What went wrong?

>Women's sole role and social value was reproduction
>An unmarried woman was the property of her father, and once married, she became the property of her husband. She had few rights, except for privileges granted by her husband or father.
>Married women were required to obey their husbands and were expected to be chaste, obedient, pleasant, gentle, submissive, and, unless sweet-spoken, silent.

The power of the State always expand by enlisting the support of people who feel oppressed by intermediary institutions, them using this people to destroy these institutions.

It works with absolute monarchs enlisting the support of the commons to defeat the aristocracy, and the modern state extending right to women to destroy the power of the patriarchs.

>Where will it all end? In the destruction of all other command for the benefit of one alone—that of the state. In each man’s absolute freedom from every family and social authority, a freedom the price of which is complete submission to the state. In the complete equality as between themselves of all citizens, paid for by their equal abasement before the power of their absolute master—the state. In the disappearance of every constraint which does not emanate from the state, and in the denial of every pre-eminence which is not approved by the state. In a word, it ends in the atomization of society, and in the rupture of every private tie linking man and man, whose only bond is now their common bondage to the state. The extremes of individualism and socialism meet: that was their predestined course.

Bertrand de Jouvenel, On Power

...

this board attracts the weirdest people

As people developed a greater tendency to think for themselves and question the institutions of society, it became increasingly difficult to find a convincing argument for why one sex should be granted freedom, while the other should be considered property.

Our forefathers swallowed the cuckpill and fell for the equality meme.

Thank G*d

That's an interesting take on it.

Second from left, Alpha as fuck.

That's a bad thing though

Men are not supposed to care about women though.

I don't think so. If there is a clear reason to grant one group rights and keep the other in slavery, that reason should become apparent through questioning. "Because so-and-so said so" is not a good basis for a system of ethics.

>Men are not supposed to care about women though.
According to who though?

>he doesn't want a completely obedient wife that's his literal property

t. nu male

If I do ever seek a partner, I do not want them to be obedient to me solely because of the power I have over them. That would be like Stalin claiming his people love him because anyone who says they don't gets a long vacation in Siberia. It's fake and hollow. It would be well and good if my main desire was power and not loyalty, but I have no great need for power. It says more about my value as a person if people freely choose to be loyal to me, rather than only demonstrating loyalty to avoid a threat of violent retribution.

I can see why women don't want traditional sex roles with you guys ragging on how they're just property.

I seriously don't understand why would you want a mindless robot employee over a thinking partner. You're the only one insecure about his masculinity here.

Not sure how it happened, but all I know is that I am a 20 year old khhecfv and women's freedom is the cause

Yeah, being chads cum dump is so much more liberating. Or working 55 hr weeks at your HR job.

>fell for the "marriage is about love" meme

You honestly want a wife that would argue with you, be insubordinate, nag you, etc? You're fucking crazy. If you're going to spend the rest of your life with someone you might as well train them. Make it easier on both of you.

Women do want it though. Women have a natural instinct to submit to men they perceive to be high status. No matter If it's through enforced monogamy or harems forming around elite men; it will happen.

>You honestly want a wife that would argue with you, be insubordinate, nag you, etc? You're fucking crazy. If you're going to spend the rest of your life with someone you might as well train them. Make it easier on both of you.
Train them, sure, but not make them a slave. I'd rather have no one at all than someone who does what I say just because they have no choice to do otherwise. I'm already pretty thoroughly convinced that the family life isn't for everyone though.

>Calling all women cum dumps
More and more women are joining the fem crusade because of guys like you. Don't worry. I'm sure you're a MGTOW.
I'm sure you're an expert on women's psychology.

What is this, /pol/?

I never called all women cum dumps though, you idiot. I merely said them playing the role of some guys cheap fuck toy.

Fem crusade is a joke that will be exterminated by either Islam or coservatives.

Are you honestly denying women don't have an invorn desire to get swooped up by some Chad? Why do you think Disney movies are so popular- a hot guy comes and does everything for you.

According to nature, the men who care the least about women(psychopaths) breed the most.

That's not a "should" or "supposed to" though. It's just a correlation.

Hey, nice appeal to nature. Do you enjoy being a slave to your base instincts?