Mankeeping

[MayorQuimby]

True. On the other hand, its good to have a degree to fall back on should the marriage end. Working for 20 dollars per hour wont cut it.

But doesn't your country have these laws that enable a woman to divorce-rape her ex-husband? I believe your courts put men in jail for failing to pay their ex-wives alimony, don't they? So what do women have to fear?

If I were a hot young woman, I would sink my claws into some young, promising (this means he has the potential to make lots of money) man with a good degree. Then divorce him, take his house, and then marry the next. Do this till my looks completely fade. In fact, your laws have made this way of living so easy, that women would actually have to be stupid not to take advantage of men like that.

 

[Correll]

Not always. My daughter regrets waiting. Quite a bit. She is now 34, they had a daughter 4 years ago. She always planned on having two, but now can't. Things happen to women that can end pregnancies and ability to carry a child, things that develop later and almost never when young.

Lefties know that. THey don't care. The pain and unhappiness caused by their ideas, they consider a fine price to pay for...something.

 

[MayorQuimby]

Lefties know that. THey don't care. The pain and unhappiness caused by their ideas, they consider a fine price to pay for...something.

That something is called white genocide.

 

[Correll]

Our culture isnt going to die out from a few less births.

Sure it will. That is why you are supporting the "less births". To see the traditional American culture die, and be replaced with some shitty third world fusion, where the terrible lefty political ideas will be the new norm.

In todays world before one gets married they learn a skill or degree so if the marriage fails they dont end up working a medium paying job. Thats punishment.

No, that's a dumb idea based on dumb ideas.

 

[Marener]

Midnight FM, is demeaning women who want to be motthers, in this very thread now. You are simply saying something that isn't true.

FEMINISM is not about women having a choice. It is about pushing women to be what FEMINISTS wants them to be.

I wasn't aware Midnight FM defines feminism now.

So, you want a situation where your side is allowed to tell women what they should want, and the other side is supposed to just stay quiet?

Your request is denied.

Again, my side doesn't want to tell women what they should want. It just wants them to have options.

No, it doesn't offend me, because I think it is not true.

Women think it's true. But you know better?

The point being raised in this thread is that women are finding men to be inadequate and therefore not wishing to date. The result of that suggestion has been to find a way to blame anyone but men for this.

 

[Correll]

If one is lonely thats on them. A choice.

NOpe. That's clearly false. If bad ideas or practices, have ruined the potential dating pool, that's not a choice, that is society being fucked up by bad ideas.

That you would say something that is so clearly false, means that you are a dishonest person, willing to lie to protect and advance ideas that you know are bad for people.

They arent entitled to another fir a mate.

No one said anything about being "Entitled". That is a strawman that you put here, so that you can pretend that the other side of you, are not completely right and you are not completely wrong.

It is a lie that you are telling.

Freedom means having the choice.

Freedom also means that people that disagree with you, can make their case for their ideas. You are here LYING so that you can try to push the idea that people like me should NOT be allowed to make our arguments, and if we do, that we should not be listened to.


Because you know that if people are well informed and have a chance to think about it, that your ideas will be shit canned like they deserve.

Its a wondrrful thing. This trend is going to continue to grow. Just the way its going to be. Freedom provides many a route. We emphasize work waaaaaay over the family. So the family part is giving way. Perhaps we need to place alot less expectations on people.

It is a terrible thing that is hurting people by the tens of millionsl, if not more.

AND it is hurting society as a whole also.


Your ideas are bad. They are hurting people and all you can do to defend them is talk complete shit.

The more truthful the discussion, the more apperent it is that your feminist ideas of poison for people and societies.

 

[Correll]

I wasn't aware Midnight FM defines feminism now.

He's an example, and his argments are more in line with the reality of the feminists movement than the fake facade you are trying to present.

Again, my side doesn't want to tell women what they should want. It just wants them to have options.

Except you are attacking me for trying to have a real discussion about those options and those choices.

So, you want them to have choices, but only if your side is the only talking about what their choices are... so that you can control what they hear, before them make their decisions.

You are presenting as more... subtle than the other leftie, but your end goals are the same.

Women think it's true. But you know better?

I like that you try to conflate "women" and "feminists".

Right there you make a lie of your pretense of wanting them to have choices. YOu are about trying to take control of the discussion, so that you can control the information they get so that you can control their decisions.

You have an outcome you want, and you are willing to play dirty to get there. Dirty and mean. Mean as sin.

The point being raised in this thread is that women are finding men to be inadequate and therefore not wishing to date.

That is the way that lefties want the issue to be looked at. Blame men. Minimize or dismiss the harm.

The result of that suggestion has been to find a way to blame anyone but men for this.

When did you consider the possiblity that women might be wanting something unreasonable?

Or do you start with the premise of blaming men?

 

[Marener]

He's an example, and his argments are more in line with the reality of the feminists movement than the fake facade you are trying to present.

I disagree. This thread has a lot of participants and only one is behaving as such. It would suggest it's a minority opinion. You can find someone that will say anything. We can find people to argue that women shouldn't have jobs at all. I don't claim that's representative of your side.

Except you are attacking me for trying to have a real discussion about those options and those choices.

So, you want them to have choices, but only if your side is the only talking about what their choices are... so that you can control what they hear, before them make their decisions.

You are presenting as more... subtle than the other leftie, but your end goals are the same.

If you limit the choices, it's not really allowing a choice. I have no problem with people saying that motherhood and being a SAHM is great. I only have a problem when it's implied it's superior.

I like that you try to conflate "women" and "feminists".

Right there you make a lie of your pretense of wanting them to have choices. YOu are about trying to take control of the discussion, so that you can control the information they get so that you can control their decisions.

You have an outcome you want, and you are willing to play dirty to get there. Dirty and mean. Mean as sin.

What does this mean? What information am I trying to keep away from them? I don't recall ever saying anything like that.

That is the way that lefties want the issue to be looked at. Blame men. Minimize or dismiss the harm.

That's what women are telling us. Shouldn't we at least be open to hearing what they're saying about men if we are to help them?

When did you consider the possiblity that women might be wanting something unreasonable?

Or do you start with the premise of blaming men?

Women in the article are saying that men don't have support structures and therefore it falls on the women to be their entire emotional support which is overly taxing. It doesn't seem unreasonable for women to want men who have friends.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Lefties know that. THey don't care. The pain and unhappiness caused by their ideas, they consider a fine price to pay for...something.

I would argue that they don't acknowledge it. Liberals and leftist simply refuse to see the negatives of what they do. All they do is yell.... TTRRRRUUUUUMMMPP!!!!!!!!!

 

[Marener]

I would argue that they don't acknowledge it. Liberals and leftist simply refuse to see the negatives of what they do. All they do is yell.... TTRRRRUUUUUMMMPP!!!!!!!!!

Yet more narrative making and we are just supposed to believe it because you say so!

 

[Marener]

Anyone care to explain why it's women's fault that men don't have friends and hang out anymore?

I don't think we've seen that yet.

 

[Correll]

I disagree. This thread has a lot of participants and only one is behaving as such. It would suggest it's a minority opinion. You can find someone that will say anything. We can find people to argue that women shouldn't have jobs at all. I don't claim that's representative of your side.

Except, his behavior is more in keeping with how feminism really is. We can see it in the conflict between your words and your actions, as we see in the next point.

If you limit the choices, it's not really allowing a choice. I have no problem with people saying that motherhood and being a SAHM is great. I only have a problem when it's implied it's superior.

So, you welcome a debate, but only if the other side isn't allowed to claim their view is "superior"?

That's a pretty standard lefty mindset, and it is you talkign shit about wanting to give women choices, but actually you want to control the discussion, to control their information, to thus control their choices.


And to be clear, my side, the pro-motherhood side, is far, far superiour to the feminists anti-motherhood side.

What does this mean? What information am I trying to keep away from them? I don't recall ever saying anything like that.

That's what women are telling us. Shouldn't we at least be open to hearing what they're saying about men if we are to help them?

Open to listening? Sure. But not just assuming they are correct. You want the discussion to start with BLAME MEN as a premise.

That is not a discussion. That is your side lecturing people adn telling them what to think.

Women in the article are saying that men don't have support structures and therefore it falls on the women to be their entire emotional support which is overly taxing. It doesn't seem unreasonable for women to want men who have friends.

From the op.


"'The Christian right has set the US on the road to Gilead. Without a fight, other nations may follow'

"'Mankeeping Is Why Women Are Done With Dating'"


Yeah, that sounds really constructive and like men are getting a fair hearing.

 

[Rawley]

If women can aspire to higher things than being mothers, I see nothing wrong with that.

"higher things?" Really?

 

[Correll]

I would argue that they don't acknowledge it. Liberals and leftist simply refuse to see the negatives of what they do. All they do is yell.... TTRRRRUUUUUMMMPP!!!!!!!!!

Agreed. They know, but lie and deny and refuse to acknowledge it.


And yes, then yes, TRUMP, or RACIST, or some such nonsense.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Yet more narrative making and we are just supposed to believe it because you say so!

Hahaha!! A narrative I am making?? LOL
FFS child - look all over this forum!! All over left media, all over late night shows - you do know why Colbert is gone right? Hint - TRRRUUUUUUUMMMPP!!!!!!!!!!! AUAAUUUUGGHH!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Marener]

So, you welcome a debate, but only if the other side isn't allowed to claim their view is "superior"?

That's a pretty standard lefty mindset, and it is you talkign shit about wanting to give women choices, but actually you want to control the discussion, to control their information, to thus control their choices.


And to be clear, my side, the pro-motherhood side, is far, far superiour to the feminists anti-motherhood side.

You're conflating. I think having a choice is superior to not having a choice. I don't think that one choice is better than another.

Between the two of us, you're the one telling women what they SHOULD want. Not me.

You're not arguing with me but a strawman.

Open to listening? Sure. But not just assuming they are correct. You want the discussion to start with BLAME MEN as a premise.

That is not a discussion. That is your side lecturing people adn telling them what to think.

Alright. Then argue they're not correct. The premise is that men having few friends means that they are more reliant on support from their partner which is taxing them.

Go ahead and argue against the premise. Or are you just going to BLAME WOMEN more?

From the op.


"'The Christian right has set the US on the road to Gilead. Without a fight, other nations may follow'

"'Mankeeping Is Why Women Are Done With Dating'"


Yeah, that sounds really constructive and like men are getting a fair hearing.

Take it up with the person that wrote it. You're avoiding attempts to discuss the topic.

 

[Correll]

You're conflating. I think having a choice is superior to not having a choice. I don't think that one choice is better than another.

You said that you were open to discussion, but that you had a problem witth the idea that my side could claim that our view is superior.

That is you trying to control the information that women get.

Control the information, while your more agressive allies lke MIDNIGHT FM, spout the most agreesive negs and shit talk imaginable.

That is the "discussion" you want to have. That is NOT offering a choice, but you trying to control the choice.

Between the two of us, you're the one telling women what they SHOULD want. Not me.

I'm an older man who has a family and has seen many peers have or not have families.

I want younger people to have that information so they can make an INFORMED decision.

If they really decide that having children is not for them, I want for them to have seriously considered that, and to NOT have regrets when it is too late to do shit about it.

You are the bad guy here, not me.

You're not arguing with me but a strawman.

Alright. Then argue they're not correct. The premise is that men having few friends means that they are more reliant on support from their partner which is taxing them.

Go ahead and argue against the premise.

I doubt that this is a major problem, or cause of the decline in dating and fertility.

Or are you just going to BLAME WOMEN more?

Take it up with the person that wrote it. You're avoiding attempts to discuss the topic.

I think women are the ones making the decisions that are driving these problems.

 

[Unkotare]

There is something seriously wrong with some of y'all. Fortunately, nature always wins.

 

[Correll]

There is something seriously wrong with some of y'all. Fortunately, nature always wins.

Said a man who never sat in a hot tub while watching glaciers slide past.

 

[Unkotare]

If women can aspire to higher things than being mothers, I see nothing wrong with that.
...

There is no higher thing.