I no longer blame the women….I blame their enablers

[iMickey503Participant 12468]

narwhal wrote:

These really apply to any living things behavior. If a dog barks too much…
– The dog can decide he doesn’t want to bark anymore.
– You can train the dog not to bark.
– You can punish the dog for barking too much.
– You can put a muzzle on the dog, or give him up to someone who doesn’t care about the barking.

You just pulled a FAUST!

Guarantee you are from the midwest.

You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home

[narwhalParticipant]

iMickey503 wrote:

Guarantee you are from the midwest.

Texas

Ok. Then do it.

[MonkParticipant 17074]

sidecar wrote:

Then you are both wrong AND one of the enablers.

Not at all – understanding something is not the same as excusing it.

I understand that hypergamy is hardwired in. I do not however excuse their cruelty and spite, because that is a result of their free will.

For there to be guilt (I assume you intend accountability and guilt to be synonymous), there must be free will. But there can be responsibility.

Thus the wolf eats the sheep because it must. It is not guilty, but it is responsible. If on the other hand, it were to choose to be cruel for the sake of it, it would be guilty.

[narwhalParticipant]

Monk wrote:

Thus the wolf eats the sheep because it must. It is not guilty, but it is responsible. If on the other hand, it were to choose to be cruel for the sake of it, it would be guilty.

That’s a ridiculous analogy. A women doesn’t behave badly out of necessity. She’s not doing it as a means of survival. She’s doing it out of greed, selfishness, etc. She is not a mindless animal incapable of doing nothing but what her instincts tell her to do.

You are absolutely correct that if a society doesn’t punish people for acting on their selfish destructive instincts, then you’re going to have more and more people act on those destructive instincts. That doesn’t mean that the destructive behavior isn’t morally wrong and reprehensible.

Here’s a better example I think. It’s perfectly legal, convenient and enabled, for a parent to feed a child nothing but fast food for 18 years straight. The parent is naturally lazy, so it’s their first instinct when it comes to meals. Are you going to say that the parent is not to blame because they were allowed to do so?

Ok. Then do it.

[sidecarParticipant 35862]

Branched off wrote:

I think it is not possible for women to work at a higher standard.

Well that’s something they need to fix. They certainly won’t try so long as men allow them to work at a lower standard because muh natures.

narwhal wrote:

– Women can voluntarily change their behavior.

Really?

I stopped reading there.

You really do live in a fantasy world of shoulds and coulds instead of the real world that is. You need to do something about that.

Monk wrote:

Not at all – understanding something is not the same as excusing it.

But that’s exactly what you’re doing here.

Women need to be held accountable for their sh​itty behavior whether they can supposedly help it or not.

So you understand that they are greedy, selfish cun​ts? So what. That still doens’t give them the right to be greedy, selfish cu​nts.

If you don’t blame women for their sh​itty behavior, then you are an enablers.

[HermitParticipant]

sidecar wrote:

Women need to be held accountable for their sh​itty behavior whether they can supposedly help it or not.

I gotta’ give you a big ol’ star and agree with this 100%. Do you let the serial killer go on killing even though he’s insane and can’t help it? Do you allow the child molester who can’t help it continue doing what he does?

Women absolutely need to be held accountable for all their actions no matter what. Young children may not know any better, but good parents still punish them when they do wrong. Women need to be punished for the s hit they pull, no matter what. Like the video that Awakened posted with the lunatic female screaming at the cop. That crazy bitch should be locked up. That behavior is inexcusable and if she really can’t help it, then she for damn sure needs to be locked up.

Whether or not a woman doesn’t know she’s doing wrong should not excuse her of her actions. I don’t care if she has an army of enablers. She should be stopped. That’s it. Right is right and wrong is wrong.

The evil in women’s hearts leaves them no moral bounds as to inhibit them from descending to the lowest levels of darkness to acquire their self entitled desires.

[SandalsParticipant 4254]

It’s the enablers. You gotta break a women like a horse. It is natures way.

Look at a forest… so beautiful. But take a microscope and look at that forest and it’s an orgy of violence – animals eating each other, killing one another, males raping females (and the females loving it!). Everyone’s fighting for survival.

Girls s~~~ test. And violence is the way of the world, gentleman. To refuse to break your girl is to defy nature. Our current system, enforced by men, punishes men for doing what is right and natural.

Oh, but wait… that’s a no free speech zone, isn’t it…? What’s that? We can’t talk about animal nature? Ok, it must be the women’s fault because that’s their ugly nature. What a horrible thing I have said… shame on me. Ok, we’ll blame the women then.

[SandalsParticipant 4254]

Well I just read this:

A few rules please:

• Totally inappropriate s~~~ (like suggested violence) will be unapologetically deleted. We are not Jezebel.

So I guess I have broken the rules. The left does not need to censor our speech. We do it so readily to ourselves. We cuck ourselves.

The left, on the other hand, has no such rules. They actively promote violence, and then act on it, which is why then win, every time. We’ll never learn. It’s the enablers.

[MonkParticipant 17074]

narwhal wrote:

A women doesn’t behave badly out of necessity. She’s not doing it as a means of survival. She’s doing it out of greed, selfishness, etc. She is not a mindless animal incapable of doing nothing but what her instincts tell her to do.

What is that ‘bad’ behaviour?

Hypergamy, grasping after resources? The Selfish Gene. The drive to reproduce. It’s hardwired in.

If however we are referring to going the extra mile out of hate, that’s something else entirely. That has nothing to do with reproduction. That’s choice and therefore guilt.

Here’s a better example I think. It’s perfectly legal, convenient and enabled, for a parent to feed a child nothing but fast food for 18 years straight. The parent is naturally lazy, so it’s their first instinct when it comes to meals. Are you going to say that the parent is not to blame because they were allowed to do so?

The instinct is to feed offspring. They choose the fast food that destroys their offspring, so they are guilty.

[sidecarParticipant 35862]

Monk wrote:

Hypergamy, grasping after resources? The Selfish Gene. The drive to reproduce. It’s hardwired in.

So what of it?

If we stuck to merely what was “hardwired in” we’d all still be in the trees flinging sh​it.

There is no gene for landing on the moon. There is no instinct to split the atom.

Humanity is defined as transcending our biological limitations, not using them as an excuse.

So why permit women that excuse? We certainly don’t permit it of men.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 25019]

Women of our era have taken up a philosophy of hate against me. No woman is forced to be a feminist. Women see a benefit in their somewhere for them. I blame, shame and complain about it when I see it. That’s why I spend so much time being alone. Better to be alone than with someone who hates you for the color of your skin or the variety of your genitals.

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

[sidecarParticipant 35862]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

Women of our era have taken up a philosophy of hate against me.

Except it’s not actually hate.

It’s envy.

[Author]

Posts