First estate walk against "Male violence" in Spain

[ToadParticipant 271]

So, this is it. In my country, a few days ago was the first state walk against violence “from men”. between their petitions was that “only if is from men” the abusers will be treated as a terrorists… Of course this already happen when only with their word a man can go to the prison until he can prove that he’s innocent and not vice versa, they just want to make it worst….
Fun facts:
There was a men’s association who went with females with the slogan: “we kill to them”, and another political group showed a banner with the slogan: “against all kind of violence, the violence has no gender”… and the police had to evacuate them for their security because the people of the walk tried to beat them with phrases as: “i hope you will be in the list of killed this year”…
s~~~ just got real…

http://www.thelocal.es/20151108/thousands-protest-against-domestic-violence

[RoyDalParticipant]

The same things are going on here, in the US and Canada. It dovetails perfectly with the r/K mating strategy that Turd Flinging Monkey expounds upon in his videos.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

It’s 2015, thousands of people in Spain hate men and take to the streets over 41 women murdered in a year, less than is murdered in one night in New York City.

Things will much worse if they ever get better at all. This is reverse Sharia law and very popular in large parts of the world.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[ToadParticipant 271]

It dovetails perfectly with the r/K mating strategy

first time hearing about that… what it means?

It’s 2015, thousands of people in Spain hate men and take to the streets over 41 women murdered in a year, less than is murdered in one night in New York City.

funny thing is that 40 murders in a country of 47 millions and they have the guts to claim that this the worst plague nowadays…
the business goes well…

[OldBillParticipant]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

…41 women murdered in a year, less than is murdered in one night in New York City.

While the OP’s link is just another example of the all-to-usual female hypocrisy, there’s no need to compound the error by posting feelings and hyperbole disguised as facts.

In 2014, the number of murders in New York was just over 300. That’s less than one per day. This year the murder has increased, mostly due to liberal pressure to end the “stop and frisk” program. The increased murder rate produced 54 corpses in the first two months of the year, still under one per day.

We’re all men here. We deal in facts. Leave the histrionics and lies to the women, okay?

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[ToadParticipant 271]

i would be fooled as the black guy ( 😉 ) because, i mean, why are they all laughing and showing their tongues as if the camera man would be a cell phone and they are making a selfie?…is this a serious matter or a party?

[OldBillParticipant]

Toad wrote:

first time hearing about that… what it means?

It’s a mostly discredited biological theory dealing with “Quantity vs. Quality” reproductive strategies. Putting it in simple terms, r-selection species rely on quantity; large numbers of offspring, minimal investment in rearing, and early maturity of young. Conversely, k-selection species rely on quality; small numbers of offspring, major investments in rearing, and delayed maturity of young. Naturally, this all occurs on a spectrum or bell curve with very few species being “perfectly” r or k selected.

Biologists have mostly dropped the theory. Along with making theories fit the facts, good science follows the thesis-antithesis-synthesis model. Empirical data from population studies poked holes in large portions of the r/k selection theory, so the parts that worked were kept and used in new theories. Others disciplines like economics have rummaged part of r/k theory out of the dumpster for their own use.

The PUA community, MRAs, and other self-taught “sociologists” have also latched on to r/k theory as a way to “explain” female hypergamy. (Their use of hypergamy is slightly off too.) What they fail to realize is that by using r/k theory excuses female hypergamy by removing potential for choice from women.

Oddly enough, by absolving women from any responsibility and denying that women have agency over their lives, the people using r/k theory to excuse hypergamy have quite a bit in common with feminists.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

OK, well I pulled that our of my ass but the point is that 328 murders in NYC in 2015 but when I grew up there in the 1980’s the murder rate was 4 times as high so it would be 40 murders in 10 nights.

Sorry for the exaggeration. I guess a thousand man march is called for every 10 days in NYC (at least in the 80’s).

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[OldBillParticipant]

Im sorry but r/k selection theories do not deny women their choice nor excuse anything.

You don’t understand. Using the mostly debunked r/k theory to buttress hypergamy claims doesn’t deny women a choice. Instead, it asserts that they are unable to make a choice.

Instead of the excuse being “because vagina”, it becomes “because genetics”. Once again, their excuse is that it is never their fault because they have no choice.

Your example regarding fat and obese people is entirely accurate, just not in the way you thought it was. The growing numbers of self-deluded people in the “fat acceptance” movement eagerly latch onto excuses for being obese instead of facing the reasons for being obese. Whether it’s PCOS, metabolism issues, the “high’ cost of nutritious foods, or any of the hundreds of other excuses, they want to believe – need to believe – it is never the obese person’s fault. It’s never a result of their choices and actions, it’s always the fault of something they have no control over. In their stampede to craft excuses, they surrender any agency in their own lives.

When we rightfully call out women for their unconstrained and mindless hypergamy, we come perilously close to excusing women for that behavior. There’s a fine line between hating the sin and hating the sinner. Women, like all humans, have agency over their lives. Very little in their lives is completely out of their control. Arguing againt hypergamy and then using the debunked r/k selection theory to suggest a genetic reason for hypergamy only gives women an excuse for their s~~~ty behavior.

I’d rather not excuse women for hypergamy because I hold them to the same standards regarding agency that all adult humans should be held to. If women fail to act like adults it is because they choose to do so and not because their genetics leave them no choice in the matter.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

Cheating isn’t a sin. Because there is no god. It’s just something men feel is really wrong for the women they are having sex with to do. It’s a mating strategy men don’t like, because it conflicts with theirs.

Whether there is a god or not. Whether this is a simulated reality or not. Cheating is lying. If she was up front beforehand, or even if it was an invitation to a threesome, that would be different. But, cheating is lying. And lying is one of the most corrupting influences on society.

I do understand. R/K theories do not take away a woman’s choice. The fat acceptance movement is stupid, but the solution is not to undermine the scientific basis of hunger it’s to teach self control. Same with r/k. Maybe some would try to use this theory to absolve women of responsibility, but that’s pretty stupid.

The problem with fat women is they refuse to admit they are fat. Another part is how fat women carrying themselves, and present themselves.

A fat woman is not going to look good in a bikini. But, I can think of some formal dresses that would look would be flattering on a fat woman.

[OldBillParticipant]

I do understand. R/K theories do not take away a woman’s choice.

You say that, but then you write this:

The fat acceptance movement is stupid, but the solution is not to undermine the scientific basis of hunger it’s to teach self control. Same with r/k.

Self control – also known as choice or agency – is precisely what I writing about. In that sentence, you agreed with the basic premise of my posts and yet you want to believe otherwise.

Pointing out the fact that r/k selection theory has been discredited and replaced doesn’t undermine the scientific basis of hypergamy. Hypergamy exists. The only question is how much of hypergamy is choice and how much of hypergamy is “hard wired”. I believe it is much more of a choice than genetic predestination.

Maybe some would try to use this theory to absolve women of responsibility, but that’s pretty stupid.

Maybe someone would? They already do. Haven’t you been paying attention to the various links posted here?

As for it being stupid, haven’t you been paying attention to all the other claims by third wave feminism?

I believe all your assertions are in err. Deal with it.

The word you wanted was “error” and I believe you’re a badly educated idiot. Deal with that.

By the way, what’s the deal with all your one or two sentence posts in this thread? Most don’t seem to be in reply to anyone or any post in specific. Are you just typing away in some stream of consciousness? Or are you unable to collect your “thoughts” into coherent paragraphs?

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[OldBillParticipant]

Err is a word.

Yes. err is a word. Err is a special kind of word known as a verb, f~~~wit.

When I err, I make an error. When you wrote “I believe all your assertions are in err.”, you either should have written have written “I believe you erred in your assertions.” or “I believe all your assertions are in error.”.

Because some people abuse science doesn’t mean we should obscure it.

I never suggested that and only someone with questionable reading comprehension would think I did.

I pointed out that r/k selection theory has been debunked, that working biologists no longer use it, and that fairly recently various non-scientists had pulled it out the dustbin to excuse away female hypergamy. I went on to assert that providing additional excuses for female hypergamy denies the agency women should have and regularly claim to have in their own lives.

I go on to say that, while hypergamy is real, hypergamy is also a choice. Women have always had the same potential for hypergamous behavior. However, that behavior has normally held in check by various social and cultural means. In the last few decades the West has seen those socio-cultural restraints loosened allowing women to choose to be more hypergamous.

…people crave carbs is scientific reality. We don’t say “ooh you shouldn’t say that because people will use it as an excuse.”

You do have trouble reading, don’t you? I never claimed anything like that.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[OldBillParticipant]

Most ideas don’t really take a paragraph.

Your ideas don’t. Others not so much.

Brevity is the soul of wit.

And multiple posts are?

Longwindedness is the life blood of stupidity.

As is functional illiteracy.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

I smell tradcon in here. for that consider this. Maybe the nuclear family is actually ill fitting for the human species at this point. Maybe Traditional roles harm everyone. Maybe specialization is wack too.

The so-called “nuclear family” cannot exist given the current laws, regulations, court judgements, and female group think are set against it.

That dream is currently dead.

Though, those that are steering this mess clearly are trying to use debt to control the situation. Unfortunately, debt is a mathematical blob like monster that sucks resources into itself, until it causes a collapse.

And after a collapse, it will be the self-sufficient ones that will survive. Such as MGTOWs. And it will be such people that will have the pick of the litter.

[Cipher HighwindParticipant 1144]

Your equating females to the First Estate of Ancien Régime France was a master stroke, Toad.

[ToadParticipant 271]

Your equating females to the First Estate of Ancien Régime France was a master stroke, Toad.

sorry for my poor english, pal but, i not sure i understand you…

if you mean about the “estate” word in the title of the post it was because the walk have this name by the institutions and because it was a walk over all my country… I didn’t realize this would have anything to do with the ancient France at all, maybe in your language you should chose other word…
but, if i made a master stroke even without realize it… good for me 😉
greetings

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

You know that women raised boys into who they are. Think about it. If there’s too much volience against women from men, the way to solve the problem is teach women not to abuse boys. There is scientific proof that spanking and other form of physical violience teaches the child to be violent as gets older.

“Medical professionals investigating the long-term effects of spanking have consistently found a link between corporal punishment and increased aggression in children. Such “educational” discipline correlates to higher levels of acting out in school and trouble in academic performance. It predicts vulnerability to depression, typically in girls, and antisocial tendencies usually manifest in boys.

Boys are spanked more than girls. Physical punishment most frequently occurs at the toddler or preschooler age. Parents of lower income and with less formal education spank more often. Religious conservatives tend to favor corporeal punishment, though not always the case. The King James version of the bible, Proverbs: 13:24, expresses the sentiment “spare the rod and spoil the child” in antiquated language: He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. ”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-me-in-we/201202/how-spanking-harms-the-brain

Women are the cause and the solution. Stop spanking boys and you will see a huge decrease in violence.

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[ToadParticipant 271]

Weird. i think most of the rebel in today young society it is because women tell everybody that punish and spank kids will be harmful for them in the future and because of that kids nowadays are spoiled as f~~~ and when they are teenagers they think that the world is theirs and they can do whatever they want…

They have no respect, no considerations and no consequences for anything or at least they think they don’t… i used to received a good slap in the ass and even in the face when i did something disrespectful and i have grown as a respectful and educated man… but , ey! i can only talk about me…
like we used to say in my country:
“a good slap at time saves a lot of bulls~~~…”

[Author]

Posts