Red Pill TheoryAnita Sarkeesian and Friends Lobbying To Censor The Internet Via the UN; or Cunning Female Machiavellianism on Blatant Display (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan

tl/dr - Women are far more cunning and Machiavellian than most men could ever hope to be.


I want to post a video today that was uploaded to YouTube within the last 24 hours by a man calling himself Paul Joseph Watson. Now, after watching the video, I would like to immediately hamstring your hair-trigger on the Reply button to make the obvious points, which I will get out of the way now:

  • Yes, I know the video is sponsored by InfoWars, and yes, I know everybody has mixed bag feelings about the validity of InfoWars. That's not what I'm discussing today.

  • Yes, I know that the actual likelihood of the UN wielding this sort of power, or attempting to wield this sort of power in post-modern, free, industrialized nations, is not high.

Whether they could actually pull something like this off within the United States is not what I'm talking about either. What I am talking about is that


I think if Niccolo Machiavelli were alive today and witnessing the absolute gall of these women, of their ability to embrace their true, inner Dark Triad, of their willingness to use their "Women Are Wonderful" advantage to such a cunning level, well....I think old Niccolo would be furiously taking notes on how to up his own DT game.

The very idea that our favorite Hug-Box Trigger DumplingsTM , Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn, think they have the moral sanctity to actually censor internet traffic that doesn't meet their perverted, twisted ideas about "cyber bullying", reminds me of a blog from our very own esteemed /u/IllimitableMan, and I'm going to highlight some parts of his post "The Red Pill Constitution" to show just how prescient that post was in the context of these current events:


(emphasis mine)

01.) – Feminists claim they want equality but their actions and reactions indicate it is power without responsibility that they strive for. They desire both male and female privileges consolidated to form a perverse type of “feminist privilege,” thus upsetting the balance of power and social dynamic between the sexes.

As is illustrated in the video, and also astutely pointed out by Mr. Watson, Anita and Friends want to use the ruthless hand of international governmental power to censor (and potentially jail) any man who tells her she "sucks" or "is a liar", yet do nothing to censor the expression of slut walkers, MRA convention protesters, or HamPlanets who want to vandalize weight loss campaign ads.

They want the power to shut down speech they don't like, without the responsibility to censor themselves from saying crazy loon-ball feminist shit.

Their decisions are based on their current emotional state rather than logic. Once overwhelmed by the feeling of the moment and riding on a tidal wave of emotion, even if an awareness of what is fair and rational remains intact in the woman, she shall opt to ignore it in favour of indulging “what feels right.”

"Doing what feels right, in the moment. Think about this fellas; here we have a bunch of (what is usually) young, free-speech loving, censor-ship hating, progressive liberals, who under most **logical circumstances would absolutely ABHOR the notion of any type of censorship, especially on the internet...

...and here they are lobbying for censorship on the internet. Why? Because FEE FEES, that's why. Anita fancies herself a logical, rational, progressive woman, and here she is asking big daddy UN to shut up anyone who dissents with her feelings. She even says at the beginning of the video, something that could only spawn from the fluffiest of hamsters:

"I mean, it's not only about what's legal and illegal, right?" - Anita Sarkeesian

Yes, Anita, that's exactly what it's about. But I wouldn't expect you to understand or to grasp that concept in your perpetual emotional state of being offended by the collection of pixels on your computer screen.

03.) – Women are Machiavellian in nature. In comparison to the average man they are far more proficient in the art of manipulation as well as comprehending the realm of subtext to “read between the lines.” The theoretical evolutionary basis for this sex difference is that due to smaller body mass and inferior musculature women had to learn to use men as tools rather than directly oppose them in physical competition. This makes the pronunciation of female strength a propensity to be mentally violent rather than physically. Physical violence is outlawed whereas mental abuse is not, and it is this which allows women to get their way using their favoured method of coercion without being held accountable by a system of law.

As I stated in the TL/DR, women are capable of far more Machiavellian behavior than a man could ever hope or dream to possess.

  • I mean, what could be more narcissistic than to presume you have enough credibility to address the UN, and actually be manipulative enough to actually get a seat at the table?

  • What is more Machiavellian than using the strong arm, or attempting to use the strong arm, of other men to do the bidding that you cannot do yourself? Are weak men calling you dirty names on the internet? Get bigger, more powerful men to stuff a sock in their mouth.

  • From Wikipedia: "Psychopathy is characterized by enduring antisocial behavior, impulsivity, selfishness, callousness, and remorselessness". Anita and Friends demonstrate psychopathy to a tee here. It doesn't matter how many men are censored, how many men are fined, no matter how many men are socially ostracized, no matter how many men are literally stripped of their freedom for 6 months for disagreeing with a feminist on Twitter. None of it matters as long as the Hugbox remains intact and unfettered.

So JP, what's the takeaway here, you ask? Well, the takeaway is to learn to spot the traits in women that society has trained you from a young age to ignore. I can't imagine how many plugged in feminist manginas could watch Anita give that verbal vomit, and just nod along with her, waiting to take up against the evil misogynists. The takeaway, especially for the lurkers, is to not take shit at face value, and realize that the "Fairer Sex" is capable of far more subliminal ruthlessness than you realize.

When it comes to getting what they want, women are about as "fair" as a mafia-rigged unlicensed boxing match.

minor grammar edits

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (4 children)

The sad thing is people on the blue pill will take these mentally handicapped women seriously, inb4 I get v& for speaking out against our feminist lord Anitasarkeesian.

[–][deleted] 67 points68 points  (27 children)

This is just a theory, and I could be wrong, but I actually believe Anita Sarkesian is self aware. Whether that makes her more or less diabolical is open for debate. But I believe she knows that she is full of shit and doesn't believe half her own lies. From what I've read she used to be a con artist and so feminism is just the latest and greatest con to come rolling around and she has profited immensely. Imagine being at the UN talking shit that you know is shit and watch hungry shit eaters anxiously gobble it up. It must be an intoxicating form of power. We'll have to ask Donald Trump about it when he's president as well.

[–]MelodyMyst 41 points42 points  (1 child)

Meanwhile, in another thread, Isaac Asimov answers the question and drops RP truth...

"Isaac Asimov wrote a short story about this: 'My Son, the Physicist'. Even though the story has a slightly humorous touch, the problem is radio communication between Earth and Pluto, with a 12-hour delay. The physicist's non-scientist mother has the answer:

"Good grief, Gerard, are you trying to get some talking done? [...] Well, all right, but if you're going to say something and then wait twelve hours for an answer, you're silly. You shouldn't. [...] While you're waiting for an answer, just keep on transmitting and tell them to do the same. You talk all the time and they talk all the time. You have someone listening all the time and they do, too. If either one of says anything that needs an answer, you can slip one in at your end, but chances are, you'll get all you need without asking." "How did you think of this, Mother? What made you suggest this?" "But, Gerard, all women know it. Any two women - on the video-phone, or on the stratowire, or just face to face - know that the whole secret to spreading the news is, no matter what, Just Keep Talking." That was written in 1962."

There you have it. Just keep talking.

[–]ether_reddit 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's not RP truth, that's simply discovering asynchronicity. We take that for granted now because so much of our communication is asynchronous, but back then it would have been quite peculiar even to contemplate, let alone realizing that it was possible.

[–]Endorsed ContributorTheRedPilsner 34 points35 points  (6 children)

She is a con artist. There are countless infographics and YouTube videos about the distortions, exaggerations, and outright lies in her "Tropes vs Women in Video Games" video series, but she still gets crowdfunding and sponsorships from big corporations.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (3 children)

Right that's what I thought. But the big question I'd like to know is that when she's at that UN podium do you believe that her solipsism and disassociation have managed to convince her of her own lies or if she knows that she is telling lies as she lies.

[–]theaviationhistorian 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Problem is that there is a difference between shaking up a highly emotive driven movement within genres of feminism or gaming, and trying to play the same moves and control the big dogs that have been managing greater house of cards and can outswindle her (or Jimmy Hoffa her) in 5 minutes. Even if she gets up on that podium, she will be undermining her actions and doing the same undoings that brought down Senator Joseph McCarthy when taking on Pres. Eisenhower and the US Army during the Second Red Scare.

Similar things are happening with Anita, Zoe, & Co. and I don't think she will get up to those ranks (if she is wise in this game). Only time will tell...

[–]krakosia 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Well the un did have that Emma chick give the fake feminism speech a few months back. Allowing that shows the un wants the sweet white knight feels of "helping women". The tide is not flowing in the direction you think it is

[–]theaviationhistorian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True, but I saw more support to Emma Watson's campaign, from the mainstream, than with this one. And her group really didn't get much going on as they hoped, despite calling up many groups (including the ever-volunteering white knights).

The problem I noticed working with various social movement groups (including some feminist a decade back) is that talk is really fun and motivating; but action is a whole different deal and few follow up with both. Very few.

[–]theaviationhistorian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly, she is a snake oil saleswoman that benefits from all of this drama, sucks the revenue, support, and drive of the current feminist and some equal rights movements to a short term goal with a long term loss in order to obtain the benefit from them. I'm sure as hell that in a few years, Anita, Zoe, and others will skedaddle out of here when they sucked all of the profits possible and leave into ruin the movements and people they supported them.

There were similar charlatans before and there will be similar charlatans as soon as Anita, Zoe, & Co. leave.

[–]obama_lurves_nsa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Racist pimps have Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton

Feminist pimps have Anita Sarkesian

Illegal immigration pimps have Jorge Ramos

Marxist pimps have George Soros funding OWS

All these same "downtrodden" and jealous butthurt groups all do the same thing. They make threats until they get their way bc they could never accomplish it by themselves peacefully without intruding on other people's lives.

[–]Endorsed Contributorleftajar 13 points14 points  (0 children)

She called in a bomb threat on her own talk, and then "donations" to her "non-profit" increased 1,000% in the next fiscal quarter.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (5 children)

Of course she is. You don't get to be the poster child for this shit without knowingly serving a different agenda. Gloria Steinam was a CIA agent and all the regular joe feminists are useful idiots being duped into working against their own self interest.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 9 points10 points  (3 children)

After the Mattress Girl text messages were released to the public, proving that she was full of shit, she was used as a poster child by the government.


[–]krakosia 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Narrative and facts often collide with each other and rare is the occasion when facts survive

[–]2012Aceman 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hands up, don't shoot!... didn't ever happen.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Someone here mentioned that two opposing ideologies are purposely collided, and one eventually gets consumed by the other.

[–]drallcom3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agenda: Being able to censor the internet.

[–]QQ_L2P 4 points5 points  (3 children)

If I remember correctly there was a few snippets and threads that popped up during Gamers Gate about how Anita Sarkeesian is a mouthpiece for a guy named John McIntosh.

I'll reply again if I can find those threads, but I am firmly of the belief that Sarkeesian is nothing but a strawman for everyone to direct their ire at as she dances the marionettes' dance.

There's a whole meme dedicated to the guy.

[–]jimmybrite -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Josh is her boyfriend, which makes this all the more interesting.

[–]QQ_L2P 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Those two are bumping uglies?


[–]jimmybrite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh most definitely, here is an artist rendition of their future kid.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

My disposition is that she is aware that she's full of shit and that does make her more diabolical and dangerous, but that's a separate topic for a separate thread. Despite being a "female video game social justice warrior", she is on video proclaiming and admitting that she really doesn't spend much time playing video games at all. It's more about the movement and less about the medium.

[–]1commentatorX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its very clear. Anita Snorkeesian is absolutely playing the game. I doubt she even identifies with her followers anymore. She's making mad stacks with the telemarketing conference model, and doesn't want that to change - so of course she's going to keep the narrative going, she'll keep riding that train off the rails and into the woods if she has to.

[–]obama_lurves_nsa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agree with 100% up until the point of talking about Donald Trump. Trump is the opposite of Sarkesian:

-Sarkesian spreads lies people love to gobble up (some realize she is full of shit but are too scared still to do anything to stop her since the current repercussion is to be attacked by the mob)

-Trump is spitting truth nobody has wanted to hear for a long time (but some are loving silently and quietly since somebody isn't afraid to speak truth finally.. but are shy since the repercussion is also to be attacked by the mob)

[–]theaviationhistorian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So she's putting on a facade to the point of wrapping herself around Poe's Law (similar to the arguments on Anne Coulter) to the point of continuing the cynical farce in order to surf this movement to a short term livelihood for personal gain? It pretty much sums up what she and others are doing to the point of decimating the current wave of feminism from the inside. But I don't know why we should take this more seriously than non-gamers and non-activist listening to them.

This is the same organization that had the lackluster force to prevent genocides in the 1990s, prevent the Iraq War, and appoint Saudi Arabia as head of the Human Rights office.

It is snake-oil saleswomyn appealing to the venue that supports people doing all kinds of chicanery!

[–]ChairBorneMGTOW 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely a con artist. Her original funding drive was to get the money to produce a series of film documentaries... Say around a dozen or less. But she produced two if I recall, and has made no effort to fulfill her obligation to her donors. Does that fit the legal definition of fraud?

Of course the dumb naive cunts (both male and female) who donated won't ever make a police complaint because she's a fellow SJW.

[–]jimmybrite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She is, she uses teleseminar techniques.

[–]mobilus 30 points30 points [recovered]

Don't kid yourselves. Feminists are not spending their own money to lobby the UN. This isn't about women trying to control internet freedom so you can't criticize them, this is about the highest tier of the wealthy in the world trying to control internet freedom.

US wealth inequality - top 0.1% worth as much as the bottom 90%

Anita Sarkessian and ilk couldn't be Machiavellian about a cookie recipe let alone global communication laws. The femme du plume on the podium speaks from ignorance, not even understanding how she got there. She's the unwitting voice of the money barons, reading from the script their middle managers supplied her. Think of the children. Think of the oppressed upper middle class white chicks who have their feelings hurt online. This is the strategy being used to get you to shut up and stay in the dark about how your life's energy is being robbed through global banking piracy. And once they're done robbing you, they'll ask you to go to war for them so they can burn the evidence of what they've done.

Then they'll start all over again, like they always have.

[–]LoL-Guru 5 points5 points [recovered]

Nailed it. I wish this got more upvotes for coverage. The corporate elite have been trying to censor the internet for a while now, or did we all just forget SOPA and PIPA? This is clearly just another power play.

[–]RedPill115 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a mix. The rich people you're talking about are doing what you're saying, but in order to get women to buy in they have to give them something as well, and that's a mix of giving someone women the ability to talk and anyone talking back is "harrassing them", while for other women it's by telling them no one would be able to say bad things about them online any more.

[–]RichardBelmont 49 points50 points  (18 children)

Sadly, Google is joining in on this too. Check @googleideas

[–]ShounenEgo 31 points32 points  (16 children)

Universities and tech industry jumps on board. It's a game of power, as always.

If you want to be perceived as supporting moral values nowadays, you support feminism. This is why I'm a vocal support of "think as you like but behave like the others".

It's like you're a politician who doesn't believe in God yet says "with the help of our Lord" in almost every speech.

[–]Red_Swords 33 points34 points  (0 children)

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me"

Be careful which ideas you choose to implicitly support with your silent acceptance. Protecting your personal power is an act of futility, if you set the stage for it to be stripped away in the future.

[–]Fhqwghads 33 points34 points  (7 children)

"Think as you like but behave like the others" isn't meant to cover things like this. Any behavior that's harmful to you in the immediate or near future should not be mimicked.

If you and everyone else subscribed to that philosophy without thought to the outcomes of your behavior, then ideas like those stated in the OP will have a higher chance of success, and farther reaching consequences.

Of course, you'll be able to hamster away your complicity by telling yourself you were only acting in accord with the laws of power.

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I vas only following orders.

[–]muuh-gnu 3 points4 points  (1 child)

hamster away your complicity

It is not complicity to survive first and fight them slowly by stealth subversion. When you want to infiltrate enemy lines, or the enemy has already overrun your lines, you absolutely need to become invisible and get into guerilla mode. Openly figting to the last man is stuff for the movies, in reality it gets you quickly executed. Patient step-by-step subversion is how they won after all. Theyre outright communists and want to crush western civilisation, but they cant say that openly that way. Instead they also pretend to be "one of us", getting into our positions of power, just fighting for human rights, female rights, equality, fight racism, etc. But as they say behind closed doors, the issue is never the issue. The issue is always revolution. So if stealth and perserverance right out of the Soviet infiltration playbook worked for them like a charm, how does it suddenly turn into complicity and hamstering if you do it? For me what you say sounds like good old "now run into the enemy MGs, soldier, or are you a coward?" shaming technique to make people do something stupid.

[–]Fhqwghads 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For all the truth in your statements about subterfuge, it's not the time for those of us capable of using logic and reason to duck into the shadows and infiltrate the opposing ranks. We still have a window where standing up and pointing out logical flaws will change minds and sway opinion.

Just look at this Trump phenomenon. He's massively popular because he's not couching his words or bending over to allow PC ideology to dictate his speech and actions. He's become an overt icon against that bullshit, and showing that people are getting sick to death of feminist, victim propaganda.

So, yeah, I agree that there are times when you can put your head down and pretend with everyone else, but this isn't the time.

For me what you say sounds like good old "now run into the enemy MGs, soldier, or are you a coward?" shaming technique to make people do something stupid.

Pointing out bad logic is a shaming technique? Get the fuck out of here.

[–]ShounenEgo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm not going to hamster it away. I'm just not in the mood to change the world in the long term and I refuse to get into moral conflicts in places were the cost for me is higher than the benefit of "men". In the case of Google, I will most certainly avoid conflict to keep my job at Google instead of throwing oil in the fire and increase my enemies. I'm not a red pill savior, I'm a selfish bastard who will look his own benefit. Straight up.

Red pill teaches that society's initial expectations are about telling me to sacrifice myself for the sake of others. Suddenly I'm expected to throw under the bus my career progress/prospects in favor of becoming vocal against misguided landwhales who have the upper moral hand?

I ain't doing it. I'd rather lose all the karma in the world than my job.

But in case you subscribe to the idea of changing the world in the long term, tactical-wise it's stupid to go against feminists as they are in a point where it's pretty much one of their strongest points (tech companies). Tech companies right now are forced to act as if gender "differences" in wage and representation are the real thing and in some countries they are even forced to meet a women-men ratio as quota. You think that you'll just approach anyone in such a company, tell them their assumptions are wrong and they'll go "aha, we listen to reason and you're right"? It's as if you've never debated before.

Sun Tzu didn't said "avoid attacking the enemy at the point where he's strong" not because he was weak, but because he was smart. Do it somewhere else. Do it by disproving the myth of wage gap in court or something. Don't just flex your "you're wrong" muscles everywhere and think that what matters the most is to be "honest with yourself", as if picking your battles intelligently is a sign of dishonesty.

[–]gokurakumaru 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It's weird that people hate the trend but refuse to buck against it for fear of being smacked down. Not everybody needs to be Rosa Parks, but somebody needs to sit down with in the white part of the bus or nothing will change. On the contrary, it's only going to get worse.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its too early for a Rosa Parks moment. Right now the feminists have perceived moral high ground. A man going all Rosa Parks would get looked at as a krank, like most of the manosphere.

You need to learn the game, understand it, manipulate it to your advantage.

[–]NecroticFury 0 points1 point  (0 children)

id rather take an amused mastery approach and subtly drop red juices into my otherwise feminist propaganda.

if you can play the game well enough, people will tolerate almost anything you do, even if it came straight from your ass.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedPillDad 13 points14 points  (1 child)

politician who doesn't believe in God yet says "with the help of our Lord" in almost every speech.

This reminds me of the recent South Park episode - "Stunning and Brave." A bunch of swaggering frat boys who embrace PC vocabularity for profit. They gush with hypocrisy, which is the whole point.

Like everybody else, UN panders to these outrage artists to position themselves as pro-female. Until people call politicians and corporations on this shit, they will continue to work that angle.

[–]redzorp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The UN, the MSM, Google, Facebook, Twitter and Universities are all part of the same Elite structure that criss-crosses with government.

They have the power to socially re-engineer society and that is exactly what they are doing. They are the ones who prop up the likes of Anita Sarkeesian and plaster her all over the media. Before Anita it was Gloria Steinem. Before Gloria it was Betty Friedan.

They will keep ramming the feminist agenda down our throats until all males in the Western Hemisphere are completely and utterly emasculated.

Tesla predicted all this way back in1926, which was THE reason he went MGTOW before the term even existed. He called it the "Bee Society" and today we are pretty much living inside it (and it will only get worse):


[–]1-800-777-GOLD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"think as you like but behave like the others"

yeah fuck that - if something is bullshit, I call the bullshit out - don't care if people dislike it, they aren't worth my presence if offended without legitimate logical opposing argument

be the change you want to see in the world

[–]PeanutFlavor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I refuse to subscribe to that ideal...the only sure fire way to allow all the wrong things to happen is to stand by and do nothing but hum and nod and not make a wave. What you're communicating, especially these days, by not being active in your disagreement is you're allowing them to think you agree by default. Now you have to actually put up with it when you could've battled for your POV. See something, say something.

[–]krakosia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep. See any media event from Google these days. They make sure 50-50 split between men and women presenting. No matter how shitty the female presenters are.

This is evidenced by how robotic the Google events have felt in the last year since they started doing this

[–]youdonotnome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the amount of dopey house-wife couch-potato tech-feminists this pleases, far outweighs the amount of men it annoys.

mostly because men are too busy to pay attention to this shit.

[–]8thhenry 9 points10 points  (3 children)

Milo tore these scum a new one.

[–]youdonotnome 4 points5 points  (2 children)

is brietbart a legitimate news outlet that people take seriously?

or does it just show up in my results because google knows what i like?

[–]spacelaserstingyeyes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Milo is so anti-PC that I can't help but love Brietbart at this point.

[–]ColdEiric 19 points20 points  (13 children)

I'm wondering if she'd rather be a housewife married to an alpha male.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 59 points60 points  (8 children)

I bet for all of her feminist rhetoric she's probably an absolutely filthy whore in the bedroom.

[–]Endorsed ContributorTheRedPilsner 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Strange, I've always gotten the impression that Anita S is the type of woman who thinks that sex is icky and gross.

Zoe Quinn, on the other hand, is a well-documented whore. She cheated on Eron Ghonji with 5 other men, including her boss and a journalist who gave her game favorable coverage.

[–][deleted] 26 points26 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 38 points39 points  (1 child)

First she would say it was "strong and empowering" to make the sex tape. Then when that didn't work, she'd go back and call it rape and start carrying a mattress around.

[–]mugatucrazypills 19 points20 points  (0 children)

they should sell mattress backpacks at the uni bookstore for SJW just starting their Studies program, damn that's a good idea

[–]Hoodwink 25 points25 points [recovered]

Women wouldn't turn against her. They'd destroy the guy who released the tape.

After all, most are whores in the bedroom, these days.

[–]user_none 4 points5 points  (2 children)

After all, most are whores in the bedroom, these days.

Nah, they're not. I've experienced more women that are so damn clueless in the bedroom, and just go with it, rather than really take part in the whole badassness of that is sex. Like, "I love how you move me around." and I'm just re positioning. I'm thinking, "Who the fuck have you been with, and why don't you take charge of your sexual fulfillment?"

[–]Hoodwink 1 points1 points [recovered]

How close to a major city are you?

No pure white-bread 'pseudo-cities' with low crime rates.

[–]user_none 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is the San Francisco bay area close enough for you? I live mid peninsula and work in SF. I date women from all over the bay area.

I'm in the fucking war zone of dating.

[–]youdonotnome 2 points3 points  (0 children)

her head would explode in a house-wife situation. she's too far along now.

but yes she definitely fantasizes about being reamed.

all feminists do. it's totally society's fault though

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (2 children)


EDIT: Whoops replied to the wrong post lol.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

That would be great. Her getting fucked in the ass by a ginger, begging for the gingercock. Oh the hilarity. Just make sure to blur out your face, except the hair. Gotta emphasize the red hair.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 89 points90 points  (55 children)

I'm starting to understand why women were not allowed to make public speeches before. Just another reason why they shouldnt vote. I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, fuck the New Zealand and Tennessee government for giving women the first rights to vote. On the other hand, allowing women's true exploitive nature to be revealed after being suppressed for thousands of years has enabled us to lift the veil off our eyes, to study, compare notes, and figure them out to an extreme level of accuracy on a logcial level.

I'm starting to believe Aaron Russo was right. The elite of America and Europe are trying to force the world under one totalitarian state. The UN is entertaining this nonsense to see if they'd be able to make it law under the guise of reducing female suffering. They dont give a shit that it makes sense, it gives them incredible power. Watch your ass boys.

Red Pill Video Compilation Nuke

Reason for Women's Liberation

  • Aaron Russo, explains why the elite and CIA funded women's liberation.

  • The clip is a small segment of Reflections and Warnings. Again, a bit more Dark Enlightenment territory, but highly recommend.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 47 points48 points  (35 children)

Bill Whittle was onto a similar idea in one of his YT videos. Basically speaking, after WWI, the "proletariat of the world" was to unite under world Communism in response to economic suffering. When that didn't work, the communists divorced the ideology from economics, and married it to the culture, where they highlighted western oppression of women and blacks.

It's why in most schools, we only ever learn about the horrors of American plantation slavery, while ignoring the fact that blacks were enslaving each other in Africa for thousands of years before America was ever even a thing.

That's probably what is going on here; using internet "bullying" as a sort of "beach-head" to test the waters on what they can get away with. Today it's internet censorship in the name of "female suffering", in 30 years it's international hate-crime tribunals to put men on trial to stop "female suffering". You can't have worldwide totalitarianism unless you have a worldwide victim, and women are always on the table in the victim department.

[–]bananadictatorship 40 points40 points [recovered]

And why we ignore that whites enslaved whites, yellows enslaved yellows, and so on. Every race of people has enslaved their own. And most have enslaved some members of most other major racial groups.

What's odd is that the practice of guilt being passed down generationally is a brutal, discriminatory practice that these neo-communists support. But not consistently, or every racial group would be in debt to every other.

[–]sorryimachampion 29 points29 points [recovered]

Probably worth noting the over a million whites were enslaved by blacks


[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 24 points25 points  (8 children)

Thank you for this. I've never heard about it and I'm always looking for censored history.

Such raids in the Mediterranean were so frequent and devastating that the coastline between Venice to Malaga[5] suffered widespread depopulation, and settlement there was discouraged. In fact, it was said that this was largely because 'there was no one left to capture any longer'.[6] The power and influence of these pirates during this time was such that nations including the United States of America paid tribute in order to stave off their attacks.

Wow. The enslavement of whites was so bad, the U.S. had to bribe the pirates. If that got out, the black victimhood narrative would be challenged. Can't have that now can we? That would be, Politically Incorrect

[–]1Dis_mah_mobile_one 14 points15 points  (7 children)

The US's first foreign war was in 1804, against the Barbary States to stop their attacks.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 6 points7 points  (6 children)

School AKA the Department of Education (DOE) AKA the governement likes to jump straight from Columbus landing and peaceful thanksgiving dinners to the Revolutionary and Civil War. They skip the white slavery, Native American Genocide, slavery, and removal part and a bunch of other inconvenient details.

[–]1Dis_mah_mobile_one 1 point2 points  (5 children)

Mine didn't and I went to public schools

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 1 point2 points  (4 children)

White slavery, and the American Holocaust? How about IBM and the [German] Holocaust when the U.S. Treasury gave a license to IBM to do business with Germany (Nazis), giving them holleriths, machines that directly enabled Hitler's mass killings by calculating census data about all undesireables? Keep in mind, this was during WW2 when other businesses were banned.

[–]1Dis_mah_mobile_one -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Not that book exactly, but yes. Then again I live where the Indians ended up so.

[–]sensitiveduck -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Most people genocided was not done by nazi's and the victims were Christians

[–]through_a_ways 1 point2 points  (0 children)

were enslaved by blacks

Not blacks, browns. And so much so that half of Europe is named after the phenomenon.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 11 points12 points  (0 children)

To everyone woman who says "I'm getting my own back on men after female oppression", I tell them that all black men are entitled to one white female slave to similarly compensate them for generations of slavery.

[–]2Overkillengine 2 points3 points  (0 children)

whites enslaved whites

I deserve Irish reparations, dammit! Granted, I'll have to effectively pay myself, but why let pesky logic into my victim identity politics?

[–]87GNX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. Blacks only got imported to America because the Irish couldn't take the heat. (literally). Hence "redneck."

[–]1Jaereth 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Today it's internet censorship in the name of "female suffering", in 30 years it's international hate-crime tribunals to put men on trial to stop "female suffering".

It's funny to me that the UN would even entertain these idiots. They show up with their purple hair and start talking about concepts like Twitter and Internet message boards - Meanwhile women are getting killed for being raped in Middle Eastern countries.

But yeah Anita, you are on the forefront of protecting women. I'm sure the women who can't leave the house without covering up their faces and are denied education are greatly indebted to you for your strides to make sure nobody is mean to them on Twitter.

[–]Endorsed Contributorleftajar 4 points5 points  (1 child)

That is a fantastic video, and should be required viewing for this sub. Also, Bill Whittle is the man, and is about 80% responsible for why I consider myself a Conservative/Libertarian.

Here's the video you're referring to.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it were up to me, I'd sticky this video on TRP for about 2 weeks.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (14 children)

As much as it pains me to have to cite such a person i feel i have to point out that Anders Breivik covered this in his 2083 manifesto. The collapse of economic marxism and its replacement cultural marxism, it's ties to the feminist movement, it's methods and it's goals. Economic marxism relied on a united proletariat, cultural marxism sought to recruit other victim groups to push its agenda-gays, muslims, women and others.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 5 points6 points  (2 children)

This is ultimately why granting female suffrage has been such a disaster. Men earn their vote by entering the military draft (we agree to go die if the gov't deems it necessary); women are gifted their vote by turning 18. Men routinely vote for freedom and less government intervention in our lives, women routinely vote for more welfare and higher government intervention in our lives. And if women can convince even a small percentage of men to go along with them, a free society is ultimately doomed to eventual dictatorship.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Paul Joseph Watson talks about the barbarian at the gates in a recent video and how the gate has to be held open for the city to fall. The women are those holding the gate to western civilisation open.

Again, i hate to recommend it but the very start of Breiviks manifesto covers this succinctly and intelligently in far greater detail than i could give justice to in a Reddit comment. His methods were atrocious but his message is redpill relevant.

[–]cariboo_j 4 points5 points  (0 children)

LOL Ted Kaczynski made some very astute observations about how the leftist victim mentality is ruining civilization too...

It's too bad they both concluded the best course of action was to kill a bunch of random people

[–]redzorp 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Yes, however the Breivik incident had all the markings of another false flag - purpose of which was to demonize white nationalism and all the truth contained in his manifesto (if he even wrote it).

Breivik was another Oswald.

The psyop worked, with Europe currently guilt-tripped into accepting millions of migrants. After all, no one wants to "be a Breivik"

Why conquer a people when you can simply brainwash them into conquering themselves?

[–]Complexifier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This is one of the possibilities, loads of people have pointed out that the event bore all the hallmarks of a intelligence service op.

[–]loddfavne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If intelligence has intelligence, they will never underestimate human stupidity. There will be men who does incredible stupid stuff. If you are in doubt, do some research with youtube-videos of people doing stupid stuff. What intelligence will do is to simply exploit these kinds of situations.

For instance: There might be a conspiracy in Norway when the intelligence-service advices the politicians that every cop should bear arms at all times. This was not the case before the Breivik incident. Most of the politicians are against it, but intelligence is over the law in this particular case because of what Breivik did. Intelligence don't do shit, but they will take advantage of oppurtunities.

[–]imaterriblelurker 0 points0 points [recovered]

Fuck off.

My little sister was supposed to be at that camp. If only the traffic out from Oslo on E18 had been a bit faster my little sister would have been on that island. She lost friends. Kids I used to know are dead because of that piece of shit.

So, no. Fuck you. I'm pretty sure you're not even Norwegian, i bet that for you it is easy to believe those things. But you are wrong in your beliefs and I hope you will never expirience what we went through.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]imaterriblelurker -1 points0 points  (3 children)

I think you're the one letting emotions cloud your judgement. If you're not from around here, allow me to reiterate. We dont want him, his view nor the type of people who think like him.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]imaterriblelurker 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oh, so now it's all of a sudden OK to consider that morality and behaviour might be relative?

No. ABB is an evil human. Through and through. The things he said, the ideas he espoused are the same as those espoused and acted upon during the murder of Benjamin Hermansen.

Of course, you edgy, know it all internet dwellers have no reason nor the empathy to for once shut your fucking mouths and stop trying to validate him.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chill, i made a statement of fact in response to something written in the thread. Actually the only time i share an opinion is to express regret at having being reminded of where else i had read what was being discussed.

[–]Steve_Wiener 13 points14 points  (9 children)

This is the first thing I thought of as well.

First it will be censorship of "misogyny" aka anything women don't like. Then anything "racist," which is already happening in Britain, where kids have been arrested for facebook and twitter posts and the girl who didn't want to work in a group with Asian students they didn't speak English. Then anything remotely anti-government because they are probably domestic terrorists and we have to keep the kids safe. And this continues until the level of legal public discourse is so limited that future generations never think outside of it and it is much easier to control their minds/perceptions/beliefs etc and get them to go along with government actions that remove freedoms or violate the constitution.

Also, great link. How interesting that the women's lib movement was funded by the Rockefellers and the globalist "elites." How did the feminist imperative get ingrained into governments and become the gospel of academia? Who is still funding this shit today?

[–]redzorp 7 points8 points  (0 children)

And don't forget the president of France, Hollande who is trying to pass a law to make promulgating "conspiracy theories" illegal on the internet.

You can't make this shit up.

Personally, I am more angry at the average man and woman on the street than the hooligans who are engineering all this. The masses are pathetic, clued out idiots. Their ignorance will simply send us all down the toilet.

[–]through_a_ways 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Then anything remotely anti-government because they are probably domestic terrorists and we have to keep the kids safe.

"Protect neoteny" is a very common, emotionally derived, "moral" compass.

Men consented to feminism because women are neotenous and men love women.

Everyone consents to absurd laws against child pornography (to the point where you can throw a flash drive in a window to get someone arrested, and even drawing pornography is illegal in some areas) because children are the standard of neoteny, and everyone loves children.

Everyone enthusiastically consents to strict animal abuse laws because dogs and cats are neotenous, even though they simultaneously fund a holocaust of cows, pigs, and chickens, and eat their corpses on a daily basis.

[–]Modredpillschool 0 points1 point  (5 children)

This is really damn interesting. It's too bad it's really very paranoid sounding to investigate it, I'd love to see somebody do research on it.

[–]Steve_Wiener 4 points5 points  (2 children)

I'm pretty sure people have linked 3rd wave feminism to certain elites or globalist groups like the World Bank. You could probably find info/research on that pretty easily.

The other part is basically documented in the books or quotes by globalists including the agenda to push race mixing and destroy the traditional and ethnic/cultural identity of Western European countries and America.

Antonio Gramsci, Barbra Spectre, Henry Kissinger, and others. Presidents Kennedy and Wilson alluded to it. David Ike describes it as the totalitarian tip toe.

But, OH NO! Conspiracy theory! Hurr durr get your tin foil hat, hurr durr ad hominem while ignoring evidence and seeing it happen in front of your face.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

As the old saying goes, my friend, it's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And that's how women destroyed the world with suffrage.

[–]vandramir 6 points6 points [recovered]

I think its absurd that voting is a right rather than a privilege. If we are to actually have a government run by the people, then the people should have the responsibility to educate themselves on the issues and stances of the politicians. Every politician should make all of their stances available and have to stay within a reasonable proximity to their original stances throughout their term or face real consequences. Politicians should fear the possibility of even seeming corrupt in the same way certain business execs fear seeming like they are doing insider trading. Everyone should have the opportunity to take an exam showing they know where politicians stand and potential repercussions of their choices. It should be an honor being an eligible voter that people can be proud of. People will argue that it is harder for some people to gain access and thus it will silence their voice. However we don't give people drivers licenses with out having to pass a test just because it is harder for some people to make time to get to the DMV. What does it say about our society that we understand letting someone drive a car without the proper knowledge is dangerous, but voting for the direction of our country is not. That means we do not believe that we can actually have any sway in the direction of the country, otherwise we would feel like voting based on our feelings can have much more repercussions than driving without the proper training. Perhaps if people had to prove they understood the lessons from Vietnam we could have avoided the genocide of 1 million Iraqis and we would be able to stop the pending future genocide of the Iranian civilians. What a hopeless feeling it must be looking at the looming shadow of the US military and knowing what is to come. Hell, I might turn to religion in such a hopeless situation as well. I also believe the only proper presidential candidate in our situation would be a literal sock puppet. Perhaps people would finally realize the stupidity in blaming all of the societal ills on a mascot and focus their attention on the shit head politicians that actually put our laws into place and sell the people as debt slaves to the bankers.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 7 points8 points  (1 child)

otherwise we would feel like voting based on our feelings

This is what the government and elite want. Feelings can be manipulated and swayed with constant propaganda, and repeating false narratives. Then the voters vote based on this false narrative that were designed to have people oppress themselves and part with their money. This is why the church is loosing power and trying to adapt by adopting SJW ideologies in direct contradiction with their religious scripture; they're trying to retain the monopoly on indoctrination they once had. The government and the church have always struggled for monopoly of power. Today, Academia is the New Church. Governments have realized that outright indoctrination doesn't work very well in a 1st world country, so they resort to subtle techniques over a long period of time. View: Demoralization

Remember Century of the Self?

[–]through_a_ways 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think its absurd that voting is a right rather than a privilege.

It's very sad that people have changed the definition of human right to "stuff that I want the government to give me"

[–]Squeezymypenisy 1 point2 points  (2 children)

the CIA in the 70s? Because they did not exist until the late 40s early 50s.

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 3 points4 points  (1 child)

edit: /u/redpillschool (regarding your comment above), keep in mind the DOE is the government.

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02217.html

At Random House on March 15, 1976, Feminist Revolution was just another women's book in production. It consisted of a multifaceted analysis of the women's liberation movement edited by members of Redstockings, an early radical feminist group. A self-published edition released the previous fall had stirred up controversy with its indictment of liberals, lesbian pseudo- leftists, and foundation grant feminists. 5000 copies had sold out.

Part of the book-some say the most interesting part-was titled "Agents, Opportunists and Fools." It attempted to link the CIA and the corporate establishment to several individuals and institutions connected with Ms. Magazine, hardly frightening material for the publishers, through a subsidiary, Knopf, of The CIA and the Intelligence. Feminist Revolution had passed an initial libel reading by Random House's legal department on March 2nd, and a contract was signed in the office that March morning. 20,000 copies of the book were scheduled to hit the stores in June.

That afternoon, an unannounced visitor appeared in the citadel of the free press. A presumably angry Gloria Steinem asked to see Random House president Robert Bernstein. She was there to hand-deliver a letter from her attorney threatening to sue for libel unless the chapter on the CIA was removed from the book.


[–]redzorp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The CIA and powers-that-be funded Ms. Magazine so thoroughly that at one point the magazine stopped running ads on it's pages!

I mean, how many magazines in the history of the world have run without ads and survived?

Feminism was absolutely an Elite project.

Control the women and you then control the men. Even slave masters as far back as Ancient Rome understood that.

[–]Reflexiver 1 points1 points [recovered]

From the video:

"When I saw their intentions behind it [...] I saw the evil behind what I though was a noble venture."

From ancient sayings:

To win 100 victories in 100 battles is not the highest excellence; the highest excellence is to subdue the enemy without fighting at all.

And the 4 is there.

If you are directly fighting you are already losing. You play games making believe others beneath you that wars exist and they are worthy to fight. And people think women are highly Machiavellian.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having served in a for profit war, and watching KBR and it's subsidiaries rake in cash from the government while we came home in body bags, that's exactly what they do. Get the proles to rally to the fight so you can profit from it, and doing that is so easy to do. 9/11 didn't have to be an inside job, it was a blessing to the people who stood to profit from war. They managed to get two wars out of it.

[–]ioncloud9 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Who is going to build these concentration camps that feminists want to put men into? I doubt they will find anywhere on the planet a woman only construction company to do it.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If women were in charge throughout history, we'd still be living in grass huts.

[–]redzorp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They don't need to. There will be plenty of beta-male construction companies willing to do the job.

SIMP Construction Co at your service, m'lady.

[–]ChadThundercockII 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Look, we get it. Society is fucked. Women have the upper hand and feminists are abusing the power they acquired since women's lib started. But let us not forget that it all started as a shit-test. Our forefathers caved in and now we are suffering from it. We need to strike back with the same cunning they used to get us in this shit hole.

Let us dust our pimp slaps and reclaim this world to the true patriarchy. I won't allow my future boys to live in a world where their manhood is prosecuted. Enough is enough.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Oh the patriarchy is coming back. This all ties into the cycle of Tyranny.


I'd say the current state of the west is somewhere on the latter side of Complacency and bridging upon Dependency. Just look at the western state of single motherhood. But for the tax structures that men have allowed to happen, society would have crumbled already. But it's still coming, and if you are under the age of 35, I think it will happen in your lifetime.

Once Patriarchal tyrannies seize these fiscally irresponsible and complacent western nations, either by finance or by force, these women will finally experience what a real "patriarchy" looks like.

Ancient Rome thought it was invincible, too.

[–]mahlzeit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you seen TFM's egalitarianism cycle? I'd be interested in your thoughts on that.

[–]SpaceCrunch 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I used to be big fan of Infowars. It warmed my heart a little to see Paul Joseph Watson being on point and funny.

[–]youdonotnome 4 points5 points  (0 children)

and suddenly Reddit's entire perspective on internet censorship shifts.

[–]ztsmart 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The internet will treat whatever censorship they try to create as damage and simply route around it.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 11 points12 points  (9 children)

Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by social evolution and randomness.

Two of the three fathers of modern advertisers wrote "confession" books before they died. These three men are Hopkins, Lasker and Oglivy. Oglivy himself said that any of his success he owed to Hopkins. Hopkins had trained under Lasker.

With Oglivy, he had a basic layout for all his adverts. But then there was that part which made the ad stick in the person's mind. When asked how he found that part that made it click, Oglivy said he tried random things and tested want worked.

Social evolution is based on the concept that everyone is constantly putting out there random ideas. What is called a meme. The system can be influenced to some degree to make a meme "stick", but it is not guaranteed. Also memes themselves evolve off previous memes.

A meme to be successful has to follow the basic beliefs of the social group (environment). And there is constant competition from other memes.

There are environments within environments, so the larger environment will influence the smaller environment. Example a coral reef within an ocean. The ocean is the larger environment but there will be creatures that have adapted to the coral reef.

Example of a meme that will not work, despite following TRP theory, social evolution and biological evolutiion.

I have stated that Alpha's never have friends they just have mutually beneficial relationships and the moment this relationship ceases to be beneficial the relationship ceases. I provided evidence both historical and in other non human social structures.

This meme can not be popular because males have the idea (much older meme) of the blood brother concept. So this overrides my meme.

The conspiracy meme on the other hand is a powerful one. The reason is hu!an beings want what appear to be logical explanations. Evolution of all types from the ground level appears to be illogical and full of chaos.

The average person doesn't want to hear that Oglivy most of the time did not know what he was doing. He just tried random things and saw what worked. By his own account he had 30 to 40 campaigns which he considered great and as he put it 100s which he considered average and some which where failures.

[–]DrXaos 10 points11 points  (2 children)

| The average person doesn't want to hear that Oglivy most of the time did not know what he was doing. He just tried random things and saw what worked.

He did know what he was doing.

He recognized limitations of his own opinion (unlike most people) and valued proper empirical testing, and doing so made him successful.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 3 points4 points  (1 child)

You phrased it much better then me ☺He would examine his audience and then find out their belief systems. Then he could come up with possible memes and eliminate ones which ones to against these belief systems. But the ones which where not eliminated have to be tested.

So the idea that Mohammad was not antiChristian or antiJewish will not fly for obvious reasons. I can provide evidence from the Koran to show this, quotations on the great dome etc. And I can provide evidence that this attitude did not happen till after Mohammad's death.

The prevailing meme of both Muslims and Christians is they want to kill each other. So I do not need to do any empirical testing ☺

I could spend an infinite amount adverting my meme, it will not change things. Historic example is the Ford Edsel.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Awww, a cute little emoticon!

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

How do you think social evolution happens? You think the founding fathers just threw a bunch of mad libs together to write the constituttion? No, they fucking formed a criminal conspiracy to rebel against their divinely mandated monarch.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You think the founding fathers just threw a bunch of mad libs together to write the constituttion?

Pretty much that is what happened. Go back 50+ years before the constitution was written. Social Media 250+ hears ago was pamphlets. Every town has a small newspaper the owner would publish anonymously a pamphlet. They would then be passed from hand to hand.

Pamphlets that where popular would be passed around more and possibly reprinted, remember this is before a Xerox machine so type had to be laid out by hand. So when reprinted by another publisher he would modify and add more content.

So for that 50+ years before the constitution, you can see an evoltuion of ideas that formed the constitution.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And if you were printing something that the king did not want you to print you and everyone who read it would be members of a conspiracy. What is so hard to understand about this. Conspiracies are real. It's a legal term. People are charged and convicted of criminal conspiracies every day.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by social evolution and randomness.

I think that this point of view is naive. Bad people exist. People that have many power are able to do crime that are beyond your imagination to keep their power or even increase it.

With this mind state you allow those people to get away with their crimes by using plausible deniability.

I think the best attitude is to never exclude conspiracy nor social evolution nor randomness and acknowledge the fact that politic is often a mix of the three.

[–]redzorp 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Go back to wanking, Sir Wankalot, you just fell victim to the CIA's own meme about "conspiracy theories"


[–]sir_wankalot_here 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said conspiracy's never exist. I posted the source that Roosh quotes over on DE 6+ months ago. I said what is the best explanation in this case.

CIA/NSA conspiracies usually involve the collection of information. So way back when I was saying windows 95 was backdoored. The evidence was what appeared to be NSA keys.

[–]BetterBadIdeas 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Ha. Let em try. As usual they walk into an arena they don't understand. The UN will not, can not, and never could impose or even influence such a change

[–]Tqbfjotlds 3 points3 points [recovered]

The UN has quite a bit of influence in the developing world. I can see them starting to add conditions to curtail cyber-bullying to projects they sponsor.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's really where these efforts will gain their footholds. They will point to developing countries and say "see!? our censorship protection programs really work! You should implement them in your own countries!"

[–]redzorp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They certainly can and they have. Just look at how many UN treaties, covenants and charters have been officially adopted by diverse nations around the world over the last 60 years.

Eventually a US president (maybe the next one in 2016) will adopt this UN policy against cyber-bullying, which will eventually be challenged in the US supreme court. Just like gay marriage, the compromised court will pass it into law, free speech be damned.

[–]Trail_of_Jeers 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Never met a liberal who liked free-speech.

[–]Lesic 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Remember that all modern sjw feminsits are just tools of corporations and governments.

Mere puppets.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry but this reply just made me think of this hilarious South Park episode:


"You're all just little eichmanns for the corporations!"

[–]RamsayRedbeard 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Whoa, whoa, whoa - Where did this notion that "progressive liberals" are "free-speech loving" and "censorship hating" come from? It is, in fact, quite the opposite.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I said that in a "tongue in cheek" manner. If you ask any liberal, they will tell you that they are "for freedom of expression". This is the flag they fly when they're out slut-walking, posting stupid Facebook pics, or railing against "patriarchy" on Tumblr. IOW, they are all about their own free speech, right up until you say something they don't like.

I know tone often times doesn't come across in prose.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

good job with this analysis

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

wish I had something to add. But I don't. Good post.

[–]waldoxwaldox 1 point2 points  (0 children)

rockerfellers are sponsoring feminism as exposed by aaron russo, an insider who knew them. this is one way to censor the internet


[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is very accurate.

These women fully understand that they are seeking female privilege. It is a lie to believe they are "naive" in their attempts to secure power.

The biggest problem is the number of beta males/manginas who are going along with this bullshit.

This kind of stuff could never happen in the Islamic world because the men are far more self aware of gender dynamics.

Unfortunately, the average White male has become a hen picked beta simp.

[–]sungkwon 1 point2 points  (0 children)


What is this?

[–]wanderer779 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wonder what these UN delegates were really thinking as they listened tot his. Just to put it in perspective the other thing I saw in the news that was on their docket was the war in Syria. So on one hand you have this war that may end up having huge geopolitical implications, human rights abuses, the refugee crisis, ISIS, how it is going to affect stability in the middle east, and on and on. That is item 1. Item 2 is people are saying mean things on the internet. I mean these people have to be laughing at these girls at least inwardly. Then again they could end up being a real threat to free speech, which is probably perfectly fine with some of these delegates. Useful idiots. This is the only explanation I can come up with for why they are not meeting any resistance on this.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]friendlysociopathic 2 points3 points  (20 children)

There is a difference between women and women with BPD mate.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 18 points19 points  (19 children)

I absolutely adore the pretty labels we use in today's society to rationalize away bad behavior. If a woman is behaving badly, we say she has BPD. If a man is behaving badly, we say he has ADD or ADHD.

[–]friendlysociopathic 3 points4 points  (18 children)

We say that because BPD is a diagnostic construct that defines the most consistent traits of garbage women. It doesn't excuse their behavior; it defines and explains it so that sane people can avoid them.

Also, a man acting like a BPD will get diagnosed with ASPD, not ADHD. ADHD is essentially a childhood diagnosis of BPD/ASPD traits.

[–]Endorsed Contributorvandaalen 7 points8 points  (17 children)

We say that because BPD is a diagnostic construct that defines the most consistent traits of garbage women. It doesn't excuse their behavior; it defines and explains it so that sane people can avoid them.

"Crazy bitch" paired with the advice to not stick your dick into it, does that job perfectly in my book.

[–]friendlysociopathic -1 points0 points  (16 children)

If you're happy to stop thinking and inquiring as soon as you have a simple answer, then yes.

[–]Hoodwink 6 points6 points [recovered]

There's a lot of women out there who use psychiatric labels to get away with things. I've seen real schizophrenics who have more self-control and self-awareness than some women who seem to act like children when it suits them.

It's passing off responsibility to some foreign object. Careful of the ones who wear their badges and identities as an excuse to bully or get away with shit. Women never seem to grow out of it.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 4 points5 points  (7 children)

Good point. The women who constantly run around telling people that they are BPD are rarely actually BPD. They're pre-buttering you with a nice, pre-packaged excuse for their future bitchy behavior, with a little helping of self-serving sympathy on the side.

[–]mugatucrazypills 1 point2 points  (6 children)

women actually tell you they are BPD ?

BPD is the worst in women. They have no self awareness, and it's effectively untreatable.

ADHD is like a rash by comparison.

I'd rather date a skitzoid.

[–]WillWorkForLTC 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The only women I know from my hometown who had BPD diagnosed are now dead. One spontaneously and without explanation even with an autopsy. The other committed suicide for the 22nd time and finally (albeit possibly accidentally) succeed. Take it for what you will.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A woman who successfully commits suicide is always an accident.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

women actually tell you they are BPD ?

I've had women be braggadocios about their mental illnesses numerous times. Women are fascinated with the fragility of their minds, it's why so many of them major in Psychology in college. It's usually a lead-in before a sympathy sob story about her asshole father or overbearing mother. They foolishly think saying this will appeal to my sense of give-a-fuck.

[–]mugatucrazypills 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Indeed a woman takes Psych 101, and suddenly she's ready to by the MD/Phd. double major Senior editor of the DSM_V in her mind.

Love diagnosing. ... The other one is Abnormal Psychology or Criminal Psychology, try to take either at your local college and you'll find you can't because it's booked to 2020 by women didling the skittle in class with "dangerous angry broken man" fetishes.

Future pen-pals for our serial killers I guess.

[–]Dustin_Bromain 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This comment hits so, so close to home for me. Just recently hooked up with a crazy chick at one of my frat's parties who acts like a complete BPD crazy bitch. She was shocked when it only took me one attempt to guess her major. Hilarious stuff man.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

BPD is untreatable. I divorced one.

[–]friendlysociopathic 1 point2 points  (4 children)

That's cool but that doesn't invalidate the fact that understanding such women and learning the clear signs involved in spotting them gives you an advantage in life. Don't buy into their self victimization, but the signs for a woman with a Borderline personality (IE, a female psycho) are really obvious when you know what they are.

[–]Hoodwink 1 points1 points [recovered]

There's something in medicine, I forgot the term it's called under, but it's like this:

If something has a really low rate of actually happening. Chances are that you are actually dealing with a fake or your mistaken almost 5-1 (or more). Because BPD is essentially behavior like a manipulative child seeking attention, you're probably going to misdiagnose it more often than you're actually going to see it.

Even though a large percentage of women have had it or will in their lifetime - doesn't mean it actually exists with that prevalence. I have two doctors in my family - they both complain of drug addicts looking for a fix and women who are looking for attention or a way to deal with stress as the worst patients who come in.

[–]friendlysociopathic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like 2-5% of the population have Cluster B personality disorders. I would have to be diagnosing 10-25% of the population as borderline for that to be the case. It's extremely common.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I would agree there is a degree of drug-seeking behavior behind it. I think I read somewhere that something like 25-30% of all women over the age of 35 are on some sort of psychotropic medication to treat depression or other disorders.

Glad to see all that feminism worked out for them.

[–]user_none 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Speaking of such, I now keep an eye out for pill containers when I'm at a woman's place. If I see a prescription for which I'm not familiar with the name, I take note and Google it later.

Take note guys, watch out for the ones being drugged for depression. I lived in absolute hell for 5 years when I was younger because I ignored that and white knighted, thinking I would help her. Don't do it.

[–]redzorp 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I don't think its about stopping thinking. It's calling it like it is.

BPD is just pseudo-intellectual psychiatric clap trap with no basis in reality. By labeling something a medical "disorder" there is an automatic reduction in responsibility from the one suffering the so-called "disorder." She has a medical problem. It's not her fault.

There are no BPD women. There are only crazy bitches.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I dont have to change it's how I am!" is the logic

[–]strangerstranger90 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's face it: The more outrage these two cause, the more attention they'll get (both angry and sympathetic reactions), and the more "important" they'll become as a result.

Seriously, how the fuck could such worthless, stupid, and incompetent nobodies get to speak in front of the UN about a non-issue without such stupid impulsive anger and reaction (by both us and other internet communities over the years).

Y'all preach being in control of one's self and doing the rational thing, I don't see it whenever Anna Sarcuntian is mentioned.

[–]Statecensor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good keep them crying and whining at the U.N. Remember guys the U.N is the place so fucked up that its peace keepers go from keeping the peace to roasting Africans alive in bonfires. That happened less then twenty years ago.

I would much rather them be a a location that can get some press but do no real harm. Then having those two pieces of garbage at capital hill talking to lawmakers that might be able to change some law or administrative decision that would actually matter.

[–]HeadingRed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think we have too many "real" liberals or conservatives anymore. We don't have a intellectual salon culture where this kind of discourse can take place and the merits of ideas can truly be discussed without too much rancor or negative impact. It's that kind of culture that spawned many of the ideals that the US was founded on (and to be fair many of the reforms that did make life better all around the world).

The internet could have been this kind of place but it has turned into a WWF wrestling match where everyone gets a trophy and only the loudest and dumbest get to be in the ring.

[–]1Mikesapien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then we'll make our own internet, with Blackjack! And hookers!

But seriously, I foresee a great rift coming in the near future.

On one side, you'll have a statist, socialist, politically-correct, corporate net with heavy censorship, catering to mass media and big business.

On the other side, you'll have subversive, meritocratic, real internet, divorced of political or economic interests, where free expression is king.

It'll be interesting to see where everyone falls.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really like that YouTuber. Is that you? Subscribed and enjoyed a few of his other videos.

[–]cosmonk_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My favorite bit of entertainment from Anita is when she used Tomb Raider as an example of sexism in video games and then in a later video used THE EXACT SAME EXAMPLES from Tomb Raiders as examples of female empowerment.

[–]Drunken_Pink_Rhino -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Is this the sub where instead of tinfoil hats you wear tinfoil underpants? I don't know how to wrap mine. :(

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I will not be able to leave the anger phase ever. Deal with it.

load more comments (2 replies)