The downfall of the straight male in western society

[HitandRun Reggie]

[i]"The point is that it should be women who choose, not men

[9erempiree]

Feminist:facepalm

[ImmortalNemesis]

jameer

where are you

[9erempiree]

Jameer would call them cucks.

[ImmortalNemesis]

they are cucks tbf

[Dbrog]

What a joke this is. Feminist propaganda is hilarious. How are women not the ones that choose right now anyway? They literally are choosing from a ****ing platter of men who have to come up and try to peacock for them only to be rejected many times. It may be a silly analogy but look at tinder and how many matches per week women get compared to men. It's a ****ing astronomically higher number! Isn't this the literal definition of choosing? Basically a police lineup and they point to one! :oldlol:

[UK2K]

Haha that bitch got her man so ***** whipped she made him think being a feminist means allowing your wife to sleep around. :lol :lol :lol

[El Kabong]

As long as she's willing to let him sleep around too it's fine. But she probably wouldn't.

[warriorfan]

op are you stupid this is great. Find that guys wife and go fucc Her. Women turning cucks isn't anything new. If women want to convince their cucks to fucc me I'm all for it.

[imdaman99]

You post an article that's more than 2 months old...are you going around searching for feminist articles? :wtf:

[Derka]

This has been posted here before.

Feel the same way I did then: what these people do has zero bearing on how I do my thing.

[knickballer]

Didn't read but if the guy likes/okay with her wife being rammed by other men and sleeping around that's his problem. I pity the dude though. Beta gonna beta you know?

Alot of this shit is just counter culture though. I don't think people even care about these issues but they just want to fight some battle.

[Vaniiiia]

op are you stupid this is great. Find that guys wife and go fucc Her. Women turning cucks isn't anything new. If women want to convince their cucks to fucc me I'm all for it.
Cringe.

You are clearly a virgin.

[RidonKs]

it's a salient point

its why a feminist laughs at the counter revolutionary mens rights activist who suggests there are significant double standards that immunizes the positions women take and hold back men from expressing what they really think.

the feminist knows that the double standard was literally the legal basis for the oppression of women. men are judged on one standard, defined as the citizen; women are judged on another standard, defined as sentient property. as you might imagine, holding rights that are parallel to livestock can be an inhibitor in your development.

the sexual double standard is a particular concern. people need to grow up feeling the freedom to explore their sexuality however their need. if that need isn't satisfied, or if you satisfy it in a deviant or disreputable way, or worse yet if its satisfaction is forced upon you without your consent; and that sexual appetite propelling each of us into the unknown desperately searching for god knows what we want? it will ultimately deteriorate.

you become subservient, docile, uncritical. essentially you become livestock, as befits sentient property properly defined.

this is called dehumanization. it is systematic bigotry. it is invisible to its enablers and the root of all evil to its victims.




i think the sexual liberation of humanity will be quite something to behold and my gut says nothing will stop the current trend toward hedonism and liberty. people will do what they want in the society we've constructed around them. prostitution is well on its way out of the black market. friends with benefits have overtaken the western world.

the great irony is that monogamy is now construed as the feminine prerogative. if you want me, you have to want ME and ONLY me. and she has also been its only noble adherent for the most part, which gives credence to the claim and i guess is a part of her naivety. but its also been a masculine prerogative to cement his authority over his property and refuse her the freedom to liberate herself from his sexual stranglehold. which factor was more at play is impossible to tell.

though its interesting that pre-ancient greek societies were matriarchal. the youthful goddess lead the pack and chose her mates on an annual basis; mates who at the end of the harvest were sacrificed. the superstition was prior to the realization that men were equally necessary for procreation though so maybe a moot point.

i think she will realize her romantic requirements can be divorced from her sexual longings a lot easier than she thought. men figured this out years ago; or perhaps we are just so wired as to make it a non-issue since time immemorial.

there will always be couples who settle down together and remain in partnership for life. the particular typeset that will follow that path isn't going away. in a lot of ways its an excellent idea on merely pragmatic grounds; you become so intimately familiar with the other person that you can combine your energies in productive ways, you get constant support and well meaning instruction, most of all you get consistency and reliability (if you're lucky)... not to mention the opportunity to raise the next generation. lots of people want that.

but i believe the great majority of us seek a less resourceful path. we don't want to tend a garden, we want to blaze a trail through the great wilderness, lay our claim and let it be known that by GOD WE WERE HERE. there's a little kid inside everyone of us who desperately wants to be a conqueror.

the often anonymous satisfaction of that need, through say bar hookups and online dating, is a marvelous strategy that i think is only in its beginning stages. most importantly i stress those strategies obligate CONSENT, since it is our personal autonomy that's primarily at stake.

will it lead to monogamy withering away to like local communitarian probably rural pockets? possibly. dunno if that's a good thing but we'll be finding out soon enough, so long as we don't kill ourselves in the process.

[Vaniiiia]

it's a salient point

its why a feminist laughs at the counter revolutionary mens rights activist who suggests there are significant double standards that immunizes the positions women take and hold back men from expressing what they really think.

the feminist knows that the double standard was literally the legal basis for the oppression of women. men are judged on one standard, defined as the citizen; women are judged on another standard, defined as sentient property. as you might imagine, holding rights that are parallel to livestock can be an inhibitor in your development.

the sexual double standard is a particular concern. people need to grow up feeling the freedom to explore their sexuality however their need. if that need isn't satisfied, or if you satisfy it in a deviant or disreputable way, or worse yet if its satisfaction is forced upon you without your consent; and that sexual appetite propelling each of us into the unknown desperately searching for god knows what we want? it will ultimately deteriorate.

you become subservient, docile, uncritical. essentially you become livestock, as befits sentient property properly defined.

this is called dehumanization. it is systematic bigotry. it is invisible to its enablers and the root of all evil to its victims.




i think the sexual liberation of humanity will be quite something to behold and my gut says nothing will stop the current trend toward hedonism and liberty. people will do what they want in the society we've constructed around them. prostitution is well on its way out of the black market. friends with benefits have overtaken the western world.

the great irony is that monogamy is now construed as the feminine prerogative. if you want me, you have to want ME and ONLY me. and she has also been its only noble adherent for the most part, which gives credence to the claim and i guess is a part of her naivety. but its also been a masculine prerogative to cement his authority over his property and refuse her the freedom to liberate herself from his sexual stranglehold. which factor was more at play is impossible to tell.

though its interesting that pre-ancient greek societies were matriarchal. the youthful goddess lead the pack and chose her mates on an annual basis; mates who at the end of the harvest were sacrificed. the superstition was prior to the realization that men were equally necessary for procreation though so maybe a moot point.

i think she will realize her romantic requirements can be divorced from her sexual longings a lot easier than she thought. men figured this out years ago; or perhaps we are just so wired as to make it a non-issue since time immemorial.

there will always be couples who settle down together and remain in partnership for life. the particular typeset that will follow that path isn't going away. in a lot of ways its an excellent idea on merely pragmatic grounds; you become so intimately familiar with the other person that you can combine your energies in productive ways, you get constant support and well meaning instruction, most of all you get consistency and reliability (if you're lucky)... not to mention the opportunity to raise the next generation. lots of people want that.

but i believe the great majority of us seek a less resourceful path. we don't want to tend a garden, we want to blaze a trail through the great wilderness, lay our claim and let it be known that by GOD WE WERE HERE. there's a little kid inside everyone of us who desperately wants to be a conqueror.

the often anonymous satisfaction of that need, through say bar hookups and online dating, is a marvelous strategy that i think is only in its beginning stages. most importantly i stress those strategies obligate CONSENT, since it is our personal autonomy that's primarily at stake.

will it lead to monogamy withering away to like local communitarian probably rural pockets? possibly. dunno if that's a good thing but we'll be finding out soon enough, so long as we don't kill ourselves in the process.
http://i.imgur.com/shcw2cs.jpg



***** kill yourself already bro :kobe:

[NZStreetBaller]

If a woman is out there fuccing other dudes. Then she certainly aint your woman and you most definately are not her MAN

[RidonKs]

http://i.imgur.com/shcw2cs.jpg



***** kill yourself already bro :kobe:
#jussayin

[Dbrog]

RidonKs wtf even was that mayne? hahaha!

I THINK, from what I gathered, you are saying there is a role reversal going on and women are now thinking of men as livestock? And then go on to hypothesize that they could eventually separate sex the way men have done forever? Hence the monogamy fading away? I feel like this was written while you were under the influence of something :oldlol:

[RidonKs]

thats about right dbrog


i think we underestimate how inhibited women have been by patriarchy. lot of marvelous things to say about our patriarchal heritage but one of them ISN'T the treatment of women.

for thousands of years the suggestion has been that women are at best part of a support system, and at very least an object of value and desire. and of course if you just look outside the window, women are currently turning that ancient speculation completely on its head. it's worth a look at our western canon to really get a picture for what has gone on. how many females can you read from before 1750 or w/e it is? not a particular many.

so without going on ad nauseaum this time, all i'm pondering is whether we have yet to see the heights of a woman's genius, as we have seen the heights of male genius? will the peak of feminine intellect more or less produce the same ideas... or will they be uniquely insightful and distinguishable from the intellectual masters of mankind?

which emancipation has been healthier so far: the female spirit's or the male spirit's?



then again that distinction might be meaningless and the peaks of genius are so high that sexuality becomes irrelevant from the equation.... reason drives everything, while sexual appetites and base motives are stifled. female and male makes no difference.

i should also say i haven't really seen any first hand evidence of what i'm writing, its all just imaginative crap. or hardly that i dunno :lol

[SpecialQue]

Couple has open marriage.

Teenage boys get mad.

The world continues to turn.

[Akrazotile]

Couple has open marriage.

Teenage boys get mad.

The world continues to turn.


This.

The guy probably is a huge cuck. But so what. That's his business.

[Trollsmasher]

thats about right dbrog


i think we underestimate how inhibited women have been by patriarchy. lot of marvelous things to say about our patriarchal heritage but one of them ISN'T the treatment of women.

for thousands of years the suggestion has been that women are at best part of a support system, and at very least an object of value and desire. and of course if you just look outside the window, women are currently turning that ancient speculation completely on its head. it's worth a look at our western canon to really get a picture for what has gone on. how many females can you read from before 1750 or w/e it is? not a particular many.

so without going on ad nauseaum this time, all i'm pondering is whether we have yet to see the heights of a woman's genius, as we have seen the heights of male genius? will the peak of feminine intellect more or less produce the same ideas... or will they be uniquely insightful and distinguishable from the intellectual masters of mankind?

which emancipation has been healthier so far: the female spirit's or the male spirit's?



then again that distinction might be meaningless and the peaks of genius are so high that sexuality becomes irrelevant from the equation.... reason drives everything, while sexual appetites and base motives are stifled. female and male makes no difference.

i should also say i haven't really seen any first hand evidence of what i'm writing, its all just imaginative crap. or hardly that i dunno :lol
you need some schopenhauer in your life

[Derka]

Couple has open marriage.

Teenage boys get mad.

The world continues to turn.
So, so, so very much this.

[BasedTom]

If a woman is out there fuccing other dudes. Then she certainly aint your woman and you most definately are not her MAN
pretty much hit the nail on the head

[Jameerthefear]

I've posted this before. It's SO EASY to spot the ****ing cucks in this thread. Just so ****ing easy.

[iamgine]

Many people have open marriages but the way this one is worded...Sounds like a fake internet trolling story.

[niko]

it's a salient point

its why a feminist laughs at the counter revolutionary mens rights activist who suggests there are significant double standards that immunizes the positions women take and hold back men from expressing what they really think.

the feminist knows that the double standard was literally the legal basis for the oppression of women. men are judged on one standard, defined as the citizen; women are judged on another standard, defined as sentient property. as you might imagine, holding rights that are parallel to livestock can be an inhibitor in your development.

the sexual double standard is a particular concern. people need to grow up feeling the freedom to explore their sexuality however their need. if that need isn't satisfied, or if you satisfy it in a deviant or disreputable way, or worse yet if its satisfaction is forced upon you without your consent; and that sexual appetite propelling each of us into the unknown desperately searching for god knows what we want? it will ultimately deteriorate.

you become subservient, docile, uncritical. essentially you become livestock, as befits sentient property properly defined.

this is called dehumanization. it is systematic bigotry. it is invisible to its enablers and the root of all evil to its victims.




i think the sexual liberation of humanity will be quite something to behold and my gut says nothing will stop the current trend toward hedonism and liberty. people will do what they want in the society we've constructed around them. prostitution is well on its way out of the black market. friends with benefits have overtaken the western world.

the great irony is that monogamy is now construed as the feminine prerogative. if you want me, you have to want ME and ONLY me. and she has also been its only noble adherent for the most part, which gives credence to the claim and i guess is a part of her naivety. but its also been a masculine prerogative to cement his authority over his property and refuse her the freedom to liberate herself from his sexual stranglehold. which factor was more at play is impossible to tell.

though its interesting that pre-ancient greek societies were matriarchal. the youthful goddess lead the pack and chose her mates on an annual basis; mates who at the end of the harvest were sacrificed. the superstition was prior to the realization that men were equally necessary for procreation though so maybe a moot point.

i think she will realize her romantic requirements can be divorced from her sexual longings a lot easier than she thought. men figured this out years ago; or perhaps we are just so wired as to make it a non-issue since time immemorial.

there will always be couples who settle down together and remain in partnership for life. the particular typeset that will follow that path isn't going away. in a lot of ways its an excellent idea on merely pragmatic grounds; you become so intimately familiar with the other person that you can combine your energies in productive ways, you get constant support and well meaning instruction, most of all you get consistency and reliability (if you're lucky)... not to mention the opportunity to raise the next generation. lots of people want that.

but i believe the great majority of us seek a less resourceful path. we don't want to tend a garden, we want to blaze a trail through the great wilderness, lay our claim and let it be known that by GOD WE WERE HERE. there's a little kid inside everyone of us who desperately wants to be a conqueror.

the often anonymous satisfaction of that need, through say bar hookups and online dating, is a marvelous strategy that i think is only in its beginning stages. most importantly i stress those strategies obligate CONSENT, since it is our personal autonomy that's primarily at stake.

will it lead to monogamy withering away to like local communitarian probably rural pockets? possibly. dunno if that's a good thing but we'll be finding out soon enough, so long as we don't kill ourselves in the process.

If you had a wife she'd go **** other guys just because you wrote this. At least i'm assuming because i couldn't get through 20 words.

[niko]

I don't get why you all care what others do so much. Do your own thing. I don't think being some anti woman person is much better. Be a man. Part of which is not giving so much thought to all this stupidity like it affects you.

[niko]

I've posted this before. It's SO EASY to spot the ****ing cucks in this thread. Just so ****ing easy.
You're massively beta. You read a story about some girly man and somehow you feel like it's going to affect you.

[RidonKs]

If you had a wife she'd go **** other guys just because you wrote this. At least i'm assuming because i couldn't get through 20 words.
lol then why would i have married her

tax purposes i guess in which case fvck it

[RidonKs]

I don't get why you all care what others do so much. Do your own thing. I don't think being some anti woman person is much better. Be a man. Part of which is not giving so much thought to all this stupidity like it affects you.
its just as dangerous to simplify everything down to black and white while calling curious people who want to talk about it dumb... you would have made an excellent brown shirt

[oh the horror]

I care when other men attempt to "educate" the rest of us men about how we should act with women like In cases like this


You want to let your wife fu*k other men while you sit at home and refer to yourself as a feminist? Fine. Keep that shit to yourself

[niko]

its just as dangerous to simplify everything down to black and white while calling curious people who want to talk about it dumb... you would have made an excellent brown shirt

I don't care if you want to talk about it. People here are acting like there being this subset is bleeding into the rest of society and is coming straight at them. It's stupid.

Being open minded doesn't mean you see every minor thing of being of enormous importance.

[Derka]

I care when other men attempt to "educate" the rest of us men about how we should act with women like In cases like this

You want to let your wife fu*k other men while you sit at home and refer to yourself as a feminist? Fine. Keep that shit to yourself

Unless you're a complete shut-in, there is at least one point in your week where someone tries to "educate" you about something they believe in. Under no circumstances are you compelled to listen or care about what they have to say.

[NumberSix]

I don't care if you want to talk about it. People here are acting like there being this subset is bleeding into the rest of society and is coming straight at them. It's stupid.

Being open minded doesn't mean you see every minor thing of being of enormous importance.
Yeah but, "open minded" usually means being open to only left wing ideas. There's nothing "open minded" about saying "my ideas are by definition, open minded and yours are by definition closed minded." In these cases, "open minded" is just a code word for "think like me."

[niko]

Yeah but, "open minded" usually means being open to only left wing ideas. There's nothing "open minded" about saying "my ideas are by definition, open minded and yours are by definition closed minded." In these cases, "open minded" is just a code word for "think like me."
they're afraid they will have to become feminists and their girls will have harems while they sit home and raise babies because of a youtube video. where you got left wing and right wing is beyond me. You and Kevin should just make a thread and argue with each other THis is not political at all.

[kNIOKAS]

it's a salient point
...
the sexual double standard is a particular concern. people need to grow up feeling the freedom to explore their sexuality however their need. if that need isn't satisfied, or if you satisfy it in a deviant or disreputable way, or worse yet if its satisfaction is forced upon you without your consent; and that sexual appetite propelling each of us into the unknown desperately searching for god knows what we want? it will ultimately deteriorate.
...
i think the sexual liberation of humanity will be quite something to behold and my gut says nothing will stop the current trend toward hedonism and liberty. people will do what they want in the society we've constructed around them. prostitution is well on its way out of the black market. friends with benefits have overtaken the western world.
....
there will always be couples who settle down together and remain in partnership for life. the particular typeset that will follow that path isn't going away. in a lot of ways its an excellent idea on merely pragmatic grounds; you become so intimately familiar with the other person that you can combine your energies in productive ways, you get constant support and well meaning instruction, most of all you get consistency and reliability (if you're lucky)... not to mention the opportunity to raise the next generation. lots of people want that.

but i believe the great majority of us seek a less resourceful path. we don't want to tend a garden, we want to blaze a trail through the great wilderness, lay our claim and let it be known that by GOD WE WERE HERE. there's a little kid inside everyone of us who desperately wants to be a conqueror.

the often anonymous satisfaction of that need, through say bar hookups and online dating, is a marvelous strategy that i think is only in its beginning stages. most importantly i stress those strategies obligate CONSENT, since it is our personal autonomy that's primarily at stake.

will it lead to monogamy withering away to like local communitarian probably rural pockets? possibly. dunno if that's a good thing but we'll be finding out soon enough, so long as we don't kill ourselves in the process.
Inrtdesting.

I would however feel unsure about the freedom to explore the sexuality from the get go could be leading to normal sexual development. We kind of know that repression transforms it in times, but I just don't know enough about the alternative of absolute freedom leading anywhere.

Regarding hedonism, liberty and the less resourceful life - I would attribute that to culture and technology. It is way easier to find partners online than to try make it work with the neighbour in the same town. Revolutionary speaking, the nurture of intimate relationships has become a hard way to have sex, since everybody is mobile and can get laid through connecting with like-minded individuals. Friends with benefits are often the shallow relationship, that's not really friendship anyway. We're living in a culture where relationships can be easily discarded, and the divorce rate is getting higher and higher. Nobody is encouraged to stick together and make it work.

All this goes together with the diminishing family culture, since the individuality, autonomy and a right to buy a proper consumer good - either sex or lifestyle - seems to have become a norm. However, I think that the monogamy is not going to disappear completely, as we find young couples creating families, and I see it as a pushback against contemporary culture, the meaningless of work&party lifestyle.

So masses are out to get laid, but there's a pushback as people don't find it normal I think. It's not as dim.

Regarding differences between sexes and everything - I try to stay away from the topic because I just don't see it as a fruitful discussion. Both men and women are human, both love raising children and living with their significant ones. To me they are more alike then not. Women have been an integral part of any society, and I fail to see an adversarial relationship between men and women. Maybe in ISIS, but not in the world history at large.

[UK2K]

Yeah but, "open minded" usually means being open to only left wing ideas. There's nothing "open minded" about saying "my ideas are by definition, open minded and yours are by definition closed minded." In these cases, "open minded" is just a code word for "think like me."

Fact.

There's an obvious bias when it comes to which side is 'open minded' and which side is 'hateful'. Its in society, its in the media. If you don't think like a liberal, they will throw buzz words at you (bigot, racist, hateful) that earns them liberal bonus points.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

If you had a wife she'd go **** other guys just because you wrote this. At least i'm assuming because i couldn't get through 20 words.

You couldn't get through 20 words because you are an illiterate. And stupid. And retarded. Yeah, that sounds about right. Niko is illiterate, stupid, and retarded and hence could not digest Ridonk's opinions.

Go f*cking do the dishes like Yoko commanded you to, or find yourself entertaining your sick cuckold fetishes on the Futon. You all around sicko sick person.

Hell awaits those of your ilk. And unlike your wife, people are hard at work making it nice and toasty for you to burn in.

[Dresta]

I do wish people would stop talking about the oppression of patriarchy, when it was a social arrangement that clearly protected women from what would be far more serious oppression. Now the world has changed, and become safer, women still secure themselves extra protections (now from the state), but while also demanding greater freedom and licence.

There hasn't been any significant cultural change. It's as it always has been.
 As in almost every culture, the essential facts of biology are manifest: the female is the limiting-factor in reproduction and therefore the female is in so many ways privileged; by contrast males are obliged to compete intra-sexually for status as a display of their genetic quality, and only the high-quality males are selected by females. The fact males compete and fight over status in such a way does not make them more free, but less so, and more a slave to biological functions.

And for the most part, with women, they find themselves joining in with the culture of permissiveness, indulgence and sensuality, not because this is in their natures, but because there is an increasingly strong social pressure encouraging them to do so. I knew lots of girls who only went out and slept with guys because 'that's what people do; that's what's normal' - even though it made them uncomfortable in lots of ways.



i think the sexual liberation of humanity will be quite something to behold and my gut says nothing will stop the current trend toward hedonism and liberty. people will do what they want in the society we've constructed around them. prostitution is well on its way out of the black market. friends with benefits have overtaken the western world.

the great irony is that monogamy is now construed as the feminine prerogative. if you want me, you have to want ME and ONLY me. and she has also been its only noble adherent for the most part, which gives credence to the claim and i guess is a part of her naivety. but its also been a masculine prerogative to cement his authority over his property and refuse her the freedom to liberate herself from his sexual stranglehold. which factor was more at play is impossible to tell.

though its interesting that pre-ancient greek societies were matriarchal. the youthful goddess lead the pack and chose her mates on an annual basis; mates who at the end of the harvest were sacrificed. the superstition was prior to the realization that men were equally necessary for procreation though so maybe a moot point.

i think she will realize her romantic requirements can be divorced from her sexual longings a lot easier than she thought. men figured this out years ago; or perhaps we are just so wired as to make it a non-issue since time immemorial.

there will always be couples who settle down together and remain in partnership for life. the particular typeset that will follow that path isn't going away. in a lot of ways its an excellent idea on merely pragmatic grounds; you become so intimately familiar with the other person that you can combine your energies in productive ways, you get constant support and well meaning instruction, most of all you get consistency and reliability (if you're lucky)... not to mention the opportunity to raise the next generation. lots of people want that.

but i believe the great majority of us seek a less resourceful path. we don't want to tend a garden, we want to blaze a trail through the great wilderness, lay our claim and let it be known that by GOD WE WERE HERE. there's a little kid inside everyone of us who desperately wants to be a conqueror.

the often anonymous satisfaction of that need, through say bar hookups and online dating, is a marvelous strategy that i think is only in its beginning stages. most importantly i stress those strategies obligate CONSENT, since it is our personal autonomy that's primarily at stake.

will it lead to monogamy withering away to like local communitarian probably rural pockets? possibly. dunno if that's a good thing but we'll be finding out soon enough, so long as we don't kill ourselves in the process.
Hedonism does not lead to liberty but to servitude. Thinking the two go together is a huge mistake that even Epicurus didn't make.

"Men of intemperate minds can never be free: their passions forge their fetters"

You talk about the great majority, but the most likely way the great majority are ever going to find fulfilment in their lives is through familial commitment. People like the idiot who wrote that article can preen themselves all they like about how open-minded and forward-looking they are, but the truth is that they are merely self-indulgent and disgusting, and no child would want such embarrassments as parents.

"sexual liberation" & "hedonism" are not new things - they have run rampant many times throughout history, more than often enough to inform us that their indulgence does not lead to any freeing of the human spirit, and that the consequences for a society as a whole is generally negative, breeding decadence and licence. Did you know that the word libertine meant very much the same as what liberal means - A man attached to free and enlarged principles, a votary of liberty? Until, through licence and ill-use, the word became debased and associated with the likes of the Marquis de Sade. And as you can see: the word liberal itself is quickly going the same way.

[Nanners]

Great response to this self-described "male feminist"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-yaGzOO-Dw

The dude who wrote that original article is just a complete cuck and weakling douchebag. The guy cant really call himself a "male" feminist since he seems more feminine than his woman.... if anything he is a female feminist.

For the record, I consider myself to be a hardcore liberal, and I also think 98% of feminists are ****ing retarded.