Several times already, just again, I heard the complaint that women are so much less against the world financial madness, the warmongering, the technotronic indoctrination of children, and what to madness and evil left in the world, presented as men.
Although the observation as such is certainly true; but the action is totally inappropriate, even naive.
I can not this quite common complaints, sometimes wailing of men, the women would take so very little merely sponges with the stream, only the explanation is that these, even if they reject the Geschlechtergleichmacherei otherwise, just that propaganda unnoticed just yet to a considerable extent have been misled.
How to get (in this case man) to expect from women a comparable risk-taking and leadership, alswie of men?
A similar ability to clear, persuasive speech? (Yes: women can speak well, especially since much is known how many really are capable speakers.?)
How many Hildegard it was in the story, how many victorious armies Amazon?
Women to the front, or what?
And the men do then for the wounded inside the sick brothers?
It is formulated very exaggerated, it almost seems alswie that women complained complaints about men wanted to not have children, this is not even suckle.
The problem lies elsewhere. Namely, not that it's not quite succeeded, despite all effort, from women to make men, but quite largely allzumal educated men - and who else would be wise to keep out of trouble to be able to? - Mentally to feminize as in their behavior and actions.
Most of them do not even notice how they make everywhere cowardly kowtowing before political correctness, adjust the gender talk, so even in her speech make lasting curtsies before the prescribed Kriecherzeitgeist, just so as not to give, as "macho" as "chauvinist", as "yesterday's" male präponderant, maskulistisch suprematist to stand fast in the stocks.
"Bad, that is cowardly!" (Nietzsche)
In radio, for example, they dare not even speak of the listeners, no, it must be called listeners. (The other day I had the case that one even spoke three times within a few minutes of his moderation, that is certainly not by accident, of the "Arbeiterinnen- and working class." Pure idiocy.) And so on ad infinitum.
Used to speak in such contexts of nuns. Today we have Nachbetbrüder.
Man complains volubly about another example, that women's football is not as popular as the men's soccer. Thus, a evil discrimination but also. And no one even dares to simply laugh.
It complains even about the fact that fewer girls roofer or Steinmetz learn than boys. To change that, then you will hold "Girls' Day". (Whether some young women then the heavy lifting will gebärunfähig, have broken with forty discs, no matter.) Anywhere moronic feminism.
So, men: As long as you let you soap in this way, I can not seriously take you.
And complaints that women were doing men's work not enough, certainly not.
- Advertisement -
Tags: feminism , gender speech , Geschlechtergleichmacherei , Kriecherzeitgeist , Nachbetbrüder
After Ted Gunderson his whistleblowing survived less than a year, but it is a sign of extreme courage to make public, what does Mrs. Hagberg:
http://die-red-pille.blogspot.de/2012/10/schwedische-politician-stot.html
Woman and woman Ditfurth Wagenknecht example, one should also mention various scientists as well. Fewer women that provide publicly against the madness, is probably simply because fewer of us are in the relevant fields in the public, are popular. Relative, percentage, seen, more upright might even be among women than among men.
@ 34
I should be right there yes, if women contribute accordingly. Overall, I can not see much of it though.
The argument with the popularity engraving limited; even where there have been brought to any particular level of awareness people predominate in the sense of the thing, the men clearly; and not because the women wegbissen not deprive seriously, wanted to know nothing of them, but because the simple little relevance exists.
I understand of course that you do not like to hear as a dedicated woman happy; but it is now times fact. (Or, for my sake, for many years, at least my observation goes there.)