If a male doctor in a full-blown White coat and stethoscope shoved a female athlete who was standing near her injured teammate out of the way like that, no matter the context, you specifically would be calling for his death.

Mutual respect seems to be a male only concept, so let me explain it to you. It is founded on a simple principle: the boundaries we expect others to respect are the same boundaries we are obligated to respect ourselves. Men generally understand this intuitively. You do not casually shove another man aside or presume that your personal importance entitles you to disregard his dignity. It is generally understood that a violation of this principal is a provocation to violence, precisely because it violates the principle of mutual respect. Here, a woman shoves a man aside like his his personal boundaries are beneath her consideration. When he responds by shoving her back, the people lose their fucking minds. But what, exactly, is the problem? That he violated her boundaries? She had already violated his! That he failed to show her respect? She did the same thing! Women do not respect this simple principle of mutual respect, which in a truly egalitarian world should clearly be binding to everyone. Instead whenever a women is involved we are suddenly expected to apply a different standard. What do you want? Do you want equality between men and women? Because what it seems you really want is the relationship between a medieval aristocrat and a peasant.

Almost all the problems you see in society are caused by liberal women

They defend false accusers. They defend abortion. They defend prostitution. They defend mothers murdering their own children. They defend the destruction of the nuclear family. They defend parental alienation against fathers. They defend lenient sentencing for violent female offenders. They defend female domestic abusers. They defend misandry and the blatant disrespect of men. And then they have the audacity to turn around and pretend like men are the only morally depraved monsters capable of evil. Women are far from the saintly angels or innocent victims they paint themselves to be.

"The player was wrong" mfers probably think the staff is in the wrong when the genders are swapped Y'all will always think it's the guy's fault

Since Lindsay Clancy's trial 82 mothers have killed 123 of their children.

Make the false accuser famous.

No, she does not realize anything. No, she will not realize anything. No, she will not change her belief system. Because she has none. Only high-testosterone, high-IQ heterosexual males speak and act as a result of their mental model of the system as a whole. Everyone else just says and does whatever they think will keep them safe, and maybe get them a pat on the head. Her mental model is not "Diversity is good for France." Her mental model is "if I say diversity is good for France, others will approve of me". If you have enough voters who believe things simply because others believe them, democracy becomes irrelevant. Actual opinion no longer matters, only the illusion of consensus. Because the people who are swayed by the illusion of consensus become the swing voters, and everyone who actually needs to be reasoned with becomes irrelevant. That's what women's suffrage is really for. That's what immigration is really for. That's what government school systems are for. They are all for generating a critical mass of voters whose opinions are formed outside their heads. That's why the entire Western political class appears to hate high-T hetero White men suddenly and all at once. Western high-T hetero White men are the demographic that advances civilization at all, but they are also the greatest impediment to managerial rule. And guess which one the political class actually cares about. So, no, women are not going to suddenly wake up and reverse course. You are not going to seize power by changing women's minds. You must change women's minds by seizing power.

Earl Silverman was abused and when he reported it to the police they laughed at him. So he set up an abuse shelter for men. It was funded by himself due to lack of government support unlike the female abuse shelters. He had to close and took his life a few months later. Organisations for men only are considered discrimination and thus not allowed. So either the organisation focusses on women only or on both but give priority to women. It's not about men not wanting to help men, it's that men are not allowed to help just men. When men advocate for a male-only thing, it's shut down before it even started because it's considered discrimination. Giving the idea that men helping men is seen as an attack on women.

That trainer actually pissed me off because I hate ppl like that and read them very easily. They’re weaklings who can’t wait to exert power and force and will use whatever excuse they can to do so. Then they look at you crazy for reacting to it or calling it out because they thought they were being slick and getting away with it.

Most men raising the issue of “obligation sex” aren’t primarily arguing that a wife must have sex whenever her husband wants it, regardless of her desire. They’re pointing out a double standard in how marital duties are treated. Husbands are routinely expected to fulfill their responsibilities—providing, protecting, emotional support, household labor, and the rest—without the option to opt out simply because they “don’t feel like it” that day. These duties are treated as ongoing obligations within the marriage. Yet when it comes to sexual intimacy, the conversation often shifts: a wife’s lack of desire or consent in the moment is treated as absolute and sufficient grounds to withhold it indefinitely, with little reciprocal expectation. If consent is the governing principle that can suspend one core marital contribution, consistency requires asking why the same principle doesn’t equally allow a husband to suspend the contributions expected of him. The underlying point is about reciprocity. If sex is no longer framed as a mutual marital duty but solely as something requiring ongoing, enthusiastic consent from one party, then the framework should apply symmetrically to the other party’s duties as well. Otherwise, consent functions as a one-way veto rather than a shared standard.

Bible: A husband must love and provide for his wife. Feminist: Yes!!!!!!! Bible: A woman must submit to her husband. Feminist: That's only if he deserves it. He has to earn my respect, submission comes naturally if a woman is treated right.

1. She’s the Gatorade carrier. Inconsequential to situation. 2. She pushed him as if he’s intruding on the process. 3. He’s justified to check her further later on. 4. I predict an apology from the player that shouldn’t occur. Sadly.

I’m going to point this out right now Women do NOT, in fact, have the power to end civilization. Your biggest dumbass belief here is the idea that forcing women to be broodmares is a greater crime than auto-extinction. I promise you society will create Gilead before it goes down without a fight

Imagine being so privileged that you dont even realise male-only gyms are illegal in the UK and many states in the US because theyre seen as discriminatory towards women, but women-only gyms are perfectly legal in both the UK and US everywhere

Women will literally go to therapy instead of building a flying car.

Chronologie der Verweigerung Autos mit 0-100 in weniger als einer Sekunde geht nicht. Ok, das geht, aber nur weil es sich ansaugt. Senkrecht die Wand hochfahren kann es nicht. Ok, das Auto fährt die Wand hoch. Aber fliegen kann es noch lange nicht. Ok, das Auto fliegt kontrolliert runter. Aber es kann nicht selbst abheben. Ok, es kann einige Autos überspringen. Aber das braucht doch niemand. Gut, die Technologie der Düsen kann man nutzen. Aber nur einmal, dann ist der Tank leer. Ok, der Tank kann selbsttätig wieder aufgeladen werden. Aber Druckluft ist einfachste Technik. Ok, man braucht schon viele Düsen und ausgefeilte Technologie. Aber die stammt von SpaceX, hat mit Autos nix zu tun. Ok, die Anwendung ist für Autos. Aber wenn das einen Nutzen hätte, wäre das von VW schon vor Jahren in Serie gebaut worden.

It's not a pandemic. We can get laid without commitment, cook better than most women or just use ubereats, clean our own homes or higher a helper and come back to peace and quiet. What exactly is a wife going to add?

Ja. Das wird nix. Die Brüder Wright brachten beim ersten Motorflug làcherliche 200 Meter zusammen. Ist dann auch gescheitert, das Projekt. So Shice setzt sich einfach nicht durch.

"A woman would never lie about sexual harassment or assault." Actually, women lie all the time.