Well, that would be the "off" I was referring to.
No one is saying you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. They're saying that there's no guarantee that you'll get what you want.
Right?
It depends on what you want, whether or not that is feasible, realistic, and is what other everyone else wants.
Right?
So you say you want one woman for every man so every man has a chance for sex and love.
Okay.
Well that only mathematically works out of there actually are enough women to go around for the number of men.
Obviously. Yay maths.
As it turns out, the percentage of men under 18 in the US is 51% to the 48.something% of women.
So that's not very realistic is it? By the numbers, it's not possible for that age cohort.
How do you propose to make the divide happen? Pass women out like participation trophies against their will so they won't fall to hypergamy? Some of these Tatertotaholics have suggested a lottery.
Bless them. It's like they secretly hate themselves but can't muster the gumption to cut their wanker off themselves. They have to coerce women into fits of depression deep enough to drive them to that level of violence on men's behalf because men won't just ask for help.
Also, they could call that love and sex, but everyone else is gonna see it as slavery and rape. It is what it is. Reality can be a real smack in the face like that.
Again, the thinking here is just not very realistic.
But what is real ... that no one can in good faith promise you you'll either get what you want in life or be able to keep it ... IS the truth. If you can't work with or start with truth, what do you think happens to you?
It's the truth for all of us.
Feminism and ending patriarchy can't promise me love and sex either. Or respect, integrity, any of the things.
It can increase my chances by decreasing the tendency toward "cheating" or "gaming" in winner take all dynamics.
That's enough for me because I'm not a fool and it's clearly better than what we've got now where there are fewer winners and everyone is inherently out for themselves because they have to be.
Tate, on the other hand promises them that "chance".
But that "chance" is a lie because he's a fraud, a grifter, a snake oil salesman. A con. He can't back that promise up. He could pay men women tonsay certain things and he does. But that's not truth. That's advertising. Acting.
So when people, mostly men, say stuff like "at least Tate gives young men a 'chance', unlike feminism" you're basically telling us and women (at large) that you men would rather believe an obvious and blatant lie that makes you feel good and doesn't require anything from you other than blind and empty faith (and as much money as you can throw/waste) than accept a not unpleasant truth and do a little work. Like you're still in kindergarten and trying to get out of doing your homework.
And men wonder why young women are opting out of dating?
???
???
No offense, but y'all need to have a come to Jesus and get a grip on yourselves. Re-orient yourselves with some common sense and practical thinking. Logic and shit. Wasn't that supposed to be, like, biologically hardwired as part of the penis package or something? We women have sure been brow beaten with that mantra for more than a little while. Clearly just another lie.
