Minichan

Topic: Should we take rights away from women?

Anonymous A started this discussion 3 weeks ago #135,989

Like do they really deserve rights? I just feel like they'd be happier without them

Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later[^] [v] #1,444,148

Think about how much more time they'd have to pick out the perfect outfit that slays if they didn't have to vote.

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,149

They should take away all nigguh rights

Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,150

Lemme guess, you’re the type of dude to go around saying that and then you wonder why women don’t like you so you blame chads?

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,151

@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Sounds like projection, buddy. I just want women to be happy which means taking away their rights

Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,153

@previous (A)
I don’t think that’s how it works.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,154

@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Think about how happy women would be if they didn't have to work or vote. They'd be ten times happier and just the thought of their smiling faces would make it all worth it

Mr. Bloody Lemonade replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,155

@previous (A)
Wouldn’t that decrease the American GDP by 50% automatically making China the largest economy measured by nominal GDP?

Mr. Bloody Lemonade double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,156

Like just as a man… let me rephrase that.

As a rational thinking person who likes the idea of having money, the concept that I would live with a woman and then pay for her existence while she doesn’t work sounds painful. I want to actually, you know, enjoy my life, and I’m not so narcissistic I need somebody else to have less than me for me to feel good about myself. I’d rather live in a household with two salaries mine and hers, because that would make life so much easier and wouldn’t feel like a burden. But that’s just me personally. I figure if I only know I’m on this earth once for sure, I’m not going to make my life unnecessarily more difficult out of something stupid like pride when most people don’t even care about that standard that women don’t work anymore because it’s unrealistic.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 seconds later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,157

@1,444,155 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Do you honestly consider money more important than women?

Mr. Bloody Lemonade replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,158

I’ve seen other men make a big deal out of wanting women to make less money than them. From my point of view, that’s stupid. Like what, if a woman is a millionaire and she thinks I’m attractive, I’m not stupid. Why would I not want to make my life easier?

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,159

@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
You want women to work like slaves anon? How can you be so cruel...

Mr. Bloody Lemonade replied with this 3 weeks ago, 6 seconds later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,160

@1,444,157 (A)
Well… can you live without money or without a woman more easily?

Love women, all due respect to women, nothing against women, but… I’ve seen homeless people, it doesn’t look fun.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 23 seconds later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,161

@1,444,159 (A)
Well isn’t it cruel that you have to work by that logic?

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 10 minutes later, 56 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,162

@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Women are higher lifeforms anon they shouldn't have to work but we must to ensure their safety and survival

Mr. Bloody Lemonade replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,163

@previous (A)
They’ll be alright.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,164

Honestly, I think I’d prefer somebody who wants me over somebody who needs me, because that sounds annoying. Don’t get me wrong I’ll help out if she needs it obviously, but I don’t want to be the sole thing keeping her alive if she’s an adult like, that sounds annoying.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,165

Now if she’s a trust fund baby tho, then she doesn’t have to work, then it’s okay.

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 9 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,266

@1,444,150 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Most of the "redpilled" men were naive young men doing everything they were told they were supposed to do for years, only to get disrespected.

This attitude among men developed only after that.

@1,444,153 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
The data shows it is. It's called the paradox of female happiness.

As rights increased, women gradually became less and less satisfied with their lives according to self-reported data.

@1,444,155 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
No, because you need people being born to keep the GDP up. Collapsing birth rates is a negative effect on GDP.

Plus, men can focus more on work if the wife takes care of the home.

Eliminating the eternal dating norm we have now would allow that money to be invested rather than flushed away for a woman's entertainment.

@1,444,156 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)

If that's a common attitude, then why have men been the providers across cultures and history?

Clearly most men are fine with it.

Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 10 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,268

@previous (E)
> argueing with rapemeat
> ISHYDDT

Anonymous E replied with this 3 weeks ago, 32 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,269

@1,444,158 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)

> I’ve seen other men make a big deal out of wanting women to make less money than them.

It's women that require men to make more money and provide.

Men learn quickly that a woman who earns more will be rude, unaffectionate, and likely to cheat or dump him if she even accepts the relationship.

And if she does have a relationship, you can bet she won't support him the way men support their partner.

> From my point of view, that’s stupid. Like what, if a woman is a millionaire and she thinks I’m attractive, I’m not stupid. Why would I not want to make my life easier?

This isn't a movie.

In reality men might have a rare choice to date a woman who's a class above them, and she will not be happy to support him.

Anonymous E double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,270

@1,444,164 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Financially independent women will ride the carousel until some braindead hunk knocks her up, and then she'll be a single mother.

Women who need a provider will be nice, contribute to the household like a teammember, and stick around even if it's boring.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,315

@1,444,269 (E)
Well nobody’s forcing you to be with a woman. I don’t feel like taking care of an adult. I don’t care.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,316

All this incel shit, be honest, give one reason why you need a girlfriend in the first place. There’s literally no reason, if you don’t like woman, you don’t need one, so what’s the point? If you want an easy life, don’t make life harder for yourself than it has to be. All this angst crap about "oh women have freedom and that’s why they hate me, woe is me, women shouldn’t have rights and shouldn’t have jobs!" Just shut up, you’re only pathetic because you like being pathetic, it’s probably some kind of humiliation kink. I’m not complicated, look, if a woman is cool, she’s cool, if she’s not, don’t care, not my problem. That’s why I don’t worry about any of this crap.

(Edited 12 seconds later.)

Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,317

And besides, why would I want somebody who doesn’t work who doesn’t have any rights? That sounds boring as hell. I want someone who’s actually smart and accomplished so I can brag about them.

Anonymous F replied with this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,320

Matt rages so hard on womens rights because he aspires to be one someday.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,331

@1,444,317 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Most cringe shit I've read in a while.

Anonymous E replied with this 3 weeks ago, 5 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,336

@1,444,316 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Societies run on social contracts, calling men incels over and over again isn't going to make people look the other way when women are problems.

There's only so far these problems can go before you get the social fractures that are happening today. Birthrate is collapsing, the wealth transfers propping up female "independence" are becoming impossible to sustain.

Eventually the country adjusts, and lets men keep what they produce, or the whole system collapses as men move to alternatives.

Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,337

@previous (E)

> Female

Anonymous E replied with this 2 weeks ago, 53 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,338

@previous (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
Yes, used as an adjective.

It's supposed to be problematic when someone uses it as a noun, because they aren't using woman instead.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,363

Eh, the birth rate is collapsing?

The world population is still growing because Africans are having so many children it makes up for the decline in population everywhere else in the world.

Have you ever considered that the alt right weirdness is why women don’t want to have kids with you? This take is insanely creepy that women don’t want to have children with you, therefore you think women should have less freedom. What’s the logical implication of that? The logical implication is rape.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,364

I’m also not calling "men" incels, I’m a man, I’m not calling men incels, I’m calling a man an incel: you.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,365

Realistically, the world population won’t decline for 50 years, but the population of Africa isn’t expected to stop growing this century. It’s not really a crisis on a global level, it will be worse in some places and non-existent in other places. It will be the absolute worst in Japan, followed by China, then Eastern Europe, followed by Western Europe, unless the US stays far right, as long as we have immigration, our population should reach 400 million, so we’ll keep growing, and in Africa, this just won’t be an issue they’ll have to deal with.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade quadruple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,366

Although, if the US doesn’t have immigration, we’ll end up like China and Japan.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade quintuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,367

The only part of the world that won’t need to consider immigration will be Africa, they’ll be the only part of the world that doesn’t need it to maintain their population in the 2080s. With probably the exception of South Africa because South Africa is more culturally western, they have fewer children. So right now they’re one of the strongest economies in Africa, but that probably won’t last very long if we’re thinking in terms of decades because they’re going to be dwarfed by other African nations. And already, there are some people in South Africa with anti immigrant sentiment. So it’s not purely a "white people bad" thing, xenophobia is bad, but Africans have the potential to be xenophobic, it just won’t really manifest itself this century because they won’t ever have high immigration because they just won’t need it.

Mr. Bloody Lemonade sextuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 30 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,368

Right now South Africa has a larger economy than Nigeria, but Nigeria has over 200 million people, South Africa has over 60 million people. Nigeria has a very high birth rate, it’s not unlikely it could surpass the US population at some point. Even if Nigerians say poorer than South Africans, it’s kind of inevitable they’ll be the largest economy in Africa and therefore collectively more powerful than South Africa in the long term. And everybody in the world is so biased against these people nobody is going to realize what’s happening until we’re all old and it becomes completely obvious even though it was obvious the entire time.

Anonymous E replied with this 2 weeks ago, 13 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,444,461

@1,444,363 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Obviously that's not actually the point.

Women can take care of themselves, pay for their own bastards. No more DEI.

Let them choose to pay their own way, or find a man who will actually commit to them.

Fearmongering about rape is a way of getting ahead of the actual argument, it's just strawmanning again.
:

Please familiarise yourself with the rules and markup syntax before posting.