if you want to prevent a woman from straying, impregnate her, limit her employment prospects, & surround her with family
it worked for thousands of years
8 comments
Actually, it hasn't. If that were the way that nature truly intended things to be, the women's lib movement would never have happened. It would have been unnecessary. If men really were superior, it would be inherently known. Women would never question that, because it would be common knowledge, saving men the embarrassment of constantly having to assert their superiority. Since nature does not work that way, all men have been doing is humiliating themselves by constantly bleating about how masculine they are & why, somehow, that is better, all the while crying about the perceived loss of femininity in women who can drive & wear pants. When asked to provide any proof to back their ridiculous assertions, all men do is fall back on religious bullshit or easily debunked junk science. Those are not good arguments, which just makes men as a whole look even stupider.
[Repeats my usual 'Animal Kingdom Arguments' schpeil with the references to Anglerfish, Headbutts, Flashy Plummage, yada yada yada for the #526th time]
Actually, as long as the MAN has the option of straying, some of their women will feel that their straying would simply be justice.
So unless your 'barefoot and pregnant' plan has a male version, you're just spinning your wheels...
I've been with my wife for 19 years. I've never once had to worry about her straying.
I guess when you have trust, you don't need abuse.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
