Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Attention "nihilists"

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 04:06:45 AM
This will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but having more REASONABLE control over women is probably a good thing in the long run.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 04:16:42 AM
It's popular with me.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 04:41:57 AM
This will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but having more REASONABLE control over women is probably a good thing in the long run.

Expand on this idea.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 05:08:43 AM
Don't you ever say "please"?

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 05:26:10 AM
This will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but having more REASONABLE control over women is probably a good thing in the long run.

Expand on this idea.

We have all seen what the modern financially and sexually independent woman looks like. A walking disaster. Once a culture loses its women to materialism, "sexual liberation" and reckless "independence" we have all committed suicide. Women would be much better off playing nurturing roles in society. They may have their say and positions of power (matriarchs, areas women are more knowledgeable in etc etc etc) but ultimately there should be safeguards against them becoming entrenched in feminist thought.


It is no wonder 1 in 4 women are on some sort of mental health medication now. It is no coincidence that women over 40 are ranked as some of the most MISERABLE groups in Amerika mostly due to shunning marriage and children for career. Not to mention how female "independence" and "empowerment" have helped ravish the tradition family structure and produce endless divorces.


I am not advocating treating women badly or with violence. Not at all. I am advocating organic gender roles which have manifested themselves naturally over all cultures.



- Restrict their voting rights to local elections.
- No education higher than high school. The higher IQ ones may go on to higher learning if they wish, but these would be very few.
- Bring back shaming for sluttiness and divorce
- Praise femininity and its complimentary role to masculinity
- Champion monogamy and chastity
- Establish communal rituals commemorating and exhaling female fertility in order to make the step into womanhood something that is taken SERIOUSLY 



Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 05:56:41 AM
I am not going to sugar coat anything for you. You're on a metal site. You can handle it.

Some of your ideas are beyond stupid. You've been suckered into advocating stupid apish Christian garbage by stupid Jewish notions of Gender Feminism designed to turn women against themselves, their children and the family.

The proof in the pudding that sells you on feminism being worthless is only proof Gender Feminism(Where women want to be men, hate feminine values) is a failure. But that has nothing to do with education or voting rights. The two are not the same, and the cocksuckers and bastards want women to think they are. They want the opponents of the ills gender feminism has brought to think they are. You've been had. You're a sucker. By being suckered, and talking about limiting education and other ridiculously stupid notions, is drive home the notion that venerating the beautiful role femininity is wrong. Gender feminism is pushed by the opportunist who has hijacked women's rights, civil rights and every other pursuit to make them destructive when they didn't have to be. This all happened after WWII, when the opportunist was in full control of every avenue of cultural and educational development.

Women are beautiful. The female perspective brings much to humanity. Queens have ruled justly, and fairly. They do not "need to be protected from themselves" anymore than men do. The beauty and validity of natural gender roles should be reenforced, along with equal opportunity in education, government and the work force. Women competing with men in the intellectual fields and arts hurts nothing. We have much to gain by allowing strong women who are not ashamed of being women into the throne room. We are not a war like society or a tribe of hunter-gatherers.

Feminism is not the enemy. Gender feminism is. Equity feminism holds the key to the future white women of the future deserve.

Speaking this noise is what they want you to do, so it drives the negativity in modern liberal thought home. Don't be a Jewish tool. Don't be a fool. Don't be scared of women.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 06:06:59 AM
Haha :)
Whatever you say, Jack :)

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 06:17:25 AM
Stupid, barbaric, Christian, and for proles in trailer parks  :

- Restrict their voting rights to local elections.
- No education higher than high school. The higher IQ ones may go on to higher learning if they wish, but these would be very few.


Valid and fair, and unrelated to the above.

- Praise femininity and its complimentary role to masculinity
- Champion monogamy and chastity
- Establish communal rituals commemorating and exhaling female fertility in order to make the step into womanhood something that is taken SERIOUSLY


Jude-Christian values are not Aryan values.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 06:45:46 AM
But that has nothing to do with education or voting rights.

I would think more carefully about this.  Women should not receive the same education as men full-stop, from the beginning.  That is not to say that they should not be educated to the same level, selection for higher levels of education should be based purely on merit, although even here men and women should generally receive tailored educations.  Voting rights, if we have a democracy at all should be restricted to individuals in positions of significance in society, this would probably consist primarily of men but I don't see any reason not to allow women with the right credentials to vote. 

In general most people should be directed into gender roles that are variations on traditional archetypes, warrior and priest, mother and wife.  I see nothing degrading in the traditional roles of women and any civilized society should be able to accommodate exceptions to its rules.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 06:53:20 AM
Ah. A voice of reason. That's what traditional Christian heritage gets you.
You wonder what Christianity has to recommend it? There it is.
Apart from basic sanity though, it has its problems.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 06:56:30 AM
Basic sanity would be a good start, if we had that we'd be infinitely better off than we are now.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 07:02:47 AM
Some of us have it, and it's not only restricted to Christians.
But there's not nearly enough of it, presently, to make up for its lack.
Any dumb-ass can see the ten commandments are exactly that: rules to live by.
So what we are dealing with is a huge number of something-less-than-dumb-asses.

Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 07:37:05 AM
In general most people should be directed into gender roles that are variations on traditional archetypes, warrior and priest, mother and wife.  I see nothing degrading in the traditional roles of women and any civilized society should be able to accommodate exceptions to its rules.

Stop. Women priests were common in Western and Ancient religions before the time Jebuz. We don't need warriors anymore unless we are enforcing Israeli security or the interests of the Multinational Oil-igarcy.

Women can be lawyers, doctors, architects, composers, programmers, designers, thinkers and insert whatever else as good as men can. And we benefit when the brightest women are allowed to be as such. Men in these fields have children. So can women.

Fuck off with dressed up Christian morals.




Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 09:35:12 AM
Women can be lawyers, doctors, architects, composers, programmers, designers, thinkers and insert whatever else as good as men can. And we benefit when the brightest women are allowed to be as such. Men in these fields have children. So can women.

Can they? They certainly have the IQ for it. That's not enough though, most don't have the desire or ability to actually give themselves up to some of these professions (which is how excellence is achieved). They seek a work/life balance. They seek family. At least as far as Medicine is concerned, the further up the ladder you go the more women drop out. They simply have no incentive to succeed. Why should they? A cruel world indeed that feeds them the lie that they can find purpose and satisfaction in these pursuits. A handful can.

The relationship between women and their children and men and their children is different on every level. But you're right, they "can" have children. What's the effect on 1) their work 2) their children and 3) them though? Is it equivalent to the effect on men? Why not complimentary roles? Men don't have to worry about nurturing their families, women don't have to worry about providing for them. Solely from the point of view of sexual dimorphism in mammals, not conservatism or traditionalism. Yet in action they are the same.

Now isn't that a funny thing.

Edit: Who benefits? 70% of my class was women, perhaps a third of them did not practice their profession for a single day after the mandatory training year. Competition for entry is cut-throat, but doesn't test nebulous stuff like uh, mettle I guess. Yet if those places were filled with men, I can't imagine the same happening. Schopenhauer was caustic, did not have the knowledge we have now, but was essentially correct. Otto Weininger was 100% accurate:

Quote from: Wikipedia
In his book Sex and Character, Weininger argues that all people are composed of a mixture of the male and the female substance, and attempts to support his view scientifically. The male aspect is active, productive, conscious and moral/logical, while the female aspect is passive, unproductive, unconscious and amoral/alogical. Weininger argues that emancipation should be reserved for the "masculine woman", e.g. some lesbians, and that the female life is consumed with the sexual function: both with the act, as a prostitute, and the product, as a mother. Woman is a "matchmaker". By contrast, the duty of the male, or the masculine aspect of personality, is to strive to become a genius, and to forego sexuality for an abstract love of the absolute, God, which he finds within himself.

It will seem immediately distasteful unless absorbed internally. Unless you feel/realize/discover it. Can women make the best of metal? Or were they prevented by some social cause or the other? Each pursuit, explored in turn, reveals the answer.


Re: Attention "nihilists"
April 07, 2012, 11:01:00 AM

Quote

The relationship between women and their children and men and their children is different on every level. But you're right, they "can" have children. What's the effect on 1) their work 2) their children and 3) them though? Is it equivalent to the effect on men? Why not complimentary roles? Men don't have to worry about nurturing their families, women don't have to worry about providing for them. Solely from the point of view of sexual dimorphism in mammals, not conservatism or traditionalism. Yet in action they are the same.

A society with healthy gender roles would naturally organize itself in such a way where these realities are manifested. I agree the bonds between mother and child are closer but being the only person on this site in history to have any kids, I can say they're not as different as you're making them sound.  If the roles were reversed in a family, where they both love the children, but the male stayed home while the female worked, is there an issue there?  I'd have no issue being a "house dad". And if my wife were to be the bread winner, so be it.

Imposed equality is stupid if it isn't what naturally occurs. I am arguing against imposed inequality. Let us recognize the true nature of our species, kick out the Bible values, and build families from there. The chips will fall where they should.