>>214297470
>Your mom is a woman, would you say your mother is a bad thing?
Yes
>would it not follow that you are also a bad thing, as no good can come from that which is wholly bad?
No, women are simply biologically necessary (for now) for the continuation of the human race and a required fact of existance more than something that has moral value.
Women by themselves at their core are completely retarded solipsistic NPC creatures by default, and only change their behaviour to that of a pleasant one only for a transactional exchange with a man of the highest value she can get at that moment and as long as that transactional value exists.
>>214297842
>do you want to live on a planet with all men?
I want to live in a world where either women keep their retard nature but are slaves to the total submission of a man or a world where women can actually truly love a man and be more free. Currently you get the worst of all worlds. But with AI and artificial wombs we will see comptetition between AI and women which will over time be less and less pedestalized and cared for.
In a future society filled with very easily accessible AI avatars, VR tech, and robots, assuming no black swan events, there will be literally no reason to ever think about creatures that want everything but bring nothing but headache while getting bored of you after 5-7 years and taking half of your things + tip along with the children no matter who you are or what you do anyway.