When women got the right to vote, they started voting in bad laws that go against the family, the unborn child, and everything good!

12:53 AM · Feb 6, 2026 · 23.1K Views

From an evolutionary standpoint, getting raped is nowhere near as bad as being an incel

Human behaviour has evolved through billions of years to maximise the survival of their genes. That is why they are so protective of their offspring and why they love their relatives.

So let's look at rape vs being an incel. If a woman gets raped, he risks having his kids carry genes from a genetically perhaps not as fit male. He also will not get the father to offer resources for them.

Compare this to life-long inceldom, which kills your entire descent. It's not even remotely close. Being an incel is something far worse than getting raped and therefore being an incel also means much greater psychological stress and pain.

Is this news to you?

No.

Trooning is the peak expression of men being unable to face who they are. There's a reason why it happens in spaces most exposed to feminist narratives.

When confronted with too much proof repeatedly, a man will literally chop his dick off and identify as not male before he allows himself to even briefly perceive the vulgarities of his nature. Then he will continue practicing them in their most flagrant form, thinking he's no longer doing those things because he's a man. It may work, briefly.

Similarly, male-abused male children do not grow to hate men, they either grow to hate women or become pseudohomosexual.

i can't fucking take this anymore
how are women still allowed to walk the earth like human beings
why are they not leashed like dogs and walking on fours naked in parks?
why why whyyyy
it's not fucking FAAAIR

[From “Breaking Bad, 2”]

I had promised a critical review of the series, but the YouTuber who reviewed it on his channel, which Mauricio transcribed and linked to in my midnight post, already covered the essentials[…]
Episode 2
In the first subversive message against Aryan sanity, we see Walter having breakfast with his family, who judge him with their stares. Remember that the right path would be to share meals in a Syssitia[…]Without the proper Männerbund restoring Aryan culture is impossible (women aren’t creators of great civilisations)

This lack of manliness, stemming from eating with a woman and a disabled lad instead of soldiers, is reflected in Walter having to kill a dangerous Hispanic man[…]
In the second subversive message we see that Walter was expecting a baby girl, according to the ultrasound. What an idiot given that Walter Jr. is disabled and, in a normal world, the father should yearn for a male heir to replace the idiot[…]
Episode 3
“Murder is wrong,” Walter writes during his internal struggle because he doesn’t dare kill the dangerous spic, who is tied up in Jesse’s basement. Is it possible to reclaim the Old US with such Christian morality? Then, Walter calls his wife to check in because it’s late and he hasn’t arrived, as if implying that she’s the one in charge. It’s inconceivable to become a Nazi with Americans like that[…]
But then Walter regains his manhood and commits his first direct murder: he finally kills the Hispanic guy. How many of those who blog on racialist forums would commit such an act?[…]
Episode 6
Walter’s chosen alias for dealing with drug traffickers is mentioned for the first time: Heisenberg, in honour of the German who should have built the atomic bomb for the Third Reich[…]
Episode 10
Nothing to report here except that feminism continues in the final scene, with Walter and Skyler in bed, Skyler not even letting Walter kiss her (compare it with the rape of the Sabine women: the foundation of Rome)

This last Thanksgiving I was visiting with my in-laws.  During that visit I made this statement to my sister-in-law “Yes mam, I am a proud sexist!” Why would I say such a thing? Isn’t being a sexist inconsistent with Christian values?
[…]
In regard to my in-laws, as kind and as loving as my mother and father in-law are – they are feminists. Don’t get me wrong, they are not drooling at the mouth, man-hating feminists and they would not even call themselves feminists. They certainly would never march in a feminist parade. My in-laws just believe in equality for men and women, partnership marriage and my mother in-law told me she taught her daughters to and I quote “be independent and not need a man”. Their father worked in a factory but he wanted better for his daughters and he encouraged them to get a higher education and have successful careers like their mother who was an accountant.
My wife and her sister are actually on different sides of their parents on this issue.  My wife’s sister is more feministic than her parents and my wife is less feministic than her parents.  My wife will at least tell people she believes in male headship in the home and she tries to a certain degree to fight her own feminist tendencies.  But it is extremely difficult for my wife because of the combination that she is very intelligent, strong willed and she was raised by parents who instilled feminist principles in her. So there are days when she full on gives into the dark side and goes full blown feminist on me.  Those are the days when she says “you can’t tell me what to do – you are not my father”.  Other days I can tell she is truly trying and waging a war against the dark side in her that she knows in her heart conflicts with the Bible and what God wants for her.
On the other hand, my wife’s sister is a completely different story. She fully embraces her dark side (aka feminist tendencies).  Her sister is also a Christian and is actually very involved in her church. She believes in partnership marriage and that her husband does not have any more say in the marriage than she does. For a very brief time when she was on the verge of her second divorce she tried to embrace submission in order to save that marriage.  But in the end the marriage still died and he divorced her.[…]

(Charlie Kirk)
Watch how many Democrats show up to protest the Supreme Court saving millions of innocent lives and tell me this isn’t a spiritual battle.

(@FreeRein)
image

(@soupexpertDonna)
My body my choice is back for women who want to kill their babies, but still not for those who do not want to take a possible kill shot !! And, since they claim that men can get pregnant, complete with male pregnant emoji‘s, why aren’t men being offered abortion?
And lastly, I thought calling somebody a woman was an illegal pronoun! Half of the babies in the womb are women, so how is it called female healthcare to chop female babies into pieces?

(@Ghenghis)
For sure it is a Spiritual battle and the dems side with darkness and satan.

(@MarkUSAFVet)
image

(@KA3UXU)
It is very much a spiritual battle. Satan has been ticked off like crazy since Trump became president. The Demonic-party with its share of Rino republicans are still possessed. Even with Trump out of office, the Demon-rats remain obsessed.

(@PhibesMd)
Anyone who can support abortion, especially in the unfettered ways that most of these wack-job leftists do, has either no soul, or has leased theirs to Lucifer.

To ardently support and protest the right not only to kill babies in the womb, but in some cases after the child is birthed is pure evil.

Women call ChatGPT "he" or "she", remember women always usher in the age of darkness.

Women are the conduit of evil.

7:35 AM · Jan 30, 2026 · 224.6K Views

[From “Breaking Bad, 1”]

If Breaking Bad has the reputation of being the best series, that means it is a portrait of the American psyche of the 21st century, as novels such as Ben Hur and Uncle Tom’s Cabin[…]Just as these novels completely sold out to Christian ethics were supertoxic to the Aryan DNA of Americans of yesteryear, so are all the Netflix and HBO series today[…]
The first toxic message appears at the beginning of “Pilot”. Walter White[…]tells his wife Skyler White in a video he records that she is the love of his life. Remember that Savitri Devi said she would despise a man who put her before him. A real man shouldn’t idolise his wife[…]
Walter White’s only child, Walter Jr. (“Flynn”), who was born with cerebral palsy, would have been euthanised in Sparta[…]In addition to his wife, Walter also addresses a message to his son[…]To love defective offspring because Christian ethics prevent us from performing the most basic euthanasia, something that the pagan Hitler wanted to transvalue with his Aktion T4[…]
The following family scene shows that Walter Jr. is even a little shit. If Christianity prevented me from euthanising him as a baby, I would disown such a creature and let the female raise him without a penny from me[…]
In the following toxic message, we see Walter White teaching a mixed class: boys with girls. This is a modern aberration: Boys should be educated to wage war (exterminate Neanderthals) and girls to procreate warriors[…]
Hank Schrader is Walter’s brother-in-law and a member of the DEA. We see the next toxic message at the same party, where we see for the first time that Gomey, Hank’s right-hand man, is Hispanic: someone who should never have been an American citizen[…]
When Walter flees in the van after chemically knocking out a gook and a spic who wanted to kill him, we hear niggers’ rap[…]In the final scene Walter makes love to his wife with degenerate music, but this time apparently composed and played by white people

Remember when the internet was a male space?

In the 90s and early 2000s the internet was largely a platform where white men communicated in chatrooms and forums. Of course, women also used the internet, but the general audience was male, the jokes were written for men and you just assumed you were talking to a man. Even in the late 2010s a lot of the instagram comment sections were still predominantly occupied by men, making jokes.

Now, this is not against women (in this society you always have to clarify), but there is something I miss about this "male space" that was the internet.

It made me think about female inclusion – inclusion or invasion? Before you judge me, please read what I have to say. There are other examples of this: Women became referees and commentators in male sports games. In the past, there were more martial arts schools where only men trained. There are probably hundreds of other examples.

Don't you miss the feeling of being somewhere where just men talk with each other (not necessarily all-inclusive, politically correct language, but also not necessarily only vulgar and offensive tone)? More than that, don't you need it? Don't you need the rivalry, the jokes the appreciation, the feeling of being irreplaceable?

Luckily, we still have the possibility to do this, but the amount of spaces is becoming less and less.

The Percentage of Incel Men is Far Greater than 10%

Many people here say that incels are a minority and only 10%. Well let me tell you something, Incel = Not being able to get sex on a regular basis. Just because a normie got sex once at 18 by some ugly drunk fat girl and then at 23 by some below average drunk club slut doesnt make him a non incel.

He just got lucky twice in his life. The rest of his life women keep sex away from him. He is not a non incel.

I know MANY normies who have MANY female friends and they Struggle like hell to get sex and like hell to get a gf. Many male normies ARE FUCKING INCEL. They just have a lot of friends and go out a lot and are NT. It doesnt mean they are slaying like chad or even getting semi regular sex with one girl. THEY ARE FUCKING BLUE BALLED SEXLESS LOSERS.

The only difference between male normies and male incels is that male normies have been accepted by women to be entertainment clowns for her when she is bored when chad is not around. There is no pleasure or fun in being a male normies. Your basically a sexless tool for women to use as an emotional tampon or some gay best friend type shit.

All the normies on here KNOW we are correct in out assessment of succubi and how shallow and discriminating they are, they just dont want to appear weak and admit the truth that THEY ARE LOSERS with Women. Normies eat the leftovers of chad, the breadcrumbs off the table = they get sex once every 7 years and then come here and say how amazing women are and laugh at incels even though they technically are Fucking Incels themselves who got pussy like only 4-5 times before age 35.

Therefore the male incel population is like 75-85%. Only like 10-20% OF MEN get regular sex from succubi. And only like 1-5% of men get hot regular sex for FREE from succubi.

[Discussion] Making women's vaginas public property who do not contribute tax wise to society isn't always enough

There needs to be a more detailed system

Lets say a 18yo single mom who never contributed and for a long time never will shall made also have their anus and oral cavity public property.

A woman who worked 10 years full time and stops contributing with taxes shall only have made their vaginas public property.

A woman who doesn't pay taxes shall have made their vagina public property instantly.

If a woman doesn't contribute with tax money for 2 years her oral cavity shall become public property. Her anus after 5.

A woman who hasn't contributed continously for a year shall have made her vagina made public property until she is 80.

A woman who has gotten their mouth and anus made public property shall have their oralacavity and anus made private property after 5 years of continuous tax contribution

Abortions shall be made illegal

[Serious] Daily reminder to always contribute in making a hole's life worse in any way possible

Always be rude to a waitress and never tip them.
Leave bad reviews on your nearest female owned businesses
Always give your female professors the worst rating in feedback forms.
Always dislike a YouTube video featuring a hole and report the channel for harassment.
Always criticize and be impolite towards nurses and flight attendants.
Never follow a hole on Instagram or Twitter or TikTok and if you want to, post hateful comments on their posts.
Download porn movies from torrent sites or daftsex so that not one penny goes into the back accounts of those whores.
Use Adblocks on female owned websites and leave negative comments
Never help a hole in distress. They are not entitled to it.

Remember, every hole on this planet hates you and wants you dead. The least you can do is make them feel a bit shittier about themselves. I know it won't affect their lives on tutorial mode much but every action of yours matters and it may lead to a beta uprising in the near future.

[…] In the 1960’s during the rise of Second Wave Feminism a new word was coined.  This new word, “sexism”, was as actually built using the fight against racism as a model.
Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary defines “Sexism” as:
“1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex”
Now some may contend that sexism always existed – it just did not receive an official label until the mid-1960’s.  But we need to realize that along with this new label “Sexism” came a new set of morals not previously recognized in human history.
Is Discrimination Always Wrong?
Since the creation of mankind women were in fact discriminated against.  But here is a truth that every Christian must realize – discrimination is not always wrong.  To discriminate against someone is to treat someone differently based on certain demographic characteristics.
For instance we don’t allow people put in prison to vote.  That is a form of discrimination.  We don’t allow children to vote and we allow parents to make decisions for their minor children.  This another form of discrimination (age discrimination). We also only give welfare assistance to people who make under a certain amount of money – if you make over that amount you won’t get assistance.  That is discrimination on the basis of how much you money you earn. There are many college scholarships that are only available to you if you are an African American – that again is a form of discrimination based on race.
The point is, we as a society have made judgements as to what types of discrimination are moral and just and what types of discrimination are immoral and unjust.  The question for us as Christians is – does the Bible agree with American standards of what is just and or unjust discrimination? […]

Nope, I am going to let the feminists have the toxic workplace to themselves, and recommend all men boycott that sex-hostile place. Why would you want to spend time in a place where your sexuality is systematically persecuted? Let the cringing manginas who still want to put up with it grovel in apology for the slightest sign of masculinity under the hateful cunts who rule the workplace. Real men have better things to do, not least mount a resistance movement against all this misandry. That is my vocation.

I think people should look up to their pastors as their heroes (all humans have heroes), but when it comes between a husband and wife, I ALWAYS take the side of the husband! Pastors are not even to be compared ladies to YOUR OWN HUSBAND! The Scriptures teach, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord” (Ephesians 5:22), but there is no command whatsoever to obey your pastor. A minister is simply an influence in your life for God, as he teaches the inspired Word of God, and if it ever becomes more than that, you need to RUN AWAY FROM THAT PLACE! Biblically, a woman is not supposed to rely upon her pastor for Bible knowledge, but her OWN HUSBAND! 1st Corinthians 14:35, “And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” You learn at home from hubby! And if your husband is a theological ignoramus, then you praise him for what little knowledge he has ladies! We need a whole new generation of Christian ladies who have been RAISED TO PRAISE, instead of the NAGGING HAGS today! BRAG, DON'T NAG HAG!!!

Just for all of those who think the KKK is soo bad, read your history. The KKK was a group of white men then protected WOMEN. They even protected Black Women. Over the years it has turned into what people think are racist. This is not true. Read your history before you bash people, I have done years of study on them just for this reason.

Modern games are cucked

I tried playing Far Cry 4, one of the female rebells/warriors was a foid, ruined it for me!

Started up Civilization VI, the introduction video was a father talking to his warrior daughter who later became a female president!

Started up Skyrim, female Imperial officer, female stormcloack soldiers and fucking shield maidens!

Started up Deus Ex, Human revolution, the smart scientists are female, male scientists are incompetent!

What the hell is going on here?

It's the male instinct to have sex with as many women as possible, any way possible. Just because women don't want to have sex with me, doesn't mean I don't want to have sex with them. But you will never see me grab a woman's ass at the grocery store and start fucking her. There's laws against that which represses that instinct.

Yet, the female sexual instinct is not similarly repressed. Their instinct is to have sex with the most dominant/good looking/criminal males they can possibly find. That shouldn't be allowed. Queue some fat landwhale or effeminate numale telling me it's not comparable, because in the first instance I am violating someone's consent and therefore their rights but in the case of females, they are not violating anyone's rights because "muhh freedom of association". WRONG. Let's explain why:

So let's say at some point I get tired of paying taxes and I just stop completely. Most people(with the exception of anarcho-capitalists) would say that's a crime and that I should go to jail for it. But who am I really hurting by not paying my taxes? Not the government-they don't need my money, so there has to be another reason why people would want me thrown in jail. It's because people know that some portion of tax money goes to supporting infrastructure and the needs of people like healthcare, the police force, jobs, etc. So by not paying my taxes, I'm not hurting one particular person but society as a whole.

Similarly, the female is not hurting any one individual when she chases degenerate men like criminals and douchebags. Nor is she hurting any one individual when she chases highly attractive or powerful men, but society at large. When women are whores for evil men, they empower them and hurt good men by depriving them of much needed affection. Further, men will themselves seek to emulate evil behavior to be sexually successful, making the situation even worse. When they are whores for only attractive men, they skew the natural equilibrium. Eventually, there is an inflated sense of despair and resentment in society, not to mention degeneracy, and society itself will collapse.

There are no doctrinally sound women pastors. Every woman "pastor" disobeys God's word.

No woman "pastor" has ever, at any time, heard the Holy Spirit tell her to be a pastor.

[..]Let’s say my daughter was 16 and a wonderful Christian 25 year old man who was a mechanical engineer approached me about courting my daughter. I was able to check out the church he attended and verify with many people his Christian character. He makes over 100K a year, owns his own home and can provide for my daughter well. Would I consider letting him court my daughter and possibly marry her as a 16 year old young lady? The answer is yes. […]

A young 12 year old girl would have witnessed births by many women by the time she reached 12 and would be fully aware of periods, child bearing and birth long before these things happened to her. She would already have been learning about child care well before she reached puberty. Her whole life would have been leading up to the time when she could finally marry and have children of her own.
So in many ways, a 12 year old girl in pre modern times would have had the maturity level of what many 18 or even 20 year old girls have today.
Also we must keep in mind that before the modern era, families took care of other and were much closer. So when a 13 or 14 year woman had her first baby, her female relatives, whether they were cousins, or aunts, or even her mother were all there to help her learn the ropes of motherhood. Today the tribal family structure has all but been eliminated.

(Edmund_Kemper)
If you had Danny Phantom’s ghost powers, would you possess a Chad’s body while he’s having sex with a Stacy?

Danny Phantom was able to possess other people and control what they do like as if he is them

Poll:
<table>

I can’t tell you how many leftists and humanists I saw on Facebook and on the news saying “The economy is not more important than human lives”. But these same leftists have no problem with 56 million human lives worldwide being sacrificed each year for the “economic empowerment of women” when women have abortions. Do you get the irony in that?

I have seen some leftists and feminists attack pro-life conservatives saying “Look at these conservative pro-lifers willing to sacrifice human lives for the economy. I guess they are not so pro-life after all.” But this is a horribly faulty comparison. Comparing COVID 19 deaths to deaths caused by abortion is like comparing normal flu deaths each year to those caused by murder. And that is exactly what abortion is – it is murder. If you die from getting a virus that is a natural cause of death. If you die from a doctor tearing you apart with medical instruments that is not a natural cause of death. That is murder.

Foolish humanists have said to those protesting the loss of their freedoms in the COVID 19 hype that they are fighting for “the freedom to give and receive the Corona virus”. So could we as conservative Christians say humanists are fighting for “the freedom to give and receive STDs which can be fatal” when they fight for the freedom of people to engage in casual sex outside of marriage?

The leftists and humanists want us to wear masks and practice social distancing to go buy milk. But in the coming months they will continue to fight for the right of two strangers to meet at a bar (with masks on of course) and then go home, take off their masks, get naked and engage in casual sex. The irony and foolishness of their positions are completely lost on them.

When God created mankind, he ordained three core social classes and those were men, women and children. After sin entered the world, he allowed for a fourth social class of slaves (both male and female) because of poverty and war.

Humanists rejected these four social class structures and instead sought to bring about a new model of society that had only two social classes which we know today as “adults” and “children”. The abolitionist humanists first targeted the slave class for elimination. Then some female abolitionists broke off and organized the first womens rights conference in 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York.

When they talked about “humanizing” people, they were talking about making women and slaves equal with free men. In other words, they were seeking to eliminate the social classes of men, women and slaves and replace those classes with one new social class, that of a “human” or “adult” while leaving the child class intact.

This is why today if any adult is seen has having less rights than another adult, it is said that the person with less rights is being “dehumanized”.

The ultimate goal of humanists of the late 19th century was to build an “internationalist” or what we call today “globalist” society. No men, no women, no slaves, no rich, no poor, no Christians, no Muslims, no Jews, no Americans, no Mexicans, no British.

Just humans.

And it is this march toward a one world society with no nations, no religions, no genders, no rich and no poor that humanists refer to as “progress”. And this is why leftists today refer to themselves as “progressives”.

Humanists knew that their master plan would take decades and perhaps more than a century to bring about. And they knew they had to do it in small incremental pieces. This is why if you notice in this ruling, the court still acknowledged that a wife had a duty to be in subjection to her husband. It would have been too much for American society to accept all at once that a husband could not use corporal punishment on his wife and that a wife did not have a duty to obey her husband.

Egalitarianism is nothing less than complete rebellion against God’s establishment of patriarchy, male headship, in all areas of society including the family, the church and civil government. The lack of male leadership in any of these spheres leads to chaos and destruction. God spoke about this in Isaiah 3:12 when he said “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths”. And this is what we are witnessing today in our equality obsessed western nations.

Jesus Christ never gave up his heavenly kingship when he came to earth. But rather he asserted it many times while he was here in his earthly ministry. He was not just a servant, but truly he was a servant leader.

Christ taught us that a servant leader does not use his leadership only to fulfill his own desires. But rather he works with and helps the people under his leadership to work together to fulfill the mission he has been given or that he has set for himself. He develops the people under his leadership and seeks to help them reach their full potential. He steps in wherever help is needed and sacrifices himself for his people, but he also pushes his people to do what they ought to do and disciplines those under his authority to help them to do what they ought to be doing.

The truth we find in the Bible is that while God has called husbands and wives to serve one another, he has called them to serve one another in very different ways. The husband serves his wife as her head, while she serves him as his helper. He uses his headship to make her the most glorious wife she can be by God’s standards, and she helps him by bringing glory to him in all that she says and does.

Let's face it, hoping for any kind of significant political change is pure cope.
Left wing, right wing, both two sides of the same gynocentric slave collar.
There is no real change possible, cause we, as a society, operate in the same framework.
A framework of validating toilets just for existing, seeing them as morally superior, seeing "excess men" as expendable drones, withholding the basic need of sex to sub-7 men and so on.
No political movement, especially not the controlled opposition "right wing", will help you get the sex you NEED and DESERVE.
They see you as nothing as a drone, they HATE you for being genetically inferior in their eyes just because low IQ looks obsessed liberated foids don't want to have sex with you. As if TOILETS get to decide who is genetically inferior.
The only difference you as an individual can make for yourself:
- Gymmaxxing and roidmaxxing in order to steal the seritonin of white knights, watching them seethe at the fact they can't do anything to you
- Fucking hot young 3rd world prostitutes instead of jestermaxxing for used up old single mom cumdumpsters you are SUPPOSED to marry, or gooning to jewish porn that is made to artificially satiste you while chad gets the real thing. Beating the life script society has planned out for you.
- Stealing money from the government, not helping random foids, being "antisocial" and "rude", being entitled and not backing down from confrontation with soys. Assholemaxxing is LAW
- Not wasting time with useless politics.
You rot on political forums with your useless opinions and your white knight stormfrontcel buddies who would sell you to mossad for an unenthusiastic blowjob from a LTB all while chad fucks your looksmatch and YOU FUCKING CUCKOLD think you are based. Fuck all that.

First, a pro-family policy agenda should recognize the natural family as a pre-political reality grounded in humans’ biological and social nature. It exists in some form in every culture. It is the cell of society. [...]

Second, the country should avoid policies, however well-meaning, that undermine marriage and the formation of families, or reward or encourage needless delay in marriage and out-of-wedlock births. The country’s regulations, welfare system, and tax code, for instance, should not penalize marriage and encourage single parenthood. Education should not coax young Americans to delay marriage while pursuing needless credentials. Housing policy should not put the price of owning a home out of the reach of the median American family. Tech policy should not make it harder for families to balance their duties at home and at work. Environmental policy should not treat human beings as mere costs.

Third, policies should favor natural marriage over same-sex and polyamorous relationships, cohabitation, or intentional single parenthood. Fathers and mothers are not generic and interchangeable “parents.” It is not discrimination to acknowledge the differences between them. Each brings unique and complementary assets to the vocation of parenthood. Every child, biologically, has both a mother and a father and has a legitimate claim on each of them. This is the basis for monogamy. Without mating, there is little public reason for marriage to be limited to two people. A policy should never encourage efforts to intentionally separate a child from his or her mother or father, except in extreme cases involving immediate threats to a child’s life and safety.

Fourth, and related, the state and federal governments should recognize the natural differences between men and women. They should also preserve this distinction between the sexes in law against attempts to replace it with tendentious and subjective concepts, such as “gender identity.”

[ In regards to Polanski rapinki a 13 year old girl]
A little girl"? Kris, c'mon....don't simplify. Samantha Geimer wasn't Dorothy Gale in buckled shoes and pigtails and a blue-checked dress who was playing dolls and hopscotch with friends when a cackling schoolyard creep named Roman Polanski slipped a Mickey Finn into her Coca-Cola and thereby had his way. And doesn't her mother dropping her off at Nicholson's house mitigate things somewhat, at least to the extent you might not want to call her a "little girl"? Polanski did a fiendish and detestable thing, but it sounds to me like Geimer's mother was an enabler and provocateur in this episode. It seems as if she delivered her daughter on a silver plate to a pack of ravenous wolves (because guys at a Hollywood party are always ravenous)...like a goat tied to a pole in the middle of Jurassic Park. What did Geimer's mother think was going to happen when she dropped Samantha off at Nicholson's? Did she think that her daughter would...what, meet Daniel Ellbserg out on the patio and have a stirring discussion about the Pentagon Papers? Or meet a CBS casting director looking for a very special young teen who could fill a part in a new series? Unless mom was retarded she had to know that some guy might make a move, Hollywood being the bacchanalian place that it is or at least was, especially back in the coke-and-quaalude days of the '70s. I helped raise two boys and know something about the basics of parenting young teens and I would have never dreamt of dropping off a daughter of mine at a party filled with older men...c'mon.

No one is physically or psychologically mature enough to be married at age 9

Impossible_Wall5798
Not anymore, they’re not. We live in different times where childhood is prolonged and even after puberty, there’s a long teen period and even in 20s, young adults are quite immature.

This was not the case a few centuries ago. Boys and girls matured both physically and psychologically much earlier.

Puberty often occurred between 9-11 years old, and reaching this stage meant a girl was considered physically and socially ready for marriage, as average life expectancy was much lower. Marriage at puberty was a norm across many cultures.

Now that puberty and psychological maturity is delayed, also not a social norm, one needs to wait before they get married.

[Venting] The term "friends with benefits" makes me sick

Am I the only one? It makes me seriously physically sick and nauseous, dizzy. Sometimes i cry a little.

I guess it comes from my bluepilled perspective being broken, but I would expect this type of "no strings attached" degeneracy from men, but it really fucks with me to see women go around talking about having FwB, fuckbuddies, etc. Like it's normal! You fucking sociopaths..

How can there be more proof of the blackpill than that? It proves that love is not real, femoids are shallow and have no feelings.

Imagine you study and work hard, become an engineer or some shit, just to betabuxx some SOCIOPATH roastie who had fuckbuddies. Sex to her is a meaningless pragmatic tool to use you.

You wouldn't even know if they are a psycho or not because asking them about such stuff is "none of your business".

This is what I said in my other post, "IT MEANS NOTHING" because that's what sex is to them, nothing. Normies are all degenerate coomers, men AND WOMEN alike.

One thing is rejection, and then there's being in love with a sociopath, which most people are sociopaths.

Imagine having all this fantasies of love and intimacy for someone, and they just fuck whatever stranger makes their genitals tingle, and they are completely emotionally unaffected and dettached. This world is fucked.

Beat your liberal wife make her do the dishes

Admit it women, you only want to be apart of chads harem

They want to be used by chads, they will put up with getting beaten, they would rather be chads cumslut than date a non Chad. This is what they want, they are evil by default. Nothing matters to them beside looks, don't delude yourself. We are dirt to them, I saw a woman crying today and I actually felt a little happy. She was probably crying about the chad who doesn't want to fuck her anymore

The Arguments Against the Marriage of Pubescent Women Are Faulty
[…]
When we acknowledge the fact that worldwide a total of 0.2 percent of women die from pregnancy related deaths, and that includes pubescent mothers, then the even if they represent a higher proportion of that 0.2 percent it does not make a strong case against pubescent women marrying.  Instead we can respond with that fact that at least 99.8 percent of pubescent women worldwide will survive their pregnancies.
When we acknowledge the fact that only 2 percent of all infants worldwide die in the first year of their life and even if children from pubescent mothers make up more of that 2 percent than children from postpubescent women, we can rightly say pubescent mothers have at least a 98 percent chance of their children surviving their first year of life.  A difference somewhere within the 2 percent range between two groups of women having their children survive is not a strong argument against pubescent women marrying.
Some may respond that these are numbers that mix the developed world and undeveloped worlds.  But let me remind you of the WHO numbers which stated even in sub-Saharan Africa, which has the highest MMR in the world, only 500 women out of 100,000 died from pregnancy related complications in a given year over the last decade.
[…]
Now that I have shown the arguments against pubescent women marrying to be faulty and weak, we will now present strong arguments for the marriage of pubescent women.

Early Teen Women Are More Moldable

In the Scriptures we read the following passage from the Book of Jeremiah:

“1 The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying,

2 Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. 3 Then I went down to the potter’s house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.”

Jeremiah 18:1-6 (KJV)

In the above passage God is speaking to Israel as his wife. The phrase “O house of Israel” is used in other passages like this one below when God refers to Israel as his wife and he as her husband:

“Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.”

Jeremiah 3:20 (KJV)

Just as God sought to mold his wife Israel to be the person, he wanted her to be, so to for a marriage to be successful a woman must be very moldable just like clay in the hands of a potter.

When women are in their early teens, they typically are more moldable but as they get older into their late teens and especially early 20s, they become much harder to mold or change in their person and habits.

And make no mistake this is EXACTLY why most people today oppose women marrying very young because they know they are so impressionable or moldable at that age. They don’t want men being able to mold young women so they want to delay marriage as a long as possible pushing it into the early and mid-20s.
Christians who follow this false philosophy that young women need “find themselves” and “be their own person” before marriage are going against God’s design.

Remember that God says marriage is a picture of Christ and the Church. Does Christ mold his church? You bet he does. And he tells men to love their wives as he does:

“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Ephesians 5:25-27 (KJV)

We are often told today that if a man attempts to mold or change his wife’s behavior at all that he is “controlling” and this bad. We are told that if a man truly loves his wife, he won’t try to change anything about her.

Well I can tell you based on the authority of the Scriptures above that if a man does not attempt to mold and shape his wife to present her to himself and to God as a glorious wife in the same way Christ does his church then he is not loving his wife as Christ loves the church.

And yes, it takes a sacrifice on our part as men and courage on our part as men to “rebuke and chasten” (Revelation 3:19) our wives as Christ does his churches. But when done in the correct spirit, such rebuke and chastening by husbands is called “love”.

I completely agree that most teenage girls in our culture and time period are not psychologically prepared for having children. But that is because our culture babies children in ways cultures of the past did not.”
This is a half truth. While many young teens may not be ready for marriage, many of them most definitely should be getting married. (Past puberty) It’s not like maturity increases the older you get. In fact it’s even a dangerous lie to tell teens that they are “children” or “adolescents”. As to your daughter not being ready at 12, why isn’t she ready? Even you agree that it is wrong to “baby” teens, so why would you purposely infantilize your daughter to where she is not capable of functioning as a woman when she is pubescent? Dont follow the culture. Follow what Paul said about being an adult.

Here’s a good video where a prominent psychologist even states that many teens should be getting married. https://youtu.be/N_pKVCGJ7E4

(The following paragraphs are fragments from an article called “The World of The Handmaid’s Tale: Not Completely Bad”)

I have already addressed the fact that the nation of Gilead was wrong in usurping the authority of father’s over their daughters. But what if fathers willingly gave their young daughters, even those in their early teens as portrayed in arranged marriages to older men – is this a violation of Biblical morality?

The answer is a resounding NO. It is not immoral or “abhorrent” or “horrific” in the eyes of God. The Scriptures tell us in two passages when God says a young woman is ready for marriage.

In the book of Ezekiel God portrays his marriage to Israel as an older man taking a young woman who has shown the signs of puberty as his wife:

“7 I have caused thee to multiply as the bud of the field, and thou hast increased and waxen great, and thou art come to excellent ornaments: thy breasts are fashioned, and thine hair is grown, whereas thou wast naked and bare.

8 Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord God, and thou becamest mine.”

Ezekiel 16:7-8 (KJV)

And in the New Testament the Apostle Paul gives us another qualification for when a girl becomes a woman and is ready to be married:

“36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.”

I Corinthians 7:36 (KJV)

The phrase “if she pass the flower of her age” refers to if she has had a period.

So, God’s allowable age for marriage to a woman is when she shows the signs of puberty, development of her breasts, growth of pubic hair and she has had a period. At that point it is perfectly moral for her to be married.

And her “consent” is not required by God. And God does not grant her the “agency” that we believe women have today. It is her father’s decision (Exodus 22:16-17). And there is absolutely nothing unbiblical about arranged marriages (Jeremiah 29:6). Also, it is not immoral for men much older to marry younger women.

I get there are evil men, but claiming all men should be in jail is extreme.

So a man, yet again attacks a child and a female for not being willing to sleep with him?
Men should be born in jail and have to earn their way out, like wtf

Women making up claims of sexual assault is as old as men committing sexual assault itself. Both of these sins have occurred throughout history and our legal systems must recognize the very real possibility of both of these things occurring.

A lot of Ford’s defenders will say “Well she talked about him doing this way back in 2012 in a therapy session long before he became a nominee and there is documented proof of her making this claim to a therapist. Why would she make up the lie before ever knowing who would be President in four years or that he would nominate Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court?”

Well first and foremost there is no documented proof of her making a claim that Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape her. She never gave the therapist any names. Her husband alleges she told him afterwards that it was Brett Kavanaugh but spouses lie for each other so he is not a reliable witness.

So, this leaves us with two other likely possibilities of what actually happened. Ford could have been sexually assaulted by someone other than Brett Kavanaugh and she may not even remember who it was. But she chose to put Kavanaugh’s name in as her attacker when she saw him announced as Trump’s nominee because she wanted to stop him from being nominated.

An even worse scenario would be and could be that she made the entire event up in therapy as an excuse to deal with problems in her own marriage and then filled in Brett Kavanaugh’s name as the attacker as an added bonus. And of course, her loving husband supports her in her lies. This is a very real possibility as well.

But what about the second or third woman?

A second woman, Deborah Ramirez, has claimed that Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself in her face when he was Yale University. So, if we have two women accusing him then both these claims must true right? That is the sad standard for many in our society. If you can’t take the man down with one flawed accuser, just throw in another for good measure.

This second woman even admitted to not being sure it was Brett Kavanaugh who exposed himself to her until after a democratic lawyer helped coach her and convince her that it was.

Then of course we have the trashy lawyer Michael Avenatti claiming he has yet another woman making claims against Brett Kavanaugh.

Conclusion

Senator Mazie Hirono was partially right in some advice she gave to men the other night when she stated:

“I just want to say to the men in this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.”

The only part of her advice that was wrong was when she said “shut up”. I would simply change this part of her statement and give this advice to all men including Brett Kavanaugh in the face of the rampant misandry going on in American culture today:

“I just want to say to the men in this country: Speak up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.”

The Bible gives us as men this admonition:

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”

1 Corinthians 16:13

I was so pleased to see Brett Kavanaugh make the forceful defense he did in his interview with Martha MacCallum from Fox News. I was pleased to see him speak up and step up to the corrupt political forces that would see him step down.

I pray that God will give the Republican senators the wisdom to see that this is truly a smear campaign against a good man and a good judge and I hope they will have the courage to help him win this nomination.

According to the Bible, everything about a woman, both psychologically and physiologically, was created for man. That means a woman’s psychological desire for sex, her breasts, her nipples, her vagina, her clitoris, all her erogenous zones and her ability to experience sexual pleasure from all these areas was created for man. Does that mean we are saying God only created woman for man’s sexual pleasure or that he only created sex for sexual pleasure? Of course not. But it was a primary reason and now we will explain why.

Why would God create make sex so extremely pleasurable and make man’s desire for it so strong? The reason is so that man could image God’s desire for the beauty of his people and his desire to take pleasure in his people. In what is widely considered a prophecy of Christ and his Church Psalms 45:11 states “So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him”. And in Psalm 149:4 we read “For the Lord taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation”.

When we remember that man’s primary purpose is to image God and we see that God as a husband to his bride desires her beauty and desires to take pleasure in her we now understand why God designed man designed man to receive sexual pleasure from the beauty and body of a woman. This is why we can rightly say that seeking out sexual relations with a woman is part of God’s mission for man.

God did not create women to live for themselves and do whatever made them happy. This is the lie that Christian feminists tell women today. The Scriptures are clear that God did not make men or women to do whatever they wanted, but to fulfill his plan for his glory.

The Bible clearly states in 1 Corinthians 11:9 that “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man”. And the Bible tells us the larger spiritual purpose for which God created woman for man in the following passage:

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”

Ephesians 5:23-24 (KJV)

God created woman for man so that together they could model the relationship of God to his people and in the New Testament age – Christ and his church. The Bible gives us details below of how a woman was meant to submit to and serve her husband and thus picture the church’s service to Christ:

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”

1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

Unless a woman is one of the few who have the gift of celibacy that they “may attend upon the Lord without distraction” as 1 Corinthians 7:35 states, a woman can never reach her full potential as God has defined it without being married, bearing children and caring for the domestic needs of the home.

A woman reaching her full potential in God’s eyes has nothing to do with her having a college degree or a successful career outside the home. But rather it has everything to do with her fulfilling the purpose for which God created her which was to marry, bear children and care for the needs of her husband, her children and her home.

8 Biblical Differences Between Wives and Slaves

As we have previously shown from Exodus 20:17 and Leviticus 25:44-46, wives and slaves are both considered by God to be the property of men. And both wives and slaves are commanded by God to obey their masters in everything as Colossians 3:22, Ephesians 5:24, 1 Peter 3:5-6 tells them to do.

But this is where the similarity between wives and slaves ends and the differences begin. Below are eight Biblical distinctions between wives and slaves.

1. Slave owners don’t have to sacrifice themselves for their property – husbands do.

“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it“

Ephesians 5:25 (KJV)

2. Slave owners don’t have to teach God’s Word to their property – husbands do.

“And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.“

1 Corinthians 14:35 (KJV)

3. Slave owners don’t have to act as human instruments of God’s sanctification in the lives of their property – husbands do.

“26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Ephesians 5:26-27 (KJV)

4. Slave owners don’t have to love and care for their property as they do their own bodies – husbands do.

“28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church“

Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

5. Slave owners don’t have to give their bodies to meet the sexual needs of their property (nor should they) – husbands do.

“3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.”

I Corinthians 7:3-4 (KJV)

6. Slave owners don’t have to honor their property – husbands do.

“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.“

I Peter 3:7 (KJV)

7. Slave owners don’t have to give their property the fruit of their labors – husbands do.

“Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.“

Proverbs 31:31 (KJV)

8. God did not design men to be the property of other men. God did design women to be the property of their husbands.

“7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.“

1 Corinthians 11:7-10 (KJV)

Conclusion

We have shown conclusively from the Bible that contrary to modern humanist notions of equality, God has actually designated wives and children as the property of their husbands and fathers. And again, contrary to modern egalitarian views of what marriage should be, God commands wives to regard their husbands as their masters and like slaves to be obedient to their masters in everything. The obvious exception for both wives and slaves in their obedience is if their masters command them to sin against God. It is only in this case that they can and must disobey their masters as Acts 5:29 tells us.

Why God Wants You to Stay in an Abusive Relationship
[…]
But when we read the Scriptures we see a very different view of how we should respond to abuse:
“18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. 19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: 22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: 23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”
I Peter 2:18-24 (KJV)
When we endure grief or suffer wrongly at the hands of others, in other words when we endure mistreatment which is abuse and take it patiently the Scriptures tell us “this is acceptable with God”.  God is not excusing the actions of the abusers.  But God is saying when we are on the receiving end of various kinds of abuse and we take it patiently that this is acceptable with God.
Such a thought is foreign to our thinking but the Scriptures tell us “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord” (Isaiah 55:8).
We often talk on this blog about how God likes to image or model things.  Man was created to image God and thereby bring him glory (I Corinthians 11:7) and woman and by extension marriage was created to help man fully image God as a husband and father (I Corinthians 11:9, Ephesians 5:22-33).  When it comes to this matter of suffering abuse – we, both men and women, actually model Christ when we suffer abuse from others taking it patiently as he did. And that is why God wants you to stay in an abusive relationship.
[…]

To be fair to their point, I'm not sure that you and other full-on defenders (or "appologists," if you prefer) for Polanski aren't engaged in a mirror-land version of the same thing. You didn't defend Jacko, I don't imagine you'd be AS jazzed to defend Michael Bay of a similar charge.

…

You're right -- I wouldn't feel as strongly about this if Michael Bay was the transgressor. Or OJ Simpson. And there's no question that I felt zero sympathy for the young-boy-coddling Frankenstein freak that Michael Jackson turned into. Polanski is a master filmmaker and therefore a kind of Art God, and yes, in my heart of hearts I feel that he occupies a special place in the ongoing creation-and-destruction process and should be, at the very least, afforded the respect that he has more than earned. He's not just some corner-grocery schlemiel. He's Roman Polanski -- a self-torturing artist and seer and a candle-lighter in the depths of the human condition. And an artist who hasn't, to my knowledge, been chronically and repeatedly buggering young girls. Yes, he acted like a slovenly unthinking beast with Samantha Geimer, but once and only once (as far as the law and known recorded fact is concerned). Once! And she's past it. And so is everyone else except for the ranting online moralists.

So on top of everything else, genuine Art Gods...yeah, you're kinda right...deserve, I feel, a certain kind of consideration that could also, perhaps, be extended to Joe the Plumber types from time to time, depending on their particulars. We need to show compassion and understanding all around when and where appropriate. I'm not saying that Art Gods are exempt from honoring the laws of decency and compassion that we all must follow, but they are, I feel, very high on the general totem pole. Because Art Gods bring a certain understanding and clarity about common woes and miseries to humanity, and in a way are (I feel) the Chosen Messengers because their work clarifies our situation, refreshens our spirit and lightens our load.
..

RE: [Serious] Pedophiles and Pedophile Sympathizers are a CANCER on the Incel Community

Most of them aren't. Even if they are, I couldn't fathom why any adult would find a conversation with a child to be romantic at all.

Innocence is charming, it melts men's heart like nothing else in this world, not that I would expect a brute like you to understand.

I just don't understand how anyone who is in their 20s can be attracted to a 14-year-old. Disgusting.

Maybe because you are gay?

It’s because social compatibility is an abstract concept to autists anyway, so the idea of a female partner who is socially underdeveloped is less of an intimidating prospect for them. In their mind someone they can ‘mould’ or ‘groom’ (yes several in this thread have used these exact terms) as if they were the father is actually more viable to them than a female with a fully formed mind. Personally I can’t think of anything being more of a turn off.

You are an infiltrated woman or cuck. If you were truly an incel you would already know that females cannot be allowed to have freewill, they will ALWAYS, without exception betray you. (maybe some mothers are an exception)

🥰ABOUT ME:🥰

.Male

.Bisexual, only interested in men

.Antinatalist

.Athiest/Anti-theist

.Radical Vegan extremist

.Blackpill Misanthropist

.Misandristic (I hate men 100x more than I hate women)

.Not a terf, but I may reblog gender-critical postsNot a radfem, but some of my views are similar so I may reblog radfem posts

.Not an ecofascist, I don't like environmentalism

.Existential nihilist(? I guess)

✨BELIEFS:✨

.Non human animals are more important than humans. I'd sooner eat 10,000 humans than eat one chicken

.All religions and spirituality are dangerous ideologies

.Human cis Men have little to no sentience

.Cis Men have inferior biology

.Males are inherently biologically evil. Global cleansing and extinction is the only way to fix this

.Trans men are more complicated. It depends on the individual. In general they already receive a lot of shit from society so I see them as low priority on my misanthropy scale

.I'm pro porn but only if it's exclusively cis men involved

.All humans should be killed, but cis men should be killed first

.Procreation is one of the most unethical things a person can do

.Eating animals should get you the death penalty

.Most heterosexual intercourse is rape and should be abolished

.I'm okay with transsexuality, but I hate rapehons. This often gets me labeled as a terf. I don't approve of gender roles

.The environment has been 600 million years of hell on earth for sentient creatures. The environment is not your ally

.I approve of legalizing suicide.

#vegan#antinatalism#kill men#cis men are inferior#trans#transgender#men are objects#men are the problem#veganism#radical veganism#animal rights#animal liberation#extinctionism#human extinction#environmentalism#anti-environmentalism#misandry#misanthropy#misanthropy is valid#mdni please#gender#gender critical#anti terf#suicide#bisexuality is a curse#bisexual#male#anti porn

Iran bans women from 77 university majors, including engineering, physics
Iran bans women from 77 university majors, including engineering, physics
Iran’s Science and Higher Education Ministry has banned women from enrolling in 77 university departments on the grounds that there is no work for them once they graduate from post-secondary education, according to the Telegraph.
"Our experience in the past showed us that even if women graduate from these departments, they fail to work actively in these fields," a ministry official said.
“Departments like agriculture and mining are unfit for the female nature,” the official also said.
With the move, women will no longer be capable of becoming engineers, nuclear physicists, archaeologists, business graduates and computer scientists as these and other departments in over 35 Iranian universities will henceforth only admit male students.
English literature, translation and hotel management are some of the other banned departments.
Another Iranian official said the move was designed to establish “balance” in the education system.
Some 65 percent of students in Iranian universities are women, and the country also has one of the highest female-versus-male graduation rates in the world.

Having said that, many women today don't want a Biblical marriage, because they have been indoctrinated with the sinful ideologies of feminism. 1st Timothy 5:14-15, “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. For some are already turned aside after Satan.” God's will for 99% of women is to GET MARRIED, BEAR CHILDREN, GUIDE THE HOUSE, and STAY OUT OF TROUBLE! God never intended for young women to pursue nursing careers over marriage and motherhood. I'm not against being a nurse, as long as it doesn't keep you from your primary life's objective—which is to GET MARRIED, BEAR CHILDREN, GUIDE THE HOUSE, and STAY OUT OF TROUBLE! Careers get in the way of marriage and motherhood. Most Christians who are honest, know working women who are so busy and caught up in their work, that they have totally lost sight of ever becoming a mother, even if they manage to fit marriage into THEIR PLANS!!!
In many cases women don't even want to get married. This is truly sad. I've been looking for a wife for several years, but women nowadays seem to have their OWN AGENDAS. They simply aren't looking for a husband! This is an untoward generation, half-butt backwards on everything!!! Brother Roloff was right, the world has become a giant prison institution and the inmates are running it! The inspired Word of God teaches that A HUSBAND IS TO RULE OVER HIS WIFE... Every woman should desire to wait on her husband hand and foot, for that is why God created her! Genesis 2:18, “And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”

image

The christan bible we have today is the scrote bible. Its stupid and makes no sense. The bible is a huge wall of moralfagging and shit. It was written for scotes by scrotes and does not hesitate to shit on women and call them "naturally evil hoes" every chapter.
But we all know men are truly the evil ones. Everything bad and evil is done primarily by men. Like 90%. Women are the only ones capable .of empathy and being moral. The empathy part in a males brain is very underdeveloped and small. They needed that room to think of the coom and to do mental gymnastic moral fagging when they rape a dog or something.
Men are not humans. I belive women are the true humans. A human being has: empathy, morals, self control, beauty, respect, and a soul. Men have proven time and time again that they have none if this, or at least a shallow version of it.
Men are demons who crawled from hell and tricked us into believing we are evil hoes that need to be controled. They then wrote some bulshitt book to justify our opression even though They KNOW its retarded and wrong. So to feel like the moral onees, they created the bible, quaran and othe r moralfagging scote books.
Men dont even like like people. I mean sure when they are young they are alluring so they can trick a women into being their host. But once they hit 30, their true form shows. They lose their "hair", their bodies form bizarre proportions and they start to resemble brutish orges they are.
Observe at this picrel: this is what the average elderly couple looks like. The women is cute, approacable, has hair, wise looking, and genuine. But the scote on the other hand has lost his "hair", is creepy, ugly, brutish. his human aura is missing. His aura is that of a demon. A monster.
This is a huge mess. Only science can save us from this hell.

image

This is gendie ideology. Male fantasies now divorced from their (incorrect) biological rationalizations. The false female supplicant, now a categorization open to any man who masturbates to the idea of being desired for indiscriminate sex (that’s a great majority of them!). The false male deity, a creature with exclusive claim to autonomy, now a categorization open to any woman who sees herself as not just an object to be acted upon (she’s right, but for the wrong reason).
Built on false pretenses, both material and abstract. The male never truly becomes a female, annd neither the female becomes a male, despite their insistence and performance. The evidence of reality emerges every single time. Allowing delusions to inform your perception of reality makes you unfit and mentally disturbed, as any inability to accurately process reality would. Misogyny is mass schizophrenia, only accepted because the schizos (males and the women not yet in a position to disagree with them) benefit from enforcing their lies on others. It’s religious. Living in a lie can only give you so much. No one is truly happy, because true happiness is only found when living in authenticity. But, if living a lie means a man’s sperm can more reliably land in a hole, to him, it’s worth it. Males are willing to die to meet that end, inducing schizophrenia in himself and others, as well as and killing and enslaving the most of the race is a small sacrifice in comparison. According to him, at least.