Has anyone noticed...
- Thread starter Tha_Wood
- Start date
Unless you mean specifically American, politically-active ones, luckily the chicks of much of the world have very different world-views. For instance, traditional views on family and conservative political views are two entirely different entities in most of Europe or Asia. You will see that none of the traditional, feminine chicks there want anyone to shoot guns and drive pick-up trucks. Quite the opposite - the "traditional" views are related to equality and caring for everyone's well-being, which includes their family. The liberal vs conservative divide simply doesn't exist, it's just how America and some other countries decided to divide themselves on sometimes random sets of political issues. A chick who had "conservative" views in the US-sense would be still considered a bit manly in Poland, and not traditional at all, since our traditions are completely different.
"Liberal" back at my home means a liberal government, as in lenient laws and such. It doesn't come with the same "strong females" social movements or trans-gender social movements known in the US, for instance, as girls don't aspire to have masculine traits, as it's not something that is perceived as positive like it is in some of the western movements.
"Liberal" back at my home means a liberal government, as in lenient laws and such. It doesn't come with the same "strong females" social movements or trans-gender social movements known in the US, for instance, as girls don't aspire to have masculine traits, as it's not something that is perceived as positive like it is in some of the western movements.
Last edited:
Maybe that's because over there the conservatives are still considering the gender disparity (in its positive sense) as something to embrace, while the liberal side of things is strong on the "stop objectifying strong women" front, making the conservatives more promiscuous, and liberals shamed into becoming dudes? While politically, the conservative part of America is just straight-up insane the way I see it, I can't comprehend why liberal movements have to mean making females asexual in the process.
The fact that America has only 2 main political parties and thousands of social issues are categorized into one of 2 freaking groups (which are sometimes random and don't really go together), and that instead of choosing your belief issue-per-issue you have to vote on one of those two large groups and sort of identify with their stance on other issues you might not fully agree with, is really incomprehensible. If you're a chick and you don't want your country to go to war with everyone you suddenly have to grow a mustache and rally for trans-gender bathrooms. This has to fuck with chicks brains.
The fact that America has only 2 main political parties and thousands of social issues are categorized into one of 2 freaking groups (which are sometimes random and don't really go together), and that instead of choosing your belief issue-per-issue you have to vote on one of those two large groups and sort of identify with their stance on other issues you might not fully agree with, is really incomprehensible. If you're a chick and you don't want your country to go to war with everyone you suddenly have to grow a mustache and rally for trans-gender bathrooms. This has to fuck with chicks brains.
Last edited:
In many European countries, the political parties are more fluid, and people usually choose their politicians based on the main actions that they promise to take. The political parties of today are different than those that were there 10, 20 or 50 years ago. They come and go and represent different changes. I still find that problematic, as they still come with packages of choices (we will make all pre-schools free and move cash from military to healthcare, but we will ban weed and leave the EU). The US is just a much more extreme version of that, as there are only 2 parties that everyone for some reason considers and all issues are divided between those two.
I strongly believe that you're supposed to be voting on how you would like each issue to be handled individually, one by one. MAYBE also for the people that you believe are the most competent to make the appropriate legislation. If you pretend to agree with 100% of the opinions of a large group that is asking you for your vote, and undersign all of the decisions that they will make on your behalf, then you shouldn't even be allowed to vote, as it's unlikely that you actually formed your own opinions on your own, and it's akin to giving someone permission to do whatever they want. It's like picking the car salesman instead of picking the car you want, you know?
I think part of the reason why we have horrible governments and democracy isn't exactly working out the way it's supposed to, is because you have to vote for pre-defined groups and people, and not for future paths and how YOU want things to be.
I strongly believe that you're supposed to be voting on how you would like each issue to be handled individually, one by one. MAYBE also for the people that you believe are the most competent to make the appropriate legislation. If you pretend to agree with 100% of the opinions of a large group that is asking you for your vote, and undersign all of the decisions that they will make on your behalf, then you shouldn't even be allowed to vote, as it's unlikely that you actually formed your own opinions on your own, and it's akin to giving someone permission to do whatever they want. It's like picking the car salesman instead of picking the car you want, you know?
I think part of the reason why we have horrible governments and democracy isn't exactly working out the way it's supposed to, is because you have to vote for pre-defined groups and people, and not for future paths and how YOU want things to be.
Last edited:
That's why the US Left flicks their beans to the thought of "first female president." The rest of the world looks at it and wonders why it's such a big deal but identity politics plays a big role in it. The 2016 election has been broken down by sex, race, social class, education, etc. And each faction is pitted against the other and berated for voting the way they did.
The rest of the world, especially Europe, seems to be fine voting strictly on policy and not gender or race. Or at least not as big of a deal as the US makes their candidates out to be. Being a member of an "oppressed" group is a good thing, if not to amass brownie points to redeem for sympathy. As great as my upbringing is and as privileged as I am, I can always shut a white person up by playing the race card for being brown. A white woman, like Tomi Lahren, can end a discussion with me by pulling the gender card. That's what politics has become in the US, and maybe even the UK. But East of the UK, it seems people vote with interests in mind and not just to make history by electing a black man, a white woman, or the "first openly trans" person.
Trump's SCOTUS nominee is due today. Be prepared for both sides to get butthurt over the pick and predict doom for the US and the rest of the world. You'll see even more SJW posts bemoaning straight white men, or just white people in general. Because of a SCOTUS pick.
That being said, if Trump picks one of the two female finalists for it, prepare to see the Left's misogyny because one or both of those female candidates are Republican. Leftist males will gladly use misogynistic language, thinking that because she's a Republican, she deserves the misogyny. Leftist women, too.
Otherwise, to Woodie's original point, yes, in the US the conservative women tend to focus on their appearance over their views and policies. See: Sarah Palin. And Lahren, as you mentioned.
I view anti-feminist women the same as I view male feminists. Wolves in sheeps clothing trying to score brownie points with a certain crowd. Or money. There's always money involved.
When you think about it, things are different, but not ideal too. Several Central European countries are literally 99.9% white, with the feminist movements being rather low-profile. Those things are simply not parts of any political agendas.
There are no racial issues as you know them (even if everyone were racist, there is nobody to oppress, as literally everybody and their ancestors were born white, so it's not something anyone is even aware of). The problem there is that people vote on people and groups, not ideas. A smooth talker might still get more votes than someone who has their ideas figured out, and nobody is really held responsible for their promises.
People still run their whole campaigns based on common folks fears of the unknown, such as of foreigners!
Case in point, the limited experience with other races broke my country. The "refugees" issue alone made us suddenly vote in a horrible, almost totalitarian government that is on the verge of breaking off from the EU just to keep the Syrians away, because they were the only party who promised to not accept Syrian refugees.
That made the whole country turn 180 degrees away from their forward-looking government and ideals which dominated in Poland for the last decade or so, leading us to be the fastest growing nation in the region. Now the country is angry, divided and confused, with horrible people leading it, because the "we don't want refugees" policy came with a whole set of other backward ideas.
There are no racial issues as you know them (even if everyone were racist, there is nobody to oppress, as literally everybody and their ancestors were born white, so it's not something anyone is even aware of). The problem there is that people vote on people and groups, not ideas. A smooth talker might still get more votes than someone who has their ideas figured out, and nobody is really held responsible for their promises.
People still run their whole campaigns based on common folks fears of the unknown, such as of foreigners!
Case in point, the limited experience with other races broke my country. The "refugees" issue alone made us suddenly vote in a horrible, almost totalitarian government that is on the verge of breaking off from the EU just to keep the Syrians away, because they were the only party who promised to not accept Syrian refugees.
That made the whole country turn 180 degrees away from their forward-looking government and ideals which dominated in Poland for the last decade or so, leading us to be the fastest growing nation in the region. Now the country is angry, divided and confused, with horrible people leading it, because the "we don't want refugees" policy came with a whole set of other backward ideas.
Last edited:
Ive found males who identify as feminists are usually creeps using feminism as a backdoor way of trying to get into a chick's pants. They have no game so to speak so they spew this feminist agenda to try and get some pussy. When it doesn't work they become passive aggressive and stalkerish. My university is full of them
Tha_Wood: “I find dumb American blondes hot. Anyone else?"
masta247: “It was generally allowed at that period that the territories of the New World belonged to that European nation which had been the first to discover them. Nearly the whole coast of North America thus became a British possession towards the end of the sixteenth century. The means used by the English Government to people these new domains were of several kinds; the King sometimes appointed a governor of his own choice, who ruled a portion of the New World in the name and under the immediate orders of the Crown; this is the colonial system adopted by other countries of Europe. Sometimes grants of certain tracts were made by the Crown to an individual or to a company, in which case all the civil and political power fell into the hands of one or more persons, who, under the inspection and control of the Crown, sold the lands and governed the inhabitants. Lastly, a third system consisted in allowing a certain number of emigrants to constitute a political society under the protection of the mother-country, and to govern themselves in whatever was not contrary to her laws. This mode of colonization, so remarkably favorable to liberty, was only adopted in New England.”
Tha_Wood: "I'm taking that as a no."
masta247: “It was generally allowed at that period that the territories of the New World belonged to that European nation which had been the first to discover them. Nearly the whole coast of North America thus became a British possession towards the end of the sixteenth century. The means used by the English Government to people these new domains were of several kinds; the King sometimes appointed a governor of his own choice, who ruled a portion of the New World in the name and under the immediate orders of the Crown; this is the colonial system adopted by other countries of Europe. Sometimes grants of certain tracts were made by the Crown to an individual or to a company, in which case all the civil and political power fell into the hands of one or more persons, who, under the inspection and control of the Crown, sold the lands and governed the inhabitants. Lastly, a third system consisted in allowing a certain number of emigrants to constitute a political society under the protection of the mother-country, and to govern themselves in whatever was not contrary to her laws. This mode of colonization, so remarkably favorable to liberty, was only adopted in New England.”
Tha_Wood: "I'm taking that as a no."
Yeah, both sides have some real ugly people, male and female. Poor Republicans have a reason to look bad because they're mostly laborers and are struggling with substance abuse and working a job that would make us weep ourselves to bed every night.
But then college-educated liberals with jobs (of any kind) can really fuck their own shit up, fam, with what they think is counter-culture fashion.
I wonder if Antifa members will look back at their antics and realize they were just as stupid as these alt-right shits that ran a car through a crowd and killed that woman or fought tooth and nail to keep confederate statues up lol
What odd hills to choose to die on.
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.