>Feminist LiteratureThey write that men and boys will be killed off or mass aborted once society is automated. Does this worry you?
I'll just identify as a non-transitioning masculine presenting transgender woman.
Once society is automated, women will be replaced with plastic bags.
Nowhere does it say that, they have smarter solutions than your primitive ranting
>>84264637Why would foids be permitted to exist if they too are rendered redundant?
If women want me dead so badly, I won't stop them. All I ask is they make it quick.
>>84264687Here's another book written by another feminist saying it.
>>84264689Because they blackmailed most men. (like Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell).If a woman is pedophilic and ends up in a relationship... everyone knows the man will be punished harder than the woman. This gives women lots and lots of leverage over man. (they call this "institutional power").
>>84264637By the way this Book (it's "scum manifesto" by Valeria Solanos) has praising blurbs by major newspapers like Guardian and LA Times.
>>84264637The other side of the Book.A praising blurb from the LA Times.This book was written by a woman who shot two people.Could you fucking imagine Ted Kaczynskis Manifesto having praising blurbs by major newspapers?!?!?!?!
>>84264661If i hadn't read feminist literature i would have been opposed to that.
>>84264637Most women are too kind for that to happen so men are safe for now
>>84264850Too kind for abortions?
>>84264850>In fact, women of all ideological persuasions, with the single exception of pacifists, of whom there have not been very many, have throughout history supported wars in which the very children they are biologically ordained to protect are maimed, raped, tortured and killed.This is from Andrea Dworkin "Right-Wing women". She says that it's a mere myth that women are naturally protective of their own children.See also: circumcision. (they will fucking mutilate their own children)
>>84264891Forgot pic of her book
>>84264689>Why would foids be permitted to exist if they too are rendered redundant?Why are we circumcising healthy penises?
>>84264637and how do they plan to implement this?
>>84265026War and mass abortions.
>>84264637>They write that men and boys will be killed off or mass aborted once society is automated. Does this worry you?No, not really. Less men in ratio to women would make men's lives much easier and more important. What worries me is the reason why they'd do this is because of society's contempt for men and how little they contribute to the reproductive process now that there's no need for anything else men offer.
>>84264712That's an accurate assessment of the current world, the author is talking about men in power sending other men to wars to be drone meat.
>>84265072But feminists (and religion) are the reason men's lives aren't valued in the first place.Look at a historical place like Japan - The Samurai Elite had a small Harem, the average man was married and the bottom percentage went to brothels. It was a high IQ, high Trust society.And nowadays we have enforced monogamy even of the top 1%, celibacy, incels, mass migration... and it's a low IQ low Trust society now.
>>84265086Not if you read the entire book. That book is filled with fucked up stuff (as is most feminist literature).Feminists also do a thing were they blame men for stuff they themselves are guilty of. And it's not an interpretation - they sorta give you guidelines or hints that they are doing this.
>>84264895>>84264637https://selfdefinition.org/psychology/Esther-Vilar-The-Manipulated-Man.pdfWHAT IS WOMAN?A woman, as we have already said, is, in contrast to a man, a human being whodoes not work. One might leave it at that, for there isn't much more to say about her,were the basic concept of `human being' not so general and inexact in embracingboth `man' and `woman.'Life offers the human being two choices: animal existence - a lower order of life - andspiritual existence. In general, a woman will choose the former and opt for physicalwell-being, a place to breed, and an opportunity to indulge unhindered in herbreeding habits.At birth, men and women have the same intellectual potential; there is no primarydifference in intelligence between the sexes. It is also a fact that potential left tostagnate will atrophy. Women do not use their mental capacity: they deliberately let itdisintegrate. After a few years of sporadic training, they revert to a state ofirreversible mental torpor.Why do women not make use of their intellectual potential? For the simple reasonthat they do not need to. It is not essential for their survival. Theoretically it ispossible for a beautiful woman to have less intelligence than a chimpanzee and stillbe considered an acceptable member of society.
>>84265072>Less men in ratio to women would make men's lives much easier and more importantWomen treat the most desirable men the worst. What makes you think that will change?
>>84265094>The Samurai Elite had a small Harem, the average man was married and the bottom percentage went to brothels. It was a high IQ, high Trust society.So just like now with chads having harems and not settling down, average men getting married and incels who could choose to pay for a prostitute?
>>84265129No not at all. How many millionaires do you know who have multiple concubines and official children with them?
>>84265118Now my point in quoting this passage from that book in regards to>>84264895>>84264637Is that the only fatal flaw in this woman's cunning plan is that most women are willfully ignorant and happy to remain willfully ignorant. They could no more present a united front than all the worlds dogs could band together against all the worlds dog catchers.Far from automation freeing women from their oppression and giving them time to study philosophy and scholarly pursuits. It would only give them more time for idle leisure. Women have less responsibilities than ever before and what have they done with it? Nothing. They scroll social media, buy useless trinkets, and gossip. Where are the scientific breakthroughs, where are the new philosophical perspectives, where are the insights and discoveries? The simple fact of the matter is they aren't making them because they have no reason to.
>>84265120>Women treat the most desirable men the worst.??? No? Schizo?What will change is that the supply of men will go down, and the demand for men will go up, such that it's not always just picrel.
>>84265136Most richfags do indeed have more than 3 children. This is not up for debate or speculation you can literally just type in "millionaire's last name" + "family photo" into google and get shown pictures of the huge families they have.
>>84265137Women study Art because it gives them insight how to force men into submission.Here's an example: a feminist studies "Chastity" forcing "Love" into submission. Chastity is fully clothed and breaks the last arrow of "love".In other words: Older men are more desperate to agree to things than younger men. (that's part of the reason why adolescence is delayed in our society)
>>84265152Bro, having more than 3 children is different from having 10 wives, each of them 3 children.
>>84264637>grrr kill men kill all men! >:(>OMG IS THAT CHAD!?!?? FUCK MY PUSSY CHAD!!!they take male dick anyway, it's in their dna to whore out for chad cock. what they mean in getting rid of ugly men.
>let's kill the most useful genderLol, feminists are like socialists after they help communists take over.Line em up
>>84265160Yeah. And is that a good thing?When men are in charge you get historical Japan. Top percent have small Harems. Average man is maried.High Trust, low crime, high IQ.The Samurai were highly respectable, disciplined, accountable. (we no longer have that)
>>84265155>Christfags are an anti-sex death cult that puts pussy on a pedestal.Not exactly new information but not really contradicting the point either. A few feminists jilling off about writting essays on sex and killing men is not an accurate reflection of the vast majority of women who are simply useless idiots.
>>84265172Ere 1550 Christian Clergy used to have Concubines. Popes had children, some popes had multiple concubines.If you read feminist literature - it's women who changed that (no, really).
>>84265136Does it matter that it's "official"? everyone knows anywaymonogamy isn't what makes a society low or high trust
>>84265172>that puts pussy on a pedestal.But that's true. 100% true. So many feminists studied theology, including some of the most radical ones.
>>84265158see>>84265155You can thank the christians for enforcing monogamy and holding back chad from having all of the females instead of just the top picks. If humanity ever culturally regressed to the pre-enlightenment you would see polygamy come back with a vengeance.
>>84265188>You can thank the christians for enforcing monogamyTrue, unfortunately.But if you read feminist literature, much of Christianity appears to be run by blackmail. And in fact Christianity is highly subversive.
Tesla who was an avid simp in his youth, changed his mind later on and believed that women will make an attempt at exterminating males as soon as they have any chance of pulling it off.
>>84264637>SCUM manifestothe ragebait that keeps on giving
>>84265212Isn't it astonishing that NIKOLAI TESLA (out of all men) felt undesirable or useless as a man?
>>84265222Valerie Solanas had low IQ, but her view isn't unique, many who successfully infiltrated academia and groomed thousands of women like Mary Daly shared the same views.
>>84265212Nikolai Tesla never had children and was never married.NIKOLAI FUCKING TESLA.
>>84265094>But feminists (and religion) are the reason men's lives aren't valued in the first place. >>Look at a historical place like Japan - The Samurai Elite had a small Harem, the average man was married and the bottom percentage went to brothels. It was a high IQ, high Trust society. >>And nowadays we have enforced monogamy even of the top 1%, celibacy, incels, mass migration... and it's a low IQ low Trust society now.That was Japan. A literal island, without internet. Even then, other cultures were still having sex a lot. Hypergamy is mainly possible because of technology. It used to be that men were in surplus, but women still had to pick. Now it's that men are in such a high surplus that women can just sleep with a new man every night for the rest of her life if she wants because she can reach much farther than ever before. Reduce the supply of men, however, and suddenly it doesn't matter as much how far she can reach because there just aren't as many men. In fact, a man would be able to reach far more women that way. It's just a happier setup. In nature, a man can spread his genes far more than a woman can if he has access to women. Natural selection demands that there be more men, depending on if there's viable women. But we don't live in natural selection world anymore. We can stop it from forcing us to birth more men, and maintain a soceity that never has to go sexless.
>>84265224I don't know about that and he didn't say that women will succeed, he just thought that women are fundamentally predisposed to be against men.
>>84265222If you begin to read feminist Literature, book after book writes eerily similar stuff.But let's take the Scum Manifesto:Guardian: "Articulate, angry and funny" >>84264727LA Times: "(...) her work has the rare virtue of seeming at the same time totally insane and totally right." >>84264807She attempted murder. Why was there no cancel culture?
>>84265258>Why was there no cancel culture?Really - if you say Valeria Solanos was just a random niche psychopath (she was) - why did major newspapers write such positive things about someone who attempted murder?
>>84265253>Now it's that men are in such a high surplus that women can just sleep with a new man every night for the rest of her life if she wants because she can reach much farther than ever before.A prostitute can do the same thing. A prostitute will even sleep with affluent men every night. (also with undesirable men, but rich men seek prostitutes too).>and maintain a soceity that never has to go sexless.Women are the ones who made society sexless. If you read feminist literature you realize they aren't chaste. You realize women only ACT as prudes because they are fully aware that leveraging sex gets them stuff.
>>84264637Women are just pissy clowns mate, one day without men they'd be at a loss, society would shut down
>>84265311I used to talk a lot about this and I still believe that many women would be willing to to settle for a significantly worse quality of life if it meant that men would have it worse as well. People almost always chalk up advocating for endless immigration as something women do because they're dumb, but I think Hanlon's razor is a fallacy. It's not rational to assume the best of people when they have proven themselves to be malevolent.I think women just want to destroy everything.
>>84265311Grok and ChatGPT can run society.
Feminism's idea of leadership and sovereignty is thinking they're gonna sing koombeyah around the camp fire with the commies and muslims and we're all gonna come together.
>>84265137>Where are the scientific breakthroughs, where are the new philosophical perspectives, where are the insights and discoveries?You know that female scientists, scholars, authors whatever exist right? if you understand anything about breakthroughs it's a cumulative effort, and women are contributing to it.why project the achievements of a small portion of men onto the entire male population? unless you consider every human with no major breakthrough a wasted potential you're not making any sound point here. In the same way a female quantum physicist is an exception to the average female population >>84265118>At birth, men and women have the same intellectual potential;at birth IQ potential is different from person to person why would it be any different from man to woman?
>>84265384I think that's just something they say, they know it's not going to happen, they know that they'll just fuck everything up beyond repair and they're fine with it.
>>84265244That's probably because he chose to, seeing that having a wife and kids would probably take some of his attention away from his pursuits.
>>84265374I think they're both malevolent AND stupid, actually.The number of times I've had a female coworker confide in me about another coworker, a person in a similar role with a similar goal, and just spew the most vile hate you can imagine for as close to no reason as possible is unreal.And the differences in how they interact are insane. There's so much fake love and affection thrown out as women rip into each other.When departments led by men interfere with one another, they get together, they explain their needs and how the other is causing damage, and they simply hash it out and find a solution.When it happens in departments led by women, twenty meetings will follow, half of them will be social calls, there will be much arguing and drama guaranteed, not much will be accomplished and in the end there will likely be no resolution.
>>84265437>I think they're both malevolent AND stupid, actually.Maybe, but my point is that a lot of women, especially the type who can climb the social ladder into politics, are more emotionally invested in making life worse for men than they are in making it better for everyone. Plenty of women are willing to suffer and allow other women to suffer if they can make you suffer as well.
>>84264637The only thing protecting women from men are the laws that man made for them and are carried out by men. If all women were to act or think this way it would take less than a second for every men to rescind all of their privileges of society. Women really are too stupid to understand this concept. They honestly think theyre above everything
>>84264891>they will fucking mutilate their own childrenAnd then use the foreskins to make their face look younger.No, I'm not joking.https://www.bostonmagazine.com/health/2015/04/14/baby-foreskin-facial-boston-hydrafacial/
>>84264637This doesn't mean that women would control the world. It means hackers would.If this is a major part of their argument, then the argument may be ignored.
>>84265500That book is already a bit older (which i think makes it even more worrisome, not less).Disregard this, because even now more women vote than men.
>>84265374>I still believe that many women would be willing to to settle for a significantly worse quality of life if it meant that men would have it worse as well.Yes! If you are young that's difficult to believe but that's something that becomes apparent over time.
>>84265490Harvesting bodyparts from an infant and turning it into cosmetics is dystopian.
>>84265400>they know that they'll just fuck everything up beyond repair and they're fine with it.In that case most men will still die trying to fix it (civil war).
>>84265557that's besides the point actually, their motivation is outcome independent, they'll just oppose and undermine male authority no matter what
>>84265574It seems that way but reading feminist literature I think they have plans. Not great plans, but plans.
they are very evil bros but keep in mind we can defeat them if they get too uppity
>>84265611Of course they have a rough sketch and some ideas, but there's no real conspiracy. They just fucking hate you and see you as an inconvenience at best and an enemy at worst and that's never going to change.
>>84265631Sounds right.At the same time they lust after us. You read their books, they are HORNY. They deprive you of sex because it's a leverage but they are horny as fuck and the most prude acting ones are the biggest perverts.
>>84265212Tesla wasn't a chud.
>>84265695He was a genius. It's worrisome if someone like him says women don't value men.
>>84265118One of the very few women who was pro men and not weird like pearl.
>>84265500Who is controlling the hacker?
>>84264850Not for uglies or shorties though they'll kill you off with glee
>>84265944A different hacker with a bigger beard (ad divinium)
>>84265956What about tranny hackers? And fury hackers?
>>84265990Controlled by a hacker with a beard braided with his pubes.
>>84266027Must be some impressive pubes
>>84264637Do they say when will society be automated?
>>84266042Such a hacker, you have no idea of knowing where the beard ends and the pubes begin. It is part of his meta-existential architectural ouevre.
>>84266043No. But in that particular book she writes society can be automated very quickly once there's a financial incentive.She published this book 1967 - when most people still thought FULL AUTOMATION wasn't possible or still very off into future (like people still believed Ai will never be able to automate art).
>>84266052Art is "stuff arranged in space." With no arranger, is it art? Is a leaf or a smelly vagina art?
>>84266059Deep and insightful.
>>84266079All that I'm saying is that I have semantic disagreements with a computer making art. With no artist to speak of, we're getting into the territory of John Cage's 4:33 of people even questioning whether a dude sitting in front of a keyboard for four and a half minutes doing nothing is art or not.
>>84266092>people even questioning whether a dude sitting in front of a keyboard for four and a half minutes doing nothing is artThen we must all be artists - or art?
>>84266126I'm an artist. You don't even squirt paint at canvases.
>>84266043>Do they say when will society be automated?No. Maybe ask Elon to slow down a bit - just in case.
>>84266196>Maybe ask Elon to slow down a bitNo seriously, ask him to slow down. The women intend to kill you guys once Grok becomes too good.
Bumping in the hope that in the near future men won't be killed off.Guys - download these screenshots from books and share them online and with discords and what else.
Darwin killing teleology as the ancient conceived off has been a disaster for the human race.
>>84264637Nah, women are useless.
>>84266650Why? Why does that matter?
>>84266700They made themselves useless by refusing to be women.
oh my fucking god it's the delusional faggot who keeps posting books he doesn't understand again. i am going to shove my lotus foot up your asshole and kick the shit back into and out your mouth.
>>84264712is this that female pedophile germaine greer's book on how sexy boys are? it reads like it.
>>84264727>avital ronellthis woman literally sexually harassed and stalked her own male student and then claimed he did it to her because he wanted to destroy strong women and was sexually obsessed with her btw. she had an eleven month investigation and was suspended for a year without pay over it. it was a very big deal during metoo because she was like one of the only women and especially actual feminists effected and she tried using feminism as a cover. why can i do your arguments for you better than you can?https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/an-nyu-sexual-harassment-case-has-spurred-a-necessary-conversation-about-metoo
>>84264807>Could you fucking imagine Ted Kaczynskis Manifesto having praising blurbs by major newspapers?!?!?!?!i thought it was hilarious to end a college presentation on the unabomber with this, actually.
SCUM manifesto is deliciously ragebaity, however lets not forget it was written in the year of 1967 and had some sharply accurate prediction about our current modernity. She predicted internet and what people would do in it, she predicted trannyism caused by water estrogens and men's jealousy of ez mode, women dominating an academia and she also considered artificial wombs a tool of relief for women rather than danger and is probably right, because soon both genders will be "useless" but feminine is still more fuckable and cause less trouble on state scale.Given all that, you should be afraid and solanas either did in fact have high IQ or were a direct ZOG agent>>84264661>>84265238>>84264637
>>84267596based. we should all dig up andy warhol and shoot him and his ugly wig again in her memory.
