[Manage]

[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message
File
Embed   (paste a YouTube URL)
Password   (for post and file deletion)
  • All posts will be moderated before being shown.
  • Supported file types are JPG, PNG, GIF and WEBM.
  • Maximum file size allowed is 12 MB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 293 unique user posts.

File: 1520126482770.png–(144.21KB, 447x639, cipriani1.png)
923
No.923
>Toxic masculinity also poses a major threat to humanity. Consider that the over-whelming number of interstate and civil wars, terrorist attacks, rampage shootings, serialkillings, homicides, assaults, rapes, cases of domestic violence and cruelty to animals, andhate crimes are perpetrated by men.13 (The only category of crime that women consis-tently have higher arrest rates for is prostitution.) Carl Sagan, following Alan Alda, warnsabout the prevalence of “testosterone poisoning,” which can lead to aggression and violence.Similarly, David Pearce (2012) writes thatthe single greatest underlying risk to the future of intelligent life isn’t technological, butboth natural and evolutionarily ancient, namely competitive male [dominance] behaviour.Crudely speaking, evolution “designed” human male primates to be hunters/warriors.

>Adultmale humans are still endowed with the hunter-warrior biology—and primitive psychol-ogy—of our hominin ancestors. For the foreseeable future, all technological threats mustbe viewed through this sinister lens. Last century, male humans killed over 100 million fel-low humans in conflict and billions of nonhumans. Directly or indirectly, this century weare likely to kill many more. But perhaps we’ll do so in more sophisticated ways.

>It is considerations like these that lead Persson and Savulescu (2011) to argue for moralbioenhancement interventions that target men in particular. As they write, “if it is rightthat women are more altruistic than men, it seems that we could make men in generalmore moral by making them more like women by biomedical methods, or rather, more likethe men who are more like women in respect of empathy and aggression.” I have elsewherecriticized Persson and Savulescu’s moral bioenhancement thesis (Torres 2017a); nonetheless,such criticisms don’t detract from the important point that women, who are consistentlyunderrepresented in decisions to start wars and make peace, should play a much larger rolein shaping the developmental trajectory of civilization. In fact, one study suggests thatthe only variable that is directly and positively correlated with the “collective intelligence”of groups (analogous to psychometric g in individuals) is the number of women within thegroup—i.e., the more women, the smarter the collective (Woolley et al. 2010). It followsthat insofar as mitigating existential risk is a group activity, the community should wantmore women scholars.

What makes a good man?
¨ No.925
A good, hard cock and a welcoming anus make for a nice man.
¨ No.938
It always seemed to make sense to me that one day women would just kind of do away with men. Some old civilizations gave leadership positions to women, and most of them were pretty chill, but they never lasted long because other civilizations were all violent because dudes. You could say male-dominated civilization build a lot of stuff and made advancements, but so much of it was wiped away and destroyed by constant warring, which always came about because of dick-measuring rather than mutual benefit. Dick-measuring can itself be a motivator to progress, but it's a rather imperfect one at best.

So we needed big manly aggressive dick-contesting men to get out of the cave and start building and subsequently destroying stuff in neverending dick contests to get where we're at now, but as the destructive power of our weapons increases the dick-measuring contests will go from a few towns getting crucified to the threat of human extinction.

Really we could just lower the overall male population to 30% or so, so that men are still around but women would almost necessarily run things.
¨ No.941
Remember: gender essentialism is always wrong when it calls women stupid, but always right when it calls men stupid.

If you kill all men because men are violent, you'll just get violent women. Violence will never magically quit being useful for getting what you want.
¨ No.970
>warnsabout
>moralbioenhancement
>thegroup

Fucking format your shit after you copy-paste, sheezus.
¨ No.987
There is no such thing as toxic masculinity. It's relative... The most innocuous and previously normal male "things" are now "seen" as unusual or bad... Feminism, the destroyer of worlds, is the cause and that much is well documented, proven beyond a shadow of a doubt and just fucking common sense. Feminism is dogma, modern day zealotry with vagina "power" and the color pink everywhere until even the walking vaginas start puking. Feminism first "started" in the most recent incarnation / iteration as a community
/ socialist (I conflate the two because they are so retarded that they didn't know if they liked Trotsky or Stalin...).

"Progressiveism" is a disease and is also fascism, also since the ratio of liberal to conservative educators is 473284732 to one, all of our children and college age kids are fucking retarded, with reasoning skills / logic that's about as good as shit mixed with diesel fuel, it is fucking retarded, they have been retardified due to the shit stain teachers being liberal nazi cucks. Seriously, when will liberals stop rewriting history and changing their narrative when it suits them and fucking us normal (and the majority of Americans) conservative people?
¨ No.988
>>941
Bro, women are fucking retarded. Collectively they are just materialistic fuck bags who don't even know what they want outside of doing AS MUCH damage as is possible, to everything. Don't forget, women, communists and the whole feminism thing is running our countries. Do you see ample conversational space for conservatives EVEN THOUGH conservatives are the fucking majority, by large margins??? Fuck this planet, I don't want to live here anymore.
¨ No.992
1521126762934.gif–(472.33KB, 480x270, b354c94cd0ce8d702a77a6ddc3087e46.gif)
>>987
>>988
For someone so "right" and in the majority, you seem awfully angry and insecure. You'd think controlling the government and being such a clear righteous majority would mellow you out a little but nope. You mad because your Big Orange Daddy wants to censor your video games and state-murder you for selling drugs like communist China? Hmm?

You're exactly the reason why men suck, all you wanna do is cry and try to kill all da commie pinko fascist feminazis because you can't get laid/have a small penis/whatever. All you want is a nice strong daddy to hold you and tell you everything's gonna be fine while he fucks you with his own cheeto dick. You throw your toys at mommy whenever she comes in and tries to tell you to clean your room and eat your vegetables. No, you can't have a $30/hr no-skill manufacturing job like your grandpa because Reagan killed unions long ago, go to school little one.

The only place pathetic little cucks like you are in the "majority" are in the middle east, Africa, and smattering around Asia. Third-world shitholes where the tribes are fighting centuries-old wars over nothing, and the men don't mind because none of them can have sex anyway. Just a pit of insecure male anger where feminism never existed. Perfect place for you, get your fill, the rest of us will focus on actual problems and how to move civilization forward, not debating how to bring the 1940s back.

The reason why anyone who reads a fucking book and studies history for any amount of time comes to the same conclusion is because it's obvious. Men have ruled the world, all they've given us is "conservative" totalitarian shitholes where 95% of dirty peasants had to prop up an insecure despot or manchild. Capitalism was created as a way to continue this system of exploitation, just without the divine rule. It worked well for a little while when we had strong labor unions to balance out the fuckheadery but then the extreme capitalists killed those off by brainwashing people into blaming unions instead of the elite when the elite shipped jobs overseas. And all during the ages, men have started wars and perpetrated genocides for no good reason, and because you're way too young to actually fucking see with your own eyes what a real war looks like, you romanticize the ones in the past. Only problem is now a real war would wipe out most of humanity, which those of us who actually don't want to see the world burn want to prevent, so we focus more on keeping toxic right-wing extremists like you out of office than making sure Muslims and transgenders can't use the bathroom or whatever Breitbart is commanding you to believe this hour.

If you don't get it you're just like the kid in kindergarten who doesn't "get" the letter E. It's not my fault that kid's not the smart one. If we all don't get incinerated over one elderly man's ego and actually get to experience the Age of Woman, you might find yourself better off, even if you won't be handed a miserable bride on your 18th birthday to rape and abuse as you wish.
¨ No.993
>>992
lol is this copypasta
¨ No.996
im gay
¨ No.997
>>992
kyduh
¨ No.1002
1521328614463.jpg–(116.24KB, 622x1038, rape game.jpg)
This whole thread sucks. The OP is fucking retarded and not even edited and there hasn't been one sensible person in this thread. I'll do my best to be the first.

Hypothetical situations where there are only women are stupid. If the roles were reversed women would be as corrupt and power hungry as men. Power corrupts etc and if women had more power they would be more corrupt, it's that simple. An interesting example is the entire Rape Zombie: Lust of the Dead series. The premise is a zombie virus that turns all men into rapists but doesn't affect women, however when a man-zombie rapes a woman she becomes violently sick and dies within minutes. I think it's in the third movie (of 5) that the remaining women in the post apocalyptic world begin to reform the governments of their respective countries with amusing and zany results. Everyone should watch that series (and also translate the 4th and 5th ones because they still don't have English translations and it makes me sad).

I'm not even gonna touch any of the communist/facist and other political bullshit going on in this thread because it's so asinine it doesn't warrant a response. The quality here has really gone downhill you guys can do better, you aren't even trying to sound pretentious.
¨ No.1004
1521353944681.jpg–(854.57KB, 1280x720, hilary's america.jpg)
>>1002
>If the roles were reversed women would be as corrupt and power hungry as men.

That's true, but it's also not relevant. No one is talking about corruption or greed, yeah, we're gonna have to deal with that no matter what.

The main issue is aggression and egotism, which men are objectively shitty at controlling, and the types of men who get into positions of power are usually the worst about it.

While men starting world wars over pointless dick-waving and killing tens of millions of people is bad, it's a whole 'nother deal now that we can nuke each other into extinction.

You can try to do this whole "hurr durr women are just as bad" retardation but you know it's not true. Women may be petty and vindictive or emotional at times (albeit mostly because they're trained to be that way, just as men are trained to be aggressive), but the number of women who commit violent crimes or murder others is so tiny compared to men. We're not always going to be able to avoid Cold War-style tensions and annihilation threats, and if the people in charge are all violent egotist ape-men then nuclear holocaust is inevitable. You know it, any rational person knows it. The entire human race becoming self-impregnating women or men being replaced by soyboy cucks is a small price to pay if it means continuing on and maybe colonizing the stars some day. It's not the most likely solution but it's the most preferable over dying like the dirty stinking apes we are.
¨ No.1005
1521387176744.png–(581B, 80x18, citation needed.PNG)
¨ No.1006
>>1004
>the number of women who commit violent crimes or murder others is so tiny compared to men
That's just because they're weak
>You know it, any rational person knows it.
Nice Trumpspeach
>The entire human race becoming self-impregnating women or men being replaced by soyboy cucks is a small price to pay if it means continuing on and maybe colonizing the stars some day.
Utterly hilarious. Please write a book.
>it's the most preferable over dying like the dirty stinking apes we are.
That's actually the best thing that can happens to us.
¨ No.1007
>>1006
>That's just because they're weak

Ah yes because the only way you can kill someone is with brute upper-body strength. Oh wait no that's the worst possible way to kill someone. Even putting civilians killing each other with guns and cars aside, we have remote-controlled planes to drop conventional weapons and bioweapons. Violence, related to war or otherwise, has become so pussified and wimpy with minimal effort, it's basically made for women, yet men are pretty much the only ones that engage in it on any significant scale. Unless you mean they're "weak" in the sense that they're less willing to murder others, which is my whole point.

I love how such true and objective facts are screamed about when it comes to race, but when you point out the fact that women commit a miniscule fraction of the violent crime men do, across the board, in every country on Earth regardless of race, culture, religion, or political system, it's just ignored and handwaved because you don't like what it implies.
¨ No.1015
¨ No.1017
I think intersectional feminism is pretty great.

It shows that even in a movement devoted solely to the advancement of women, a handful of brain damaged men can take over and siphon 50% of its energy toward brain damaged male issues.

Women just pathologically give power to men and this isn't likely to ever change.
¨ No.1018
1521483581123.png–(113.11KB, 235x271, flabber.png)
¨ No.1021
Men even make better women than women. That's how much better than women men are at everything.
¨ No.1023
>>1004
Eh you're dumb. Women and men are meaningfully different. But in terms of the world being better or worse if one gender has more or less power, that's stupid. We're human beings regardless of our gender and we have a lot more in common than we are different.

Also, replying to some of the other people: women commit violent crimes way less, and in general commit murder less. But historically speaking, there's been just as many female serial killers as there have been male ones. It's just women tend to use less violent means of murder, ie poisoning. I really should start studying gender more seriously, it's fascinating and meaningful the spiritual and emotional differences between men and women.>>1004
¨ No.1025
Women should be treated worse than beasts of burden. Their only value is their ability to give birth, and it's only a matter of time before we (men) work out a way of making children without the need of an uterus.
¨ No.1039
>>1025
Agree with this. Once women are out of the picture we can finally build our gay Nazi utopia and plow little blonde boys on the moon colony, just like God and the fuhrer intended.
¨ No.1040
>>1039
Shut up, woman.
¨ No.1050
RickB is literally 5'4" tall and weighs about 85lbs.
¨ No.1055
Everybody in here is fucking retarded. "toxic masculinity"?
"commumism?" How retarded are you guys to assume this? This viewpoint is removed from reality- you haven't gotten any poof, from statstics to the shittest of ms paint strawmen comics that prove what op is saying. And even if you did, have you ever heard of the phrase "There are three types of lies: lies, dammed lies, and statstics?"
¨ No.1056
>>1055
You're lying
¨ No.1057
1522009005337.jpg–(123.84KB, 1280x720, you lost.jpg)
>>1055
Yes, because by the witty magic of that one quote, all statistics that have ever been compiled are completely meaningless, forever. Sorry, future generations, we're not going to get any more techonological or societal advancements because this drooling retard over here pointed out a quote he heard once without understanding it in the least.

But the funny thing is you don't even need numbers. It's just obvious if you have more than one functioning brain cell. The sky is blue, the sun is really bright, and women commit a tiny fraction of the violence that men commit. Men are extremely insecure and egotistic (women can be as well, but again, not as violent about it) and if you point that fact out they start flying into violent rages about it, so women don't point it out as often as they should, but we'd probably all be much better off if men were just a smidge more like women. Or a lot more.

"Toxic masculinity" is a made up and redundant term. It's like saying "violent war". Masculinity is a made-up and subjective concept with little meaning, so trying to parse it out into different types and make qualitative assessments on those types (like toxic) is a meaningless exercise. Aside from occasional outliers, men are biologically designed to be aggressive and power-seeking, which often leads to men killing each other over nothing. This was what that whole Cain and Abel story was about, by the way. Civilization came about when some of the smarter men found ways to get both men and women to suppress their natural animalistic instincts through religion, legalism, and/or state violence. Naturally these men were also violent and power seeking, but it helped organize it at least.

Now we've gotten to a point where civilization demands that men suppress pretty much all of their natural instincts, that they basically live the lives of women. Their natural imperatives as men are now obsolete and are counterproductive to advancement. That's also why they're all going nuts and becoming frog fascists or black radicals and generally trying to get back to being apish buffoons beating and killing each other. It's not because they're "toxic", they're doing what comes natural that they've been denied all their lives. It's like a tiger in a Vegas act, you can suppress all those tiger instincts for a while but one day that tiger is going to eat the gay dude and everyone's going to gasp, but it shouldn't be surprising.
¨ No.1058
>>1057
Shut up and go make us a sandwich, woman.
¨ No.1060
>>1058
What sort of sandwich would you like? Maybe something on flatbread? Is that what you're into, sicko? Flat sandwiches? You never want to eat my sandwiches anymore.

Delete Post