Why have feminist been so successful at destroying masculinity?

Why have feminist been so successful at destroying masculinity?
>and why and how were they so successful?

Other urls found in this thread:

bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486
bu.edu/thenerve/archives/spring-2010/reviews-spring-2010/homosexuality/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
google.it/search?rlz=1C1EODB_enIT544IT547&q=4 times more psychopaths &oq=4 times more psychopaths &gs_l=psy-ab.3...185857.190004.0.190223.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0.nxWu4mcGyaE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

because it's hot as fuck

manginas thirsty for pussy helped them

as i said, manginas...

You seem insecure

Because we let them.

That's hot.

They made it illegal to be a man.

Then they had Jew propaganda vilify anything but faggots all while pumping out "real men" propaganda, and displaying every white male from the 80's on as a violent drunk wife/child beater.

In truth though the court system outlawed being a man.

They're not.
If someone can be brought down by a feminist, then they were never masculine to begin with.

Men allowed them do it because our society is retardedly egalitarian and pro-woman, so they believed it was right to give women everything they wanted on the false basis of "equality"

Gender differentiation dilutes when animals live in optimal conditions. Aggressive masculine traits become less beneficial in civilised and technological societies.

Jews and chemicals

Source needed

pissing all that birth control into the water supply

they used political correctness and threat of social prosecution/ostracization as means of control. They can do or say anything and if a man retaliates or even disagrees he's a bigot, abuser, violent, misogynistic pig.

Unfortunately not much can be done about it on a broad scale, it's just one of those overarching things that happens in history, sort of just the direction the wind happens to be blowing.

You can try to isolate yourself from it, find a rare traditional woman, live in a bubble and find happiness, but to become outraged and push to change it? You're just wasting your time and you'll be miserable.

The elite used feminism as it lead to better means of social control.

"But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness. They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools. And instead of worshiping the glorious, ever-living God, they worshiped idols made to look like mere people and birds and animals and reptiles."

Because the entire right-wing intelligentsia was murdered in 1945 and they have had over 60 years of unbridled power and resources.

What more can you expect of the "great, totally not cucks or shit even though I watch all BBC on tiny white girl porn" white race?

"So God abandoned them to do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other’s bodies. They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen. That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, are heartless, and have no mercy. They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too."
>Romans 1

This species is doomed.

>deterministic view of history

How does it feel to be special?

What would be the use of masculinity in this era?

robowaifus haven't come yet

DELET RIGHT NOW

...

It's the only thing that keeps civilizations alive?

Not that I expect a Chilean dude to know anything about civilization

>masculinity, the most conflictive and warmonger trait keeps civilization alive

Top kek

bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486
bu.edu/thenerve/archives/spring-2010/reviews-spring-2010/homosexuality/

conversely masculine traits become more successful in an r-selected society.
only when social norms can be strictly enforced do k-selected strategies excel.
in other animals this means a female can only breed with the local population and not look outside said population.
This puts commitment pressure on all individuals as all individuals learn about all individuals and their pecking order(small town gossip)

>Why have feminist been so successful at destroying masculinity?

Victory by attrition. Women are genetically programmed to bicker and bitch until they get what they want.
Men generally expect upfront results for their actions and will weight out most situations and abandon the ones that don't pay off in the long run for them. Women on the other hand understand that every sqaure inch of space they take bring them one step closer to their goals no matter how insignificant is seems at first.

Example.
Q, You want to control free speech?
A, Then attack video games and comic books

Why?
Because most men aren't going to stand up against vidya and comic censorship, it's not that big of a deal to them.
Women will use victories like that as a stepping stone to push for censorship on other fronts, usually the ones nobody really cares about.... They nibble around the bigger issue until they control every small aspect surrounding the bigger issue, then when it's completely surrounded they plant their own on the inside then nuke it from within and from the outside.

They win because they while they look like retards fighting over the most petty shit, instinctively they understand that once they control the narrative over all of the small stuff it adds up to a larger force then the bigger picture itself.
They're like bees or ants. One at a time is completely harmless but a thousand of the fuckers stinging you all over is deadly.

The cause of civilisation is an ability to partner. Natural Domineering-submissive behaviour is an antithesis of that.

>having firemen, policemen and army is not a social stabilizer

Also, war and fear of war is a good thing.

Do you know why you are using a computer? Why modern states exist? Why we went to the moon? Why rockets and satellites exist? Why nuclear power exists?

War and the fear of it. Lack of war would mean we would live 35 years in little villages in the forest

Except human beings develop hierarchies which are exactly that and that are fundamental to civilization

dont forget, toxic plastics and adding soy to everything.
>>>"read about the effects of soy on male testosterone"

The whole postmodernist revolutionary movement (or cultural marxism, as some like to say) inherited from the older generation of marxists a very high degree of skill in social organization and cultural warfare (Gramsci), gradually imposing themselves against the norms and beliefs of the vast majority of the society through the establishment of a leftist hegemony in the academia and then the penetration of all the cultural network (media, education, religious bodies, music, traditional popular organizations and festivities, elite rings, etc.). Feminism is of course part of this devilish enterprise.

And one should never forget the globalist capital supporting this movement throught its many foundations, without which this cultural revolution would never have happened so fast.

>having firemen, policemen and army is not a social stabilizer

Wouldnt be needed without the savage instincts

>War and the fear of it. Lack of war would mean we would live 35 years in little villages in the forest

Yeah dude the death of millons is totally justified by some technological improvements (that we will still going to reach just slower), we dont need any wars anymore, modern society have no place for masculinity NOW, its irrelevant if it was needed in the past.

Idolization of submissiveness.
As someone who fell for that bullshit in my late teens and thought he was gay for a while, it's devastating for society.
That shit needs to be purged pronto.

I bet your going to try get your girlfriend to stand up to me

They haven't been.
I think it started off with some fair and reslasonable complaints and got blown out of proportion.
Just ignore them

Its not really feminists who destroyed masculinity. They just exploited the power vaccume caused by the collapse of masculinity in western culture.

Once a culture phases into the decadence/intellectualist stage of its life cycle things like ambition, self sacrifice, reenforcing power with violence, war making, etc etc are all replaced by pleasure seeking and pointless intellectual circle jerk sessions. Intellectuals begin fabrication justifications for why its okay to abandon the culture's core values. Commonly seen throughout history:
>were too CIVILIZED to fight! We arent BARBARIANS! We solve our problems with wealth, wit, and intellect now! (Unfortunatley the actual barbarians rareley seem to care that the culture theyre sacking is too sophisticated to fight them)
>we dont need those traits anymore! Its good times! Be glad theyre gone!
>why shouldnt women be granted power? Its not like in our new advanced culture a woman is any less capable of fulfilling the roles than men are!

In every culture that was in this phase of existence women are granted increased power. They dont destroy the societey, theyre simply a symptom of a culture that is already destroying itself.

Feminists act like theyre the first to do what theyre doing. In point of fact its happened in the twilight stages of so many empires and cultures that its impossible to assign a definitive number to how many similar groups throughout the ages have done it before them.

what do you mean idolization? if anything we idolize being bitchy?

>fire
>savage instinct

Retard.

Also:

>women don't fight or commit crimes so no need for police
>women wouldn't try to steal resources from other women so no need for army

Yes, the death of millions is totally justified because the alternative would be cavemen level of tech.

/thread

They succeeded because they started with children. Had they tried to do that on our grown grandfathers who fought in the 2nd world war, they would have been laughed at.

So they had to take young people, children, and start spewing into their brain this new anti-masculinity crap. When you shape a child's brain, you shape his future emotional responses. As adults, only a small percentage, those with incredible willpower, will be able to succeed at rewiring their brain.

are you referencing Glubb?

I suppose I meant femininity. Submissiveness and femininity go hand in hand though.
Society basically idolizes being as weak as possible if you're a man. Men are wanted to be seen as weak so that women can be strong.
That's not even getting into gay and trans nonsense. All that shit is just weakness, and a tactic to destroy any masculinity left.

You still do not answer whats the use of masculinity in 2017. Its normal that instinctively you crave a masculinity, as that was the alpha traits in ancient times, but look at the alphas of our society, those at the top arent really masculine at all, its more full of sneaky jews and "numales"

Yes, he probably is. While I think he was onto something Glubb's theory was too raw and imprecise.

Psychopathy is masculine traits brought to the extreme mixed with manipulation,

There are 4 times more psychopaths in the corporate world than in the general population,

This should tell you something.

Sure am. He made a lot of really good points and paralells.
He himself stated it was just a rough line of thought based on historic observation and needed a lot more thourough study. But yeah, his references arent incorrect but the mother fucker utterly refuses to cite sources which makes looking up verification for the claims he made a bitch and a half.

Wut, non-violent tactics like manipulation are feminine traits, males had the strength, women could only get ahead by convicing them

This is true for past societies, but how could our society be destroyed with the actual technology? We will always have meatheads for army, and even if that reduces the chairforce doesnt need barbarism, modern combat is technological so no point in fearing new barbarians

All human behavior traits exist because at one time it was advantageous. Being a cold fuckin analyst who could plot his actions and kill without hesitation to achieve his goals was a HUGE benifit to somebody.

Hell, still kind of is. When psychopathy and sociopathy isnt hampered by low IQ or actual mental illness it really gets shit done. We just consider it a mental illness or disorder today because it doesnt fit in with our social values. Reality is a psychopath isnt some chainsaw waving lunatic listening to voices in his head like hollywood portrays them as.

A psychopath is somebody who looks at 5 people trapped on one railroad track and one person trapped on another and can make the decision to kill the one to save the 5 without remorse or emotional trauma from it.

Lots of psychopaths are all over the place. Societey just doesnt really use them as much anymore.

>reptiles and idols
Ribbit?

Well Glubb pointed out something interesting. Tech doesnt really seem to determine an empires longevity. It determines the shape of the empire. (How far can their power reach, how quickly can they enforce it).

Collective willpower to USE that technology determines longevity. Take for example the British Empire. It was founded on wooden ships and muzzle loading black powder weapons.

By the time it collapsed just after WW2 they had gargantuan steel battleships that could fire explosive shells 35 miles. They had tanks, planes, machineguns, even a few crude nuclear weapons.

Thier empire collapsed all the same in the 50's simply because nobody in britain wanted to manage a bunch of colonies anymore, and everyone was so shit shocked from WW2 that any threat of violence set the population to shrieking about being too civilized for that anymore.

Colonialism ceased being the lifeblood of the british empire and instead became considered an archaic and barbaric holdover from those days with wooden ships and muskets. They willfully abandoned thier empires holdings under the mantra "were too civilized to fight! Dont you know its the modern era!"

We do indeed have lots and lots of tech. But do we posess the willpower to use it?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

google.it/search?rlz=1C1EODB_enIT544IT547&q=4 times more psychopaths &oq=4 times more psychopaths &gs_l=psy-ab.3...185857.190004.0.190223.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0.nxWu4mcGyaE

Psychopaths are bold, mean and disinhibited, mostly masculine traits yet they occupy corporate ladder positions in incredible numbers when compared to the normal population.

It may surprise you, but being those things(read:being masculine) is always a plus when dealing with other people.

It's sick and sad that you haven't find out yet.

Also, manipulation is not stricly a female trait, Odysseus used it too and the Greeks loved masculine men. It's the trait of a smart man.

It's true that women are more manipulative but they are afterall women and use it to get petty stuff, you need an actual brain to get important stuff done by manipulating others

Your interpretation of masculinity is flawed you'er exaggerating the flaws and not even mentioning the positives. Yes masculinity does make meatheads, but it also makes scientists, doctors, engineers, ect.
masculinity is needed to advance society, if masculinity stopped existing we would stagnate.

I think we should all find a common starting point:
Women like to turn men into their beta provider, to boss him around and in the end cheat on him with the chad. That's okay, it's just their genetics. It's the shit testing. I'm testing you, if you show that you are a beta, then you can fuck off.
It's up to us MEN, to understand this and not let them do this to us.

So how did it start this gradual increase in the amount of men who don't understand this or are not able to manage this painful phenomenon?

After the boomer generation the increase became painful. Why? lots of little millenial boys, children, raised with father absent, or present but so cucked and beta that God only knows how on Earth he managed to get a girl and fuck her and have a kid.
I personally experienced this as a child in the 90s and I have other people I know, millennials, who are on a level of awkwardness and failure with girls/women, that pain arises only by thinking to it.

It all happens because as a child, you are not raised by men who turn you into a man, but you are raised by a woman who knows only how to turn you into a beta cuck.

Why did we have so many baby boomer fathers leaving kids with women and not teaching them about manhood, or so many baby boomer fathers who were betas but still managed to reproduce? This is where I don't find an answer.

Of course I'm not referring to ALL baby boomer fathers. I know personally some millennial guys in their late 20s, who had a father with steel balls, and to no surprise in middle school they were already confident and hooking up with hot girls in their class.

I wouldn't say I necessarily have a deterministic view, obviously events can spark from nothing and then cascade into massive change, so yes it IS possible to change the tide but it would be extremely difficult and most likely futile in the short term.

All I'm saying is that you can think of these kinds of events (success of feminism) as a sort of tidal wave. It's daunting to oppose when it has built up power, and 99.9% of those that try will be swatted down and destroyed until society collectively changes and an opposing tidal wave is formed, but that's done through more than just force of will of small groups or communities (like ours) it has to be massive, tens, if not hundreds of millions of people around the world who have to reform their entire outlook simultaneously. There needs to be a trigger for this to happen.

i0m MGTOW and also i promote female genocide