The more patriarchy, the better.
Thousands upon thousands of years ago, homo sapiens figured out that the most effective way to survive was to have men be in charge. More so, our ancestors figured out that a group, of any size, has the greatest chances of survival if the men are masculine and the women are feminine. Across all cultures – every last one – this has been the underlying system for our entire species. We didn’t start doing this because of happenstance, and we didn’t stick to this system simply because “it’s the only thing we ever tried.”
Progressive attitudes about the aptitude of women is absurd at best, and dangerously ignorant at worst. Our species didn’t pop into existence 20 years ago. The first humans evolved a minimum of 200,000 years ago. We’ve had countless generations to know what works, and what doesn’t.
Women being in charge … has never worked, and never will. Not among families, and not among nations. As much as I would like to think every woman can be a Margaret Thatcher (my greatest idol), the truth is that 99.99% of women are more likely to be a Theresa May instead.
Men leap off bridges to save complete strangers and even refuse to tell the world their name after doing so … women don’t. Men face dangers head-on, women run away. Men work life-risking jobs, women don’t. Men volunteer to fight in wars that will likely get them killed, women don’t.
Men almost always fall for girls even if that girl offers nothing in return. (I will get back to that important point soon.)
100% of the people who consciously make life-risking, long-term decisions are men, from leaping off bridges to save strangers, to working dangerous jobs.
Character is primarily what I mean when I say men are better, though it’s not all I mean. Men have better character, and that is an undeniable fact.
I’m going to throw a bone to the guys who are stupid enough to be interested in my ex-wife. As much of simps as they are, there is one thing they help prove, even if they don’t realize it. They help prove the very point I’m making with this post. Blind, unwavering devotion, even if all they get in return is sex. Is she there for him (any one of them) in the same way, or to even the same degree? Would she ever make any personal sacrifices to help improve his life? Would she care about him at all if he didn’t give her the utmost attention and blind devotion? No, not even close. There is nothing my ex-wife wants from him (attention, money, sympathy, blind devotion, etc.) that he isn’t willing to give her, despite the fact she doesn’t reciprocate it 100%, or even 50%. These guys allow themselves to be used by her, most commonly for attention, as all simps do, and to emphasize this even more: She is happy to be the one using them. So, even though their behavior is detrimental to themselves, to the rest of society, and even to my ex-wife herself, I must thank all of these simps for helping me prove …
Men are better.
Even if feminism became the law of the land, and got forced down all our throats, … it still wouldn’t change who and what women are, and it wouldn’t change who and what men are, at our cores:
Women will do anything to have the most. To have the most money, security, and power that they can get.
Men will do anything to fulfill the role of provider and protector.
Men are better.
No amount of feminism will give women the instinct to leap off a bridge to save a drowning stranger. No amount of feminism will give women the instinct to give all, or nearly all, of their income to someone for nothing in return. No amount of feminism will give women the instinct to shield their man from gunfire.
Women will always want to be served.
Men will always want to be the ones who serve.
WITHOUT A DOUBT, MEN HAVE FAR SUPERIOR MORAL STANDARDS
Men are far more powerful creatures than women, and yet…
Men show a tremendous amount of restraint when women behave erratically, violently, unfairly, or immorally.
Men don’t cheer atrocities committed to women.
Men don’t actively seek to persecute women.
Most women these days, including the non-feminists, have convinced themselves that just about any act of evil or unfairness is only bad … if a man does it. Nobody needs to call themselves a feminist anymore, because nearly everyone says they want “equality.” When this “equality” is put to the test with just about any individual woman, it always turns out she’s against it. No woman – not one – wants equality. Women are either okay with being different, or they want supremacy over men. You’ll never find anyone who’s stance is somewhere in the middle.
Every woman who says she wants equality, in truth, means she wants superiority and privilege.
If a woman cuts off her boyfriend’s dick, she is cheered, but if a man were to cut off any part of his girlfriend, women would be outraged and people of both sexes would be up in arms.
If a woman harasses or threatens a man (or even a little boy) in public, nobody does anything, but if a man raises his voice or raises a hand to a woman, there is no shortage of people who who come to the woman’s defense, caring nothing about what’s truly going on. If a woman abuses a male, in public, everyone assumes he deserves it, and they ignore it.
If a woman gets the kids, it’s good, but if a man somehow gets the kids, it’s unfair.
It’s good if a man has to pay a woman “child support” and alimony, but if a woman has to pay “child support” and alimony, it’s wrong.
The list goes on and on, but I don’t want to overstuff this post with these kinds of examples. Instead, I’ll give my audience a challenge here: Whenever you’re out in public, or watching a movie or TV show, try to observe all the things you see both sexes say/do to men, subtle or overt, and then ask yourself, “Could a man, specifically a man, do that to a woman?”
For example, in Kill Bill we see a woman brutally slaughter 88 men, but you’ll never see a movie where a man brutally slaughters 88 women in the exact same way, where he’d slice their limbs off, impale them, or cut them in half.
As another example, in the Saw movies, we sometimes see women dying, but we never see them suffer. We always see the men suffer, like the man who had to saw off his own foot to escape. You’ll never see a movie depict a woman having to do that to herself.
On a much lighter note, my daughter loves watching the 20-minute short “Olaf’s Frozen Adventure.” In the middle of this short, Olaf visits a family that explains their Christmas tree to him. Olaf says, “You cut down a tree, and dress it’s corpse in candles?” We see the two kids in the family start crying, while the wife gets mad and hits her husband in the back of the head.
That moment from Olaf’s Frozen Adventure is one of my favorite examples of the double standard women have. The fact this is from a Disney short reinforces my point. It’s a Disney production, G-rated, and meant for kids. What do you think the rating would be if, in that exact same moment, the husband hit the wife over the head, instead?
You can see this kind of behavior in almost any entertainment you watch. A large number of things can be done to men, but if a man were to do it to a woman, it would be unthinkable.
I’m not here to say this double-standard is unfair. Not at all, because I agree with this double-standard 100%. But what I’m trying to say is: Men don’t treat women this way, 99% of the time, in both real life and in entertainment. There’s no law that says the wife in Olaf’s Frozen Adventure can’t be hit in the head, and there’s no law that says 88 women can’t be massacred in Kill Bill. Despite there being no law against these things, men still don’t depict it.
Right-wing, or left-wing, doesn’t matter: Men treat women far better than women treat men.
Women most certainly commit violence toward men, like swinging broken glass at them, or cutting off their penis. (If you watch the documentary The Red Pill by Cassie Jaye, you hear a story about a man who tried to call the police on his wife, who was throwing glass bottles at him, and the police officer said he would still arrest THE HUSBAND instead, even if the wife was the guilty one.)
Fact: Women instigate violence in relationships more often than men. Fact: Women verbally harass men far more often than men harass women. And of course, Fact: Women rob men of their children far more often than vice-versa. Fact: Women expect to be entitled to a man’s money after divorce, whether they have kids or not, far more often than vice-versa. These are facts, not my opinions.
So, here’s how this particular subject matter makes men morally superior, by far:
Men are far more capable of forcing women into submission than women are toward men. Men are far more capable of causing harm than women are. And men still show far greater restraint. In fact, you will notice that males (of any age) don’t come to the defense of other males when they are being abused by their mother, sister, or partner.
Men are bigger, stronger, more naturally-skilled at fighting, have a higher pain tolerance, and are more intelligent than women, and yet, men still don’t behave this way toward women. (At least, nowhere near as often.)
Men have twice the physical strength, men have a far better stress-coping threshold, and men are more intelligent (don’t let feminist-written blog articles lie to you about that particular fact). But despite the fact that men can easily overpower any woman, in any given situation, the vast majority of the time, they consciously choose not to.
Answer this philosophical question with the utmost honesty: What’s stopping men from just turning against all women and turning them all into slaves and/or prisoners with absolutely no rights whatsoever? What’s stopping all the men on Earth from just forcing all the women on Earth into complete, total submission, and taking away every last modicum of freedom they had?
My rhetorical (multi-part) question is supposed to prove one simple, obvious fact: Men never have, and never will do this because men are morally superior. Despite being more powerful physically and mentally, men just plain don’t do that, and never will. Men don’t abuse their greater power.
Men are more powerful AND more ethical.
Men haven’t turned against all women because men love women. Men care about women. Men’s lives completely revolve around the women in their life. It’s not “the law” that forces men to allow women to treat them almost any way they want to; it is the very nature of men that allows it no problem. Even if men only allowed women to treat them like dirt because of “the law,” the fact would still remain that it was men who made those laws.
I can’t emphasize enough the fact that men treat women better than they treat each other. The reason I can’t emphasize it enough is because, when you think about it, everything men do is for women. Half of the world’s population (and only one half) devotes their entire existence to the other half.
Men don’t end relationships nearly as often as women do. The reason why, is the exact same reason men get into relationships in the first place: Men just want somebody to serve. Someone to protect and provide for. Men just want somebody to devote themselves to.
Why do think simps exist at all? Also, there’s a reason you never see women simping in droves for men.
Yes, I will say this with the utmost certainty: Men understand true love far better, and give true love far more often, than women. Because men will commit to a woman who gives nothing back. We have to be advised by wiser people to NOT do that, otherwise we will.
Men have been the majority of rulers and leaders for all of human history, sure, and it is to that limited extent I will agree the patriarchy exists, but if you do an ounce of critical thinking, you’ll realize:
It is the patriarchy that has required men, for hundreds of thousands of years, go to war while the women stayed at home where it’s safe. Yes, MEN are the ones who decided that men are expendable.
It is the patriarchy that pressured (or forced) men to be the providers and protectors of their families.
It is the patriarchy that created vagrancy laws that punished men who didn’t work, and after three offenses could result in the death penalty. In other words, men have created laws that punish other men for not making themselves useful to society. They were even branded enemies of the state.
It was men who ordered, “Women and children only” on the Titanic when the lifeboats were limited.
It is the patriarchy that has always given men harsher sentences for the exact-same crimes.
Recall the examples I gave above. If you clicked the links, you saw videos proving that men and women BOTH are almost not concerned at all with a man’s wellbeing, but rush frantically to defend a woman, even if she was the abuser.
Men expect each other to have restraint when a woman’s shouting at us. Men expect each other to have restraint when a woman is being violent. Men tell each other to “suck it up,” no matter how hard the situation is.
Before I conclude this section, I want to emphasize the flipside of this. Women don’t want to have their paychecks garnished, women don’t want to be yelled at, women don’t want to be struck, women don’t want to be held to high standards … But women are still more than willing to behave in the exact manner they don’t want men to act.
That fact alone makes men morally superior to women.
Ask any female and she can confidently tell you: Girls love their backstabbing, lying, deception, gossip, breaking promises, and emotionally destroying other girls they feel superior to (or who make them feel insecure). Women ARE willing to instigate conflict, including, but not limited to, physical conflict. Women ARE willing to take things that don’t belong to them (or don’t solely belong to them, like children). Women are more than capable of holding double standards and being hypocritical. Women ARE willing hurdle insults, and harass, and degrade, and crush spirits.
Society, especially the female half, points to men and says, “They’re the ones doing all the crime! That proves only men do bad things!” But everybody conveniently forgets the fact that women do all of these things and more, but through their manipulation of men. They use the state to take a man’s money, which is robbery. They drive fathers to commit suicide, which is (in my opinion) akin to murder. Not to mention the fact women tell lies to a near-pathological extent.
And even when women commit outright crimes, like literal murder, they use their tears to get out of trouble.
Women are not above any vile behaviors, at all. They engage in the exact behaviors they demand men not to do. People of both sexes overlook this simply because we have all made it taboo to point it out. Women can, and will, do shitty things. They do it every day. Just in case you still don’t see what I’m getting at here:
Men are MORE capable of causing harm, but are far less likely to do so. Even men who actually are the violent types … still tend to avoid harming women. Most murderers still prefer to kill men over women. So, even when men have dropped their standards or their personal code, they still treat women better than they treat other men. I’m not saying no man has ever harmed a woman, I’m saying that men in general have always been far less likely to.
We just stand there when you want to hit us over the head. We just take the insults and the degradation. Women show the world all the time that they want to be superior, that they have no regard for any person who isn’t useful to them, and that they are completely capable of doing anything imaginable if they know they can get away with it. Men have restraint, though. We hold back, and we accept.
Again, I agree with these double standards, just so long as we all acknowledge them. I’m not complaining about the shitty behavior of women, I’m simply stating that women do shitty things all the time, while men show far greater restraint and maturity, despite being MORE capable of domination and destruction.
That makes men better.
The Evil Things Men Do Are Also Morally Superior to the Evil Things Women Do
With this section, in no way will I mean evil things men can do aren’t evil. I’ll be comparing like with like. The actions I describe here that generally apply to men are certainly evil. Just had to get that out of the way for the stupid readers.
When you think of evil things men do, what comes to mind? Pretty much the only things that come to mind are physical violence, right? Men are physical creatures, no matter the situation, and that’s the essence of so-called “toxic masculinity,” I guess.
Here’s a bit of truthful humor…
Both funny, and completely true.
Everyone – and I do mean everyone, meaning boys, girls, men, and women – would rather suffer evil from a man, than suffer evil from a woman.
If a man beats someone to a pulp, at least the beating only lasts a minute or two, and then it’s done! Maybe it takes a few weeks to heal, but the point is: Such wounds will heal. And even if you suffer wounds that never fully heal, the body and the soul can adapt to a missing eyeball or a permanent limp.
Would you rather have that happen to you, or would you rather have your precious kids taken from you, AND your home (which you worked your ass off paying for), AND your car, AND a portion of every paycheck you earn? In addition to that, would you also like for this person, who robbed you of everything you hold dear, to also say every horrible thing they can fabricate about you, and make people think you’re a monster when you’re not? And she does all of this simply because … she could. She does all of this simply because she didn’t want you anymore, but refused to give up all the good things you provided for her at great sacrifice.
One bad day getting bruised up…
Being robbed of everything you hold dear, finding out the love of your life cares nothing about you and was just using your love to her advantage, and making years of your life completely wasted because she took everything you worked hard for?
Which one would you rather suffer? A moment of pain (few weeks at worst), or having a crushed spirit for the rest of your life?
Hell, even if a beating resulted in death, I think most people would still prefer that over living decades with a crushed spirit before succumbing to their mortality. Men who get their kids taken away are 10x more likely than average to commit suicide. So, if something happens to you that’s going to get you killed, would you rather get your soul crushed first and feel that pain for countless years, or die without getting your soul crushed first?
If anyone had to choose one or the other, I think everybody would choose the ass-kicking instead.
And don’t make the mistake of believing divorce is the only way women can ruin someone’s life. Sometimes, women get pregnant from non-partners, and lead their husbands/boyfriends on to believe they’re his kids when they’re not. It’s true that approximately 20% of fathers are raising kids they believe to be theirs, who aren’t.
Another way women ruin lives is by destroying the family unit. Even if you ignore the emotional damage that does to a man, it scars the kids even worse. Kids almost never recover from that. Not to mention, it destroys any good chance they had of forming lasting, healthy relationships of their own.
If you watch the movie The Red Pill, made by Cassie Jaye, among many other things, you’ll hear a story about a couple that had five kids, but the father learned, by complete accident one day, that none of his five kids are actually his; the kids were conceived by their neighbor. Things like this don’t just destroy good-meaning men, it also ruins the kids. For any child (or even adult, possibly) who learns the father they love is not actually their father, that’s guaranteed to give them trust issues, a childhood of confusion, emotional scarring, and the utmost resentment toward their mother (who probably still wouldn’t have remorse).
Or, how about being accused of being a rapist when you’re not? I think of someone like Brett Kavanaugh, who was declared guilty by half the US simply because he was accused. As if there weren’t enough reasons already to oppose the feminization of our society: We are now at a point where the accusation ALONE is the proof of guilt. Any woman can just point her finger at a man they want to hurt, accuse him of rape, and then his future is destroyed, even if an investigation exonerates him.
Obviously, I’m not saying all accusations of rape are false, but without a doubt, there are far too many people who believe false rape accusations are rare. They are not rare. They are quite damn common.
Or, I’ll use an example of something less severe. Let’s address how women think they’re morally superior to men because “Men only want sex,” which implies women want things that are more virtuous.
That’s a lie. The whole “men just want women for sex” argument is asinine, because 1), most of the time, men want more than just sex, and 2), even if that’s all a man wants, it’s still morally superior the only thing that women want from men: Usage.
“I just want to put my dick in you” is, morally, far superior to, “You’re only valuable to me as long as you do things for me.”
Even when men cheat, it’s just for physical satisfaction that he’s not getting at home. When women cheat, it’s an almost-guaranteed indication that she has feelings for the guy she cheated with. My first girlfriend left me after cheating, which probably stemmed from a biological urge to prefer the man who has more to offer her.
Women only become interested in men for what that man can do for them. Men will fall in love with a woman simply because she’s beautiful. I fell in love with my ex-wife before I even knew her name.
Women use men for money and for giving their offspring good genes. If a man lacks either one of these traits, he will only be a temporary relationship, guaranteed. For example, I’ve never been rich, but my ex-wife still used me for my genes. She left me very shortly after our daughter was born, which was no coincidence. A child is the greatest manipulation tool for a woman (more on that in a bit), and my ex-wife didn’t want a child with bad genes because that would make them too difficult to handle. She already knows that she doesn’t have great genes, and I know she knows this because she outright acknowledged it. She said, “I hope [our daughter] gets your brains and your eyesight.” If my ex-wife was going to use a man to make a child, she made sure that man had good genes first. I am tall, strong (even when I don’t work out), highly intelligent, and I don’t suffer from nuisances such as allergies or seizures. I don’t even need to wear glasses.
So, that’s being used for good genes. But when you look at the ex-wives of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, that kind of proves that even being filthy rich doesn’t guarantee a woman will stay. Do you think either of these ex-wives walked away with $0 to their name? Of course not. They knew they’d leave their husbands with billions of dollars.
No matter how good a man’s genes are, and no matter how much money he has, none of it guarantees the love of his life will stay with him. If anything, a woman who did NOT have to settle is MORE likely to leave her man. Because the less a woman has to settle, the more she can take when she leaves, and she won’t have to share it. At least a woman who settles has accepted this is the best she can have, and she’s far less likely to leave because she won’t have anything to take.
So, would a person rather get used for a one-night stand, or get used for their genes/money? Women getting used for sex only have to deal with their feelings getting hurt for literally one night, crying about how “He never called me.” Men, on the other hand, get used for their bank account and their genes, and once the kids are born, women seize the opportunity to use their kids as the ultimate manipulation tools.
Even if 100% of men only wanted sex, and nothing else, that is still morally superior to what women use men for.
I’m not trying to make it sound as if men can’t scar a person’s soul. In my post about abortion, I mentioned the horrific Fritzl case, in which an 18-year-old girl was locked in a basement for decades and got raped thousands of times by the one man she should have been able to trust the most. THAT is one of the most life-ruining things imaginable. But what happened to that girl was an outlier. It was monumentally rare. Nearly all men can’t even imagine doing that to their baby. Besides, women have committed similar crimes, too.
My overall point is: The damage men inflict are short-term, the vast majority of the time, while women frequently cause long-term damage to both men and women, and without remorse. Seriously, when was the last time you heard a woman sincerely apologize for anything, compelled only by the goodness of her own heart? The only common thing men do that causes long-term damage is when they abandon or abuse their children. Boys and girls who grow up without their daddy, or without a good daddy, are almost guaranteed to live miserable lives.
HOW THE SEXES TREAT EACH OTHER
If you want to see, in real time, why feminism is unrealistic, then pay attention the behaviors of the sexes toward each sex.
When men see a woman fail at something, she is given almost nothing but sympathy and patience. If the woman can’t shoot a hoop very well, or play a video game very well, or can’t lift something heavy, watch how men come to her emotional and physical assistance. The woman doesn’t need to be attractive, but the support is amplified if she is attractive.
How do men treat other men? Like complete garbage, and they’re okay with that. We endlessly barrage each other with insults, taunts, challenges, humiliation, and we certainly don’t give sympathy cards to each other. We may feel pressured to tone down these things when we’re in a work environment, where female coworkers could complain about it, or our bosses remind us how that behavior doesn’t help the company’s image. But when we’re not bogged down by these social pressures, this is how men treat each other.
Notice how men don’t take it personally. Notice how men don’t get offended when we rub our game victories in each other’s faces, or get insulted, or get mocked. Girls/women can’t handle any of this, not once, especially from men, but men can handle endless verbal beatings no problem.
Evolution gave men this instinct, and for one simple reason: It makes us stronger. This fact is easily in the top-5 reasons why women aren’t, and never will be, as strong or capable as men. Even in our over-feminized society that’s controlled more by feminism than by nature, men are still no less expected to treat women like fragile flowers. Everybody is expected to think women are the equals of men, or even superior, and yet everybody still finds it unthinkable for men to treat women the same way we treat other men.
Mentally AND physically, strength only comes from constant exercise. When the mind doesn’t get challenged, and if the body doesn’t get challenged, both with atrophy.
There is a certain fact that emphasizes my point even more. Girls and women don’t treat each other very well, either. Ask any of them. The females of our species aren’t just manipulative and unapologetic toward men, they are the exact same way toward each other. And yet, they still can’t handle being on the receiving end of such treatment. Logically, if everybody started treated women the way men treat each other, that should make women tougher, right? No, that wouldn’t work. The sexes are biologically different.
Men are like muscles. Getting torn down makes us stronger. But women are like glass. Damage is permanent. It takes very little to put cracks in glass.
PHYSICALLY AND COGNITIVELY BETTER
This one should be a given. Men have been the risk-takers of our species since the dawn of our species. But too many people don’t get this fact, for some reason. The reason I’m going to address this at all is because feminism is based on the belief that women can be the equals, or superiors, of men. The truth is: Women can’t even come close.
This harkens back to something I said in an earlier post: If women want to be judged by how they compare to men … then they will be judged by how they compare to men. The facts I’m going to explain in this section shouldn’t offend any women, though, because women didn’t evolve to do the things men can do. They evolved to do the things men can’t do.
Men are inferior at sympathizing. Men are inferior at understanding infants. Men are inferior at cleanliness. Men are inferior at organization. Men are inferior at caring for the disadvantaged or the sick. These are things our species needs, and these are things men need women for. Oh, there’s also the fact men can’t produce new people from their own flesh and blood.
Now, that being said…
Men get in fewer car crashes than women, despite driving 30% more often than women. In the military, men have far more accurate aim when shooting, especially in real combat situations. Men sometimes possess genius intellects, while women never do. (I’m not referring to IQs. Even Stephen Hawking thought IQ tests were stupid. What I mean by ‘genius intellects’ is whether or not a woman can make grand scientific discoveries, simply from her wit. There may be an anecdote or two, but it virtually just never happens.)
Men are approximately twice as strong as women, including upper and lower body, and men are even stronger in relation to overall size than women (meaning, even if a man and woman are of the same height, the man would still be physically stronger). Men convert more calories into energy, while women convert more calories into fat. Even untrained men have greater hand-grip strength than female athletes.
Men can run farther, for longer. Men have more advanced hand-eye coordination.
To throw women a bone here, there is one thing I assume women are better at, even though I can’t find any solid research on this. I assume that women can survive longer without food or water, given that they, proportionately, store more fat than men (and they’re smaller).
There is only one reason women live longer than men: Men, simply by existing, reduce the stress in women’s lives. Men live more stressful lives making sure women can live safe, comfortable lives. Yes, a lot of the time, men do stupid things, but that is in their DNA. Being risk-takers is part of what makes men better. Men take risks so that women don’t have to, and yes, sometimes risks are taken just for the fun of it, but all the types of risks men take stem from the same instinct.
Where Patriarchy Came From
When I say ‘patriarchy,’ I mean the fact that men have been rulers far, far more often than women have throughout human history. I don’t mean ‘patriarchy’ to mean that women have never been able to be rulers, because that’s easy to disprove.
Young people always seem to assume that the world popped into existence as soon as they were born. Young people always believe they are the first ones to want societal reform of any kind. Fact is, the poor have always wanted what the rich have, women have always complained about not being as powerful as men, etc., etc. None of this shit is anything new.
So, why have things been a certain way for thousands upon thousands of years? Because the unfortunate fact is: Only one system can work the best. All other systems either fail, or can’t stand up to the might of the best system.
If you want your society to survive and thrive, keep the men in charge. If you want your society to survive and thrive, most of the women need to be feminine, bear children, and raise those children as feminine mothers.
Young people can have ideologies for weeks, but ideology is nothing compared to results.
“Oppression of women” is not the reason men have always been in charge. Men have always been in charge because men are stronger than women, both physically and mentally. Men are naturally more capable of handling stress, and keep emotions in control, and focus on tasks instead of focusing on feelings.
Remember how I started this post mentioning how men will leap off a bridge to save a stranger trapped in their sinking car? THAT is the mindset of a leader: Doing what’s necessary at any cost. Men don’t enjoy being tough on their kids, and they certainly don’t enjoy arguing with their spouses, but men are built to focus on doing what needs to be done. Honor and duty are in our DNA. Feminists just whine about how it’s not fair that women haven’t had more power … but power is not a toy. Power is a responsibility. True leadership requires true strength.
A woman, if she got her way, is more likely to force her people to be more fair and equal (using men as enforcers, of course), which is the essence of socialism, which always results in the OPPOSITE effect taking place. Or, a woman is more likely to just cave in to whatever demands people make of her. A man, on the other hand, is far more capable of making decisions that actually benefit the most people, even if it’s not popular. For example…
Remember in Game of Thrones (season 1) when Robb Stark sends 2,000 men to their deaths in order to distract the Lannister army, while the bulk of his army attacked the Lannister faction led by Jaime Lannister? Robb Stark sacrificed 2,000 husbands, fathers, brothers, and sons just to capture an extremely valuable hostage (the son of the leader of the Lannister forces).
Could a woman do that? Could a woman consciously send 2,000 men to their deaths just to distract the enemy? (Would a woman even have that kind of strategic mindset in the first place?) Don’t get me wrong: It’s wonderful that most women wouldn’t have the stomach to do that, and I like that about women, but it’s that very nature that makes women inferior at leadership.
Every job I’ve worked where a woman ran the place was operated poorly. Every job I’ve had where a man ran the place, everybody was happier with their job, there were fewer overall problems, and problems got resolved faster and more efficiently. Men aren’t just strong, they are also better at motivating people. Men can negotiate better, they can think more outside the box, and the fact men can handle stress better makes their workers also less stressed out.
For all the people who fervently disagree with me about the nature of women, look at Instagram for a solid hour. Can you even scroll for twenty seconds without coming across a female trying to draw attention to herself by showing some extra skin?
Anyone who thinks women can equal men in physical or cognitive strength is fooling themselves. Anyone who thinks women are leadership material is fooling themselves. When you leave males and females to be exactly as they want to be, and you don’t force any kind of ideology upon them at all … you find that boys/men are inclined to be rough and task-oriented, and you’ll find that girls/women are inclined to converse a lot, and want to take care of things.
Women are supposed to be the heart of every community and society. We shouldn’t even want them focusing on stressful jobs even if they could handle them as well as men.
Every creature in nature descended from something that had an effective survival mechanism. Humans are a weak species, even compared to our cousins the gorilla and the chimpanzee, and women are the weaker half of our weak species. But all creatures have a survival mechanism, right? Yes, and that includes women. Especially women, actually. Women evolved arguably the most effective survival mechanism in all of nature…
Manipulation. They evolved being natural-born manipulators. Their survival mechanism is persuading men to do things for them; to take all risks on their behalf.
They can’t compete with men physically, and so competing with men mentally was their only available option. And it’s not even about intelligence. Women are less intelligent than men. It’s about manipulating men’s instincts. Humanity will never have a female Einstein, but there’s an endless number of women who can persuade men to give them thousands, or even millions of dollars just for showing their tits on the internet. It takes no intelligence to show skin, but it works every time.
Men are their survival mechanism. Women depend on men for everything, especially for comfort and convenience. From plumbing, to cars, it is men who created and continue to maintain and innovate these things. Providing for women and children is the purpose of the existence of men. Leadership is among the things men were always meant to do. Leadership is not about power, which is why those who seek power, for power’s sake, inevitably abuse it and destroy those they rule over.
Authority is a responsibility. Only those who don’t crave it should have it.
Men have always been in charge because that’s how Mother Nature intended it. Leadership is the obligation of the strong; it is not a place for the weak. Women can be leaders, such as my greatest idol, Margaret Thatcher, or such as Queen Elizabeth I, but these examples are strictly outliers. It is astronomically abnormal for women to be effective, efficient, aspirational leaders.
Most people, including women, greatly prefer having male bosses over female bosses. And when you look at just about any statistic, you see that male bosses produce better results. Just a few days ago, I overheard one of my female coworkers complaining about our female manager, ranting about how much she “hates girl bosses.”
Men have an innate inclination to produce the best results we can, while women, if they are in charge of just about anything, seem to only take on such responsibilities because feminism brainwashed them to think they should.
99.99% of all female leaders, in any setting, are just trying to prove something, and then they proceed to fail at proving it.
Let us be completely honest with ourselves: How many women get into positions of leadership in the first place without complaining about something? Complaining about being oppressed, complaining about “the patriarchy” (as they define it), or complaining about the ludicrous wage gap. How many women truly earn their positions of authority? How many women can actually start a business from the ground up, and maintain it and flourish it for decades? And if they somehow do achieve that, how often do they achieve that without using a man’s money, expertise, and/or hard work on their behalf?
Women can’t understand a man’s nature … because they are not men. They can’t understand the instinct of a man to keep trying against great adversity. Women don’t see adversity as an ally through which to grow stronger; they strictly see adversity as a problem, and more often than not, they buckle under its pressure.
Women can’t understand the instinct to constantly strive, or constantly work toward achieving something, whether it’s starting a big business, or just defeating a difficult video game boss. Women can never understand the instinct to sacrifice their lives, in a moment’s notice, without hesitation. They can’t understand the instinct to want to build and improve things, day after day, physically or figuratively. Women are not “worker bees,” so-to-speak, but men are. Men are social creatures. Men are task-oriented creatures.
Men are born with a sense of duty, and honor. But this needs to develop, and develop properly, which is where fathers play the most crucial role. Fathers must be the head of the household, so that women grow up with minimal insecurities, and men grow up to be real men.
Bottom line: Men make people better. Men keep people safe and provided for. It is through masculinity that people can be wise, because wisdom comes from adversity.
For a strong, healthy, thriving society, you need to let your men be men, and everything will fall into place.
It’s not easy to obey a man’s authority, but it always produces the best results, in any situation. Growing in strength isn’t easy, nor is it supposed to be easy. But it’s better than having a society of weaklings who rot their own nations from within, from not understanding masculinity and antagonizing it.
Yes, men should be the head of the household. Yes, marriages should guarantee everything is in the man’s name, and that the kids will be his if the marriage falls apart. Yes, men should be the only leaders of nations. The only exceptions to these rules is if a woman actually proves herself to be on equal footing to a man, which 99/100 cases, she can’t.
Men make families, groups, and nations strong. Women make people weaker when they are in charge, and therefore, they shouldn’t be.