The Hitler Conundrum by RionaEire

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

The Hitler Conundrum

POSTED BY: RIONAEIRE
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 12:17
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 6594
PAGE 2 of 2

Thursday, March 7, 2013 6:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I'm sure that staying with him because she likes to be hit is the more likely reason.

But, I will give you credit in that not having to deal with someone else's negatives is what makes it possible for some people to have a crush on the totally wicked types.

Like how people have crushes on Jayne, or Mal, when both of them would probably be completely intolerable in real life.

Some women like to be hit. Who am I to say that they'd stop that desire after they had 3 kids? My mom got rid of my dad who never raised a hand to her and spent 5 years eating a kitchen table worth of M&M's and Hostess treats and puking her guts out while her kids begged her to stop outside of the bathroom door while crying.

It's not just wicked types for fantasies, although if you can agree with me, you've probably had a fairly rough upbringing like my bros and I had. Whatever the fantasy, if you can live it long enough on your "off days", why bother getting into a real one when you only have a few hours before you have to go back to work, is all I'm saying.

Glad you threw Mal in there with Jayne though....

Even in 2013 America, i'm sure their good points would not outweigh their bad points in the "ideal relationship" for most modern women....

Let's see how that changes by 2015 or 2020.....

It's a "Woman's World" now, because we've reached the Apex of civilization in America.

Things will get worse, much worse.....

Genetically speaking, men are protectors. In most cases, aside from the children in the family, women.... not so much.

Welcome to the new era of America. The downfall.....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 7, 2013 7:14 AM

BYTEMITE

How to condense years of knowledge into a single post here without writing something longer than your original article…

You’re going to read a few answers that will say things along the line of “manly is good” or “we value male traits but not female traits” and the like. But I’ll impose this one question for you to ponder: When are women ever derided for being feminine? Rarely if ever. It’s not a case of “we value manliness” it’s actually a situation of “we do not allow men to be feminine”. We restrict men to the male gender role while we’ve allowed women to chose a male or female gender role.

And, quite frankly, the reason we’ve done so is that equality does not and can not exist.

I’m sure anyone here can come up with thousands of examples of how “women were historically oppressed”, usually by comparing the rights/privileges of women today vs the rights/privileges of the women of old. But then look at men. Has the role of men changed? No, not really. Men are still expected to be men. Now, I’m sure someone will come up with the suggestion of “liberate men as we’ve liberated women from traditional gender roles” but there’s a slight problem with that:

Societies which free it’s men from traditional gender roles are committing instantaneous suicide. Without men willing to sacrifice themselves to defend the borders, to work the “shit jobs” with must be done to make civilization possible, with the freedom to buck the constraints on their violent tendencies… said society would implode in short order into anarchy and/or be conquered by an outside force which stuck to traditional gender roles.

But there’s a corollary to that statement: Societies which free it’s women from traditional gender roles are also committing suicide, just at a slower pace. When women no longer motivate men to become marriage material, when women influence government/society to replace bedrock “masculine” values (equity) with “feminine” ones (equality), when women gain freedom from the constraints to their promiscuity… that society loses the very things which make civilization work.

I make both statements because I hope you can understand the point I’m trying to make: There is extreme value in masculinity: masculinity is what makes civilization even possible in the first place. On the other hand, there is also extreme value in femininity: femininity is what motivates men to do those things which create civilization! Without either, civilization will not happen. If you have civilization, removing either will destroy civilization (just at different rates).

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORDS

The sickness which has infested western civilization is the idea that men and women are equal and/or interchangeable. This is simply just not true. Men and women are built for different tasks at a biological level: males (having greater variability in philological traits) go out and test the environment, the males who survive mate with the females (having less variability) and shift the genetics more towards what is best for the environment. Just about every two-gender species works in this manner. The reason is that Mother Nature is rather smart: You don’t waste reproductive potential on environment testing.

So, yes, the fundamental root of the “problem” is that women make babies. Until you resolve that issue (and the biological differences that result from that issue) you will never have equality. And, thusly, since we can’t change the “is” to the “ought” we wish for, we need to stop screwing up society by trying to implement the “ought” instead of dealing with the “is”. Men should be men, women should be women, and we should advance and succeed as a society and team rather than continuing this self-destructive path.

Words

Look what feminists have done to boys in education for the past twenty years. There actually applauding the fact there there are more women in college after boys have been doing worse for the last twenty years and are dropping out of school at higher rates.

And what of equality? Why haven’t feminists been closing the health gap instead expanding it with even more spending on women’s (especially white) health? What about the longevity gap? What about the retirement gap? What about the custody gap (women vet special attention in the workplace but keep the status quo of women and children)? What about the sentencing gap for the same crimes (there is no consensus on a racial gap but there is one for a gender gap)? What about the draft and all the other female privileges?

Western society has exploded due to women's rights in the form of a massive expanse of government. When you research societies, you will find that they are transitory in nature. They rise and fall in rather predicable patterns (the only thing that seems to differ wildly is actual method of implosion). When a society “leans left” it is already in its decline.

I’ll admit that there is a “the chicken or the egg” question here which I’ve had lots of honest answer-seeking debate about. Does the expansion of women’s rights cause the decline, or is the expansion of women’s rights a symptom of the decline? It is, honestly, an interesting question if we wish to attempt to lengthen the length of time a society can be successful before it’s implosion.

However, please understand that at this point said question is simply academic. Whether the expansion of women’s rights to “equality” is a cause or an effect, we are still currently in the situation where women’s rights have been expanded thusly and therefore are in the decline and should be preparing for implosion.

Words words

It’s only when individual survival is relatively guaranteed that we begin to consider stepping away from traditional gender roles. It is the “oppression” of survival that enforces traditional gender roles.

(1) We survive. (2)We advance. (3)We get assured survival. (4) We Relax. (5)We free our women. (6)The nature of women changes society to a point where it no longer works. (7) We collapse or are conquered.

That’s the cycle. The question is: is it even possible to stretch the “good times” between 5 and 6, or do we have to focus on stretching 4 to 5?

Sadly, given the immediate and massive change in government after women get the vote, I think once 5 happens it’s quickly downhill from there (measured in the lifespan of a civilization, that is).

Words words words words

Democracy is an unsustainable form of government.

The only two which work are an Immortal Benevolent Dictator (rule by “God”) or democracy limited to those we want society to emulate/become. I’m rather fond of the “must own land to vote” idea. Once you’ve worked hard enough to earn some land, some of the naivety about how the world really works is no longer in your system.

Is it “misogyny” to recognize how the women’s vote changes government, and to recognize that said changes are not good for the future of the civilization?

Women in government steal from men (paying the majority of taxes) to provide for women (receiving the majority of government services) via the “pretty way” of doing it through government rather than just robbing the men themselves.

Now… that paragraph is truth. I guess facts piss you off. If you’re going to be pissed off no matter what I say (simply because you don’t like the facts) why should I spend effort to wrap it up in pretty bows?

Words words words

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 7, 2013 7:15 AM

BYTEMITE

(I'm pretty much totally fucking with you)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 10, 2013 9:04 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

I don't know whether you are joking or serious Byte....

Honestly, at least to me, you've hit the nail on the head. My grandmother believes 100% in what you've said here and she was a bad ass woman who didn't take any shit from her 2nd husband (and consequently has outlived him by 25 years and counting.....)

The "store" that I work for is one of hundreds stateside that will likely be closed before the year is up. When I asked my "black male" boss if I even really had a future here if my union job didn't work out, he told me to look elsewhere. 80% of the full-time management staff is white women. The only exception is one black Jamacian woman and one black male on the day shift and a black male on the night shift. Everyone else making anywhere close to decent wages and benefits are white females.

At the same time, it's no secret that there is no "cohesion" between departments or shifts and the store is thrown through utter chaos from day to day.

I'm sorry... I'm not saying that ZERO women should be in management positions, but to have a store with 160 employees, only 19 of which are management, and to have only 2 of them be male is a HUGE mistake.

For "F's" sake.... there are like 4 groups of women managers and their employees who are all on their managers "cycles" now and nothing gets done because they're always fighting.

If this keeps up, our store will be closed.....

You seem to get it Byte.....

Others here will probably hate me for posting it.....

G.I. Jane is noteworthy, but she is the exception to the rule. She is also not at all "marriage material" for 95% of men that couldn't handle her.

When G.I. Jane gets the job to run a store and handles hiring, especially if she creates a "Sapphic empire" around her..... She will ruin the store and make sure that all of her employees are eventually laid off when the store closes.

There is ZERO help from one department to another now. Nothing but egos and past grudges running the store, and we will die because of it.

I could take any one of 17 women's places at my job and start the healing, but that will never happen.....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 10, 2013 9:29 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
I don't know whether you are joking or serious Byte....

I'm not serious. Which is why I'm not even trying to argue.

Strict gender roles haven't saved the Japanese from a less than replacement birthrate.

Democracy in general involves the tragedy of the commons stealing from the pot at the middle of the table, even Plato saw that, and Plato was full of self-serving bullshit. It's not just women having the vote that's the problem but democracy itself - it's inevitably a kleptocracy for everyone involved.

About the only valid argument here is that when women have more options they compete with men - for jobs and limited resources and money. But frankly life is about hustling and scrambling and making your own way in the world, not relying on someone to do everything hard for you.

It's a trick nowadays for a family to get by without both parents working. Basically people needing to feed themselves is a reality that's always existed. It's the idea that one gender must be the breadwinner that's ridiculous and unsustainable.

That's not to say that the jobs shouldn't go to whoever is the most fit for the jobs - but provided the same education, both genders (and all races) should be equally fit, and anyone can engage in folly and failures of common sense. Your workplace is poorly managed and a toxic environment - and that's not because they're all women but because as people I suspect 1) they haven't been properly trained by corporate because there's no money for training, and 2) they probably weren't good fits for the job as individuals (not because they're women).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 10, 2013 10:03 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Women are completely capable of taking care of themselves and their children and hundreds of cats.....

There are always exceptions to the rule, but women should not generally be allowed to "rule" as management at jobs or head any number of people that could be laid off in this economy.

Argue me that point if you will, but half of the males that hold these positions have way too much estrogen in their veins to wield those positions in these trying times. I think we're far from a Noah's Ark Flood cleansing, but the storm that's happening is going to leave plenty of management folk with their asses flapping in the wind, and a majority of them that will need to find a new job will be women who only got the job because of formerly current "equal rights" laws.....

The problem with working directly for women a majority of the time has almost nothing to do with the women themselves. It lies in who they choose as subordinates....

If you have a store, as mine is, run by a high-paid woman, you might be inclined, as my store-director has been over the years to push out every white male manager and replace them with a cast of 90% white female managers and throw in two token black-males.... The best of both worlds, right?

Meanwhile, nothing gets done, the "kids" walk all over the management and get nothing done, and the night crew has to clean up all the day-shift's deficiencies. The only reason I'm getting over 30 hours a week is because everyone I work with knows my number and I cover for them when they need/want a night off....

I'm currently only scheduled for 14 hours a week, and I'm not lying when I say that I'm a serious commodity to this store now.....

I'm glad I work on night shift.....

The day shift is filled with up to 16 white females and 1 black female. The black female is the only one of 2 that I enjoy talking to when she opens in the morning.

The rest are self-serving bitches on wheels.....

I won't begrudge them their desire to "move up", but at the same time I laugh because even though the entire store is chock full of management estrogen, I'm sure many of their superiors know they are failing as a team and they'll all be lucky to have a job next year when our store is closed, let alone a promotion....

A VAST majority of Women have ZERO idea how to make it in the work place.

It's not their fault....

Men and women are wired differently....

I'm quite convinced that if we were living in 2113, that every one of the female managers at my company would have had penises installed before they were 6 years old.....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 10, 2013 10:22 AM

BYTEMITE

And this is why I don't take you seriously. "Wired differently."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-brenoff/girls-good-at-math-study_b_1
146191.html

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/13/girls-are-just-as-good-at-ma
th-study-in-86-countries-suggests-856512/

Pfft.

Yeah, because in the entire history of the world, there weren't circumstances that forced women to work together for their mutual survival in an absence of men. So of course they can't manage anything worth shit. Men did all that because there were always men around.

(World war 2 world war 2 world war 2)

Fortunately, I recognize a fellow mischief maker. I don't take you seriously because I know you're not taking yourself seriously. Everything you say is intended to get a reaction.

So apart from screwing with you right back, what else am I supposed to do? I could just ignore you, but that seems childish. Or at least not as fun as engaging in a long standing battle of wits. And so here we are.

But man, you need new ammunition. You act like you think I'm going to get offended when you talk about cycles and PMS and estrogen. Frankly, you don't seem to know much about any of those things. It undermines your efforts. You should pick something you know, really well, that you know is a weak chink in someone's armor, and then needle it ENDLESSLY until the person breaks.

Oh the RAGE, the hilarious rage. Join me, and together we can rule the galaxy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 10, 2013 4:48 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:

You'll find a lot fewer women crushing on Louis XVI of France, who was theoretically an absolute monarch because he was shy, bumbling and deeply sexually insecure. You don't feel safe with that guy, you have to listen to him drone on about his locksmith hobby while he refuses to sleep with you and people laugh at him. And then you'll be beheaded.

That made me laugh. Too true.

Never really been into romance as a genre, although I do love a bit of Austen when I'm feeling blue.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:32 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

I really admire Hitler and I think he has a lot of nice things to say:

Who knew Hitler was a Commie?!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 12, 2013 1:16 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

Unabashedly looking forward to Sun. I don't care what you guys think.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:04 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Seriously Byte... If you were Selena Gomez, not only would I join you, but I'd beg you to marry me and be your boot to stomp on all of the stupid and/and or ugly and/or otherwise unfortunate people.....

At the same time though, I wasn't trying to rile you up. You're already sufficiently riled up for any war.....

Hell.... you're probably one of the few self-respecting women alive today that I know that actually understands that there really is a "war" going on....

Wish I was a sheeple slave, really.... no reason to be as smart as we are when there is zero we can do about it.....

We live in the age where idiots rule......

It only took 16 years to eliminate the Electoral Vote.....

Nobody is talking about that, Byte.....

As much as I hated the complaining about it in Bushes 2nd evil term, we're hearing the same shit from the "conservatives" about Obama's i'll gotten 2nd term....

Sorry, "American Idol" voters......

If you spent one day using your f'ing brains and read about the Electoral Vote, you wouldn't bastardize it on either side.

Hell.... why bother to convince them.....

They're nothing but puppets.... :(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:00 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

and by 'ill gotten' I take it you mean 'won'

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:41 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
At the same time though, I wasn't trying to rile you up.

Is this some bizarre courtship dance of yours or something? Or are you just being ironic?

This is where this whole thing becomes completely inane, where it's basically like a series of "u mad bro?" in an endless one-upping cycle.

It's like people realized that if you couldn't annoy someone in a conventional way you could turn the whole conversation into a pointless brick wall and accuse them of being annoyed anyway. Like some kind of reward for being utterly ineffective.

I abhor laziness. Where is your creativity? You're all over the place, and then you rely on a tired meme for one last desperate attempt.

Maybe you were never as good at this as I thought. You just hit the reverse and strode ass backwards into greatness, but then kept walking into corners because you couldn't see where you're going. Been living on borrowed glory ever since.

I give up on trolling. I'm actually depressed right now. Fucking disappointment.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:47 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

I could always just be like Kaneman was back in the day and tell you to eat my ass?

Is that what you'd prefer Byte?

Usually I like a girl to take me on the town and impress me before she makes out with my asshole, but I'll make an exception for a strong woman like you. :)

If you want to kiss my mouth, you have to put a ring on it baby.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 12:17 PM

BYTEMITE

And all the questions ever were answered!

But you can't overcome my smug sense of superiority. Because I know what you are now.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE