Thread 24697222

How valid are Vilar's arguments in an age when women are outperforming and outearning men?

>>24697222 (OP)
>trips
Checked. This is your third or fourth bait post about this book. Just say what you want to say about it.

>>24697224
I'm just hoping for a discussion with others who have read it, or at least to read their thoughts about it. It's definitely thought-provoking, and challenges a worldview that many if not most people take for granted, either in a vague way or in definite terms.

the most provoking claim for me wasn't even that women use men for labour but that women were built to handle suffering because they can bear childbirth, also supported by studies that have found women's pain tolerance to be higher than men's, having understood that simple premise, it should open up entire lines of reasoning that challenge our views about women being the fair gender or women being delicate princesses, vilar is making the overall claim that women can handle pain better than men and therefore shouldn't complain about patriarchy or advocate for feminism, they were built purposely for receiving blows from men while men were built for handling the adversities from the environment, this is a much better claim, much more fundamental than advocating for traditional gender roles like housewife and breadwinner

>>24697222 (OP)
i read couple of dozen pages of that book, and I feel like she has a point. in today's men- women relations men is basically a slave to a woman. he has to submit to her every whim, every demand, has to put up with her crazy expectations, has to give her money, lots of money, basically has to strip himself of his dignity and individuality as a man. in return he doesn't get much

>>24697375
>vilar is making the overall claim that women can handle pain better than men and therefore shouldn't complain about patriarchy or advocate for feminism, they were built purposely for receiving blows from men while men were built for handling the adversities from the environment,
>
fuck you. I read that book. Its not a long book its a short quick read. Nowhere does Villar say that. Instead she concentrates on calling out bad behavior for what it is. Honestly a 1970 girl writer spouts off like a 1999 manosphere blog.

>>24697400
>i read couple of dozen pages of that book, and
well instead of skimming I read the whole thing. Its a free download online if you search. She makes women out to be callous manipulative and spoiled brats. Which is what men have been sayig for years. She said it all those years back, and back then you cant accuse her of being a right wing grifter.

>>24698008
look man i know about modern day white women, i met a bunch of them. obviously i agree with you, didn't you read my post?
my only hope is that not all the women are like that

>>24698008
Women are 100% master manipulators. That's where they find their strength, since they can't just brute force their way to their goals.
The only question is really how much of this stuff they do knowingly, and how often it's just monkey brain kicking in.

One day mods will care about zero effort cross-board spam.

>>24697222 (OP)
All those books were in to support the narrative and cause disruption between the people, not to mention that it was an opportunistic scam to latch onto, pqving the way to the manosphere and redpill movements. Men and women were made perfect for each other and they need themselves more than ever, but you need to get out of the psy ops you're into to see that.

Also, if i may add, OP is a faggot.

Same problem, different manifestation.

>>24699016
This is delusional. Feminist dykes are more likely to hate and resent masculine “chads”. The major problem is depolarization of the sexes, and in general industrialization, post-industrialization

>>24697375
I've long speculated this. To be a man is to be sensitive.

>>24697400
No wonder feminists hated her. She told the truth and they resented her for it.

>>24697400
The roles will always reverse.
Man is now receiving what he dished out.
The women who resisted man perished, and the survivors begrudgingly and humiliatingly surrendered. This is the only way forward.

>>24699201
Oh boy then I got bad news for you.

>>24699288
Women learned to soften men.
From cannibal rape apes to pacifist simps, man's evolutionary march goes on.
The pendulum goes fast these days; it won't be 10,000 years of abuse ahead of us. It will be a century or few; and then free generations will be born. It is natural to love.

>>24699330
To truly produce a hell of eternal torment you must wish it on yourself just as much and you must be able to withstand it to a greater extent than your victims - unless they merely take your place.
That's why forgiveness is key.

>>24699330
>Whig History
Things are always in flux

>>24699109
>hate and resent masculine “chads”
the one thing those women resent even more is weak, spineless men that do what they want

>>24699351
True. But there is no game with a permanent winning streak.

>>24699430
Yes. Men who truly submit to women cannot be spineless- they must embody self-love and feminine audacity to pull it off.

>>24699437
>Yes. Men who truly submit to women cannot be spineless- they must embody self-love and feminine audacity to pull it off.
You're either a retarded woman or a pathetic, delusional "male", lmfao

>>24697375
>but that women were built to handle suffering because they can bear childbirth,
Can they handle teenage balding?

>>24699443
Femboys are popular.

>>24697222 (OP)
>falling for the tricks of a jewess trying to drive a wedge between men and women

>>24699504
With a vocal minority of homosexuals, and you support pederasty. Kill yourself.

>>24699513
Equating fembvlls with pederasty? Nah, women love androgynous men, femboys - just as men love tomboys.

>>24699525
you and i both know what you actually mean, faggot
get help

>>24699553
I am speaking of men being remade and remodeled. The current and old mold is obsolete- and we know how nature deals with that.
From effete to androgynous to near identical form - I predict this to be the male evolution from hereon out.
The time for sexual dimorphism is gone as we no longer can afford warfare across the species, nor do we have natural predators. Even labor is is increasingly easy or automated - no need for the current male shape. The old attitudes towards women and sexuality are being eroded with pinpoint accuracy.

>>24699663
you are objectively evil and will be destroyed, transexual parasite

>>24699671
You oppose eugenics, aesthetics and taste. Ugliness is not a priori aspect of humanity. Kinda funny that men would view it as such. My methodology to reach this state is also natural- and the other species that lack sexual dimorphism are not evil or particularly vile.

But men are uglier than women largely because of sex trade. What kind of genetics purchases its own survival? And who sells it?

>>24699692
everything you manage to babble out past your double chin is nonsensical rationalization of both your sexual perversion and physical repulsiveness after the fact

>>24699330
>and then free generations will be born

utopian levels of delusion

>>24699663
We have natural predators. Each other.

If some groups decide to defang and declaw themselves, they'll just be outcompeted by those that don't. Evolution will eliminate them, in an unpersonal way.

>>24697400
more so because women are on hormonal birth control. if you have natural women they don't act like western women act.

It's fucking crazy how servile the average "straight" man is.
They'll reorganize their entire life around women, dedicate hours a day to grooming and working out specifically to meet women, expend significant energy seeking out single women, and in a relationship do basically everything the woman wants them to do. They'll even work all day every day doing exactly what another man tells them to do for 40 fucking years. All for the smallest crumb of pussy.

>>24698006
She does, but only in respects of childbirth. She argues that with modern medicine childbirth isn't really that painful and so women shouldn't be celebrated half as much as they are for shitting out another wagie.

>>24700047
>We have natural predators. Each other.
For now. But half of us can't have sex for free. Notably the portion that wages all the wars. It's a vicious cycle but by no means eternal. We used to eat our neighbors on most corners of the world.
>If some groups decide to defang and declaw themselves, they'll just be outcompeted by those that don't.
We don't need to declaw ourselves, just arm our visage so that it becomes valuable loot - and suddenly the evil enemy soldiers have all disappeared, invalidating all militaries.

>>24699926
>utopian levels of delusion
Dolphins don't wage wars. They don't live in a dystopian dysgenic spiral of asshair supremacism either. Coincidence?

>>24700225
Think about it. If Russian and Ukrainian men as of the fighting age looked like their women... They would be having fun with one another rather than killing each other.

>>24700079
It's not crazy. It's the pendulum. The black race will dominate the west and the arab world soon enough. The jew will go through the same system it put others through. Why? Because we embody both sides of every interaction we have.

>>24699119
>No wonder feminists hated her. She told the truth and they resented her for it.
in the author's own words. I started getting death threats from women after it was first published. It happened when I got reprinted and updated. And it *still* happens today. The author admits that if she had known it would lead to life long death threats she might not have written it.
>
which to me really says it all. Women know what they do.

>>24697375
>women were built to handle suffering because they can bear childbirth, also supported by studies that have found women's pain tolerance to be higher than men's
this is absolute retarded nigger bullshit and just turned me away from reading this, thanks.

>>24700225
>Dolphins don't wage wars. They don't live in a dystopian dysgenic spiral of asshair supremacism either. Coincidence?

dolphins rape other animals, group rape each other, kill children belonging to rivals.

As I said, utopian level of delusion.

>>24700259
sounds like esthar vilar didn't know what she was doing what she wrote it.

In other words, she underestimated female aggression and vindictiveness.

>>24700285
it's true. It's easy to make the mistake to think that women's pain tolerance is lower because they cry and voice their emotions, but that's because it's currency for them to do so, while for men it's anti-currency.

>>24700300
I didn't say humans would stop raping if we were a mostly sexy species. I said we wouldn't wage wars and we would be free.

>>24700312
But no woman made physical moves against her. Bark is cheap and I'd bet money many edgelords we see online are women.

>>24700079
It really is. It's one of those redpills that is so hard to unsee with how pervasive it is.

>>24700316
If everyone is sexy, no one is. These things are relative. Why would that ever change?

>>24700319
Wrong. She was beat up in Germany by 4 women.

https://gynocentrism.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Esther-Vilar_-Liebe-macht-unfrei-_-Die-Weltwoche-Ausgabe-51_2007-_-Weltwoche-Online-%E2%80%93-www.weltwoche.ch_.pdf

>>24700323
You wouldn't know from a glance if you'd kill your greatest genetic match or your greatest rival - who might even be a real upgrade on your own tribe/population.
Game theory mixing with male sociosexual hierarchy and cross-population competition would certainly be interesting.
Women are also highly unlikely to be lethal against women, whereas men invent horrible weapons to slay their own kind. Dehumanization is a built-in feature of the male form - and changing it to a non-monstrous direction could only aid us.
Remember; women aren't only sexier, they are also more neotenous and expressive. Generally, less apelike and dehumanized.

>>24700331
I'll add a pic for posterity if someone else trawls through archives like I do, in a future where that link doesn't work.

>>24700331
Guess snitches will always get stitches.

>>24700334
>Dehumanization is a built-in feature of the male form - and changing it to a non-monstrous direction could only aid us.

Let's say for the sake of argument that more feminine men would aid humanity in general. If you try to put such a goal into practice it's inherently as self-defeating as population control. Because you never manage to affect all groups completely and equally. Whichever subgroups of men you miss will benefit from being more selfish, more aggressive. They will propagate more and all you will achieve is that those who are most loyal, receptive and open to hear your ideas, will be those that propagate least on the long run. You essentially end up harming those you reach.

>>24700347
>Whichever subgroups of men you miss will benefit from being more selfish, more aggressive.
Guess the fembvlls need to be willing to initiate. Like Ruby Rhod.
But women are already using men as dildos so male on male culture is less and less relevant.
>044PAX

>>24700360
Women are discarding men from every position, and only using men. They have full power despite the lack of muscles and violence.
Thus they establish a world where men can only win like women.

>>24697222 (OP)
>Woman are outperforming men
They aren't.
>>24697224
Based noticer.
>>24697400
Woman were intentionally married to the state because they're much easier to control then men--which is why all male spaces have been banned since the late 90s.

Where woman folly men will follow.

>>24700323
Bonobos don't wage wars like chimpanzees do, and their entire species finds one another sexy.

>>24700360
The fact that you think of sex as divorced from procreation is its own testament to your confusion.

>>24700360
>>24700365
>feminist swaddle
Rape should straight up be legal

>>24697222 (OP)
Is this just "BlackPill : The book" or are there actually good advices to escape modern dating hell in there?

>>24700079
>>24700321
If it's a redpill, not a black one, what is the way out?

If all men are servile and you're not, won't they just look elsewhere?

I personnally simply said "fuck off" and am focusing on the better stuff for now. I get way more looks from other women this way somehow, although I'm objectively uglier according to what my age group sees as good-looking.

>>24701101
You might want to read the censored Feynmann chapter about women called

>you just ask them

>>24701101
Isn't a blackpill just redpill + being depressed about it?

>what is the way out?

In what way are you trapped?

>>24701160
>In what way are you trapped?
If the sexual revolution made dating trash for men, is there a way to date that doesn't suck for men?

>>24701160
>you just ask them

From Wikipedia :
>he recounts attempting to pick up a woman, insulting her after she refuses his advances

I don't see how that is of any interest

>>24701308
>trusting wikipedia to accurately portray a censored chapter

>>24701272
DNA analysis shows that twice as many women reproduced compared to men (historically 80% and 40%).

So to some degree human coupling has always sucked, even before the sexual revolution that was built on kinsey's falsified research.

I mean nothing of human drives iss more competitive and complex. Why should it be easy?

>>24700556
Bonobos, dolphins and humans can have sex for more than procreative purposes. Dogs and wolves hump or even rape among males for dominance.

Sex isn't a sin unless it's with something ugly, or as something ugly.

>>24701101
The problem is not men being servile, it's women being abusive. We can play the dialectic revenge game with them, a perpetual yin and yang war across the ages - or we can reach non-duality, the Dao. This would be the virile shemale, above the squabble, embodying both energies whilst being a male. And for the female it would be the Amazon archetype, but they could relax this time.

>>24697222 (OP)
The problem is western culture. Western culture is anti-male. It's so pervasive in our society that even questioning it is considered a social taboo.

Our culture and society claim that men and women are equal. As equals they are to be treated equally by the law. Yet we have conscription and the draft - outright slavery - and nobody bats an eye. Feminists only give lip service against it. Even then it's only some of them.

Men outearn women, but much more money is spent on women by our governments. A New Zealand study found that women are, on average, a burden to the government in terms of spending (men are the ones that pay for that). Yet everywhere you go it's all about empowering women and helping girls despite women outperforming men in education for decades already.

Our culture is fucked. The dichotomy between what our culture claims (equality) and what it does in practice (anti male) will lead to its eventual collapse.
>>24701272
Unironically: be gay. Even better if you can pull off trans or crossdressing. Starting a family in the modern day is fucked for a man no matter what, that's off the table anyway.

I've asked women why they want men to be uglier than they are and I haven't gotten an answer. They just look shocked like a jew who got named.

>>24697222 (OP)
do women date down (economically) at a rate that men do? there's your answer

>>24700454
>Bonobos don't wage wars like chimpanzees do
Bonobos are also perverted cannibalistic infant rapists (look into it if you don't believe me), and they still exist on a tenuous peace based on lots of politics and scheming. Gorillas, which are 100% patriarchal and showcase extreme sexual dimorphism, live far more peaceable existences than either of them.

In any case, "people" like you who advocates for such harmful, myopic ideas need to be split down the skull ASAP.

>>24697222 (OP)
Women are outperforming men only in the being-subservient-goycattle-category

>>24697400
>>24701812

All of you are wrong.
Modern developments are relentlessly pro male, you're just on the losing side.

The modern system simply rewards competition and physical prowess more, a very male/high test dynamic.

Being beholden to a stay at home parasitic lifeform who does the equivalent of 3/4 hour work day's worth of labor dusting some shelves or heating up a casserole is not pro-male.
Marriage was a system of contractual bartering that was later romanticized (by women) into something more than it actually was and into a lifelong vacation (this was done by women).

That women have been brainwashed by high test lesbians into the removal of this system is of course, very funny.

>>24699692
>trannies
>eugenic
Okay we're done here. You objectively need to be killed.

>>24702905
It was more labor as it used to include making and washing the clothes and looking after 9 children (instead of just 1 cat).

>>24702915
If men naturally look better than they do today, it's not trans anything. It's just eugenics.
Boobs > nipple&chest hair
Do you agree or disagree?

>>24702588
Yeah, and apes throw their excrement at their problems to make them disappear.
Man is excrement from the third hole?

>>24703117
Thats patently false. Schopenhauer would like to have a word with you. Boobs only are useful if they serve a function like feeding kids or sexual stimulation. Men have created empires. Women have not.

>>24700454
It's a pretty good counter argument against what I wrote, that it's possible for sexiness to be more broadly shared and isn't just based on exclusivity. I appreciate the admonishment.