Women can't be good ru-

>Women can't be good ru-

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_of_Catherine_the_Great
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freyr
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_of_Aquitaine
filosofia.org/mon/tem/es0224.htm
web.archive.org/web/20141229080502/http://www.educar-argentina.com.ar/CORIA/coria10.htm#.U5RW9Sj4JZ1
books.google.es/books?id=XNskK95W5BUC&pg=PA254&dq="El sistema de castas"&ei=0tAXSsigLIXGzAS_uNnHBw&hl=es#v=onepage&q="El sistema de castas"&f=false
efe.com/efe/america/mexico/publicidad-en-mexico-donde-el-color-de-piel-cierra-puertas-a-muchos-actores/50000545-3133476
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>-lers
But actually, there were good women rulers.

>Mary
>Doing anything wrong

Isabel was literally Hitler t b h

M**r pls.

>Isabel was literally Hitler t b h
How so?
>Españoles casaos con indias y así sus tierras serán nuestras.
She didn't give a fuck about race.Just about God and country

...

oy vey

Badass portrait.

Is this a citation? I mean the marriage with indian women.

That's racemixing basically promoting a soft genocide against the native people by erasing them and making them spaniard. Notice how the reverse native man with spanish woman was not allowed. Not to mention the aggressive genocide against the muslims in spain. She was a horrible queen who never bathed.

Don't forget to mention her hate for the jews and that the inquisition had some programs to "clean the spanish blood"

>never bathed.
thats a fake legend and it was another Isabel. Isabel Clara Eugenia, daughter of Philip II and governor of the Netherlands. War of Flanders, during the siege of Ostend (Belgium) that lasted more than three years, from 1601 to 1604. She was joking...

Out of those only the never bathed is bad and even then I'm sure that there are people out there that are into that kind of stuff.

nothing whatsoever.

i'd still hit it even if she never bathed

are we just going to ignore this or

cleopatra did nothing wrong

Being forever remember as the queen who died from horse dick is probably disqualify her.

She did the best she could I think to keep her kingdom. I think Roman propaganda only paints her as a slut.

Yeah but I mean...she kept her kingom intact by fucking the enemy for bread. That is kind of prostitute-y.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_of_Catherine_the_Great
She died in her bed, after a stroke.

Women can be rulers. But it's not part o the essence of a woman to be a ruler. If you embody the traits of a ruler, then you are embodying male traits, and you move away from your essence, which is female. Look at female fighters who take steroids for example, they end up looking more and more like men. The form of a particular thing matches its function. And the form of a ruler is masculine, Frey is a good example:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freyr

>essense precedes existence
>not existence precedes essence
ISHYGGYDIGGY

>the essence

This is fucking spooky.

Lol I bet this fag believes in Platos theory of Forms too. lmao

The only proper answer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_of_Aquitaine

I'm surprised you don't see the catholicucks on this board making more threads about her. she's an anglo that most people learn about in school, so most posters on this board would recognize her. besides that there's a recent trend in the historiography of tudor england to rehabilitate her legacy and explore her policied to recatholicize england in the 1550s. some even try to put her in a sympathetic light.

She was ok with women marrying indians. They just didn't move to America

>She was a horrible queen
>Brought stability
>Secured the paths
>Lowered the taxes
>Cut the nobility dry
>Created a proffesional army
>Revitalized the economy
>Invented war hospitals
>Discovered America
>BTFO muslims after they declared war on her
>The inquisition did literally nothing wrong

women are literally made to rule, and men to serve women

all women rulers in history have been great

this desu

>cut the nobility
>good
choose one

was this the most iconic cuckolding of all time?

Spotted the saracen...

>choose one
>Castillian civil wars before Isabel
15
>Castillian civil wars after Isabel
1 (before her reforms)
The Castillian nobility with some exceptions was mostly cancer

Top fallacy. Not that I don't agree with the part that rulership requires male traits, but all the rest is bullshit. Males display female traits and vice versa every day, a conflict of identity just doesn't naturally follow.

>pr*testants
>Humans
Pick one

Spotted the Azadi.

>c*tholics
>first world
Pick one

she did. she sided with mark anthony instead of the superior gaius octavius

>fucking the enemy for bread

Ironically Egypt was kinda the breadbasket of the mediterranean

...

Better pic.
Empress tzu

>Tfw you rightuessly burn down the people who betrayed you.

>Notice how the reverse native man with spanish woman was not allowed

It was allowed, what the fuck are you saying? Not many women moved to America but even so it wasn't rare for them to marry Amerindian men.

Proofs?

>1514 law
>Burgous law
>Valladolid law

There was literally nothing stopping Spanish, Amerindian or Black people marrying each other, at the end of the day they were all just Catholic. You need to understand that, legally, Amerindians and free Blacks were as Spanish as any White Spaniard.

While inter racial marriages were not uncommon, the norm in terms of inter racial marriages were the marriages between "related" groups

>Whites marrying "Mestizos", "Mulatos"
>Amerindians marrying "Metizos" and Zambos
>Blacks marrying "Mulatos" and "Zambos"

Then again, in places like what is today Colombia and Costa Rica, marriages between Amerindian men and White women were actually the norm. Also, when the Spanish government starting favouring Spain born Spaniards, basically every racial difference between Americans was erased. What people also ignore is that the "caste system" in Spain wasn't something imposed legally or even by force.


filosofia.org/mon/tem/es0224.htm

web.archive.org/web/20141229080502/http://www.educar-argentina.com.ar/CORIA/coria10.htm#.U5RW9Sj4JZ1

books.google.es/books?id=XNskK95W5BUC&pg=PA254&dq="El sistema de castas"&ei=0tAXSsigLIXGzAS_uNnHBw&hl=es#v=onepage&q="El sistema de castas"&f=false

>were actually the norm
Not really.Most inter racial marriages were mostly spanish male any women.Most spanish women in America were married to criollos or peninsulares. For example the first wife of Bolivar was moved to Spain to marry a noble there

>Not really. Most inter racial marriages were mostly spanish male any women

False, but whatever. I don't see how could anybody claim that when in most places you couldn't even find one or even two of the three main racial groups.

Even if you decide to go and search for baptize acts you will find kids product of marriages between men and women of any race. You also seem to forget that the "lack" of Spanish women was only at the beginning, and that the only places where race actually had an important part in everyday relations was today's México, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Perú and Bolivia.

Btw, I don't see how a marriage between a rich aristocrat and another rich aristocrat is an example of racial relations between most of the everyday poor people.

>False
It is not false. Stop being butthurt. The ratio was probably 10 males to 1 female in interracial relationships (Spanish only). White pussy was very valueable and no father with a brain would try to marry her with a nigger or an indian while Spanish criollos with wealth and money were pursing Spanish women.
>You also seem to forget that the "lack" of Spanish women was only at the beginning
As Criollos started to search Spanish women to m8. And then their daughters mostly married Spaniards and Criollos and so on. Spanish inmigration to America wasn't really high at any given point so the few Spanish women were very valueable.

But Spanish women in America were valueable even if they were poor as they were so few as most of the Spanish inmigrants were males and they clearly outnumbered women that is why the lower classes of males ended up breeding with indian and niggers while the higher classes married Spanish women. This is just pretty fucking clear in places like Mexico or Colombia were 90% the wealthy people nd celebrities are criollos and Lebanese

Right to the bone. Have a (you) user

>I post sources that indicated what I claim
>"butthurt", le niggers

I have to say, not only you show your ignorance of the time, but seem to believe that even at the time the simple fact of being a White Spaniard meant shit

>be White Spaniard
>poor as fuck
>migrate to America
>still poor as fuck
>no education, no access to land or money
>but I'm White, therefore, non White will chase my White daughters pussy

Race meant literally shit back even back then, the Mixed descendants of the rich/aristocratic Spanish had a way better life, access to land and money the Whitest of the poor Spaniards, who lived no different that the so called inferior races.

Also

>México
>a good example of race relations

México, along with the places I mentioned before, mainly Perú, are fucked up in terms of racial relations, the Spaniards really did a number there; but those places are not a good example of how things worked in all of Latin America.

>Colombia

The biggest racial group in Colombia are White, so is not a surprise that White are over represented in different groups, that's like complaining that most rich people in Jamaica is Black or most rich people in Argentina is White.

btw, most Mexican actors are not "White" Mexicans, but Mixed Latin Americans, mostly from Costa Rica, Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela and so on. They call them "international latins/mixed", and while yes, it fucks most of Mexican people who are obviously mixed with strong Amerindian characteristics, the reason why they are preferred is to sell their products, tv programs or whatever in most of Latin American. I mean, even Spaniards are rejected for not looking "White" enough or being too "dark".

efe.com/efe/america/mexico/publicidad-en-mexico-donde-el-color-de-piel-cierra-puertas-a-muchos-actores/50000545-3133476

so you're confirming that she was a top tier ruler

>Race meant literally shit back even back then
So why did the criollo caste basically stayed pure? They are pretty fucking numerous and they are basically 100% European.It is simple.Spaniards married outside of their race when they couldn't get anything better
>The biggest racial group in Colombia are White
>Implying
Mixed people there considere themselves white.Most can be differientiated from actual criollos pretty fast
>but those places are not a good example of how things worked in all of Latin America.
In Chile all the wealthy people are white and it is a mestizo country.In Ecuador happens the same,in Venezuela happens the same, in Cuba happened the same until Castro,in the DR happens the same with a very wealthy white ellite and a huge nigger underclass. What are those good examples? Indians weren't desired as mates and were usually made fun of for being dumb and ugly.Barely any Indian climbed the social ladder.Not even in the army.Things weren't how you put them.

...

If it wasn't for a gust of wind and some fire she'd probably be remembered as one of the worst monarch ever

How can you possibly have existence without essence? Impossible, simply. If humans were just immobile observers, why would we have hands, feet, legs, muscles, eyes, or anything at all? We simply wouldn't be, thus essence precedes physical existence.
Or take this example; The muscles in my arm have a certain strength. I can improve their strength by working out. But first i have to decide to do so, this decision in my brain corresponds to the essence which precedes the physical existence of my improved muscles.

Well meme'd!

>Males display female traits and vice versa every day
Does that say anything about the essence of a man or a woman? Don't you think it's possible to alter your essence or to degenerate or to stray from what it is to be a "man" or "woman" and thus fail at your number one task in life: Survival? Take a battlefield for example, you can look across it before the battle is joined and you will see many warriors, but only few victors. Most of those warriors do not embody the real essence of a warrior (if we assume that warriors win) only a few of them will have the essence of a warrior who wins.

>some creeps try to hit on you
>burn them alive
you go gurl!

Threads like this make me curious about the average age of Veeky Forums.

"essence" is a construct of our mind, just like every other abstract concept. something cannot have essence if it does not also exist. it is possible to exist but have no essence.

What was her problem?

She's upset that you don't have sex mods installed and constantly give her the cock for an opinion bonus

>Some creeps murder your husband
>burn them alive
>unite tribes and create a kingsom for your son
My faith lies in u mistress.

>siding with a nerd

It would be, except surprisingly few normies have heard of her.

>Guess I'm on fire now. Egh....

That horse story is bullshit made up by her enemies. Catherine was actually the GOAT female ruler

Behind every female ruler is a lover who actually rules.

>Su majestad católica Doña Isabel única reina de Castilla,León,Galicia,Sevilla,Murcia,Cordoba,las Islas de los Canes y las Indias y Señora de Arévalo y Vizcaya y conquistadora de Granada
>Cucked by anyone
Nice try. He cucked Fernando out of Castilla. Cucknando spent 2 months REEEing at a tiny as village while she didn't allow him to enter in the court. To piss him of she stopped whine to cone into the village until he accepted his cuck status in front of everyone

>Catherine was actually the GOAT female ruler
>German horse fucker
>Superior to the virginal pure queenfu the Catholic highness
Mid kek

In English please

She was a bad mum ;_;

Fucking medieval artists.

...

Could you give some examples of her reforms?

the women who actually seize power are normally decent rulers

No, they can't.

They fuck up everything they come in contact with, and if not for the men that guide them, they would be a complete disaster in every thing they do.

link pls

She took castles and weapons away from the nobility. She created brotherhoods to steal the role of protectors of the nobles cutting a lot of their sources of income. The inquisition was basically a secret service and if a noble tried to plot they would just be jailed (the inquisitor had to be named by her not by the church unlike the rest of europe) and most importantly he created a sizeable standing army and increased the crowns revenue by 10 times . Overall Castille before Izzy was chaotic and poor,the king barely had any money and he could raise at most 20 thousand men with all the help of the nobility. After Izzy Castille was the wealthiest crown in Europe (interms of net revenue), it had the biggest navy in Europe eclipsing the Portuguesevone,it had an standing army of around 80 thousand people and said army was the best equiped in Europe and at last it was a very stable country in which the church,the crown and the nobility worked very tight together. The only internal struggle after Isabel died were the comuneros but that was basiaclly Charles fault

you either have some mother issues or you're a butthurt virgin who never had the chance to speak to decent women

also, maria theresia

That's right.

Nigger, I'm a father, with military service that has seen how females under pressure perform, and you're a fucking brainwashed moron.

Females have demonstrated time and again that they make decisions that are WORSE for society, as a whole, than men do, because they don't have the same sense of self sacrifice as men, and won't make decisions that discriminate against themselves, even if it's for the benefit of society. That's why they demand standards are lowered to accommodate women, rather than accept the fact that they SUCK at most shit, and can't hang with men physically, mentally, or emotionally.

That's why we have 5 foot nothing bitches wearing police badges and military uniforms these days, and harpy shrews in office making emo decisions to give tax dollars to whores for abortions and single mothers for spitting out future criminals.

>Women are on average better rulers
>Muh they just have a men behind
Do you have any proofs? Not everything is about war you massive autist

You want proof, retard?

1. Police force
- standards lowered
-costs increased
-efficiency decreased

2. Military
- same

3. Welfare for single mothers
-increases incidents of unwed mothers instead of decreasing
-increased number of children had by unwed mothers instead of decreasing

4. University systems
- lowered standards of admissions
- increased costs due to additional logistics requirements
- increased costs due to false discrimination, harassment, rape accusations
- increased costs due to actual of the same above

All this shit is championed by female leaders.

Meanwhile, they mock women that stay at home in order to be mothers and wives.

Females are shit for leadership, and the fact that the west has been collapsing ever since they've been stupid enough to allow females to vote and impact government policy, clearly demonstrates that fact.

But the military and police corps have nothing to do with ruling. Don't be a moron. Also not all countries are as retarded as the US and their gender and racial laws

>But the military and police corps have nothing to do with ruling. Don't be a moron

They have everything to do with the female decision making process, and clearly demonstrate that their decision making is FLAWED.

Females are biologically designed to bear and raise children, and men are biologically designed to set the conditions that facilitate that purpose, and that means establishing law, order, and defending the family and tribe.

keep blaming everything on women you delusional faggot. thats no ''proof'', thats your subjective perception. if your going into a real discussion, try to get some better argument.
>b-but thats how I feel
is not a valid argument

Why do you losers always get mad when someone criticizes women? You know they find you unattractive, right

And it's always the same shit, always the retarded tired ad hominems

>You're a homo
>You're a virgin
>You have mommy issues
>You are resentful
instead of actually addressing the problem.
Every single thread I've seen about this shit on Veeky Forums always attracts a cohort of these pussy slaves with their non-arguments, like clockwork.

Joseph and Mary Magdaline

>Mary Magdalene
Where was the cuckoldry?

It's disturbing seeing these deluded whiteknights thinking they're doing a service. Women will write essays apologizing for Schopenhauer and Nietzsche while whiteknights are ready to trash both for not being nice to girls in their writing. Yes, you will find 9/10 it's always other men doing this.

They're misguided kids either desperate to be on the right side of pussy or want to show off how virtuous they are.

>always the retarded tired ad hominems
hmm you're right, but can I stll call you a faggot or nah?
>instead of actually addressing the problem
I get your point with women, I think It's just stupid to generalize a whole gender based on your experience

But we have examples of women being capable administrators. The army reqyires other kind of decission making

>people call out someone's retarded generalizations
>WHITE KNIGHT!

You're literally no better than the feminists that support killing all men because they got hit on by a guy in an elevator once. Sweeping generalizations are ridiculous no matter what flavor they come in, and opposing them has nothing to do with wanting to please X group of people.

>Dude, don't generalize. It's retarded and wrong.
>Anyone who speaks ill of women has mother issues or you're a butthurt virgin who never had the chance to speak to decent women!
Hypocrites like you are the worst of all.