Gender Everything

I have an amazing memory and I’ve spent a lot of time at malls with women. I don’t think that makes me like a woman. I also worked in a warehouse before I went to college and the place was a distribution center for salon products, so I unloaded trucks full of hair spray and shit and did inventory there, and a couple of times a year we would travel to these big beauty supply events where we would set up tables in a civic center for hair stylists to come and buy stuff, so I learned some stuff there. I gotta tell ya, being one of the dudes working in a convention center full of women who are obsessed with lotion and hair products and all that was a great time. Hotties everywhere and only a few of us guys working.

Because sex feels good, duh. How deluded are you, exactly???

Typical male response, a male thinking with his dick. Why do I even bother?

Are you implying sex doesn’t feel good by this disagreement? I pity you for not having a healthy sex life, Pandora. Someday, I hope you will. And then you’ll understand more about how females are the privileged gender, by control of sex. You control the supply (of Pleasure) to the masses (of men). Maybe it is not pleasurable for you. But you must be a small minority of women. Most women enjoy sex as much if not more than men.

NFL Players get cheerleaders.
Doctors get nurses.
Musicians get groupies.
Soldiers get army-wives.

For almost every profession and sub-culture on the planet, there is a compatible ‘female’ to the specialized-male.

But what about Philosophers?
Which women do Philosophers get?

The answer is none. There is no ‘feminine’ counterpart for philosophy. Philosophy is 100% masculine, in the strictest sense, that women completely lack the fortitude, composition, and ability to relate to philosophy in any meaningful sense. Women do not ‘Reason’, have very insignificant processes for rationality and logic, relying more on ‘emotion’ and ‘feeling’ than anything else. The causes can be simplified. A woman does not need to be reasonable in her lifetime. She does not need to reason. Logic and rationality have very limited uses for her.

Women don’t need to problem-solve, in general, when men compete to do it for them. Again, this symbolizes “female-privilege”, that women are the privileged-gender. Instead of needing to do work, needing to work, rather women have all the work (including Philosophy and Sciences) done for them, on their behalf. How else could something so dry as statistics, number theories, and advanced mathematics be done? Except by expendable men, who are more than happy to serve any function in life?

Philosophers get no cheerleaders, no nurses, no groupies, no army-wives. There is no ‘female’ counterpart to philosophy.

Women have a natural defense mechanism to protect their (female)-privilege.

One of the primary methods of defending female-privilege, is to launch continuous preemptive attacks on “male-privilege”, which doesn’t really exist. There is no such thing as “male-privilege”. The same applies to “white-privilege”, but that is another topic to discuss, in another thread. Privilege implies little or no costs, or rather, that the costs are bared by others. With women, this is obvious. Just about everything a woman has, or wants, is handed to her, by men, who want to monopolize material assets, in exchange for sex, sexual access, and sexual (mating) rites. The very definition and core meaning of “Rights” refers to mating-rites. If you have a “Right” to a woman then you have to fulfill a long list of demands and requirements (revolving around female-privilege).

Women created an illusion in the 20th Century, called “Feminism”. To acquire more power, women needed to build a mirage, a phantom, called “male-privilege”. This is a scape-goating pathology. Women could therein blame all wrongs and evils on “male-privilege”, while female-privilege, real-privilege, is completely erased and shifted from the picture. This is why, today, in 2018, nobody at all, in the entire world, discusses “female-privilege”, but instead the topics, the arguments, the debates, the news-media, are all severely focused on “male-privilege”. Humanity is focused upon delusions, so that reality is never addressed, seen for what it is, and understood. If humanity could confront reality then it should become very obvious about which gender is truly “Privileged” versus the other, which is not.

For example, imagine if you were born ‘immune’ to physical violence. Nobody is allowed to touch you, without your permission. It is a severe crime to hit you. The entire society will rally around you, to protect you, if there were ever real or probable threats of violence. If somebody wanted to harm you, then 100 people within your vicinity, would come to aid you.

Congratulations, you’re a woman. This is female-privilege, an ‘immunity’ to physical violence.

But UR, there are many women who are victims of physical abuse and violence, what about that?!?!?!

Calm down, woman. Most cases of physical abuse and violence against women, are by their “boyfriends”, whom you have chosen to allow into your lives. Women have a love-hate relationship with violence, in this way. Women want to woo and seduce the most violent types of men, but this is dangerous, obviously. Some women can’t control (violent) men very well, and so, they may be hit and beaten. However, most of the time (90% perhaps), the beaten and “abused” woman, returns to the violent male. Why does she do this? Why does she choose this?

Because women respect violent/dominant men about 1000x more than they respect wimpy, non-violent men. Women would much rather take a few hits, if it gives her the ability to ‘control’ the wild, more masculine man. This is the core of most, if not all, female sexual fantasies as well. Women dream of ‘controlling’, seducing, with sex, powerful beasts of any variety. That is the inner-core of feminine nature. Most, if not all females, share the same fantasies, using sex, to both rise in power through life, and also to defend all accumulated female-privileges, which are passed down through millenniums. Females continue to gain privilege, assets, controls, with every new generation. Females are protected by laws. Females can do, and teach, just about anything to their children, and get away with it.

How dare you come between a mother and her child?!

How many more privileges could we delve into, if people wanted to?

Here’s another example of so-called “female privilege”:

Obstetric Fistulas:

Suffering in Silence
A Walk to Beautiful

Do men like you ever think about the risks a woman takes, or do they only think about themselves and their dicks? In your ideal world, women could live in isolation and suffering and you’d still call them the privileged sex.

LOL, that’s funny. Women “taking risks”, very funny. I read online news, and entertainment news too, where women take “bold risks” wearing some stupid revealing outfit that makes her look like a slut. Yes, very “risky” or risque, as you will understand as a woman. Isn’t it ironic? What a woman knows of “risk” is taking her cloths off, to reveal herself, to seduce men?

You have no idea what men risk, by comparison. It becomes more obvious now, that men take 99% of the real risks in life.

The world, as it is right now, is my ideal world. Your mental flaw is common. You believe that I “resent”, hate women. You’re wrong though. My descriptions are not complaints. They’re not “I wish it were another way”. I am quite content with females being the privileged-gender. I haven’t told the whole story yet.

The value of men rises with age, experience, accomplishment, and the accumulation of assets. At some point in men’s adult lives, men finally become “equal” to the value of a woman. This is when men and women trade sex, and have children, usually. Because a woman’s sexual value degenerates from her youth. Women become desperate, the older you get. With men, it’s inverse. Men start out desperate, but gain confidence and value later on. Whereas the older a woman gets, her value approaches reality, that most (or all?) women are only as good as the children you can bear, birth, and upbring.

yahoo.com/entertainment/chr … 07274.html

Oh, those “fearless” women out there!!! O-M-G

Of course, everything is about sex and sexual value to you.

I don’t know about Christina Aguilera, she does not even represent an average woman, but I do think that women should be educated and given choice to make their own living and be independent. Otherwise, you’d have a situation, like above, in which women are used as beasts of burden and reproduction. I bet the men in those societies have thinking similar to yours, preferring their women to stay isolated and uneducated, and dependent on men and their own rationalizing about what’s best for them. But maybe men’s own estimation of themselves is not that far off from their estimation of their women, in that it is the insecure and powerless men that have the most incentive to keep their women on a chain.

Just so you know, I don’t agree with all these hashtag and pussy hat movements (I don’t even know what that’s all about) and I don’t take them seriously. In the West, women have become liberated to the point where their own movements are becoming subverted and corrupted, like your Aquilera, or any of those retarded Kardashians. This is not why women fought for equal rights. To me, when it comes to such inanities, it only ends up harming women, as if to say that this is what women’s freedom ends up with. And I don’t know why you’re watching these things… perhaps looking for a reason. I don’t watch or care about celebrity dramas, they are not even representative of average population or average issues (and his whole celebrity entertainment business brainwashing propaganda could be a while topic of its own).

A few simple questions. Even a female philosopher like you, Pandora, ought to be able to answer these:

  1. Which gender wears makeup?
  2. Which gender wears high heels?
  3. Which gender wears revealing clothes?

You can fool yourself Pandora, but not me. Everything is about sex and sexual value to youas a woman. You’re projecting. I’m quite accepting of the idea to judge women on behalf of merit. The problem with Merit though, is that women have almost none, compared to men. When it comes down to the bottom-line, reality, then you rely almost entirely on your sex, and having children. That’s not how “I choose it”. That’s how reality is, without delusions. That’s how “Nature intended it”. It’s obvious that I don’t buy into Feminism and Feminist lies.

Here’s what I think. I think that you, and other women, cannot stand the thought of a man thinking himself equal, or superior, in value, to you. You hate the idea of a man “bettering” you. I think that most women are this way. And so when a male renounces and denounces feminist lies, or this notion of “equality”, then you are aghast, surprised, astonished. You can’t believe, that at a point, the value of some men rise above the value of some women. Because most women believe, falsely, that they are “equal to” (superior than) men.

You believe that you are superior to men. Young women have reason to believe this, because it’s true. Young women are superior (in value) than most men. But as I mentioned, this fades and changes over time. Some men can meet the value “Equality”, and rise above it, surpass it. It’s rare that men do this. Few men rise above the value of women. But men do this, through accomplishments, great victories, sexual conquest, all gaining confidence. A man’s ego rises through Merit, through deeds. While a woman’s ego is innate, starting out very strong and high, but degenerating over time.

You and others should think of it like this. Female start out with 100% value in life. Males start out with 0%. Nobody “likes” males, at first. Nobody wants males within society. It is not until males are emasculated, domesticiated, feminized, bent, beaten, culled, that males are “welcome” (never completely) into society. This is why 90% of criminals are male. Males are the expendable gender. Males are more rebellious, resistant against Authority. Males will fight against authority, violently. Females will not. Females will submit to authority, offering your sex.

Again, all of this is not how I “choose”, not how I “intend”, not how I “want”. My choosing, my intention, my wanting, is to learn and understand reality as it is, as objectively as possible.

So if I am wrong, then you can show me where, how, when. You can teach me the error of my ways, using what little Reason you are capable of. Show me where I’m wrong. The ‘wronger’ I am, the easier it should be, for you and others, to show me my mistakes, point them out. If I’m so wrong, then I should be making mistake after mistake, easy for you to disprove.

You claim that I sexualize women? While you wear the high heels? While you wear the lipstick? While you dress up in lingerie? I’m not convinced. But I will get a boner.

It’s now obvious to me.

When women say “women are equal to men”, what you mean is, “women are better than men”. That’s the real implication.

“I am equal to you” = “I am superior than you

It’s just a back-handed way of asserting it. For example, if a random guy said to a random girl, “I am equal to you”, with a serious face, then she would get offended. It would be an insult. Because average women do see themselves as superior to men. Rightly so, I’m inclined to agree with them. Average women are, on average, superior than average men. It takes exceptional men to rise above the average value of women.

10% of men are above the value of women
value of women
90% of men are below the value of women

Let’s call this “Pandora’s Ratio”. It explains why 1 in 10 men get 90% of the sexual access and mating-rites, while the majority of men, have to take all the leftovers and sloppy-tenths.

Wrong, I think you’re being a little too insecure. Why are you even comparing yourself to women? Does your identity as a man come from comparing yourself to a woman? Is a man’s identity defined by the status of women around him? Apparently so.
I don’t know, I get an impression from you that for a woman to be “equal in value” to a man she should be a man’s property, or be incapacitated in some way - only so that the man’s “value factor” is equalized. Maybe that’s why some men shop for their women in 3rd world countries.

I compare myself to everything and everybody. That’s objectivity. You can’t pick and choice, when it suits you, the worth and value of people or creatures.

There is no lifeform with “equal” value to each other. That’s a myth. Not even genetically identical twins have “equal” value.

These are more of your projections. That’s your insecurity talking. That’s your fear, not mine.

It’s you who actually fears the prospect, that, in order for a man and woman to be “equal in value” then she must be his property. First of all, your fear is irrational. As-if women don’t think of their boyfriends or husbands as “their property”? As-if ownership and possession is a one-way street?

See how flawed your thinking is??? How skewed and slanted? You keep painting things as-if it’s a one-way street. That only men are viciously jealous, possessive, and want to own women. You are blind to the fact that women do this too. You do this too. You believe that you ‘own’ this or that man. That some men’s loyalty, is owed to you.

You’re wrong, again, Pandora.

I think that in your case maybe you should consider dialing it down a notch, urwrong, as it appears that you’ve reached a point where it’s actually dragging you down.

But what I’m seeing in your case is you painting yourself into a corner with this “I compare myself to everything around me” attitude, which also strikes me as rather passive. Who or what determines your self? Apparently, it’s everything that comes across your way. Let’s take your Yahoo Entertainment link. Why the hell did you even go there? Is this your self-reflective framework, and do you allow it to influence who you are (because it’s just there)?
Ok, I understand that we are now living in a globalized digital world dominated by mass media. But it was still your choice to react to it, or let it get to you. Why? Do you also live in Hollywood?
Same goes for these ridiculous twitter wars, just because politicians are using it as a medium to mess with each other and influence public perception, it doesn’t make it objective. In the future, you may be living completely immersed in a virtual world, and if you compare yourself to all the varieties of virtually produced stimuli would you also call it objective just because you choose to compare yourself to all of it?

Except, in a male dominated societies, male and female promiscuity are usually not held to the same standards, giving men more rights and freedoms in both sexual choice and subsistence. This is also taking into account the historical lack of property rights and rights to separate economy for women, which made women even more (legally) dependent on men for their survival. In a two way street we would have the reverse situation, in which men would have no legal rights without women, and where it is male promiscuity that is socially frowned upon.

Nonsense, now you’re resorting to Ad Hom, meaning that you no longer have a reasonable response or counter-argument.

Mass media is a reflection of society. Society represents women. So my points are very relevant. The “fearless woman” is accurate, according to the context I linked. That’s what society, and you, mean by “a fearless woman”, compared to a fearless man. A fearless man, for example, is a line-operator, working on high-voltage powerlines. Do you see any women doing that? No.

Women don’t do the dangerous or dirty jobs, blue-collar, because again the point is unrefuted now, you are the privileged gender. You can stay at home, be pregnant, and raise children. That’s always your backup, your default, your worth. Not because I choose it. But because YOU choose it. I like your “argument” so far, because if you admit to this point, then you basically know that you’re wrong.

This is just an excuse.

Societies are actually female-dominated, almost never male-dominated. This is another feminist lie. Rarely, or never, have societies been “male-dominated”. Women have always controlled society, using sex as a tool, or a weapon. If women wanted to change society, then they would simply disallow most men from breeding. And women do this anyway. You do block out most men from having sex. Admit it. You’ve rejected lots of men.

This proves my point, again.

Sorry, yes.

The number of female lineman has risen from 0 to 2% and is still rising.

:laughing:

Just goes to show how they were kept out of those high paying jobs for so long, and how even now when they’re “dominating and controlling society” they still have trouble getting opportunities for this kind of work.

The boys clubs are eroding with women replacing men in jobs that have traditionally been held by men alone which used to be every job. Laugh all you want, but its the men who laugh who are most disturbed by female’s exerting their abilities replacing them. Men are not irreplaceable in any part of the work force.

Women are not yet dominating and controlling society, but we may.