Just saw this in my Facebook feed.. is she right?

Just saw this in my Facebook feed.. is she right?

Are we literally just scapegoating the bad women as society destroyers?

Women don't want to market themselves as easy.

Of course they're going to object when an image macro suggests that they're easy.

That doesn't mean that they won't whore around as long as they don't *feel* like whores.

Yes, it's "Facebook's" fault that women are acting like whores and don't understand the value of commitment.

She's only hitting the tip of the (((Iceberg))), there.

I want to kill anyone that wears their hair in a bun

It's not just the bad women, its their male enablers.

>cousin served 10 years in military
>he's 36
>had a kid with and married 22 year old pill head
>to date she has stolen over $10000 worth of stuff and money to get her fix
>he cries and threatens suicide everytime she takes off
>has cheated on him more than 5 times in three years they've been together
>keeps taking her back
>wonders why no one wants anything to do with him
>wonders why I don't respect him or hang out anymore

Women act out only as far as their men allow. With the surplus of beta cucks there is no chance of women not being whores.

I'd rather not get laid then wear my hair like that.

I have self respect.

I would say the financial/economic/monetary situation is responsible for most of the things Sup Forums calls "degeneracy".

No, it's women's Lib.

We've had extended periods of prosperity before, but most women stayed valuable.

You just described my childhood friend, only he was too beta for military and they're both fat, gross omegas.

Also, it's heroin.

Women, even in today's society, are the arbiters of relationships. The issue is that they now find themselves in a descending spiral of putting out easier and easier because they are addicted to the gratification of men finding them attractive, and they have to compete with other women in the social totem pole.

Women talk about wanting commitment but that is false. They want the gratification of men fawning over them; men on the other hand just want the sex. Neither gender can find a stable relationship because stable relationships aren't socially competitive. Women want multiple men fawning over them and men want multiple partners. Neither can satisfy these wants in monogamy. These wants out compete the wants of companionship and love because they are much more complex, obscure wants that 99% of people can't even describe out of cliches, so they get brushed aside.

Total freedom can be more constrictive than overt oppression, and this is one such case. With so much easy sex and attention available, relationships cannot exist due to the rapidly increasing risk of cheating.

And I do in fact blame women for this. Men have always been this way but women have done so much to encourage this behavior and push other women into the spiral that they have to take the majority of the blame. Third-wave Feminism has no comparable "man-centric" movement.

No system exists in a vacuum, but I do agree that the biggest central issue is economic in nature. However, creating a better economy could just as easily exacerbate hook-up culture as it could push couples to have kids.

Wait I thought that hair was for fags? I've always used that style as a massive red flag not too bother cause the dude is gay, and most of the time anyone with that hair is either super annoying or just plain boring.

That pic is literally from 2014, and of course so is that hairstyle

Oh nvm, the date is in the pic, kek

>anybody with a manbun
>not a walking pussy

Women say a lot of shit but talk is cheap.
Just watch what people do, not what they say; intentions don't mean jack shit and everyone just spews bullshit these days. Body language and actions will become the new primary way of communicating. Eventually we will devolve from spoken language entirely.

>hey look, a femanon

I don't understand these hair styles, they look trashy and retarded as fuck, they make me physically ill to look at.

Women actually like this shit?

Check'd
>We've had extended periods of prosperity before, but most women stayed valuable.
I am not saying that the problem stems from great economic conditions, I am saying quite the contrary, that the system is based on debt, usury and major banks controlling the monetary system to extract profits from the working population (be it rich or poor). This debt based system in my opinion encourages ridiculous spending on consumer goods and other distractions.
I have several ideas regarding to this: maybe people understand somehow that they will not accomplish anything and just seek to escape by having fun no matter the cost and other psychological bullshit like that. But probably it is just the people in power trying to extend the status quo for the longest time possible by encouraging spending on frivolous goods both to distract the population and to keep the economy from collapsing (which will happen eventually, it should have ended in 2008).
You could probably fit in refugees and other things Sup Forums complains about in here.

>Blaming whorishness on facebook
Facebook didn't make women whores; they did that entirely on their own. If a man isn't providing, the girl will look elsewhere to fill the need.

>t. A man fucking a married woman