This has nothing to do with patriarchy…but interesting none the less.

Females are not just defective males. And males are not just defective females.

We are biological different

Are men and women equally intelligent? The standard line among people who accept the reality of heredity is yes, but men just have more variation. I looked into the question, and it doesn't appear to be true. Men are probably 2-4 IQ points smarter.🧵 https://t.co/Ub4gLffA92

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 2, 2024

Redbrickbear said:

---

This has nothing to do with patriarchy…but interesting none the less.

Females are not just defective males. And males are not just defective females.

We are biological different

Are men and women equally intelligent? The standard line among people who accept the reality of heredity is yes, but men just have more variation. I looked into the question, and it doesn't appear to be true. Men are probably 2-4 IQ points smarter.🧵 https://t.co/Ub4gLffA92

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 2, 2024

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

KaiBear said:

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

---

...said no one ever who spent a day around PMS.

An interesting discussion that I kicked off here.

I guess I'm not surptised that the response has been shrieks of "Reeeeeeeeee! Feminism! Misogyny!" from progressive leftists, and complementarianism from the right.

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

This has nothing to do with patriarchy…but interesting none the less.

Females are not just defective males. And males are not just defective females.

We are biological different

Are men and women equally intelligent? The standard line among people who accept the reality of heredity is yes, but men just have more variation. I looked into the question, and it doesn't appear to be true. Men are probably 2-4 IQ points smarter.🧵 https://t.co/Ub4gLffA92

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 2, 2024

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

---

link?

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

This has nothing to do with patriarchy…but interesting none the less.

Females are not just defective males. And males are not just defective females.

We are biological different

Are men and women equally intelligent? The standard line among people who accept the reality of heredity is yes, but men just have more variation. I looked into the question, and it doesn't appear to be true. Men are probably 2-4 IQ points smarter.🧵 https://t.co/Ub4gLffA92

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 2, 2024

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

---

I guess your wife is posting under your login.

muddybrazos said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

This has nothing to do with patriarchy…but interesting none the less.

Females are not just defective males. And males are not just defective females.

We are biological different

Are men and women equally intelligent? The standard line among people who accept the reality of heredity is yes, but men just have more variation. I looked into the question, and it doesn't appear to be true. Men are probably 2-4 IQ points smarter.🧵 https://t.co/Ub4gLffA92

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 2, 2024

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

---

I guess your wife is posting under your login.

---

She is too intelligent to waste time on a university message board.

How many women in the modern world were sold an idea of "liberation" that turned out to be just miserable wage slavery for corporations?

Maybe overthrowing the patriarchy was a mistake? pic.twitter.com/yFADSa0KXU

— 🌴 Josh Lekach 🌴 (@JoshLekach) January 4, 2024

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

Realitybites said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Except for upper body strength women are psychologically superior to men.

---

...said no one ever who spent a day around PMS.

An interesting discussion that I kicked off here.

I guess I'm not surptised that the response has been shrieks of "Reeeeeeeeee! Feminism! Misogyny!" from progressive leftists, and complementarianism from the right.

---

It's not that you're misogynist, just that you are dumb. With PMS comes the gift of life. Much of a woman's physiology is centered around child bearing. And we are all lucky for it. Just basic biology.

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Forgive me, i read and post on this forum for entertainment. 9 out of 10 posts are probably tongue in cheek. I freely admit I am mostly not serious and try to remember to add emojis

Maybe i will be more serious in 2024

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Conservative notions/beliefs/social views have turned out to be true.

Now...they may not be popular in the modern world (very unpopular among the ruling class of the West) but they are reasonable social views and true ones.

And the rejection of those views is leading to societal decline.

"over the last 50 years, the marriage rate in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 60%."

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/25/marriage-declining-single-dating-taxes-relationships

"The nationwide birth rate fell significantly between 2007 and 2022, dropping from 14.3 births per 1,000 people to 11.1, or nearly 23%, per new CDC data."

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-01-10/u-s-birth-rates-continue-to-fall

---

Now we are talking birth rates? I think the issue with that is attributing the issues you see with society in 2024 to liberal thinking, but I think that if you gave any society in any time period in human history the amount of change in medicine, technology, travel, freedoms, etc they would all turn out like this.

By the way, why is it an issue that the human population won't continue to explode? Are you wanting to pack the planet with humanity? Are you worried about the survival of humanity? You are eager to colonize Mars?

Porteroso said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Conservative notions/beliefs/social views have turned out to be true.

Now...they may not be popular in the modern world (very unpopular among the ruling class of the West) but they are reasonable social views and true ones.

And the rejection of those views is leading to societal decline.

"over the last 50 years, the marriage rate in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 60%."

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/25/marriage-declining-single-dating-taxes-relationships

"The nationwide birth rate fell significantly between 2007 and 2022, dropping from 14.3 births per 1,000 people to 11.1, or nearly 23%, per new CDC data."

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-01-10/u-s-birth-rates-continue-to-fall

---

Now we are talking birth rates? I think the issue with that is attributing the issues you see with society in 2024 to liberal thinking, but I think that if you gave any society in any time period in human history the amount of change in medicine, technology, travel, freedoms, etc they would all turn out like this.

By the way, why is it an issue that the human population won't continue to explode? Are you wanting to pack the planet with humanity? Are you worried about the survival of humanity? You are eager to colonize Mars?

---

Humans need to have a fertility rate of 2.1 just to replace the previous generation. If you like modern society, and all it's good things, then you need that just so it will survive into the future.

World fertility rate right now is 2.3 and dropping fast.

This is not about going back to 7 kids per woman…its about the fact that most of the world can not even produce 2 kids per woman

I will never understand liberals who love the modern world…then attack those asking it it's even sustainable

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

There will always be more male bricklayers, mechanical engineers, soldiers and police, and more female nurses and teachers, but for some reason the conversation defaults to power or wealth positions (leaders as your reference). Hyper success realms are never the effective measure of social equality, and are false benchmarks. How societies stratify at the foundational level determines ultimate social coherence. So once again, compatibility and symbiosis of strengths, not equality, is what is most important.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Conservative notions/beliefs/social views have turned out to be true.

Now...they may not be popular in the modern world (very unpopular among the ruling class of the West) but they are reasonable social views and true ones.

And the rejection of those views is leading to societal decline.

"over the last 50 years, the marriage rate in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 60%."

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/25/marriage-declining-single-dating-taxes-relationships

"The nationwide birth rate fell significantly between 2007 and 2022, dropping from 14.3 births per 1,000 people to 11.1, or nearly 23%, per new CDC data."

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-01-10/u-s-birth-rates-continue-to-fall

---

Now we are talking birth rates? I think the issue with that is attributing the issues you see with society in 2024 to liberal thinking, but I think that if you gave any society in any time period in human history the amount of change in medicine, technology, travel, freedoms, etc they would all turn out like this.

By the way, why is it an issue that the human population won't continue to explode? Are you wanting to pack the planet with humanity? Are you worried about the survival of humanity? You are eager to colonize Mars?

---

Humans need have a fertility rate of 2.1 just to replace the previous generation. If you like modern society and all it's good things then you need that just so it will survive into the future.


World fertility rate right now is 2.3 and dropping fast.

This is not about going back to 7 kids per woman…its about the fact that most of the world can not even produce 2 kids per woman

I will never understand liberals who love the modern world…then attack those asking it it's even sustainable

---

Human efficiency has to be included in the equation. The reality is the more advanced a society is, the fewer humans are required for it. That's a moral dilemma, but it is the unfortunate utilitarian reality.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Conservative notions/beliefs/social views have turned out to be true.

Now...they may not be popular in the modern world (very unpopular among the ruling class of the West) but they are reasonable social views and true ones.

And the rejection of those views is leading to societal decline.

"over the last 50 years, the marriage rate in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 60%."

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/25/marriage-declining-single-dating-taxes-relationships

"The nationwide birth rate fell significantly between 2007 and 2022, dropping from 14.3 births per 1,000 people to 11.1, or nearly 23%, per new CDC data."

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-01-10/u-s-birth-rates-continue-to-fall

---

Now we are talking birth rates? I think the issue with that is attributing the issues you see with society in 2024 to liberal thinking, but I think that if you gave any society in any time period in human history the amount of change in medicine, technology, travel, freedoms, etc they would all turn out like this.

By the way, why is it an issue that the human population won't continue to explode? Are you wanting to pack the planet with humanity? Are you worried about the survival of humanity? You are eager to colonize Mars?

---

Humans need have a fertility rate of 2.1 just to replace the previous generation. If you like modern society and all it's good things then you need that just so it will survive into the future.


World fertility rate right now is 2.3 and dropping fast.

This is not about going back to 7 kids per woman…its about the fact that most of the world can not even produce 2 kids per woman

I will never understand liberals who love the modern world…then attack those asking it it's even sustainable

---

Human efficiency has to be included in the equation. The reality is the more advanced a society is, the fewer humans are required for it...

---

Good point

Then why do we need 1 million legal immigrants a year and 200,000 illegal immigrants each month?

I mean if tech is going to allow us to replace those jobs…

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church 30 for we are members of his body. 31 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a profound mysterybut I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Sounds pretty equal to me, especially for something written about martial partnership around 2000 years ago

---

The OT is a testament to patriarchal misogyny, and abuse of women. Hardly equal, especially when you consider the totality of the OT/NT writings.

---

The phrase "patriarchal misogyny" wouldn't exist if it weren't for the OT.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

if you as a conservative ever married or even watched a tik tok video about women shopping, you would not vote for a woman..

---

Maybe I could find some better political candidates than tiktok fashion boys and girls, what do you think?

If someone did it on tiktok, everyone must do it? How much time do you spend watching tiktok? This should really clear somethings up about your posting.

---

---

No, what is foreign is conservatives having reasonable social views. If I believe that you are really dumb all too easily, just read this forum and you will be able to forgive me.

---

Conservative notions/beliefs/social views have turned out to be true.

Now...they may not be popular in the modern world (very unpopular among the ruling class of the West) but they are reasonable social views and true ones.

And the rejection of those views is leading to societal decline.

"over the last 50 years, the marriage rate in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 60%."

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/25/marriage-declining-single-dating-taxes-relationships

"The nationwide birth rate fell significantly between 2007 and 2022, dropping from 14.3 births per 1,000 people to 11.1, or nearly 23%, per new CDC data."

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-01-10/u-s-birth-rates-continue-to-fall

---

Now we are talking birth rates? I think the issue with that is attributing the issues you see with society in 2024 to liberal thinking, but I think that if you gave any society in any time period in human history the amount of change in medicine, technology, travel, freedoms, etc they would all turn out like this.

By the way, why is it an issue that the human population won't continue to explode? Are you wanting to pack the planet with humanity? Are you worried about the survival of humanity? You are eager to colonize Mars?

---

Humans need to have a fertility rate of 2.1 just to replace the previous generation. If you like modern society, and all it's good things, then you need that just so it will survive into the future.

World fertility rate right now is 2.3 and dropping fast.

This is not about going back to 7 kids per woman…its about the fact that most of the world can not even produce 2 kids per woman

I will never understand liberals who love the modern world…then attack those asking it it's even sustainable

---

Technology, modern society and civilization, does not need us to maintain our population to not only survive but thrive. We don't need 15bn humans by 2050 in order to maintain order, or 7bn, that is purely made up.

Post evidence for humanity depending upon 7bn+ humans before ill even begin arguing because that is just not passing the smell test.

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

There will always be more male bricklayers, mechanical engineers, soldiers and police, and more female nurses and teachers, but for some reason the conversation defaults to power or wealth positions (leaders as your reference). Hyper success realms are never the effective measure of social equality, and are false benchmarks. How societies stratify at the foundational level determines ultimate social coherence. So once again, compatibility and symbiosis of strengths, not equality, is what is most important.

---

Incorrect on your assumptions. Don't you know it's current year? I agree and say all the time equal opportunity will not lead to equal outcomes, but it will lead to as fair of outcomes as we can get. The US will never reach 50% female Presidency, but 0%? We can know for sure that in many election years many Americans were biased against females, even if we are from outer space.

I thought it was just a basic common assumption that we treat the Preamble as if it is saying all men are equal is mankind, not just biological males, but I guess first wave feminism still has work to do. The very idea that someone could argue for women being under the boot of men as a rule is actually not even funny, ill admit I'm a bit offended.

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

There will always be more male bricklayers, mechanical engineers, soldiers and police, and more female nurses and teachers, but for some reason the conversation defaults to power or wealth positions (leaders as your reference). Hyper success realms are never the effective measure of social equality, and are false benchmarks. How societies stratify at the foundational level determines ultimate social coherence. So once again, compatibility and symbiosis of strengths, not equality, is what is most important.

---

Incorrect on your assumptions. Don't you know it's current year? I agree and say all the time equal opportunity will not lead to equal outcomes, but it will lead to as fair of outcomes as we can get. The US will never reach 50% female Presidency, but 0%? We can know for sure that in many election years many Americans were biased against females, even if we are from outer space.

I thought it was just a basic common assumption that we treat the Preamble as if it is saying all men are equal is mankind, not just biological males, but I guess first wave feminism still has work to do. The very idea that someone could argue for women being under the boot of men as a rule is actually not even funny, I'll admit I'm a bit offended.

---

Who said anything about being under the boot? You simultaneously critique the purpose and agenda (equality of outcome), then lament when someone points out the impossibility of it, and the social destruction it creates trying to accomplish it. This isn't about legal rights, but cultural priorities.

And which assumptions are incorrect? More female bricklayers?

White women are terrible at shape rotating. One study found women's spatial IQ is a mere 86 points, with less variability than men as well.
Many IQ tests are biased in favor of women to smooth over this fact, by being centered around verbal items. pic.twitter.com/pvkNBiCH44

— Joseph Bronski (@BronskiJoseph) January 10, 2024

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

The exact same choices? Because my wife is VP of Operations at the same company for which I am CEO. She has decided she would rather quit and focus solely on being a wife and mother, so that's what we're doing. Do I have that same choice? Could I insist, instead, that she be the one who remains at work while I retire and focus solely on being a husband and father?

I don't have that "exact same choice" . . . largely because as the head of the household I naturally make that sacrifice out of love for my wife. But as a result, we are not "the same" in having that choice. We are equal in value but we are not the same.

TexasScientist said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

"But then, due to spiritual impoverishment and the influence of liberal ideas, the man ceased to be recognized as a patriarch. As a result, a modern woman rarely fulfills what the apostle has commanded not to teach, but to learn from her husband at home (1 Timothy 2:12; 1 Corinthians 14:35). There is no one to learn from now, and worldly wisdom is not enough. The soul of the woman remains hungry, and thus a kind of madness begins. She desires to seize power in the family. The child is often used as an excuse."

"And thus there is a restructuring of the entire family. The child becomes the head of the family, who is served by the mother. The child becomes an idol, the woman becomes his priestess, and the man becomes an economic appendage. As a result, the entire family structure is destroyed, and the man leaves the family to find a place where he feels more comfortable. Thus the family falls apart.'

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Historic Christianity itself is not a feminist religion

You don't need to be a Muslim to see that matriarchal societies never last long or accomplish much

---

I agree. Neither is Judaism, or Islam. Repression and abuse on the grounds of religous justification is the history of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, among other religions around the world.

Most Muslims limit women's rights. Rarely have matriarchal societies arrisen with opportunity to succeed, primarily due to male repression. Education and equal rights of women is essentially a modern concept and phenomena with limited and varied application even today. Deprived of rights, education, and less physical strength, what else would you expect?

---

One of the biggest contributors to the decline of our civilization is the unwillingness of the ostensibly liberal left to engage in moral argument, and instead go straight to ad hominem, increasingly to cancel culture itself, to avoid moral argument. Increasingly, the purpose is not win a debate but to avoid it altogether. Certain topic are simply off limits (particularly those where both data and public opinion are at odds with leftist worldview.)

The word "repression" has typically in Western Civ meant "government law that infringes on individual liberties." Today's identitarian left has dramatically expanded the meaning of the word to fit the Marxist concept of cultural hegemony....any majoritarian view. It's "anti-culture" in that regard. Any majoritarian view is oppressive, except....of course....those of the identitarian left.

Family structure impacts everything. It is the single highest correlation in crime & punishement stats, for example = growing up in a traditional two-parent home is the single highest factor in living a successful, stable life. And here we are demonizing any effort to even discuss it.

Look in the mirror, dude, and you will see what oppression really looks like.

“the number of men who have difficulty in finding a partner has doubled from 1992 to 2015…the divide of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ becomes that much more jarring in the online world.”https://t.co/9y4URwVuvT

— Rob Henderson (@robkhenderson) April 22, 2023

Redbrickbear said:

---

“the number of men who have difficulty in finding a partner has doubled from 1992 to 2015…the divide of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ becomes that much more jarring in the online world.”https://t.co/9y4URwVuvT

— Rob Henderson (@robkhenderson) April 22, 2023

---

sounds about right.. rise of the social media/internet

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

That sounds good, but is impossible. The reason we're at 3rd or 4th generation feminism is the practical reality that true equality is impossible. These latter versions recognize the shortfalls and lack of true equality and move to the absurd and destructive that only exacerbate the impossibility of it. Males and females were not designed to be equal. They were designed to be compatible. Compatibility has elements of shared purpose that evolve as societies evolve, but there are inequalities in both directions that are required for that to work.

---

I disagree, they were absolutely designed to be equal. Not the same, of course different, but plenty of women make for treat leaders, way better than many men. We all know it. Equality does not mean the same outcome can be achieved, in social contexts it means given the same sex-blind opportunities.

There will almost always be more male politicians than female, but that should never stop anyone from considering a female for office.

---

There will always be more male bricklayers, mechanical engineers, soldiers and police, and more female nurses and teachers, but for some reason the conversation defaults to power or wealth positions (leaders as your reference). Hyper success realms are never the effective measure of social equality, and are false benchmarks. How societies stratify at the foundational level determines ultimate social coherence. So once again, compatibility and symbiosis of strengths, not equality, is what is most important.

---

Incorrect on your assumptions. Don't you know it's current year? I agree and say all the time equal opportunity will not lead to equal outcomes, but it will lead to as fair of outcomes as we can get. The US will never reach 50% female Presidency, but 0%? We can know for sure that in many election years many Americans were biased against females, even if we are from outer space.

I thought it was just a basic common assumption that we treat the Preamble as if it is saying all men are equal is mankind, not just biological males, but I guess first wave feminism still has work to do. The very idea that someone could argue for women being under the boot of men as a rule is actually not even funny, I'll admit I'm a bit offended.

---

Did you graduate from Baylor ( or any other university ) ?

If so what was your degree in ?

Are you currently employed full time utilizing said degree ?

4th and Inches said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

“the number of men who have difficulty in finding a partner has doubled from 1992 to 2015…the divide of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ becomes that much more jarring in the online world.”https://t.co/9y4URwVuvT

— Rob Henderson (@robkhenderson) April 22, 2023

---

sounds about right.. rise of the social media/internet

---

Yea internet accelerated those issues…but they have been there for decades now.

Internet and dating apps just sent it into overdrive

Bryce Christensen wrote "The Retreat from Marriage" back in 1990.

[The study examines the social and cultural forces making marriage increasingly rare and fragile in the contemporary world. Four essays, together with an edited summary of debate among leading researchers, help define the historical significance of current trends in family life in America.]

bearassnekkid said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I'm surprised someone with your misogynistic views hasn't converted to Islam.

---

Acknowledging that there is a natural created order for headship and family stability is not "misogynistic".

Feminism has had disastrous consequences in western society and for the family.

---

Your mythical assertion is mysogenistic by definition. There is no objective evidence supporting a natural created order for women.

There is no evidence that equal rights for women has had anything other than positve consequences for society, and women. I think most women prefer western society to your middle eastern society.

---

No, women in this day and time have been tricked into thinking that having a career is somehow more fulfilling than having a family. There are tons of vidieos on tick tok and youtube showing unhappy 40 year old cat ladies that believed the lies they were told by Sex and the city. Most women these days would much rather be a stay at home mom with a husband who is the breadwinner. It's the natural order and always has been for a reason,.

---

Right…, Tik Tok and Youtube are definitley reliable sources, LOL. It's amazing how one TV show can upend the "natural world order. " I just don't understand why all of these deadbeat husbands and fathers allow their women out of the house when they clearly shouldn't. They're cluttering up the roads driving around. Trumper men need to get together and have Bryan Hughes sponsor some more well thought out legislation. Revoke their driving privileges, and right to vote. That'll keep them home. Keep'em pregnant and busy with lots of children. I don't guess you could blame men for failing to make enough money so their wives don't have to work. On the other hand, maybe men shouldn't be allowed to marry a woman or father children, until they show they can provide enough money to maintain the "natural world order in their home." A stiff prison term for failure would fix that! Where is Bryan Hughes when you really need him?

---

No one can legitimately answer for 'all women'.

Though I suspect many women would dearly appreciate the opportunity to stay home with their children and have a stable husband provide enough money to support them all.

Other than the first 3 years of our marriage, I have been the sole breadwinner in our relationship. However after watching all the work my wife has done caring for our extended family, it's obvious I had the easier task.

You married TS ?

---

The thing is, and you might ask your wife this to make sure, some women want a choice in the matter. Your suspicions shouldn't determine squat for all of humanity, and that is exactly the problem. Entitled men who think that a "I suspect" should determine gender roles for everyone.

---

Another one of your incoherent ramblings.

Either you are perpetually stoned, under the age of 19 or incredibly stupid.

---

Women should have the same choices that men do, in terms of how to live their lives. This is not compatible with the patriarchy. Is that plain enough for you, or is basic English "incoherent?"

---

The exact same choices? Because my wife is VP of Operations at the same company for which I am CEO. She has decided she would rather quit and focus solely on being a wife and mother, so that's what we're doing. Do I have that same choice? Could I insist, instead, that she be the one who remains at work while I retire and focus solely on being a husband and father?

I don't have that "exact same choice" . . . largely because as the head of the household I naturally make that sacrifice out of love for my wife. But as a result, we are not "the same" in having that choice. We are equal in value but we are not the same.

---

Of course you should be able to focus more on your family, and of course in many households, the woman works more than the man. That will never be the norm, but it should be an option for those that want it.

You are incorrect in your assertion that you don't have that choice. You absolutely do have the choice as an option, even if you won't consider it.