"But the ‘punishment’ is part and parcel. A guy needs to be ‘punished’ in those ways because they are restrictive measures. If he loses status, then he can’t have had much/enough to begin with. If he is mocked, then he should be able to either brush it off or answer back. If he is irreparably hurt by a rejection, then he was weak and unworthy of the status he used to possess and the woman he aimed to attain. What I’m getting at is that it’s nor really a fear of ‘punishment’, as it’s the natural order of things. It"’s moreso a fear of consequence, a fear of inadequacy. Women NEED to reject unsuitable men. We need to mock those who try and rise beyond their ranks, warn other women of unsuitable males looking for attention and make it known what we value and don’t value in a man. Perhaps the problem is that there’s no set rules as to what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’ in modern society, making it hard to know when you’re in your zone, when you’re treading the line and when you’re out of bounds. Yet, even so, it is a woman’s prerogative, her responsibility, to reject and demoralize weak men. He’s not being punished, he’s being put in his place."
Now that's interesting, because turnabout is fair play. I personally believe unattractive/unpleasant/overweight women (and women in men's jobs, and teachers, and those in HR and social work) need to be brutally humiliated in public, insulted, mocked, treated with contempt and scorn. They should be fired.
So what if the Greeks noticed that humiliating someone in public (the original meaning of Hubris) was something they considered obscene (and it often had a sexual connotation to it) and so was banned from their theater? And they noticed it was followed by Nemesis - revenge.
We're beyond all that! Evo-Psych, you know!
Who even wants to see these skanks in public? They're disgusting and repulsive.
Now if we were to do this, and instead concentrate on attractive, pleasant feminine women, imagine how fast things would change.
There is a concentrated effort to get men to accept disgusting women, i.e. fat, ugly, unpleasant ones.
Ignore that. Pay attention to the good and ignore or attack the evil. Then things will change.
Why be a gentleman at all when women aren't acting like ladies?
What's that other old saying? You reap what you sow?
7 comments:
This "Alice" character sounds like a domestic violence incident waiting to happen; which reminds me of the following joke:
Q. What do you tell a woman with two black eyes?
A. Nothing, that stupid cunt already been told twice.
He, he, he!
A cop once said this, and some volunteer work at a battered women's shelter confirmed it for me. I quote him verbatim:
"Domestic violence is really a case of two idiots fighting - and the weaker or smaller idiot losing."
That stupid twat Alice is a walking argument for bringing back the dunking stool for gossips and scolds.
I'm beginning to think that the Puritans weren't as backward as our idiot school teachers lead to believe.
That stupid cunt is in no position to call anyone unfit and unworthy for that is what she is.
I concur lets belittle men from the start of infancy, this wont result in obvious consequences like elliot rodger, serial rapists, or ellen drake( i think that was the name of the guy that made furniturr out of human skin
I suspect you mean Ed Gein, who was one of the inspirations for Buffalo Bill in "Silence of the Lambs."
Please don't ask me how I know these things.
If I ever came across that cunt, the only thing she would be hearing from me is "keep out of my reach, then you can keep all your teeth. The only thing worse than a twat nuclear rejecting a guy is the rationalizing it afterwards.
Then she wouldn't be so "empowered" chewing on her broken teeth would she?
Post a Comment