marry a woman who doesn't know how to cook and clean. No matter what it is, you are a pig for having standards.

Meanwhile, women sexually ostracize ugly men, and even go out of their way to publicly shame short men. While they have done so much for themselves to discourage taking up the traditional role as a housewife, they themselves still want tall, strong, handsome men. It is "unreasonable" to them for men to demand women to know how to cook, clean, and get on well with children, but it is perfectly reasonable to them to demand that a man be tall, good looking, strong, masculine, and have a good job.

The end result of feminism is essentially eliminating a man's ability to have standards, and doing everything possible to enable women to have as strong an ability as punch themselves a guy that is well above their weight in the dating game. They'll demand themselves a man with a good job and ability to run a family, and scoff at the idea of a man demanding something from them beyond their sexhole.

>>25899699
I'd be inclined that feminists believe that a woman can do whatever she wants to do just like a man can do the same.

Of course this must be supplemented by upbringing that encourages people to be responsible. So they do things like have children early when they are under 25 before the genome starts to get errors from replication. It is universally accepted that younger mothers have healthier children because of these reasons. That just goes in general. The genetic defects start to rack up as the age progresses and exposure to pollutant progresses as well.

The neoliberals throw out the word choice, personal choice, free will like it applies. But when one is severely constrained by life situation and the material and economical reality and limits, how can one exercise that free will unconstrained?

Wouldn't the end goal be post scarcity and monogamy for everyone? Like the most ideal goal? Regressing to traditional values is most of the time hijacked by fascists, which have their own power hungry fantasies. Wouldn't it be the ideal scenario for 90% of people? To get the material security, abundance and be able to express individuality with no material constraints?

The current economic system and the ideology of neoliberal capitalism leads to way too many inconsistencies in it one must suspect that something fishy is going on.

>>25899699
>>25899988
Nice dubs.

Also what you describe is individualism taken to the max, along with divide and conquer method to deny your opponents from gaining any traction.

Yes these things happen, these issues are of course presented by the people you talk about, their demands and so on. Useful idiots work for the overlords in making sure no one dares to oppose the ruling class.

Formerly egalitarian movement has therefore been turned into a farce that is third wave feminism.

The traditional gender roles have their meaning and logic, and no one should be forced to reject or accept them.

So yeah you are right in your critique of third wave feminism and its hypocricy. But what you criticize is the effect of how feminism was rendered harmless to the elites.

All these points are mentioned in first 25 minutes of the first video.

And for some common sense, what woman might want is a man that can control himself and does not try to control her, which leaves her to her own self control. Both people aware of the biological basis of their sexuality. Mammalian male polygamy and female hypergamy which is result of the very sexual reproduction in mammals. It is still a remnant of evolution we will never lose. And engaging in the primitive form of sexuality is just a slap to the face of everyone who dared to be more than a stupid animal.

This all is based on the ridiculous notion that people are capable of more than being locusts who drain mindlessly all resources and breed in exponential rate. Every single one of you is capable of resource management, every person as an individual is. But when they are told repeatedly that they are not, they start to believe that.

>>25899989
>Wouldn't it be the ideal scenario for 90% of people?
I don't believe so, at least not for feminists.

Nature draws all of us to what we're intended to do. As men, we are protectors and providers. Just as we were drawn as cavemen to hunt and provide food for our mate and children, now we are drawn to want to have a high paying job to pay for our wife and children.

Women are drawn to children. They have always been caretakers, even in the workforce women are far more likely to choose a career that involves children (like nursing, school teachers, etc.) than a man.

A perfect example of this is with chimps. Scientists have found that by placing a toy truck and a doll by chimps, they will get a different result from them depending on gender. A male chimp almost always takes the truck, the female chimp almost always picks up the doll and coddles it. In our very own natural world today we see a prime example right in front of our eyes telling us what we should be doing and what makes us happy.

Feminists defy this. Women were statistically happier back when they were "oppressed" by men and encouraged to take up roles as a housewife. Ever since feminism has come along and "rescued" them, they are just as unhappy as men.

This goes back to what I said about them being like a cult. They train women to want to defy men and to strive for this strange "equality" of pursuing what a man has traditionally done, and in the process they have destroyed their own happiness because they have gone against what they were coded to want to do. They hate everything traditional and everything that does not fit their cult-like teachings. Monogamy itself is becoming an enemy because it is too traditional.

>>25900386
Nature draws us, yes. But biology is not our destiny.

I agree completely.

One thing is cultist crazy feminists, and other thing are the reasonable people, like the lady in the videos, who do not get time in mass media, because they do not fit the narrative, the ideology. Because their arguments are reasonable and directly are opposed to the ideology of neoliberalism.

All that woman in videos wants is for men to be men of virtue. Not men who are violent towards women.

Who would ever profit from destroying monogamy? Those who can make other people to prefer the primitive mammalian ways and never stop to think that there can be more.

Think about the top 1%, who buy the most expensive escorts and prostitutes. They practically live lives of polygamy. Of course it would suit them if they made women desire for hypergamy. And they have their pawns that you talk about.

So yes the cult exists. But why is it a cult and not a reasonable egalitarian movement? Who would want them to be cult and not the reasonable egalitarian movement? Is it their choice? Why would a person choose this obviously sub-optimal choice?

The reasoning of why it is a cult goes beyond the cult like qualities.

File: 1426725472478.jpg (24KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 250x250px

>>25899069
>>25899197
They literally sign a paper that says they're going to be abused, for websites that are called stuff like "facialabuse," with tons of videos on... abuse. Are you fucking retarded? They know exactly what they're getting into.

>>25900775
Don't you just hate it when the leftys start their argumentation with a blatant lie and try to build their argument upon it? It's fucking ridiculous. This woman is a joke.

>>25901078
I do however think that porn is bad for society but in the same way that fast food is. You can't really ban it but there could (and probably will be in the future) be more awareness about how it harms men and can cause ED and so on.

>>25899197
"virtue"

is this the 1700s

no

Why can't women just admit that genetically they are inferior in some aspects? That's what really bugs me about feminism.

Like, there is an innate value to each sex. Men and women just aren't the same and it's clear the way that they choose careers that women just don't want tech./stem jobs.

SO WHY ARE THEY PUSHING WOMEN INTO THESE FIELDS? They generally want jobs where there is social interaction in some way. Women in general do not want a research job or a job where they're stuck in a lab 8 hours a day. They want to treat patients or attend to client's needs. It's in their blood to do so. Why are we trying to fight centuries of evolution and gender roles when they're clearly still relevant today?

I can admit that the average man is genetically superior to the average woman. It's not fair, but that's how life works. Janice Fiamengo and Karen Straughan are very interesting speakers and I'd love to go to one of their conferences one day.

Bumping

original post coming through

>>25901298
C O M E
O N
I T S
2
0
1
6
!
I T S
C U R R E N T
Y E A R
E V E R Y O N E

>>25899197
lol these women probably got into porn knowing nothing about it. You should be aware of people being into that kind of shit before you go into porn. It's like becoming an actor without ever having watched a movie or play or anything.

Has nobody even watched these videos yet?