Oh,wow

Oh,wow.
so surprised.

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/.../fidel-castros-eldest-son-commits-suicide-cuban-media-says-op-not-lying
youtube.com/watch?v=TqOlFjxV0KM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Oh wow, the same shit many here have been saying for fucking years.
I guess if the media picks it up maybe my sister will accept it.

is your sister qt?

Digits don't lie.

scary

JUST KEK MY SHIT UP BRA

Gotta love this timeline.

Gee, who would have thought

>son

nytimes.com/.../fidel-castros-eldest-son-commits-suicide-cuban-media-says-op-not-lying

...

She's alright. She's been married for like 5 years to guy she's been with since high school though so you're shit out of luck there. She's actually reasonably intelligent. She's just an absolute retard and completely incapable of logical thought in politics.

>She's just an absolute retard and completely incapable of logical thought in politics.
so a woman

There is a reason we didn't allow them to vote while giving them free reign in other places such as child rearing.

lmao who is this guy?

...

When your mother fucks a dictator you win

His Dad was a chad who lived in the jungle. What went wrong with him?

What is this supposed to prove again?

some korea guy on youtube who would make threads here

It's a combination of giving women free choice, doing away with the responsibilities they have while simultaneously giving them the benefits they require while expecting nothing in return. It pretty much kills your nation in short order. As they'll stop reproducing almost entirely, begin to act out to an extreme degree and pretty much do not feel they should give anything back ever while taking all the gibs and freedom they have for granted often demanding even more.

Castro was pretty alpha though. Trudeau is the king of low test nu male beta soyboy cucks.

Well yeah, he was raised canadian

He was effectively raised by his mother and a hardcore numale in Canada. Even if he was Fidels son this outcome could be explained by circumstances.

he was raised by his mother, and canadian

This is false. The reason is that the men is believing men and women are equal and what happens when there are no strong men left is that the state takes the role of the man.

>IT'S THE MENS FAULT!
Nope, women did all of that. Women demanded to have the same rights and freedoms as men and were willing to engage in self harm and terrorist actions to get them. Women also demanded they will not be held to the same standards as man and once again threatened self harm and engaged in terrorist actions. Once they had the same rights they used them to vote and lobby for the benefits and security marriage offered them to be made available to them without having to marry by putting in place laws that would see the state take and redistribute wealth from men towards women. Women have driven this development every single last step of the way since the suffraggetes whom they still zealously worship.

Men started refusing to take on the role of the provider, the responsibility and to be turned into mincemeat to be doled out to women far later. Refusing to be what you call "strong men" yet had become a complete joke and doormat by that point. Because they had lost any benefits, any security and any certainty these arrangements offered them once.

men still gave it to them

Men were getting weaker and there was an agenda about putting women into the working force. Women are easy to manipulate. Especially when they have a lot of free time and were just reading magazines anyways (60's).

Also this.

...

Because their choice was kill women en masse and put a boot to their neck or give in to their initial demands to keep them from sperging out. They gave in for the same reason why you and that Norwegian guy are now defending women and shifting blame to men. Because men deep down, really, really, really like women and care about them. Because gynocentrism is real and very much pronounced in humans.

This started WAY before the 60s around the time the suffragettes rolled around. Who used self harm, hunger strikes, terrorism and other acts to get the ball rolling. Forcing men to either fight their own women and lay down the hurt or try and appease them by giving them the right to vote. Given how reluctant you are to attest ANY kind of blame to women whatsoever, I guarantee you that you'd be one of the first to demand they'll be given the rights they wanted. Men "growing weaker" came after that, as they increasingly lost institutional power, control over the family, became more and more replaceable and easier to ditch as the state stepped in and began to enforce them supporting women no matter what and so on. You are wholly and completely ignoring the dynamics at play here and how they affected the power between the genders. You're the right wing equivalent of a fedora tipper.

>You're the right wing equivalent of a fedora tipper.
My point is that men let them. I agree that it's the nature of women to be a bit rebellious, but men still let them do it. And also profitable to let women work, so rich people wanted it to happen.

Sounds like my wife desu

youtube.com/watch?v=TqOlFjxV0KM

>Not rebutting anything
>Literally the same excuses people used to stop them from killing themselves and to avoid fighting them
>Setting the starting point arbitarily at the 60s rather than what lead up to it
Yeah no. You'd be the first to "let them" especially when confronted with suffragettes and the likes because you refuse to find any fault with women ever.

Trudeau is cuckspawn, the illegitimate child of his unfaithful whore of a mother.

>because you refuse to find any fault with women ever
Rather the opposite.