Modern Feminist

[–]Doogie7678 points79 points80 points 8 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiverSound 54 points55 points56 points 8 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]Landwhalephobic 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

I’m a woman and I’m only answering you because it infuriates me, a hard worker. The only reason I know any of this information is from one of my employees.

A single mother can swindle the equivalent of a 32k salary. She can receive section 8 housing (~600 Dollar value a month), Foodstamps (1 mother and 1 child can receive 400 a month), Medicaid (priceless since everything is 100% paid for through the state, let’s assume this has a 1000 Dollar a month value), LIHEAP (~100 Dollar a month value), programs to provide monthly bus passes for free transportation (~100 monthly value), child support (depends on situation, can be as low as 20 dollars a month up to 500 dollars a month), and there’s so many more programs you can get into, including free daycare if you have a job that gives you 15-19 hours a week.

These programs were put into place to help the needy and the disadvantaged, which is awesome. Sometimes people go through hard times, totally understandable, and these services certainly should be available to those in need. But now the system is abused and you have a woman popping out a baby every five years just to stay on benefits so she doesn’t have to go to work.

[–]buscemi100mm2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Landwhalephobic 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

yeah i was actually raised very left liberal and still think there should be some social programs in place to help the completely needy and dying. just like some level of basic services to those REALLY in need that could be afforded by a our crazy high taxes.

and these programs do sometimes work in smaller scales within smaller homogenous countries.

i grew up hating the right because they based their politics on religion which is idiotic. but i find myself hating the left more than an political party i can remember. now i'm all for every man for himself. i left the USA years ago and in my country now the taxes are not that high. 12-22%. no sales tax. best cost of living for important utilities. but low in social services. that is the only real way, let people care for themselves but tax them less. America's tax level is so high but they don't do shit and the ones that do get benefits, are so often system exploiters.

and especially now that identity politics has taken over. it's like you gotta kiss the feet of everyone if they are a tranny retard black midget cyclops.

I mean i don't have anything personally against retarded black midget cyclops, but don't tell me we as a system have to help ANYONE. human nature is far too dark. no matter the age, sex or race. part of it is just internet. no politician can ever say anything bad about any minority or perceived slights group (women). or its a career ender and 5 million view clip on youTube.

i could imagine as a woman, it would be infuriating to at least try to be honest about making your income and earning and saving and being taxed just like everyone else to feed these creatures with no regard for human life.

[–]ProfessorGanymede 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

Despite being MGTOW I'm still a die hard progressive liberal. I'm still anti-feminist though. I really don't care how poorly someone has done in their life or the bad decisions they've made, I think everyone should be taken care of to a certain degree.

In my eyes everyone has the right to food, shelter, water, basic utilities. It's our duty to one another for creating a society that functions as well as it does today.

Think about it. If you live in the western world you live in the best time in human history period. A big reason for that is despite there being so many poor people, most people have choosen to, instead of robbing you a gunpoint and murdering you and stealing all your stuff, to function in a, generally, civilized way.

You live in a civilized society because the poor and downtroded, (which our capitalist society need to exist in order to function), allow it. That's a selfish reason you can cling to.

I'm personally satisfied by simply trying to be the person I'd want my children and family to be around. I imagine this perfect, caring, harmonious society in my head. I imagine what a citizen of that society would be like. No one dies of curable disease, no one starves, no one dies in the cold or goes without water, no wars.

I try to be a like the citizen I believe would exist and make that type of society possible. And that person is a progressive, far, far left liberal. Mgtow or no.

[–]alphaMGTOW0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

In my eyes everyone has the right to food, shelter, water, basic utilities. It's our duty to one another for creating a society that functions as well as it does today.

So your solution is to hire an organization to instill fear and intimidation into the minds of the people that support it, in order to redistribute those ill-gotten gains to people that wouldn't have otherwise deserved it.

Everyone has a right to their own prosperity. Did you ever think of that? You want to give/grant rights of resources to people while removing my right to earn those resources?

I try to be a like the citizen I believe would exist and make that type of society possible.

You can make that society possible and provide for your communities just as you would like to see for yourself. As soon as you employ the hands of the mafia to take from the pockets of those that don't see the same society in your mind as you do, you become an accessory to their crimes. All that good you wanted for you society turns into all the evil that supports it.

[–]ProfessorGanymede 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

How much each person has the "right" to earn is completely subjective. Money is subjective, distrubution of resources is subjective. We have plenty of resources to share and still have people be able to "earn" far more than they need. People are just greedy. No one needs to starve so that you can have your Yacht. You can still have a yacht. Maybe it just won't be as big.

The entire foundation of your argument is based on the premise that people deserve a subjective amount based on how much they subjectively work. My argument is based on the fact that economics is subjective. That the only way you prosper is because of society being civilized enough to allow the proper environment for you to prosper. I'm saying that because you are allowed to thrive in this civilized society because of those around you who agree to that type of society, you owe your fellow man a debt.

That our society isn't "the guy with the biggest stick stealing everything from his neighbor" is a testimate to the millions of downtroden who help maintain that system. That you are able to sit at a computer and type to me on the internet is only possible because your neighbors are civilized and allow for you to even have the potential to have access to what you have now. Society could be so much worse. We all owe each other for maintaining the type of society that allows you to make a dumb argument to me over the internet. It could be so...so...so much worse.

[–]alphaMGTOW0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

How much each person has the "right" to earn is completely subjective. Money is subjective, distrubution of resources is subjective.

No it's not subjective. My labor is worth something, and I have all the right to my labor. If you demand I contribute my labor to something that I don't agree with than that is stealing.

We have plenty of resources to share and still have people be able to "earn" far more than they need.

The reason why we have any resources right now is because of the debt-laden system you so vehemently support. The welfare system that we have has effectively extracted all the wealth from the country, and the people are accruing debtors notes that cannot be paid back. This is happening because the US allows private bankers to issue debt notes on the bonds that it secures. This is not a democracy, and this isn't up for debate. Your right secure your own resources is as fundamental as your right to speak your mind. It is hypocritical of you to engage in this debate of "having more than I need, so I should give a little back by force" while also making your own statements and opinions without limitation. Using your rhetoric, the collective whole of the Internet, should be able to extract sentences and words from your responses since you have so much to say.

The entire foundation of your argument is based on the premise that people deserve a subjective amount based on how much they subjectively work.

No, the basis of my argument is that people have the complete rights over their time, labor, and property. You are saying that people do not, because evidently there is an entity that has more rights to each individuals time, labor and property. What you fail to understand is that, no such entity can exist peacefully while also securing more rights than the individuals that support it.

My argument is based on the fact that economics is subjective.

That is true, but we aren't talking about economics, macro or micro. We are talking about individual freedoms and the net effect of the loss of those freedoms has upon society as a whole.

That the only way you prosper is because of society being civilized enough to allow the proper environment for you to prosper.

Also not true. My ability to prosper is as good as my ability to provide a service that people demand. If society goes away tomorrow, and I still have my time, energy, and labor to provide services to people, than I can prosper.

I'm saying that because you are allowed to thrive in this civilized society because of those around you who agree to that type of society, you owe your fellow man a debt.

I was born here. I don't owe you or society anything. Anyone that thinks, by virtue of his existence, owes his time, labor and property to a fictional entity that was created by other people that were born here as well, needs to examine the reality of his existence. You are throwing up a catch-22 and calling it a statement of duty. The fictional entity that you support by virtue of you existence must be a voluntary one or it will cease to support the very foundation of its purpose, to protect rights and people.

Society could be so much worse.

It always can be worse.

We all owe each other for maintaining the type of society that allows you to make a dumb argument to me over the internet.

No, we all owe to ourselves to make the best possible future for ourselves and are children. I don't owe you or your broken system a single dime, ounce of silver, piece of land, or minute of my time.

You are allowed to have these 'progressive ideals' because of the luxuries that were created because men wanted to prosper. If you take away the mans ability to prosper (i.e. capitalize completely on his own time, labory, and property) than you also disincentivize him from contributing to the luxuries you wish to continue.

You are saying my argument is dumb, but you really haven't thought about why you consider it dumb. Possibly, that reason is because you know if more people like me stop contributing to wealth redistribution slavery systems that your society will crumble upon the weight of all its dependents.

I don't have to argue with you about anything. I am likely unable to change your mind about anything. I don't need you to prop up your broken system or to encourage its uses. More and more people are already using and abusing it everyday, and eventually it will collapse and your precious politicians that cry compassion and ever expansion of social security will be nowhere to save you from the lost collateral you willingly gave them.

[–]ProfessorGanymede 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

"No it's not subjective. My labor is worth something, and I have all the right to my labor. If you demand I contribute my labor to something that I don't agree with than that is stealing."

You just agreed with me. Your labor is worth "something." How much that labor is worth is subjective. If you don't want to contribute your labor to others then you aren't paying your debt to society. You are stealing by your own logic because without society following norms that make it possible for your to thrive, you wouldn't have the opportunity to thrive. You are paying for the opportunity to thrive. That's not stealing. It's the cost of living in a civilized society.

"The reason why we have any resources right now is because of the debt-laden system you so vehemently support. The welfare system that we have has effectively extracted all the wealth from the country, and the people are accruing debtors notes that cannot be paid back. This is happening because the US allows private bankers to issue debt notes on the bonds that it secures. This is not a democracy, and this isn't up for debate. Your right secure your own resources is as fundamental as your right to speak your mind. It is hypocritical of you to engage in this debate of "having more than I need, so I should give a little back by force" while also making your own statements and opinions without limitation. Using your rhetoric, the collective whole of the Internet, should be able to extract sentences and words from your responses since you have so much to say."

You again missed the point. I'm going to read through the rest of your response to see if you say anything against my point.

You have said nothing against my argument except "I should have the right to my labor." Which simply doesn't make sense in the context of your debt to society.

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Your labor is worth "something."

It is worth something to me, and what that worth is entirely up to me, not you. Please help me understand what is being missed about this. Since my labor is worth something other than what I get to decide to you, than you couldn't possibly get to decide what it is worth to me, which is my point. You. don't. get. to. decide. that.

you aren't paying your debt to society.

Please do read my response. I don't owe or have debt to society by virtue of my existence. It can't work that way, because it wouldn't accomplish the goal of societies purpose, which is to protect my rights.

because without society following norms that make it possible for your to thrive

Again, please read my response to you from before. I don't depend on society thriving for my existence, but society does depend on me thriving for it to exist, me and all the other individuals in their individual capacity.

You are paying for the opportunity to thrive.

No I'm working, spending my time. That is my cost. My labor is my cost to society and I reap all the rewards from my labor in order to contribute back to society. You are just saying I have to give my labor by force or it won't function, and to that I say good riddance, because it isn't worth propping up if it needs my support by force. Get my drift?!

That's not stealing.

Yep, if you hire men to come take my resources from me without my consent, that by definition is stealing. You can wrap up in the nice little package of "but its our society and stuff" all you want. It doesn't change the principle, being that society exists for the purpose of protecting the people that contribute to it, and those people get to decide what contributions they wish to make or it accomplishes the exact opposite of its intention.

I should have the right to my labor. Which simply doesn't make sense in the context of your debt to society.

Actually, I have the right to my labor... all of it. Should only works when I am accepting a privilege. And being born in society isn't a privilege, it is a right.

Yes, you really should read my response, because you are deviating from my argument in order to support "You owe me, now pay up or go to jail".

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You only have the ability to sell your labor because society creates the context that allows you to sell your labor for resources.

I have the ability to sell my labor because there is a demand. This has nothing to do with society. How do you think people functioned before without a society? They bartered in much the same way we do today. Difference is they probably didn't have a corporate monopoly holding them at gun point in order for them to accept their debtors notes.

Your debt is the simple fact that others agreeing to this system and not killing you for your boots,

That is not a debt. I didn't ask to not be killed for my boots. I didn't offer an amount of my labor to not be killed for my boots and if I had to pay to not be killed that is extortion. Are you saying you think we should legalize extortion? I didn't ask for any of the services you are stating that make me complacent as a debtors slave. Therefore, as I have not ask for credit to exist, I have not become a debtor. You are really trying to push 'debt' as a 'means of existence/survival'. That is not what how that concept works. You should look it up before you use it as the foundation to your argument.

Or you could live in a society where what you think your labor is worth doesn't matter.

No thanks, I'll live in the one that I was born in. Maybe the society exists and is beneficial to me as well, but that isn't up for me to decide and I have no agency for it to continue existing. I exist in reality, society exists as a fictional creation of man. I am superior to any of mans creations because of this fact.

What you think your labor is worth only matters because others allow it to matter.

No, it is only worth what people demand my services for. The highest bidder gets the worm, and I don't owe anyone that didn't want to pay a single dime.

Look, you can continue thinking you were born here as a tool for a fictional entity to use/abuse at their discretion, that you can only continue existing/surviving at the good will of the men that have staked a claim upon your time, energy, and labor, but this man is going his own way. Eventually, the debt of your broken welfare systems will be so high that it cannot continue without collapsing, a feature built in to the system from the start of its inception, or being replaced. All the property that is owned by such fictional entities will be owned by their new masters. You can think of yourself as a slave (as a debtor is legally defined) or think of yourself as the real human being that owes no allegiance to any men, even if they claim superiority to yourself.

That choice is yours and everyone's to make on their own terms. This man has chosen to secure his rights, and the government that he wishes to protect those rights will be paid for at his discretion or at all. If that government and its beneficiaries don't like it, they will have to slim their belts a little or replace it with one that serves that function and none other.

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't see any strawmans here. You are saying I am in debt to society for my existence within it and I am saying there can be no such debt for society to flourish.

Debt = Slavery

A debt is a sum of money due by contract. It is most frequently due by a certain and express agreement, which fixes the amount, independent of extrinsic circumstances.

I never signed a contract and there are no express terms.

Proverbs 22:7

The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender.

Amendment XIII Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

I'm not looking to 'win' anything here. I am trying to show you and others, to be a deceptive programming by those that wish to keep the 'gravy' train going. Those few people want you to be responsible for their misdeeds and greed, so they have convinced you that you are beneath them. They have done this legally by a framework under UCC called chattle and consent, and mentally, but subjugation under fear and intimidation.

I'm not spending my energy helping you see this so that I get some nibble of self satisfaction from hearing that I am right. That doesn't mean anything to me. Being able to express these concepts and further my own understanding of the way the world actually works means everything to me.

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Can't tell if trolling, but you have peaked my interest this far.

If a man commits an injury upon another, then that man is the injured parties slave until his debt is paid. The payment for debt upon private citizens is determined in civil tort court, while the payment due to general society is determined in criminal court. Once the criminal courts sentence has completed, then the criminal is said to "have paid his debt to society". That, however, does not mean the ex-criminal has paid his debt to the injured party, and is still a slave until that debt is paid.

The distinction here is that the courts operate upon separate jurisdictions. Sometimes, by law, a court is operating under a franchisee jurisdiction, where the property or obligator has failed to perform some predetermined duties. This is the court we are most interested in with this discussion, as that is where a sentence will be determined for convictions under those laws. The laws that govern social security, welfare, and income taxes are non-positive laws wherein the agreement is broken by some activity or lack of an activity and the beneficiary had explicitly acknowledged some agreement took place or he had accepted benefits (if he had done so, than the express terms of the agreement do not need to be understood, as the obligatee has already fulfilled their end of the bargain). For this reason, the government does not want you to sign their forms "under duress" as it removes your consent to follow their mass of laws around these programs. When a prisoner has paid his debt to the franchisee court, he can also be said to have paid his debt to society, because here society is loosely defined as the encompassing whole from which it is derived. Since people that also have a franchisee agreement with the body that governs them, then they suffer minor injury as well.

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So courts make laws that they impose upon the citizens of the country. And then dull out punishment for those laws that were made, regardless of whether or not each citizen actually agrees to those laws.

How is the laws that are made not made arbitrarily? Are you implying there is some kind of objective standard on what should and should not be law? Who decides what should and should not be law and how is the decider's opinion not arbitrary? I.E. based on their opinion of what should and should not be a law?

If the development of the law is based on opinion, then how is that not subjective? If the law is subjective how is it not arbitrary? If the law is arbitrary, based on subjective reasoning, then who is to say what debt a criminal should pay if he never agreed to pay that debt? How is their judgement correct or moral to force him to pay a debt he never agreed to?

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Law, as referring to criminal law where an injury must be present for a crime to have taken place, and a punishment derived, is only ever discovered, never invented.

Private Law as referring to the franchisee laws that are punishable only after the agreement process of accepting the franchisee, it's benefits and its obligations, are invented and therefore regulated by the full force of the inventor.

Think of it this way, when you hurt me in some way, I claim that injury, and then the jury of peers decides who and how much punishment is carried out. The jury of your peers stands between the injured party and the defendant. Nowhere in this process is there an arbitrary assignment or subjective opinion. That would grossly violate due process rights of the defendants.

If the development of the law is based on opinion, then how is that not subjective?

There is no subjective opinions on the facts of evidence. You must bring evidence to a court for a jury to understand what the merits of the injury are.

If the law is arbitrary, based on subjective reasoning,

As stated, numerous times before my response here, law is not arbitrary and it isn't enforced arbitrarily either. You, again, are making up postulates to my actual argument because it doesn't fit the narrative you are trying to convince yourself of.

How is their judgement correct or moral to force him to pay a debt he never agreed to?

RE:

The Thirteenth Amendment (Amendment XIII) to the United States Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime.

Because he committed a crime, he no longer gets to enjoy his freedom or gets to decide how he exercises his rights to his time, labor and property. He must face the consequences of his actions this way because he willingly and maliciously, or negligently removed someone elses rights to choose how their time, labor, energy, liberties, property is used.

Thank you for you discussion these past couple of days. I got more out of this then I had initially considered when I responded to you in the first place. Unfortunately, you are starting to go around in circles now, and not really contemplating the concepts and facts that I am presenting to you. You have reduced your opposition to questionable platitudes and unstructured inquiries. It is clear, that you have retained all that you wish from this conversation because you are repeating questions that have already been answered. I'll entertain other questions from you, however, if you can show me you have digested the material I have already presented and you have questions that do not appear to restate your original hypothesis that has already been hashed out and determined to be incorrect, that being "the virtue of a mans existence within society is his debt upon that society".

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Some rights are granted by men, some are inalienable to all humans. Maybe you were created by a fictional entity, and so you must obey what that fictional entity tells you to do or face termination by their rule of law.

If you don't know what evidence is and how it must be discovered to in order be successfully used to stake a claim, then you won't ever be able to submit evidence of wrong doing. It sucks, but that is how it must be, or as you say anyone could just claim some injury and noone would know any better about how that evidence is applicable to the injury.

If you have an authority above you dictating what you can and cannot do, then that authority is your master, and you must obey. If you think you are your own master and follow your own rules, then you will be placed along the common denominator that provides for the general welfare of society.

The entity that you claim that has supreme authority over your life is the entity that created you and will be the entity that governs your actions by punishment and regulation.

You just don't like that the entity you have allowed to govern your life has staked this claim, and rather than contemplate your own freedom and creator and prove the existence of a supernatural authority beyond man's creation, which is hard, you would prefer to accept that all other men besides the select few must be as inferior as yourself. You would rather all men be equally inferior to their masters of men, than be equally superior as all men. Good luck with that. Adopt your masters as your superior beings that created you for all intents and purposes, because you don't wish to work hard to defend yourself from their weapons.

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It is an answer, you just refuse to read my responses and contemplate what I have already shown you.

According to who?

It isn't you and that is all that matters. Because if it was you, then you would be enjoying those rights.

You want to exersize your rights? Figure out how you got them in the first place. That is a good first step.

You want other people to tell you where your rights came from? Well, there is an enumerated list of minimal requirements that the government might allow you to exersize, if you fit the criteria. But probably not, because you aren't thinking for yourself yet, and Gov. Inc. knows what rights you will gladly give up and what rights you gladly ignore, and what rights they gladly will take as long as your speaking owl language and not defending yourself properly.

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ProfessorGanymede1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nomoregouge0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It’s frustrating for me because up until I got into the job I have now, I would have better off financially if I had left my husband, taken the children, and went on welfare. Not that it was the better option necessarily, because who wants to live in the projects when they’ve had their own home for the past several years, but if I had low standards and didn’t know any better then sure, holing up in the projects would be attractive.

There is not much incentive for women with children who have been in this cycle of generational welfare. Back in the 70’s my parents had to go on assistance because all the steel mills in the area shut down and my father was a crane operator. They had to live in the projects for a year with my brother while my father got his life together and they were back on their feet in a year. What went wrong? Why wasn’t the abuse nipped when it became apparent what was going on?

[–]alphaMGTOW0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not all conservatives lean so hard to the right. While I don’t agree with system abuse, I’m also compassionate towards the needy. A family that can not afford the healthcare of their disabled child shouldn’t have to watch that child die, which would ultimately happen if we removed all social benefits for the needy. Should an able bodied adult be allowed to leech off the government by birthing a child every couple years to secure their own benefits? No. Should a disabled veteran be given prosthetics after having his legs blown off in Afghanistan? Yes. Should he be left to die on the street because he cannot work due to his disability and mental faculties? No.

If we removed all social nets for the less fortunate and disabled then we would look like a slum in Pune, India. Survival of the fittest is barbaric and we can do better. Children didn’t ask to be born, hardworking people don’t ask to lose their jobs, soldiers don’t want to come home with PTSD and a missing leg.

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’m also compassionate towards the needy.

Great! So am I, which is why I volunteer my support at shelters and food drives.

A family that can not afford the healthcare of their disabled child shouldn’t have to watch that child die

Which family? Whos? Do you know them? That happens all over the world everyday, but you are only concerned with the strangers in a 3000 mile radius?

Should an able bodied adult be allowed to leech off the government by birthing a child every couple years to secure their own benefits?

No.

Correct answer. They shouldn't, and as long as you provide mechanisms for them to do so, they will.

Should a disabled veteran be given prosthetics after having his legs blown off in Afghanistan?

That sounds like he needs to negotiate better terms for his service. He is getting paid, correct?

Should he be left to die on the street because he cannot work due to his disability and mental faculties?

Sounds like more terms need to be hashed out before he goes to do these duties. Military is private organization, outside of civilian control and law. Those private citizens that place themselves at the hand of the politicians that employ them should be more conscientious of what is going on and how their bodies are going to be used as weapons and how those weapons are going to be used to affect the lives of millions of people they would have never heard about/come into contact with outside of their job that they willingly signed up for.

The private militia already stands to defend against foreign invaders. That militia is comprised of private citizens and you bet your tight little ass, that I would support any private citizen that lost mental/physical faculties for defending my land. But I do that because I have a direct interest in ensuring his success. You, I, and most of the worlds outside of the financial elite have no interest, directly or otherwise in fighting wars and creating chaos all over the world.

If we removed all social nets for the less fortunate and disabled then we would look like a slum in Pune, India

Not true. We have the system we have because the people decided they want better for themselves and their childrens future. America was founded on the volunteer provisions of its public and the direct benefit of seeing those resources being spent on their childrens future. What you want, is to remove that system where the public directly benefits from its contributions and turn it into a system where people are forced to provide the bare minimum resources to a third party that then gets to decide how their resources are better spent. Throughout history, this has never ended well for the ignorant citizens that think they are doing good by doing nothing other than what they are told. India has a far greater spun history that is rife with corruption, colonization, terrorism and loss of identity. They would also benefit from removing their social welfare and government run business practices.

Children didn’t ask to be born,

Correct. They don't. It is up to the responsible adults that give them birth to provide the best possible care. If you remove that responsibility with your social safety nets, centralized education, and other welfare programs, then you also remove their incentive to have children in the best possible environment, which in turns reduces the care the parents give them to the minimum care that the State is controlled by law to provide. That doesn't sound like child care, that sounds more like idiotic care.

hardworking people don’t ask to lose their jobs

And if they were prudent hardworking people, loosing their job would only be a set back. But they aren't hardworking or they spend too much and you want to incentivize that behavior?

soldiers don’t want to come home with PTSD and a missing leg.

Maybe they should stop willingly signing up to fight wars on foreign jurisdictions?

I have my doubts that I can convince you of anything here. You obviously made up your mind, and as I said, women are the beneficiaries to the corrupt systems we have in place, make up the largest voting population, and are the highest tax burden. The reason is biologically ingrained to always seek out security and resources for their children. You are removing the man from this equation by coming up with altruistic methods of oppression and control under the guise of compassion. You need to understand the world does not provide for strangers under the compassion in their hearts like you think it does. It provides for the few that are able to convince the many through deception that their compassion better be in their best interest.

The longer you decide that other people should be required to provide the minimum requirement for the ilk of society, the further down in debt that society becomes as fewer and fewer people that would have otherwise worked hard for their friends, family and communities see no better result to do so while some asshole down the street who yells at their kids everyday walking home from school is equally capitalizing from their hard labor.

[–]NewLife_20170 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alphaMGTOW1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Argercy2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The services should definitely be available, we are not a third world country. A man who loses his job from downsizing and was already struggling to make ends meet, a parent in an abusive situation who needs help getting established to keep them off the street, veterans with mental health issues after serving our country, these people should all qualify for help. That’s why these services were established to begin with.

Something needs to change but it’s a delicate situation. What’s the answer? Allow children to starve because of their parents’ bad decisions? Reestablish orphanages to give parents a place to abandon children they can’t afford? This all ultimately comes down to children. What kind of people would we be to allow children to suffer in our first world country? Take the benefits away, those parents would be dumping children left and right.

[–]RiverSound 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]B_P_G1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NewLife_20170 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Idiot_Savant_Tinker35 points36 points37 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]eRoNNN22 points23 points24 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]sir_wankalot_here5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Use_VOAT_Instead6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TryDoingSomethingNew1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Use_VOAT_Instead2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iamlikethewindbaby 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MattFoley7910 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Use_VOAT_Instead3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]intentionally_vague0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]trpbritguy0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reduction-deduction34 points35 points36 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]dogwoodcat6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Idiot_Savant_Tinker2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrackingYs 24 points25 points26 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]dogwoodcat5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrJugsMcBulge12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tomato_Joker7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]theDukesofSwagger4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrJugsMcBulge2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]theDukesofSwagger2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MrJugsMcBulge0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NewLife_20170 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deadBeefCafe201423 points24 points25 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DamnIamHigh_Original24 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]justiceavenger19 points20 points21 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NewLife_20172 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]meaningintragedy12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Xplosion7312 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]enjoy_life8810 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]miapy8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Belrick_NZ7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PMmeYOURrareCONTENT3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rpleo3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ThanatopsisRex2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Official_RCLE 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordscot1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Whitified1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Pillis1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bkrugby780 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]karben140 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wolfoflulzstreet0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tankriderr0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BananaWilly0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NH_Lion120 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Narcissus36690 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lazyeyejack0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceIce0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]robowriter0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LimousineLibtard0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]starkfuture0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcros850 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IoSonCalaf0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]curiousssherlock0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]denizenoflaniakea0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Orangecup050 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr_M0t0m01 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BaconFinder1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Turkick-1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Modern Feminist
Author	kuui1
Upvotes	550
Comments	107
Date	May 14, 2018 4:57 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/8jdvij/modern_feminist/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/modern-feminist.557337 https://theredarchive.com/post/557337

Comments