Hilarious… but also all to close to observable fact in these degenerate times. Boys growing up today seem to be being forced to, to some extent and in at least some ways, turning into girls as they grow up. It brings a whole new meaning to both Sequential Hermaphroditism and child abuse.
Parents – specifically you fathers, since I’m unsure of women’s participation – it’s my opinion that you need to raise your sons right. You need to raise them to have the basic life skills, particularly cooking and cleaning. You need to raise your sons in a manner that reduces the material value of women to them to recreation and reproduction. Do not let them grow up saddled and chained with any other need for women!
Yes, I know. Cue the feminazi cunts screaming “Misogyny!” Gods, how they hate the thought of strong, independent men, even though most them wouldn’t willingly do domestic task for men. 😆
Honestly, why wouldn’t you raise your sons to be strong, independent, self-sufficient men? Why would you even want them to be dependent upon another for their basic needs, especially a womyn of today? It’s not like they will provide your son anything of intrinsic value beyond sex and children, if he wishes to sire any. The days when daughters were raised to have value to men are gone; they seem to have died with Gen X.
I Don’t Need A Woman. I Can Cook Myself Dinner
Face it; the hate and vitriol this post would generate – if they actually read it – among the majority of Western females today is strong evidence, if not outright proof, of the accuracy and wisdom of its premise. Further, if we look at womyn’s tendency to divorce and the courts’ bias against men in said divorce, there is empirical proof that women should face an uphill struggle to prove to men that their worth to them offsets the risks involved in taking them on. And, Gentlemen, I don’t see many of the ones of your sons’ generation even considering doing that.
The Best Thing A Man Can Ever Learn Is To Never Need A Woman
Honestly, the best thing fathers can do for their sons and for the future of our society is to teach them how to never need a woman for anything other than sex and bearing their children. Teach your sons all the life skills necessary – irrespective of traditional genders roles, which have been more and more rejected by women in recent decades – to be self-sufficient.
To be extraordinarily crass, crude, and blunt, fathers need to teach their sons that what a woman “brings to the table” insofar as value-add in a relationship are: three holes, two tits, and a womb. If you’ve raised them right, women can offer them nothing else that they need, allowing your son’s to choose as, when, and if they please.
Because You Don’t Require Her Help, You Don’t Need Her; You Want Her. There Is A Difference.
But here’s the thing that most people, and pretty all the feminists and their supposedly “high value” women, won’t get about this post. I’m not suggesting father teach their sons to hate women. Nor do I believe it’s “misogynist” to raise them to see no need for women beyond sex and childbearing. There’s a fundamental difference between needs and desires. And, as the same feminstas who would decry this post have taught their daughters, good relationships aren’t based upon dependency.
But, it’s truly ironic that these same womyn who taught their daughters this lesson, albeit in the nastiest, most hate-filled, and self-destructive context, go ballistic when the genders are reversed and it’s men who are taught not to need them. 😉
Raise your sons right, My Fellows!
Cue the crazed Feministas! Apparently, the “Patriarchy” now intends to use permanently comatose (PVS) and brain dead (BD/DNC) women as wombs. Because we all know these sorts will be stridently and possibly violently opposed to Whole Body Gestational Donation (WBGD). Insofar as they’re concerned, this is just a call for Zombie Handmaids ala some twisted and rather gross Z Day version of Gilead.
But hey! We could call it 40 Weeks After! 😆
Or not. You see, this is outrage based, at least partially on pure, unadulterated, Feminist ignorance and their dystopian fantasies of oppression – especially when it comes to bearing children. It has little to no intersection with reality.
The truth is that the idea of women doing Whole Body Gestational Donation wasn’t published in a medical journal. It was published in a medical ethics journal, specifically Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics. By their very nature a large portion of the papers in such publications are speculative in nature and overtly seek to find, or even push, the boundaries of acceptable practice within the medical field.
Another, even more ironic truth, is that the paper was written in late 2022 by a woman, one Dr. Anna Smajdor PhD, who is currently a tenured professor of Practical Philosophy at the University of Oslo. Even more ironic is that she based a great deal of her paper on the previous work done by another woman, Rosalie Ber, who apparently originally floated the idea of using comatose women as gestational surrogates.
Yessiree! The entire concept of WBGD was conceived by women – Smajdor is even the person to name it. But the Patriarchy!
But, In Some Defense Of Feminists
None of the above is meant to say that nothing heinous could come of Smajdor’s and Ber’s idea now that it’s been put out there. Rahm Emanuel’s Complete Lives System and how it was implemented to some extent during COVID-19 shows us that sometimes published speculative ethics are essentially an excuse for normatively reprehensed behavior. There’s always room for doctors – who play God far too often – to behave badly.
And, as well, there’s the legal issues of consent – issues that Smajdor did mention, but didn’t and can’t address. And there’s a long if not common history of arguments over what to do with people who are PVS or BD/DNC, with next of kin often being the ones to make those decisions for the “living remains” of the victim. So yeah, it’s not utterly impossible that a husband or parent could make the legal decision for a PVS or BD/DNC to enter into WBGD, but it would be a vanishingly rare occurrence.
So, they’re not completely wrong in their worries – if worrying about WBGD is valid in the first place – but it’s not the Patriarchy and it’s not a likely outcome. Men are not going to turn them into Zombie Handmaids.
The Gender Inequality Myth perpetrated upon Americans is one of the most pernicious and factually inaccurate lies ever told to us, much less a lie so successfully promulgated. I’m sure Goebbels has a hard-on in his grave over it. 😉 The Feminists have, will, and won’t stop repeating the myth of “The Patriarchy” and claiming that they’re forced to the bottom of society. Yet, the truth is significantly different. The truth is that a very few men do occupy the top echelon, but the bottom echelons are also made up almost exclusively by men. Women are, for the most part, in just below the very peak to slightly below the middle of pyramid.
Now, in both fairness and a preference for factuality, this diagram is inherently inaccurate in that it’s scaling is in all likely off, and it doesn’t represent the complexities involved, i.e., there are no thin bands of pink in the blue and vice versa. This in an inherent flaw in such diagrams brought on by scaling – the blue at the top is most likely oversized for the sake of visibility – and decided upon lack of granularity for the sake of clarity as much as by bias and attempted manipulation. Also, there’s no indication available to determine how the various metrics were weighted.
It also is predicated, at least partially upon ephemerals and intangibles, e.g., power and quality of life. Once such unmeasurable and totally subjective inputs are added, the resulting values are flawed, especially since Feminists aren’t the most nuanced or discerning sorts, and their answers most likely skewed their results downward.
Overall though, the right side of the paired diagrams is a lot closer to the truth than the Gender Inequality Myth that Feminists keeping screeching about. But then, Feminism is a huge “industry” in America with a lot of people making their rent off of it, so this has to be expected.
I’d laugh, but that would be pure mean spiritedness, since this isn’t really funny, just sad, pathetic, and completely indicative of modern feminism. This poor creature, looking about as offensive and disgusting as she can manage to make herself, is par for the course for the majority of feminist protesters.
And, I assume for some reason, they work hard to look this way whenever they take to the streets to rant about something. And yet, they wonder why the meet with little sympathy and a great deal of disrespect when they do so.