It took me less than a minute to change the article from anti-woman, to anti black, by simply replacing male with white, woman with black, and white superiority with patriarchy. Now you see how discriminatory and demeaning that piece reads --- and the scary part is that it fits just the same, I altered nothing else. You guys need to check yourself.
except that it doesnt make sense when you arbitrarily turn into blacks/mexcians/asians/whoever from whichever culture, and it does ring true when you talk about the role females have in history. all of those mentioned, have had males as the leaders. you are only proving his point for him. we have to comprehend what their part in societies are, and were.
if you can find us this abundance of matriarchal societies where women were well developed and sound leaders of the people, then please let us know. I believe you were asked this before, yet never provided the proof. the same thing said about the female gender can not be said about other human cultures, where men and women were together in societies ruling under a specific order. they developed due to a good family unit where men were the strong leaders, and women were the strong nurturers.
if you dont understand the basic natures of man and woman, then how could you even comprehend their strengths and weaknesses? our physical differences make us who we are when we interact with another. if you dont see how a man would have to protect his woman, who is the smaller sex and also the bearer of his seed, in various ways throughout history, then you also cant understand why one was the leader in charge getting in on out there and why the other was the support team. why one approaches and
takes intitative, and why the other had to use good judgement for her choices. it even shows itself today.
tell us why only a certain type of heirarchy has ever risen. why the men naturally became leaders, and why women found themselvs as the necessary backbone. in ANY culture. thats why you could never stand on an argument saying that black white or asians can be interchanged in your argument of gender, since all of the mentioned cultures have propsered under man's rule.
theres nothing wrong with having a relationship with the opposite sex where one side is doing one thing theyre good at, and the other is doing what theyre good at. men are stronger. men do plan extremely well. females do entie and lure men. they do rear children. women do have extremely perceptive skills. women do have the natural ability to discipline children and keep them in order under a stable man's rule.
nobody says it to downplay women, its only brought out to clearly define what is expected from men, and what is expected from women. men are into hard, physical work more than women. sports, labor, military, firemen, you name it. we are also naturally more capable of it. women are more equipped for being nuturing, (their bodies and nature showing us this as well), comforting, and doing homecare as well as arts and crafts. they are much more attached to their kids, and so it makes sense for them to be in that role. the law and feminists groups would even say the same.
now do you know many women who are firemen or in the battle field signing up for field duty in the military? do you know of many women who play exciting world wide broadcasted sports who have millions watching them, and with state to state men jocking them for their money and status? mael groupies who want a woman for the money she has? its more likely he will choose based on her looks, and if shes healthy/attractive enough to bear his seeds. women are groupies since they believe a high statues man can provide for he seeds.
and thats because men and women are not built the same. they look, do, and build things differently, but work best with each other. you seem to overlook this.
no, their roles are not the same. historically and biologically.
you see being equal with the female gender, does not mean that they are
identical to us. or that their skills/strengths/interests are the same as us. you can not expect something from a woman that a man is good at. there has to be a male/masculine energy and a female one in any functional relationship.
you will even see this in gay couples, there is the "butch/top" and the "lipstick lesbo/bottom."
so you cant ignore this simple principle. there will be at best, one male - one leader, and one female, one who follows under the male. the man will call teh shots. she will then be the keeper of the sanctity of their home. you will see that relationships that are more in line with this natural order will prosper.
you being way too logical breh you gotta remember these nikkas didn't make the rules they got em straight out the bible ( not shots to religious brehs)
)
it doesnt stop with these shameless females. and through that shyt it becomes this game where men bust their ass to acquire more and more material things, just so they can have women who will see it, and want that from them. it becomes the blind leading the blind. the worst part is that its all material goods, and a chase for things that are just that, things. items dont talk, they dont plan, and they dont have a mind. on top of that, many things depreciate, so theyre only nice for a limited time. expensive fancy ass clothes and cars dont afford you a good future. but if that is what it takes to get their ears up and their eyes opened, it says volumes about their character.
