Why do writers habitually idolize women?

>Men can only hate women if they've been rejected by them
>Men have never rejected women

Plenty of reasons to hate women other than 'hurr she won't fuck me'.

Name four.

Unless they're faggots.

theyre stinky

>arguing with trips
not him but
1) they're humans
2) some of them are living humans
3) some of them have been published before us
4) YA this generation is all on them, tolkien never was this bad, not even with d&d and catholics included

>Once you get to know them it's hard to not despise them.
>knows all women
>thinks the women he does know is not a reflection of himself

they continuously rape our children in schools, give up their own children to be raped willingly, they have little interest in the creation of civilization and rather wish to sully its men with shame by cuckolding them, and worst of all, they hold the keys to mens hearts. that alone is a sin beyond all, leading great men into temptation and as a result, their downfall. how many great men who would lead the way in science, philosophy, and reason have fallen by the wayside due to a woman? too many to count.

am laffin

now he is trying to hamster his failed life away by blaming women

I'll grant you 4.

Exactly, just fuck them and then get back to work!

Not a big deal.

>they're lizards
ok but how did you get published before sappho?

>my failed life
get thee hence, plebeian

>not hating women
shiggy

Well, I only know one person who's actually been published and he's a dude. Minority obviously.

Thinking all women are whores is still an idealization of women.

Because they don't know how to write female characters, and seem to idolise women.

>they continuously rape our children in schools
Very few.
> give up their own children to be raped willingly
What?
>sully its men with shame by cuckolding them
Men and women cheat in near about equal numbers.

>letting women lead you into temptation
>not joining an all-male fascist warrior brotherhood

Haven't seen that meme in a while

I mean, women are stupid, whores, useless

>tfw all women are whores
>tfw still can't get laid

Because women are pretty, they smell nice and have soft skin.

Because most fiction readers are women.

But most Veeky Forums writers write terrible female characters, so that argument makes no sense.

They're either simpering damsels or badass mary sues, or they're victims of circumstance. I can't think of a single well written female character from any male writer in the western canon.

what are most real women like?

Nice 20% of the time, lazy 50% of the time, stressy 30% of the time.

As varied as men?

>strict empiricism
nice. inherently flawed, but commendable follow through.

if women are so varied then why do they all hate me?

#NotAllWomen

Maybe you're the one common denominator user.

Generally, women don't like /pol/ types, although they wouldn't know that board, they'd just be 'creepy' or 'fuckboys' or 'assholes' or 'abusive'.

maybe humanity hates you?

;_;

you can read dazai's disqualified from being human. it is a good book. get drunk. you'll be fine ok, not really but consider it

Women rarely live for themselves. From a very young age they prune themselves for a mate instead of learning any sort of substance or identity. They hope in finding a mate, that mate will create that identity for them and take care of them the rest of their lives. What's even more fucked up is they covet other women. Hard. Women care more about what other women think of them than what men think of them. So the whole reason they're trying to find a mate that does absolutely everything for them is to impress other women anyway.

Incapable of reason, bad drivers, want everything given to them, materialistic, complain all the time, talk about their feelings, talk a lot in general, etc.

Why do you think women don't live for themselves? Men aren't that special. One dick is much like another, and because women can freely work and get an education, they hardly need a male provider anymore. Some want one regardless, but society does not prohibit female employment anymore.

Women are not all ,materialistic and extroverted, and incapable of logic or reason. You're taking some women and applying it to the whole.

You mean women don't like the truth if it hurts their feelings. People like you are taking all the efficacy out of the /pol/ buzzword. It's not as hard-hitting anymore. It's even giving /pol/tards fuel as people who have never heard of /pol/ are now hearing about it and finding people who think like them. So stop using the word, please, you don't understand the implications.

Well, I've never said it outside of Veeky Forums, and one would assume if you're here already you know what /pol/ is.

LOL

Not him, but everything you said is true.

Which will be interesting to see how plays out. It wouldn't surprise me that in 20 years, men and women barely have anything to do with one another.

Well men are either misogynists or cucks, so I guess not that varied.

Sperm banks and egg donors. That's it.

Not him, but everything you said is true.

Which will be interesting to see how plays out. It wouldn't surprise me that in 20 years, men and women barely have anything to do with one another.

>egg donors

Not likely.

Why are you repeating my post?

Most are weirdo men who were raised solely by a semi-abusive woman.

Why?

Because women only have something like 400 eggs in her whole life time. Why would they ever give any up?

No, you've created this dichotomy for yourself. More people are centered in the middle than on either polarized side.

$$$$$

They're worth a fortune. Easy money man.
Also, no woman can have 400 children. Provided two or so are fertilised, removing some of the others just means fewer periods.

Jesus christ, do any of you actually get offline and ever talk to women?

Well, if not overt misogyny than sexist. And if not overly a cuckhold, then at the very least capable of infantalising women by letting them get away with anything by virtue of being women.

Maybe you should look at the way you think of men and ask yourself if you're projecting.

No, they don't.

Not him, but everything you said is true.

Yup. First at school, now at work and at social events. The experience is always terrible and never worthwhile.

Why is my saying that any different to what the men on here say about women?

Of course I do. What are you trying to imply with that statement exactly? I can't have an opinion about women's general behavior simply because the women I know in real life are okay people?

>Why do you think women don't live for themselves? Men aren't that special. One dick is much like another, and because women can freely work and get an education, they hardly need a male provider anymore. Some want one regardless, but society does not prohibit female employment anymore.

ok, honey, except that's untrue for most of the world, has been untrue for all of it for just about all of history, and the few societies for which it isn't aren't even reproducing themselves at a sustainable rate, so they'll be gone within decades

A common way to write beautifully is to write about something beautiful, like a beautiful woman. They pull the same shit with nature.

Because a majority of the men on Veeky Forums are not a good representative of men living in the real world. Seriously, these people are assholes, I'm only here for the banter and occasional stimulating conversation or a chuckle. I like the unbridled absurdity even if I don't agree with it. But this should not represent the two absolutes you've created for all men.

There are many of us who just want to live our own lives while enjoying your company and affection while still respecting women for their own person with your own wants, desires, needs, and thoughts that are separate from our own. Don't date assholes, don't date weird clingy dudes who need your validation, don't date SJW weirdos who'll use you as a political pawn and think of you as something that needs to be emotionally protected.

I was specifically talking about the west.

What's better, living off of welfare and having 10 kids you can't afford or give any quality of life to, or having one or two after you've gotten a secure job, probably with a man who also has a secure job, that get a good quality of life.

The reality is, much of childrearing in the countries that aren't reproducing is very expensive and thus unsustainable. The only logical thing, if you're at all capable of maths, is to not have many kids. It's hardly women's fault.

Well then it comes back to where to find said normal men?

>The reality is, much of childrearing in the countries that aren't reproducing is very expensive and thus unsustainable.

It's not that simple. People also don't want to have children, because there's literally no compelling reason to when you are secular and materialistic.

Do you think it's a coincidence that the countries that have the most retarded birth rate are the ones with the highest amount of non-religious people, such as Sweden, Germany and Japan?

>because every man does. some just try harder to hide it
numale detected

i'm not trying to attribute blame, i'm saying your description of gender relations is only accurate for a dysfunctional, unsustainable society

>tfw western culture is evolutionarily unsound

I've made my peace with it, will probably concert and get a loyal young wife.

But conversely the ones with the highest birth rates also have the most poverty and infant mortality rate (India, for example). It's statistically accurate that the more poor and less educated you are, the more kids you have, and vice versa. Religion has little to do with it.

In Japan it's because the men are all into 2D girls, not because the women are super emancipated.

Are you in school? Talk to the guy who takes his class seriously, the guy who goes and spends time in the library to study. Find a volunteer program and meet people. It's okay to approach him first. If you're looking for someone online, keep swiping left until you find someone who actually seems genuine. Look for the guy who seems content and occupied with whatever it is he is doing, look for the one with a positive attitude.

I don't know what to tell you, get involved in activities with school or other groups. You'll meet genuine guys if you put yourself out there.

And yet you're saying it's because of something totally different than economics when it comes to Japan.

Make up your mind.

>living off of welfare and having 10 kids you can't afford or give any quality of life
where do you live? i know couples who literally had more kids just to get more welfare. sure they dont live in a large mcmansion but it's enough for all their bills, food and entertainment plus to save some money.

>women are as varied as men
Women are mediocre. Not exceptionally good, not exceptionally bad. Just mediocre.

I was saying it's incorrect to lump Japan in with the other two.

I'm not saying economics are the only cause. I never said that.

So are men. Most people are mediocre.

Who put these ideas into your head? There are just as many, if not more, shitty guys than there are women. Women are just as varied in type, just as diverse in thought, and women are every bit our equal. That doesn't mean you have to be a cuck feminist to realize that, it just means you aren't an asshole.

>yes goyim, step aside and don't have many children of your own race. Make space for all the Africans and Arabs to reproduce!

meh, collapse within ten-twenty years is practically guaranteed at this point

i don't believe in foreign takeover, arabs are too martially incompetent and too dependent on the west for that to ever be a serious risk

You're a liar. If you look, actually take an honest look at women, you'd see that they're not very intelligent. There are rare exceptions, but women evolved to be mothers, and her children ALWAYS comes first.

Riddle me this: if women were equal to men, why didn't they do anything of value in history? Why have men dominated every field? And don't say "le patriarchy", society isn't a monolithic entity hellbent on keeping women down.

Honestly, I predict a resurgence of dangerous ideology again. It seems like people cannot cope with decadence at all.

THERE IS A HIGHER PROPORTION OF EXCEPTIONAL MEN THAN EXCEPTIONAL WOMEN

testosterone = risk taking

risk taking = success

Historically, women were not permitted an education. It's very hard to write revolutionary philosophy or literature if you can't read, it's difficult to create great art if you're not allowed to learn how and it's nigh on impossible to invent anything if you don't know basic maths.

Most people aren't intelligent. There are only a few every generation who actually DO anything, and for most of history if those people were women they were confined to strict gender roles that meant they couldn't do anything beyond being a wife, a nun or a whore.

Because gender roles basically defined social mores. Are you saying patriarchy had nothing to do with it? When a father would sell off his daughter to a suitor? That a woman should be obedient and subservient to her father or to her husband lest she be beaten and whipped? You don't think that those types of things beat people down for generation after generation?

Well, in history, yeah. Because as said, women weren't permitted the tools to do anything fantastic.

But as the education gap closes? There are more and more extraordinary women.

They don't need to take over violently, all they have to do is keep breeding while non-muslims don't and gradually implement more muslim-oriented legislation.

Gender roles didn't come from society. They came from biology. Women have different roles even in the most primitive human societies.

Also, education does not make you more intelligent. Intelligence is a skill and a talent. If I take Joe Schmoe off the street and put him through an elite classical education he probably won't do anything with it. Same goes for women.

If women were equal, they wouldn't have allowed themselves to be "oppressed". But women are weak and stupid, they always have been and they always will be, and they have to rely on society to give them things rather than do them by the sheer force of their own will.
Where do you think societal roles came from? You think men had a conference and decided to keep women down and intentionally limit progress just because they were evil? Your post reeks of daddy issues.

The fact that a woman's fate is determined by what is permitted to her already shows her inferiority. Kind of like how blacks were given freedom.

Real equality can only be taken, when it is given it's an illusion. Anything given can be taken away. The only thing allowing women and minorities to thrive a little bit now is the white man's philanthropy.

trump and european moderate nationalism are just the beginning. you can't reform a system so fundamentally broken. i expect to see real chaos before change can take place

>And don't say "le patriarchy",
>le patriarchy xD

Every fucking time

Women are physically weaker. Everyone knows that. In most of history that counted for more than it does today, so they were able to be oppressed.