Women need to be knocked down a few pegs ngl

>>45115274
this but ironically

>>45115267
this is why we need to kill all afabs

>>45115267
Sneeds and simps need to wake up. YOU ARE NOT A WOMAN TO THEM. THEY HATE YOU.

File: women dont see low status(...).jpg (35 KB, 640x480)

35 KB JPG

*taps the sign*

>>45115355
Addendum for the illiterate, you, the mtf troon reading this, are the low-status man.

>>45115355
>high status men
>all women
>low status men
>trannies
You're a pet at best to them

>>45115375
Cis women view trannies in 3 ways:
- Another flavor of gay best friend
- Safe soft boyfriend for dick
- Predator rapist space invader

>>45115355
Trvkey true truke truke nukem

>>45115355
Lol. You're a moron.
There are no laws against men's reproductive system.
As long as women are restricted on abortion, they're oppressed.

>>45115267
i am an extremely misogynistic amab on estrogen

>>45115792
male reproductive systems are routinely surgically mutilated in america simply to satisfy their mother's lust for cut dicks
if fathers were suddenly allowed to have their daughter's genitals altered to their liking then there would be riots in the streets

>>45115911
You're saying that no father ever signs the consent for circumcision?

If you’re a tranny, cis female chauvinists think you’re a “misogynist” no matter what you do. There’s nothing that you can do to escape the original sin of being born with a penis in their eyes.

>>45115792
Men cannot legally kill their children either, so it's actually equal on that front.

>>45116079
This

>>45115267
they are correct

Incel thread

>>45115911
both the parents need to agree to cutting the foreskin before it happens dipshit, sorry vro your dad fucked you over

>>45115355
retarded mra bullshit, as if women aren't equally impacted by class dynamics, in fact, more-so as societal misogyny acts as a force multiplier.

>>45115792
All the incel chuds here are morons
Women have always been oppressed, troons are oppressed more
all of you “low value men” should be seen as worthless scum, because you have every privilege handed to you and turn around to throw rocks at our hopes to have human rights

>>45115355
"low status men" are the ones who don't see women as human and routinely beat/rape/abuse them
>I took the bait

>>45117424
the entire western human civilisation as we know it is built around worshipping women.
men are expected to appear and perform a certain way, fulfil certain roles etc.
if they don’t, they are ridiculed, opposed and shunned from society. nobody bats an eye.
women are expected to appear and perform a certain way, fulfil certain roles etc.
if they don’t, they are ridiculed, opposed and shunned from society. multi-century meltdown follows.

>>45115267
Period cunt is source of all evil and strife

“Oh i was ovulating so i sacrificed the kids to the moon!”

>>45116084
Children don't live inside wombs.

File: begone.jpg (143 KB, 960x960)

143 KB JPG

>>45115274
/thread

>>45118102
they do before they’re born

>>45117943
>women’s rights didn’t exist until recently
>arranged marriages was highly practiced in the past (and in some parts of the world today still occur)
>women have held less agency than men in the eyes of the law
>women are and will always be at risk of domestic violence and rape from men
>women are still never taken seriously in either the workforce, or during court trials
>women have historically been systematically paid less than their peers in equal work settings
yeah it’s totally a “matriarchy”

>>45118255
ejaculation outside of fertilizing an egg should be considered the killing of millions of children.

>>45118255
That's a fetus, not a child.
Children don't feed through an umbilical cord attached to their belly button..

>>45118300
His pee pee isn't getting serviced, obvious matriarchy at play.

>>45118314
how come? sperm doesn’t constitute an individual human by itself, neither does an unfertilised egg.
unlike an embryo.

>>45118327
fetuses are children. it’s a stage of human life, just like being a toddler or an adult.

>>45118595
>it’s a stage of human life
Correct.
The fetus stage. Before being a newborn, and consequently a baby. Lasts about 9 months.
And the one with power of choice, is the one turning that fetus into a ready to deliver baby.
You think that if men could get pregnant, they'd allow any kind of government restrictions on pregnancy?

>>45118595
It’s still debated at what point do we grant human rights to fertilized eggs. It’s not a settled debate. Pro-birthers want to argue if there’s even a heartbeat then it’s human regardless if a brain is present (implying you lose your humanity if your heart is replaced with a machine or is just removed entirely). Instead of maybe somewhere far later during the pregnancy when a brain is has maybe formed to begin with.

If we’re going to argue the “potential” human of a fertilized egg, you need to extend that same logic to sperm and i fertilized eggs and hold both parties accountable.

>>45118595
>sperm doesn’t constitute an individual human by itself
Neither does an embryo. Yet you claim that it's a child.
>>45118595
So why do you refer to them as children, instead of as an adult/teen/tween/elderly?
why do you pick the ''children'' stage, to refer to fetuses? If all human stages are interchangeable, why do you pick the ''children'' stage?

>>45118300
I never said it’s a matriarchy. I said it’s all built around worshipping women.
>women’s rights didn’t exist until recently
neither did men’s rights. in fact, that’s why human rights are called “human” - because they’re universal.
>arranged marriages
however barbaric, the vast majority of these marriages were arranged by the parents of the bride and the groom. the groom had about as much to say in the matter as the bride.
even then, the idea that they had no agency is false, and a modern misconception.
>less agency
again, it’s a modern misconception, albeit not entirely untrue. they had less agency in areas related to public life, i.e. representing the household. there are legitimate reasons for why that was, but you’d be right to say that these reason’s don’t really apply nowadays.
>at risk of domestic violence and rape
men are too. the risk might be lower, especially of physical violence and rape, but they’re still at risk.
of course there’s also psychological violence, however that’s a much less studied issue.
as for rape, it’s not really a matter of some evil social inequality, and simply a case of the vast majority of violent criminals being male. in the rare cases of rape by a stranger, it’s also the fact that women are often weaker and thus easier targets.
>never taken seriously
highly debatable, too broad of a statement to really evaluate. as for being taken seriously in court, women are usually taken more seriously than men, especially during hearings on family law cases.
>historically paid less
for a brief period, sure. again, there are factors such as likelihood to ask for a raise, general assertiveness etc. that influence that statistic.

>>45118640
>And the one with power of choice
exercises this choice when she chooses to risk pregnancy to receive temporary pleasure.
>You think that if men could get pregnant, they'd allow any kind of government restrictions on pregnancy?
men used to be castrated en masse, against their will, to serve as servants to noblemen’s wives (including harems, which is a separate issue), or even just to reach higher notes when singing.
even nowadays, in seemingly civilised countries, sexual offenders are chemically castrated. in far less civilised countries, regular castration could as well be a punishment for much lesser crimes, unrelated to sexuality.

>>45118835
>, sexual offenders are chemically castrated.
You're comparing pregnancy to sexual criminals getting castrated. Can you state the crime that a pregnant woman committed? Opening her legs?
You're not a serious person.
>regular castration could as well be a punishment for much lesser crimes
Could be, or is?
And a citation is needed.

>>45118648
it is debated indeed. that’s why the most reasonable position is to assume an individual human life begins at conception, i.e. when the egg is fertilised.
any other position (especially claiming that life begins after being born) implies that you lose your humanity in a series of arbitrary circumstances.
when life starts at conception, it’s no longer an argument about a hypothetical “potential human”, since the fertilised egg - an embryo - is already an actual human, however in a very, very early stage of life.

>>45118691
>So why do you refer to them as children
because “child” may also mean “offspring” or “progeny”, which is how it was used in the other anon’s argument about men not being able to kill their children.

One of these days I'm gonna turn on the news to see that one of you transmaxxers strangled an actual woman to death and tried to make a skinsuit out of her.

>>45118889
>Can you state the crime that a pregnant woman committed?
that’s not what is being argued. your problem is that women may not be allowed to abort their children. in other words, them aborting their children is subject to punishment - it’s a crime.
consensual sex isn’t a crime (exceptions apply, but that’s a different discussion), and nobody is being punished for it.
becoming and being pregnant isn’t a crime, and again nobody is being punished for it.
the woman hasn’t committed any crime, until she aborts her baby (provided that is a crime within the relevant legal system).
>Could be, or is?
could be, as I’m talking about far less civilised societies, where a strict legal system doesn’t exist as such.

>>45118923
Nah.
You're merely choosing the most sympathetic stage to refer to a human.

>>45118960
go back to /pol/ chuddy
same with all of you antifeminist worthless mra vermin

>>45119116
I’m afraid you’re projecting.

>>45119218
That doesn't even make sense.

File: 1671739730360.jpg (64 KB, 540x675)

64 KB JPG

>>45115274
i think women need to be knocked up a few pregs

Fags are retarded
Don’t simp

>>45119248
you’re accusing me of intentionally using phrasing that makes the subject in question appear more sympathetic.
it’s projection, because instead (You) are the one intentionally using phrasing that aims to dehumanise the subject in question (fetus, embryo instead of child [meaning offspring], woman instead of mother, framing abortion as something strictly applicable to the mother [“undergo abortion” inherently positions the mother as the sole subject in the whole ordeal, meanwhile the child/fetus/embryo is the one being killed])

>>45119459
>inherently positions the mother as the sole subject in the whole ordeal
She is.
Fetus, embryo, zygote, those are the correct words.
And you can use offspring. So, are you gonna change your wording?

>>45119580
>those are the correct words
as is child
>are you gonna change your wording
since it’s also correct, no.
>She is.
obviously she isn’t, given the child is the one that’s being killed.

>>45118897
>most reasonable position is to ignore the reality that a fertilized egg would not survive without the host mother existing
Do you make the same argument for raped women to give birth to their abuser’s offspring?

Its violinist hypothetical: if a dying violinist needed an organ transplant to live and you were a viable recipient, should society force you to surrender the specific organ even if you’d survive?

>fertilized egg is already a human
not without the host. The same scenario can be argued about sperm and i fertilized eggs, they’re potential humans if given the environment, same with fertilized egg. You can’t separate the fertilized egg and have it survive on its own.

>>45115355
I don't care what you posted I just think it's really weird that you posted "taps the sign" when that's a totally different simpsons meme. Could you just not get your manifesto snappy enough to work in that image?

>>45120049
What would a violinist do with an organ? Those are two totally different instruments!

>>45119724
>as is child
No. Because it's not a child.
A child is a human infant.

>>45119724
Pro-lifers only trick, is using the wrong definitions.

>>45118648
Libtards like Nussbaum want to extend human rights to wild animals but fetuses are too much.

>>45120262
>waaaahhh why cant we all agree to revoke bodily autonomy?
Go get a womb transplant and start liberating other women from their fetuses since you’re eager to bear that cross.

>>45120204
>muh definition
hardly a convincing argument. And it’s arguably not even correct, as one may refer to refer to even the zygote as a child in english(as done in the expression I’m with child).

>>45115359
>>45115355
trannies are not even low-status man, they're kicked out entirely of the male hierarchical pyramid. which makes them easy targets for misogynistic or any kind of violence. cis women love to attack and denigrate trans women cuz they can be degendered and put in the "male" place and be attacked non stop, since theyre the "patriarchy"(they're not) thus sublimating the anger, need for vengeance and resentment cis woman have for patriarchy and cis man.

tl;dr trannies are good scapegoats and sacrificial lambs for disgruntled cis fems

>>45120492
yes look at how abigail thorne lost all her male privilege!

>>45120547
>yeah let me talk abt the white tranny that has good networking and manages to be famous through her stupid vids.
waow anon you sure know a lot of trans woman huh

>>45120588
you hardly need to know a lot about transwomen to have heard of the most famous trans woman in all of the UK!

>>45120375
>as one may refer to refer to even the zygote as a child in english
You know what you're doing.
Most of you pro-life freaks call it a baby.

>>45115267
yuuppppo and it's like bitch i don't wanna look like you don't flatter yourself like that i do this shit cause of men not cause of you

>>45123206
why's there an o there there wasnt supposed to be an o there wtf

>>45115792
>As long as women are restricted on abortion, they're oppressed.
Safely, anon. Restricted from safe abortion. Women obviously have full control.

>>45117424
>troons are oppressed more
Shut the fuck up. You are literally artificial. You LITERALLY put the shackle and chain yourself.

>>45123430
Wahhhhh I'm more oppressed!!! Repost on Ovarit please!

>>45123421
>Safely, anon. Restricted from safe abortion
You think a clandestine abortion, wouldn't put a woman in legal trouble (in a restricted abortion state).

>>45123582
I mean, murder of a child should put the killer in severe legal trouble, no?

>>45120547
>look at this famous passoid and
go fuck yourself

>>45124428
>passoid

How did this thread devolve into an abortion debate? Pls stfu.

>>45124465
Not killing children is the only "right" women can still argue they don't have, even though nobody else has that right either so it doesn't even make sense. Combine that with women's insatiable need to be the victim in any scenario and every debate trends towards abortion on a long enough timescale.

>>45115274
lindsay clancy and the cornell thing did it already

>>45120492
That's just what they do to low-status men in the unlikely event that they acknowledge them at all.
The only distinct detail is that you're encroaching on their privilege which they are naturally attacking like a virus. Because of all the possible people they could think of being made equivalent to, low value men is the most egregious, which is how they categorize you at the end of the day.

>>45120049
a newborn baby would not survive without the mother existing. it’s pretty much the case all the way to adolescence, since humans have a very long upbringing period. it’s not like an embryo dies immediately after being removed from the mother after all.
this is just an example of setting an arbitrary limit after conception that, if taken to its logical conclusion, makes already born children viable to be aborted. it’s retarded.

>Its violinist hypothetical
all of her hypotheticals are fundamentally retarded, and not a single one should be taken seriously. they either willingly, or through sheer incompetence, omit and ignore crucial differences between the hypothetical situation and real life.
in the case of the violinist, it ignores the fact that the child didn’t come from nowhere. it doesn’t miraculously appear inside a random woman’s womb. the woman (in the overwhelming majority of cases at least) actively agreed to take the risk of falling pregnant when they engaged in sex. understanding the possible consequences, she chose to experience temporary pleasure anyway.
why should temporary pleasure be enough of a reason to kill another human being?
in the violinist example, we assume that there’s no previous link between the violinist and the donor. had the potential donor agreed to donate their non-vital organs in the event of the violinist needing a transplant, in exchange for some immediate gratification, then yes - they should be compelled to fulfil that obligation. as far as I know, it’s illegal to enter into such contracts in the first place, so that’s that.

>not without the host
as before, this is an arbitrary limit that makes newborns not human, because they’ll die if nobody takes care of them.

>>45120049
>>45125040
cont’d
>Do you make the same argument for raped women to give birth to their abuser’s offspring?
that’s an appeal to emotion. the child is innocent of the rape. in fact, it’s innocent of doing anything. when it is aborted (killed) it becomes a victim just the same.
however, unlike with consensual sex, the woman has not agreed to take the risk of falling pregnant. in that sense, it’s much closer to the violinist hypothetical. because of that, I would personally not be against allowing abortion in cases of rape.
this, however, doesn’t change the fact that an absolutely overwhelming number of abortions are entirely elective, while abortions of children conceived through rape make up less than a percent of cases. important enough to take into account, not quite to allow for random abortions.

>>45120375
they cannot understand this. it’s just projection, because using specific terminology and framing to dehumanise the unborn child, and equate abortion to any routine health procedure, is their main strategy.

>>45125063
forgot to add that even in the case of rape, aborting the child is still very much killing it, and women who decide to do it should be aware of that fact.

>>45125040
>a newborn baby would not survive without the mother existing. it’s pretty much the case all the way to adolescence
No it's not.
Adopted kids exist.
Kids raised by fathers, grandparents, ....

>>45125063
It's not a child.
A child living inside a womb, would suffocate.

>>45124387
Luckily that's not what's happening during an abortion.

>>45125321
>it's not a person because uh, I said so
Okay then, women aren't people, because I say so. There now women are free kills gg no re.
>inb4 but it's only okay when the one doing the dehumanizing is yourself

>>45117355
>both the parents need to agree to cutting
Literally not true, lol. Only the mother's permission is needed.

If wanting to look like a woman is misogyny then I am a misogynist.

>>45118595
fetuses aren't children any more than children are adults you fucking mobility mongoloid retard

>>45115355
Cage incels. Hobble incels. Cut up incels with chainsaws.

>>45118300
>women are still never taken seriously in either the workforce
the concept of "the workforce" is slavery for men and being included in the workforce is a step down for women, not a step up.

>>45128003
im a bincel (boymoder incel)

>>45115352
aoc just said the opposite

>>45115355
??
low-status men are indeed not human, everyone's agree about that regardless of gender(s)

>>45115792
huh? false rape allegations?

>>45128190
Low status men aren't entitled to women's bodies, but they sure are entitled to womanhood. I'll never be a woman, but the fact that I'm provided no escape, that I'll never be allowed to become a part of the exclusive special club known as womanhood really bothers me for some reason. And I'm a rational person, empathetic person. I know about the shitty things women experience, but this feeling is deep inside of me and makes me feel anxious. It feels like black spiritual sludge inside of me.

>>45128003
why? you sure that shouldnt be you instead of incels?