Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51
  1. #1

    Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?



    Men created these posters. Because they needed demand as most men were fighting and America's goal in WW2 was to because the best in terms of production in the world. Little did they know their choice of saving the country by getting workers in the factories by using shady psychology mechanisms preying on women's ego and passive sexism would also be the very thing that destroys the country years down the line creating feminism.

    So that brings me back to my original post tittle. Are men of that time to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion in women and launching feminism?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    No. I believe we are seeing a full circle with what happened in the garden of Eden. Woman wanted power, ate the forbidden fruit, and man was also curious (and wanted to see what would happen) and gave up the responsibility to the woman so he ate the fruit. He even blamed the woman when God asked. They were banished and the rest is history.

    Full circle.

    Today, we are at the point where the woman has already ate the fruit and is handing the fruit to men. MGTOW is a logical response to what Adam should've done ages ago. Walk away and let Eve deal with the consequences.

    If you don't believe in the Bible, then what I'm saying is that feminism is somewhat caused by men indirectly through inaction, but our response to feminism is on us through action. We didn't cause feminism, but we should've nipped in the butt when it first bubbled up.

  3. #3

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by opensource View Post
    No. I believe we are seeing a full circle with what happened in the garden of Eden. Woman wanted power, ate the forbidden fruit, and man was also curious (and wanted to see what would happen) and gave up the responsibility to the woman so he ate the fruit. He even blamed the woman when God asked. They were banished and the rest is history.

    Full circle.

    Today, we are at the point where the woman has already ate the fruit and is handing the fruit to men. MGTOW is a logical response to what Adam should've done ages ago. Walk away and let Eve deal with the consequences.

    If you don't believe in the Bible, then what I'm saying is that feminism is somewhat caused by men indirectly through inaction, but our response to feminism is on us through action. We didn't cause feminism, but we should've nipped in the butt when it first bubbled up.
    We didn't cause feminism directly in my opinion but we did cause it involuntary, but it was needed because we needed to win WW2. The posters shown here from that era is living proof.

    The men of those times filled a job sectors by using sexism propaganda. The women took that and ran off with ever since.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Hedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    358
    Reputation
    816
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    I don't really have a way to prove it but I believe feminism predates WW2. Didn't Rome at the tail end of its fall had its own version of feminism prop up? Women have always had a domineering nature and they venture to rule over men at every point (even when they seem weak). It's left to each man to decide whether to allow, as Schop describes them, that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged creature be a lord over his life.
    Last edited by Hedon; January 24, 2022 at 6:06 AM.
    "Woman is an incredibly vulgar animal from who man created an impossible ideal." Gustave Flaubert

  5. #5

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by manaloneforever View Post
    We didn't cause feminism directly in my opinion but we did cause it involuntary, but it was needed because we needed to win WW2. The posters shown here from that era is living proof.

    The men of those times filled a job sectors by using sexism propaganda. The women took that and ran off with ever since.
    It might help to define feminism. The problem with these terms such as MGTOW and such is that they are very loosely defined and mean different things to different people.

    Having women into the workforce in WW2 is not feminism.

    The natural order is women as men' helpmeet. Women help men with our purpose which benefits society, men, and women. Feminism is going against this and having men help women with their purpose. This is where society collapses.

    In WW2, our (USA) purpose was to win the war. Women stepped in as our helpers to accomplish this task by entering the factories. That is not feminism. The propaganda might've looked like feminism because it tried to show the women as better than men. "Do the job he left behind".... fluff propaganda. Them going to the factories because we were trying to win the war is more "Do the job to help him (us) win the war".
    Last edited by opensource; January 24, 2022 at 7:52 AM.

  6. #6

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    I think men are fully to blame. In what time in history have women ever created something? Other than babies.

  7. #7

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by opensource View Post
    It might help to define feminism. The problem with these terms such as MGTOW and such is that they are very loosely defined and mean different things to different people.

    Having women into the workforce in WW2 is not feminism.

    The natural order is women as men' helpmeet. Women help men with our purpose which benefits society, men, and women. Feminism is going against this and having men help women with their purpose. This is where society collapses.

    In WW2, our (USA) purpose was to win the war. Women stepped in as our helpers to accomplish this task by entering the factories. That is not feminism. The propaganda might've looked like feminism because it tried to show the women as better than men. "Do the job he left behind".... fluff propaganda. Them going to the factories because we were trying to win the war is more "Do the job to help him (us) win the war".
    I agree with everything you are saying but the problem is with creating these posters is that the "Do the job to help him (us) win the war". message we were trying to convey wasn't clear.

    because of this, the situation was taken
    by feminism activist and it opened up the floodgates and was used to persuade and hypnotize other women with lower IQs and the activist who had much deeper motives who DON'T think like us had the perfect opportunity to capitalize on the situation.

    Me and you know that American men meant by those poster's "Do the job to help him (us) win the war". but they (women) either 1) took it as "We can do it better than men, and we don't need him as he is not here." or 2) They understood the message we were trying to convey but and they still went ahead and pulled the trigger on launching the fem wave.

    Sometimes we except others to think the way we do and perceive things as we do and often times they don't. The guys who made this propaganda made this mistake. On purpose? I have no clue.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    334
    Reputation
    794
    Type
    mgtow

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hedon View Post
    I don't really have a way to prove it but I believe feminism predates WW2. Didn't Rome at the tail end of its fall had its own version of feminism prop up? Women have always had a domineering nature and they venture to rule over men at every point (even when they seem weak). It's left to each man to decide whether to allow, as Schop describes them, that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged creature be a lord over his life.
    [Warning, unpopular theoretical opinion]

    Rome fell because in 313 AD, the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, which accepted Christianity, and within 10 years, it had become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

    So by 323 AD it was the "official" spaghetti monster worshipping era of the empire.

    By 395 AD Rome had fallen, a mere 72 years later.

    The Roman empire was over 1000 years old, and took a generation or two to die.

    It wasn't women that destroyed Rome, although that's a normal trad cuck misdirect, because I assure you women had zero power in 300 AD.

    So what's more likely. A bunch of girls "somehow" destroyed Rome with no military force, no army, no political power, no money, and even if they did have a little their motivation was to destroy the gravy train? For...what benefit?

    Or, using the same trad cuck incel logic, did Christianity destroy the Roman Empire? Because the numbers would seem to blame the trad cucks as being far more likely the cause.

    And plunge Europe into the dark ages for 500 years, which only ended when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Empire.

    So if you want to do the "I have a dumb ass view of reality, hurr durr females bad" view of history, then clearly, the world goes to hell when Christians have power, and only improves when they're beaten down.

    So, as in all things, evidence using such silly logic, would mean that trad cucks and their crispy fried magic beliefs caused feminism (which it did) because they're a murderous hate cult (which they are) who hates women. And women didn't like being enslaved to a bunch of spaghetti monster worshippers who destroy mighty empires due to being a death cult. Trad cucks don't solve problems. Trad cucks cause problems.

    Now, I'm not trying to pick on any Christians, but if we want to blame a couple chicks in Rome who had zero power, maybe we should analyze who really had the power at the time. And how consistently they screw things up?

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bumfuck, Egypt
    Posts
    2,925
    Reputation
    10182
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    It might of planted a seed or two, but WW II working women didn't start feminism.

    When men returned, all the wartime women went back to civilian life. Rather they quit voluntarily or were kicked out, I'm not sure. Probably it was some of each. It would be the early seventies before women moved back into jobs men were doing. Least where I live.

    Feminism should of been a good thing. I would love to see a world where they had to paddle their own canoe just like guys do. But that wasn't good enough, so now feminism is just another pussy pass.
    Every day I make the world a little bit worse.

  10. #10
    Senior Member UnKnownSurviving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    268
    Reputation
    296
    Type
    MGTOW

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by DangZagnut View Post
    Rome fell because in 313 AD, the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, which accepted Christianity, and within 10 years, it had become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

    So by 323 AD it was the "official" spaghetti monster worshipping era of the empire.

    By 395 AD Rome had fallen, a mere 72 years later.

    The Roman empire was over 1000 years old, and took a generation or two to die.

    It wasn't women that destroyed Rome, although that's a normal trad cuck misdirect, because I assure you women had zero power in 300 AD.

    So what's more likely. A bunch of girls "somehow" destroyed Rome with no military force, no army, no political power, no money, and even if they did have a little their motivation was to destroy the gravy train? For...what benefit?

    Or, using the same trad cuck incel logic, did Christianity destroy the Roman Empire? Because the numbers would seem to blame the trad cucks as being far more likely the cause.

    And plunge Europe into the dark ages for 500 years, which only ended when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Empire.

    So if you want to do the "I have a dumb ass view of reality, hurr durr females bad" view of history, then clearly, the world goes to hell when Christians have power, and only improves when they're beaten down.

    So, as in all things, evidence using such silly logic, would mean that trad cucks and their crispy fried magic beliefs caused feminism (which it did) because they're a murderous hate cult (which they are) who hates women. And women didn't like being enslaved to a bunch of spaghetti monster worshippers who destroy mighty empires due to being a death cult. Trad cucks don't solve problems. Trad cucks cause problems.

    Now, I'm not trying to pick on any Christians, but if we want to blame a couple chicks in Rome who had zero power, maybe we should analyze who really had the power at the time. And how consistently they screw things up?
    You should understand that Roman society is Iron and the Christian society is more of Clay. So when there was a mixture of Iron and Clay, the Christian Roman leader (I forget his his name), took some of Roman culture, and to bring back some of Iron form of Roman, be strong in some form. But according to the bible, the Christian Roman leader made it, partly brittle, and partly strong. That's why it's partly Iron, and Clay. So, partly strong, is the Iron culture of Rome, and partly brittle, is the clay of culture, of Jews and Christians, and Christians adopted Jewish newly religion from the 12 jewish disciples. Iron and clay do not mixed.

    One of them is Peter, the Jewish disciples of Jesus, who was also a jew. Peter taught this Roman Centurion (I don't remember what his name at the moments, but this Roman man is a different man) God-fearing man, about Jesus, because, the Centurion has been praying to God, (not the Roman god, at all. But he was observing the natural order of things, that made him questions that the universe has been created by a real God, and he observed that there is a God, because he created everything, and that everything has been created with a purpose.), once Peter spoke and explained the whole entire story about jesus, from the birth of Christ, the death of Christ and the rise of christ from the dead.

    When Peter spoke, and was finished speaking, the holy spirit filled the Centurion's and his men 's souls, with the holy spirits, and their eyes were opened.

    Talk about being red pilled with holy spirits.


    And by the way, Rome fell because of the Corruptions of the Senators. And they were having sex and foursomes, which exposed them to the Roman public. So now all, of Roman citizens heard of it, were influenced by Roman Senators, which cause them to have foursomes and sex other people from the palace of Roman Senators, to the common people of Rome. Ancient Roman society were govern by Roman masculinity and virtue of morality in ancient Roman traditions for hundreds of years until it was corrupted by foursome scandals of Roman Senators.


    America is heading down the same path. A lot of politicians in America, are having sex and foursomes, and the christian pastors are no betters. So now there's scandals after scandals.


    American will fall very soon, because of lack of morals.
    Last edited by UnKnownSurviving; January 24, 2022 at 1:03 PM.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    256
    Reputation
    768
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    It has been stated that 2nd wave feminism was launched due to women getting out of the home and into the factories, then feeling animosity once the men came back from the war and replaced them in the workforce. And that makes sense. Prior to that, a woman's place WAS in the home, and working allowed for a wealth of socialization for very bored house wives. But really, it happened much earlier than that, I believe. Authors in the 1800's popularized the idea of "romantic marriage" as the norm. Prior to that is was, quite rightly, considered a legal transfer of property rights. And the courts still treat it as such. But the love-struck authors (who were universally NiceGuy simps) projected the "women are wonderful" effect onto the masses following the wide-spread adoption of literacy.

    I feel that is what really did the damage to men. Because it was the beginning of the modern fantasy-female, the beginning of "true love" and One-itis and all that. Once upon a time, men had a very realistic view of women. Hell, the Bible itself is really just a collection of "best practices" for a stable society... and it pulls no punches concerning the nature of females. Every concept that the manosphere has "re-discovered" was present in those and other ancient stories.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    588
    Reputation
    1354
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    The seeds were planted when Roman woman were granted equality - divorces went up, birth rates went down. The Empire which emerged on the backs of a million strong population in Rome could not replace its manpower losses. Due to the shortage of manpower, slavery and increasing reliance on imports became normalised. Then foreign barbarian tribes were invited to 'settle' on the outskirts and the Roman army became increasingly reliant on mercenaries.

    Rome was already in decline, but was able to cling for a long time to their fading Empire until the barbarians incursions came (which in turn was precipitated by the Huns invading Germany from the East). Because Rome had little ability to replenish losses from the foreign incursions, they became weaker and more vulnerable until they collapsed. Whether or not Christianity was adopted, the Empire was already fading and would have fallen. The catalyst was the barbarian incursions.

    The parallels between Rome and the West are obvious:
    Women granted equality, rising divorces, declining birth rates, large import-dependance, opening the door for migrants to 'settle' in order to solve the manpower issues.

    However, we still have unrivalled military technology, we won't need mercenary armies as it is likely we'll skip straight ahead to drones. And also there are no external barbarians at the gate. So its hard to say how long the decline will take, maybe another 200 years, maybe another 1000 years. Most likely we'll all be dead and gone well before that happens.

    Sources:

    > Prior to 100 BCE “patria potestas” had been the rule in Rome. The Roman family and society had been highly patriarchal and a woman went directly from her father’s possession to her husband’s essential ownership. But following 100 BCE, the practice of “manus”, in which a woman’s right to life and all her possessions were under her husband’s control, was no longer implemented. In fact, it became forbidden for husband and wife to share property. Women prospered under these new conditions; in charge of their own property, it was not uncommon for women to build up a significant fortune and around this time we see that there were statues and buildings donated by women. Women were also given the right to divorce their husbands and towards the end of the Republic divorce became a common affair.

    (link: https://depts.washington.edu/hrome/A...printable.html

    > There is considerable evidence to show the Roman society in the late Republic and Early Empire was afflicted by a low birth-rate. Augustus in 18 B.C. found it necessary to pass lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus, in the hope of raising the birth-rate by penalizing the unmarried and the childless. In 9 A.D. he attempted to supplement this law with the lex Papia Poppaea. The very existence of this legislation indicates that the problem of childlessness was widespread and long-lasting, ..

    (link: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41233558)

    > Most agree the Rome had about a million inhabitants during the Augustan era. and then peaked at somewhat over a million during the second century AD. Building count data for the fourth century tend to support a population of slightly under a million. All agree that Rome's population declined rapidly over the following two centuries, although the rate of decline probably varied considerably during this period.The sixth proved ruinous because of the Gothic Wars, which effectively stripped the city of its remaining trappings of empire. During the Gothic wars, between 534 and 563, the city was taken and re-taken by opposing forces fIve times. By one estimate, the city's population was reduced by 90% during this period (Lot, 268). This suggests that Rome still had a signifIcant population in the period immediately preceding the Gothic Wars. Those wars forced Rome entirely into the arms of the Pope, who took over all of the city's administrative functions. The city had ended its decline by 550 AD, with a resident population of about 30,000. (Hibbert, 79)


    (link: https://msaag.aag.org/wp-content/upl...4/26_Twine.pdf)

  13. #13
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    5,326
    Reputation
    15191
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith79 View Post
    its hard to say how long the decline will take, maybe another 200 years, maybe another 1000 years. Most likely we'll all be dead and gone well before that happens.
    In modern times we're the equivalent of the Berserkers, except we're inside the gates, embedded in the population and growing, as we see our lingo entering mainstream.

    It's really no wonder they're terrified and deemed our masses as terrorists and slated to be eradicated from the main stream knowledge through ongoing censorship, slander, and mischaracterization.

    A man that wins himself can also win others and that's what makes us so dangerous and outcasts labeled enemy of the state.

    Empires end when least expected in a precipitous rapid decay, like a meteor entering the atmosphere.

    Sovern men are dangerous because we can't be bargained with when it comes to surrendering our sovereignty. To the sovereign man, death is sweeter than surrender.

  14. #14
    Senior Member UnKnownSurviving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    268
    Reputation
    296
    Type
    MGTOW

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith79 View Post
    The seeds were planted when Roman woman were granted equality - divorces went up, birth rates went down. The Empire which emerged on the backs of a million strong population in Rome could not replace its manpower losses. Due to the shortage of manpower, slavery and increasing reliance on imports became normalised. Then foreign barbarian tribes were invited to 'settle' on the outskirts and the Roman army became increasingly reliant on mercenaries.

    Rome was already in decline, but was able to cling for a long time to their fading Empire until the barbarians incursions came (which in turn was precipitated by the Huns invading Germany from the East). Because Rome had little ability to replenish losses from the foreign incursions, they became weaker and more vulnerable until they collapsed. Whether or not Christianity was adopted, the Empire was already fading and would have fallen. The catalyst was the barbarian incursions.

    The parallels between Rome and the West are obvious:
    Women granted equality, rising divorces, declining birth rates, large import-dependance, opening the door for migrants to 'settle' in order to solve the manpower issues.

    However, we still have unrivalled military technology, we won't need mercenary armies as it is likely we'll skip straight ahead to drones. And also there are no external barbarians at the gate. So its hard to say how long the decline will take, maybe another 200 years, maybe another 1000 years. Most likely we'll all be dead and gone well before that happens.

    Sources:

    > Prior to 100 BCE “patria potestas” had been the rule in Rome. The Roman family and society had been highly patriarchal and a woman went directly from her father’s possession to her husband’s essential ownership. But following 100 BCE, the practice of “manus”, in which a woman’s right to life and all her possessions were under her husband’s control, was no longer implemented. In fact, it became forbidden for husband and wife to share property. Women prospered under these new conditions; in charge of their own property, it was not uncommon for women to build up a significant fortune and around this time we see that there were statues and buildings donated by women. Women were also given the right to divorce their husbands and towards the end of the Republic divorce became a common affair.

    (link: https://depts.washington.edu/hrome/A...printable.html

    > There is considerable evidence to show the Roman society in the late Republic and Early Empire was afflicted by a low birth-rate. Augustus in 18 B.C. found it necessary to pass lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus, in the hope of raising the birth-rate by penalizing the unmarried and the childless. In 9 A.D. he attempted to supplement this law with the lex Papia Poppaea. The very existence of this legislation indicates that the problem of childlessness was widespread and long-lasting, ..

    (link: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41233558)

    > Most agree the Rome had about a million inhabitants during the Augustan era. and then peaked at somewhat over a million during the second century AD. Building count data for the fourth century tend to support a population of slightly under a million. All agree that Rome's population declined rapidly over the following two centuries, although the rate of decline probably varied considerably during this period.The sixth proved ruinous because of the Gothic Wars, which effectively stripped the city of its remaining trappings of empire. During the Gothic wars, between 534 and 563, the city was taken and re-taken by opposing forces fIve times. By one estimate, the city's population was reduced by 90% during this period (Lot, 268). This suggests that Rome still had a signifIcant population in the period immediately preceding the Gothic Wars. Those wars forced Rome entirely into the arms of the Pope, who took over all of the city's administrative functions. The city had ended its decline by 550 AD, with a resident population of about 30,000. (Hibbert, 79)


    (link: https://msaag.aag.org/wp-content/upl...4/26_Twine.pdf)

    Wow. History is being repeated all over again. This time America is the new Rome. Thanks for such extensive sources for the history of Roman society and Roman traditions, and cultures. Take my thanks, johnsmith79.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    588
    Reputation
    1354
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtower View Post
    In modern times we're the equivalent of the Berserkers, except we're inside the gates, embedded in the population and growing, as we see our lingo entering mainstream.
    Respectfully, I disagree. I believe we're more akin to the Roman men who tried to avoid marriage and refused to enlist or fight, some uprooting themselves to places outside of Rome in order to not be involved with Roman society.

  16. #16

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by UnKnownSurviving View Post
    You should understand that Roman society is Iron and the Christian society is more of Clay. So when there was a mixture of Iron and Clay, the Christian Roman leader (I forget his his name), took some of Roman culture, and to bring back some of Iron form of Roman, be strong in some form. But according to the bible, the Christian Roman leader made it, partly brittle, and partly strong. That's why it's partly Iron, and Clay. So, partly strong, is the Iron culture of Rome, and partly brittle, is the clay of culture, of Jews and Christians, and Christians adopted Jewish newly religion from the 12 jewish disciples. Iron and clay do not mixed.

    One of them is Peter, the Jewish disciples of Jesus, who was also a jew. Peter taught this Roman Centurion (I don't remember what his name at the moments, but this Roman man is a different man) God-fearing man, about Jesus, because, the Centurion has been praying to God, (not the Roman god, at all. But he was observing the natural order of things, that made him questions that the universe has been created by a real God, and he observed that there is a God, because he created everything, and that everything has been created with a purpose.), once Peter spoke and explained the whole entire story about jesus, from the birth of Christ, the death of Christ and the rise of christ from the dead.

    When Peter spoke, and was finished speaking, the holy spirit filled the Centurion's and his men 's souls, with the holy spirits, and their eyes were opened.

    Talk about being red pilled with holy spirits.


    And by the way, Rome fell because of the Corruptions of the Senators. And they were having sex and foursomes, which exposed them to the Roman public. So now all, of Roman citizens heard of it, were influenced by Roman Senators, which cause them to have foursomes and sex other people from the palace of Roman Senators, to the common people of Rome. Ancient Roman society were govern by Roman masculinity and virtue of morality in ancient Roman traditions for hundreds of years until it was corrupted by foursome scandals of Roman Senators.


    America is heading down the same path. A lot of politicians in America, are having sex and foursomes, and the christian pastors are no betters. So now there's scandals after scandals.


    American will fall very soon, because of lack of morals.
    DangZagnut is here to troll and he/she is a simp/feminist.



    [Mod note: Insulting other members is a violation of Principles. If you have a problem with a member, don't pick fights. Instead, use the Report button and make your case to us mods. Incidentally, the member you quoted is not the member you insulted. Anyway, Infraction issued.]
    Last edited by Unboxxed; January 24, 2022 at 4:19 PM.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    588
    Reputation
    1354
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by mgtow2021 View Post
    DangZagnut is here to troll and he/she is a simp/feminist.
    Edit to add: Those are some serious charges.

    Your quote was UnKnownSurviving's post though? Do you have proof of what you said?

  18. #18
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    5,326
    Reputation
    15191
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Lets not us decide, hit the "report post" button the moment you become suspect, then let the bell system work its magic.



  19. #19
    Senior Member UnKnownSurviving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    268
    Reputation
    296
    Type
    MGTOW

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith79 View Post
    Respectfully, I disagree. I believe we're more akin to the Roman men who tried to avoid marriage and refused to enlist or fight, some uprooting themselves to places outside of Rome in order to not be involved with Roman society.
    It also make sense. According to the sources of Roman history that johnsmith79 just posted, Roman women were given rights and divorce rights to women by the men, after hundred years, and now, there's cases of divorce-rape by the Roman women, because let's face it: after Roman women were given rights and divorce rights, I bet you there were divorce rapes and child supports, and alimony. During those ancient years, Roman men were just now figuring those out, and so they decided to be mgtow.

    I believe there were Roman MGTOWs in during the Roman ancient empire. And they had the same problem we have in America.

    So, yes. I concur with johnsmith79: that WE AMERICANS are like, and similar to the Roman men of old.

    They have experience it before. And now, behold, history is being repeated. Again. Will this ever stop???

  20. #20
    Senior Member UnKnownSurviving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    268
    Reputation
    296
    Type
    MGTOW

    Re: Are men to blame a bit for sparking mental confusion and launching feminism?

    Troll? I'm NOT a feminist. I can tell you that. I'm mgtow plain and simple.


Similar Threads

  1. I blame men
    By KingofThrones in forum Nonmember Questions and Opposing Views
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 5, 2022, 8:53 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: September 28, 2019, 4:45 AM
  3. Blame it all on porn
    By The_Joker in forum Lounge
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: October 19, 2018, 10:25 PM
  4. The man is ALWAYS to blame
    By Chukhed in forum News Articles
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 10, 2016, 8:27 PM
  5. Can ya blame em?
    By Isaiah4:1 in forum Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 27, 2014, 8:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •