# Do women have the right to guns in the US?



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

I think they don't.

The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.

Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


----------



## westwall (Feb 24, 2022)

Better not try and take my wife's guns from her.

You won't live long.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?



Women are considered part of "the people".


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> Better not try and take my wife's guns from her.
> 
> You won't live long.


Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

martybegan said:


> Women are considered part of "the people".


I don’t know, but I read that the court found that it was about men.

Whether women were considered "the people" at that time, I do not know, this needs to be clarified.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


All women should be trained and provided with guns....the great equalizer.  Imagine how the rapists and male domestic abusers would cry.


----------



## flewism (Feb 24, 2022)

Woman, need guns more than men in today's society.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> All women should be trained and provided with guns....the great equalizer.  Imagine how the rapists and male domestic abusers would cry.




USA is a right-wing state. Emancipation is not a value for the USA


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> USA is a right-wing state. Emancipation is not a value for the USA


Nope.....not true at all.   Are you INCEL?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> Nope.....not true at al


Show me a quote from the US Fathers who spoke out for emancipation


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Show me a quote from the US Fathers who spoke out for emancipation


Are you making the assertion that the original Constitution was unchangable?   Do you not know of the Amendment system?  You ARE INCEL, aren't you?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> Are you making the assertion that the original Constitution was unchangable? Do you not know of the Amendment system?


Who among those who made the amendments was a supporter of emancipation?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.


Your logic sucks.  What does she do, when you're not around?  What do you do when the cops aren't around?  I think you have just revealed your sexism.


----------



## westwall (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.





I have more than her, dumbass.  I cover the front 180, she covers the rear 180.

DURRRRR


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Who among those who made the amendments was a supporter of emancipation?


Those who voted for the 19th Amendment.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Your logic sucks.  What does she do, when you're not around?  What do you do when the cops aren't around?  I think you have just revealed your sexism.


No, it's straight logic. You're afraid you'll shit yourself, so you ask the left system and your wife to take your man's function


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Your logic sucks.  What does she do, when you're not around?  What do you do when the cops aren't around?  I think you have just revealed your sexism.


He's INCEL....it shows.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> He's INCEL....it shows.


It's better to be an incel than to hide under a skirt


----------



## 2aguy (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?



Where do you nuts come from?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> Those who voted for the 19th Amendment.


I don't see the quote


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's better to be an incel than to hide under a skirt


Con-firmation.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Where do you nuts come from?


From the Fathers of the USA


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I don't see the quote


19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.   You really need someone to hold your hand and quote that for you?   How pathetically weak and low intelligence ARE you?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> From the Fathers of the USA


Which Founder are you related to?


----------



## Circe (Feb 24, 2022)

Stupid thread.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.   You really need someone to hold your hand and quote that for you?   How pathetically weak and low intelligence ARE you?


These are not Fathers, but left traitors, friends of Roosevelt and Stalin.


----------



## francoHFW (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.


His entire family is heavily armed. Women have every right that men have to carry guns, have a visit because you don't seem the know much about the United states. You definitely have the right to have a gun and a drivers license of course.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> 19th Amendment


However, it is only about the right to vote.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

francoHFW said:


> Women have every right


Where is that written?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> Which Founder are you related to?


First of all, anti-federalists


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Also, the logic here is that since the 2nd Amendment was passed long before emancipation (more than 100 years before begining of  emancipation movement), there could not have been any emancipation. And therefore, there can be no talk of any rights of women to bear arms (unless the constitutional court changes this)


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)




----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You're afraid you'll shit yourself


You're projecting.  My wife would kick your cowardly ass.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)




----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.


So you define masculinity by whether or not you are capable of using a gun?  I don't know what you've been smoking but your assertion makes no sense.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> So you define masculinity by whether or not you are capable of using a gun?  I don't know what you've been smoking but your assertion makes no sense.



Any military qualities of a defender


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Yes, your wife is a man. So she chose henpecked


HaHaHa, didn't get any today, eh?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Any military qualities of a defender


English isn't your first language, eh?  We don't communicate with disjointed phrases.


----------



## Likkmee (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Yes. Men have the right to Dildoz too...max capacity 10 long, hollow points are permitted


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> English isn't your first language, eh?  We don't communicate with disjointed phrases.


Any qualities that are considered traditionally masculine. A man is a defender of the family and his land, his people. He is strong, noble, honest and has the use of weapons, killing villains.

Take the classic American Superman hero as a model. Or Knight


----------



## flewism (Feb 24, 2022)

A man teaches his family to defend all they value


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> considered traditionally masculine.


Considered by whom?  I don't define masculinity by inanimate objects nor by comic books.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Considered by whom?


By Real men who reject henpecked people and feminism.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

flewism 
Is there any reliable evidence that in the days of cowboys, women wore pants, hats and were riders?
If this was not the case, then why are they photographed in men's clothing?


----------



## Captain Caveman (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> USA is a right-wing state. Emancipation is not a value for the USA


Eh, the West is predominantly ran by pussy Lefties.


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> By Real men


Linkie?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Linkie?


First you show that real men are henpecked and feminists. Who thinks so?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> First you show that real men are henpecked and feminists. Who thinks so?


Are you bored today?  Run along and troll someone else.  You are speaking to the voices in your head.


----------



## westwall (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's better to be an incel than to hide under a skirt





Dude, you are terrified of the skirt.

MAN THE FUCK UP!


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> Dude, you are terrified of the skirt.
> 
> MAN THE FUCK UP!


the man takes off the woman's skirt, the femin hides under it.

There is a difference what exactly they are afraid of


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

westwall 
It's just that there is such an expression in Russian "to hide under a skirt." This is when a cowardly boy, instead of fighting, runs to his mother and cry, ask her to intercede.


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


.

There is no gender, or even age restriction in Federal Statute regarding an American citizen's ability to possess a longarm and ammunition.
That's because we are born with that Right as an American citizen.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

To be honest, this behavior is quite typical for Russians. Even criminal authorities do not like it when a man decides something on his own. This is not stimulated by the state, and complaining has long become commonplace, both among children and adults.

In general, I think that in America it has not yet gone so far. There are quite liberal laws regarding self-defense and men's fights. In Russia, this can be given 18 years in case of death. There was at least one such precedent.

Despite this crap, America is still a very masculine country in its morals.

Is the superman cult still alive?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> There is no gender


by default it is male. Fathers did not know about emancipation. If there is a law that explicitly equalizes the rights of women in all respects, it will be so. But now women only have the right to vote in elections and nothing else, de jure


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> by default it is male. Fathers did not know about emancipation. If there is a law that explicitly equalizes the rights of women in all respects, it will be so. But now women only have the right to vote in elections and nothing else, de jure


.

You can say or think whatever you want ... It makes no difference as to whether or not women can own firearms in America.
I am not trying to help you understand, because it doesn't matter whether or not you do ...   

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> You can say or think whatever you want


It's not what anyone says, it's what the US Constitution says: women have equal voting rights. No other rights are declared.


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's not what anyone says, it's what the US Constitution says: women have equal voting rights. No other rights are declared.


.

We know what the Constitution says, and own the firearms you nitwit ...  
There are no question marks in that, and we have the firearms and bullets to prove it.

.​


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> You can say or think whatever you want ... It makes no difference as to whether or not women can own firearms in America.
> I am not trying to help you understand, because it doesn't matter whether or not you do ...
> ...


He's looking for someone to troll.  He hasn't a clue about how the US operates and it is very evident in the way he posts.  What do you expect from a 22 year old Russian?  He's still, literally, coming to GRIPS with his manhood.


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's not what anyone says, it's what the US Constitution says: women have equal voting rights. No other rights are declared.


That is where you commies have it wrong.  We don't have to be granted rights.  We have rights because we exist.  The only rights that all people in the US DO NOT enjoy are the ones that are explicitly restricted.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> We know what the Constitution says,


Then don't talk more nonsense about "equality" for women in the US. It doesn't and never was.

Leftists illegally distribute weapons to women so that they shoot off men's penises stupidly. As a result, this discredits the idea and leads to the removal of 2 amendments.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> That is where you commies have it wrong.  We don't have to be granted rights.  We have rights because we exist.  The only rights that all people in the US DO NOT enjoy are the ones that are explicitly restricted.


It's no wonder you're henpecked, you have no brains. Rights are not restrictions, quite the opposite


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Then don't talk more nonsense about "equality" for women in the US. It doesn't and never was.
> 
> Leftists illegally distribute weapons to women so that they shoot off men's penises stupidly. As a result, this discredits the idea and leads to the removal of 2 amendments.


So tell me tovarich, when did you become a US constitutional scholar when only yesterday you did not know the relationship of the POTUS to the senate and house and what powers they hold?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's no wonder you're henpecked, you have no brains. Rights are not restrictions, quite the opposite


You have no grasp of the language.  If you did you would have understood the post, which, evidently, you did not.


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> That is where you commies have it wrong.  We don't have to be granted rights.  We have rights because we exist.  The only rights that all people in the US DO NOT enjoy are the ones that are explicitly restricted.


.

It goes back to ..._ 
"A free person doesn't have to be told they are free, and liberty is not granted, only exercised."

._​


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Then don't talk more nonsense about "equality" for women in the US. It doesn't and never was.
> 
> Leftists illegally distribute weapons to women so that they shoot off men's penises stupidly. As a result, this discredits the idea and leads to the removal of 2 amendments.


.

I didn't mention anything about equality.
No one is asking you if we have the right to bear arms ... We already have them.

You are welcome to pursue whatever nonsense you desire in making whatever irrelevant point you wish.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> So tell me tovarich, when did you become a US constitutional scholar when only yesterday you did not know the relationship of the POTUS to the senate and house and what powers they hold?


I study as I go.

I still did not know that there is no declaration of full equality for women in the USA, this is a discovery for me. I didn't know this when I started this thread.

This doesn't just apply to weapons. In general, any kind of activity for women must be clearly spelled out in order to circumvent the constitution.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.


You're wrong.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American 
For example, the Russian constitution explicitly declares gender equality. It directly says that any shit does not depend on gender.

There is no such declaration in the USA, did I understand correctly?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> no declaration of full equality for women


As Black Sand so brilliantly stated.  _*"A free person doesn't have to be told they are free, and liberty is not granted, only exercised."  *_


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Concerned American
> For example, the Russian constitution explicitly declares gender equality. It directly says that any shit does not depend on gender.
> 
> There is no such declaration in the USA, did I understand correctly?


Does the Russian constitution recognize "God-given rights?"  That is where American's rights come from--not from the government.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> As Black Sand so brilliantly stated.  _*"A free person doesn't have to be told they are free, and liberty is not granted, only exercised."  *_


You simply do not understand the meaning of the Declaration of Freedoms. If we think so, then nothing need  in the legislation but prohibition.

This is bullshit.

This is done to limit the feds idiot. If freedom is declared in the constitution, the feds cannot impose a ban. That's the point.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Does the Russian constitution recognize "God-given rights?"  That is where American's rights come from--not from the government.


That is, there really is no such declaration?


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You simply do not understand the meaning of the Declaration of Freedoms. If we think so, then nothing need  in the legislation but ppohibition.
> 
> This is bullshit.
> 
> This is done to limit the feds idiot. If freedom is declared in the constitution, the feds cannot impose a ban. That's the point.


Idiot?  You are the one that is making ignorant assertions about governments that you know nothing about.  Keep spouting your communist propaganda.  When you get dry behind the ears, you can enter the conversation, little guy.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

*​**America is the hope of the entire patriarchal world. There is still no gender equality, it's fantastic!*​


----------



## BothWings (Feb 24, 2022)

bodecea said:


> All women should be trained and provided with guns....the great equalizer.  Imagine how the rapists and male domestic abusers would cry.


In my state and many others, a person regardless of gender can  walk right into a gun store and walk out with one in a few minutes, generally. Why would a woman need one "provided" for her?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Idiot?  You are the one that is making ignorant assertions about governments that you know nothing about.  Keep spouting your communist propaganda.  When you get dry behind the ears, you can enter the conversation, little guy.


communists on the left. I don't like leftists


----------



## BlackSand (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You simply do not understand the meaning of the Declaration of Freedoms. If we think so, then nothing need  in the legislation but ppohibition.
> 
> This is bullshit.
> 
> This is done to limit the feds idiot. If freedom is declared in the constitution, the feds cannot impose a ban. That's the point.


.

A Declaration of Freedom is not Freedom ...
It is the government giving you permission to exercise your Freedom as they see fit.

To govern is to ... _"control, influence or regulate people or events"_
That is not Freedom_ ...  _

.​


----------



## Concerned American (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> communists on the left. I don't like leftists


You don't know the difference.


----------



## EvilCat Breath (Feb 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Where do you nuts come from?


He's an Arab.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 24, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> You don't know the difference


It does not exist in essence, only in details. Democrats usually shout more about same-sex marriage than communists, but that's where the difference ends.


----------



## hjmick (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> *I think they don't.*
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?




Who are you kidding? You don't think...


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


They have the right to bear arms but only in the kitchen....while barefoot.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Any qualities that are considered traditionally masculine. A man is a defender of the family and his land, his people. He is strong, noble, honest and has the use of weapons, killing villains.
> 
> Take the classic American Superman hero as a model. Or Knight


When early American man was out hunting, do you suppose he left his wife without the means to defend herself against intruders, liberals, or animals?  Of course not.  Granted some could not afford a second rifle but those who could most certainly left one for their wives to use.

The right to keep and bear arms, though, doesn't stem from militia duty; it stems from the rights to life.  Do you suppose for a minute that the Founders did not think women had the right to life just like the men?


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> flewism
> Is there any reliable evidence that in the days of cowboys, women wore pants, hats and were riders?
> If this was not the case, then why are they photographed in men's clothing?











						10 Cowgirls & Outlaw Women Who Ruled the Wild West
					

Top 10 outlaw women, cowgirls, and gunslingers who ruled the wild west. Find out how these notorious women made their mark on history.




					horseyhooves.com


----------



## Abatis (Feb 24, 2022)

Can exceedingly dumb threads be hidden?


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Mrs. Bootney can use a weapon better than most current military personnel.

The militia was/is not limited by age or sex.


----------



## LuckyDuck (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Women military personnel in Afghanistan were as heavily armed as any of their male counterparts.


----------



## westwall (Feb 24, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> westwall
> It's just that there is such an expression in Russian "to hide under a skirt." This is when a cowardly boy, instead of fighting, runs to his mother and cry, ask her to intercede.





My wife doubles our firepower, and observational ability.

It takes a true dumbass to ignore tactical advantage.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> When early American man was out hunting, do you suppose he left his wife without the means to defend herself against intruders, liberals, or animals?  Of course not.  Granted some could not afford a second rifle but those who could most certainly left one for their wives to use.
> 
> The right to keep and bear arms, though, doesn't stem from militia duty; it stems from the rights to life.  Do you suppose for a minute that the Founders did not think women had the right to life just like the men?


The early American was a cowboy. He herded cows. The settlement was defended by a group of men who did not go to pasture, as well as sons.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> 10 Cowgirls & Outlaw Women Who Ruled the Wild West
> 
> 
> Top 10 outlaw women, cowgirls, and gunslingers who ruled the wild west. Find out how these notorious women made their mark on history.
> ...


The women there wear dresses. Also there were no blacks among the cowboys, this is a lie.
They are still almost non-existent on the Great Plains.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Mrs. Bootney can use a weapon better than most current military personnel.
> 
> The militia was/is not limited by age or sex.


I saw a trial case where it was established that it was about men.

There was no emancipation at the time of the 2 amendment


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

LuckyDuck said:


> Women military personnel in Afghanistan were as heavily armed as any of their male counterparts.


Lies. They were given the right to serve in combat positions only during the Obama era.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

westwall said:


> My wife doubles our firepower, and observational ability.
> 
> It takes a true dumbass to ignore tactical advantage.


This is the tactical advantage of a communist-style army, where the masses play a decisive role. The tactical advantage of the right free army is the professionalism and skill of the male warrior.


*Any of these Chinese women will be able to suck a man's dick without kneeling or bending down. You can take three Chinese women with one hand and throw them 10 meters.

But together they are the strength of cannon fodder. If a billion Chinese women die, the communists will build an incubator.

*


----------



## CremeBrulee (Feb 25, 2022)

Lol What!?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

American male tactics:


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Barbie dolls with guns.


When you see a barbie or fag with a gun, always watch her hands, she can point the gun at you or shoot herself in the mouth when she talks about cake recipes.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

American symbols on which American men were brought up:

Super*man*:








Cow*boy*:







Rodeo



Brutal Dempsey and Tyson






Great Bull









*There is NO feminism in American Culture at all*​


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

*American traditional boxing is not the feminine British game boxing.*​​*American sports such as Rodeo, American Football, Baseball and CrossFit are tough man's sports.*​​​*This distinguishes the patriarchal USA from Europe, Moscow and China, where feminism and Bolshevism are welcomed.*​​*This is the man's world*​


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Traditional American Woman - Patriarchal Princess, Graceful Feminine Beauty







And this is NOT classic american woman


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

The right-wing American Freedoms of individualism and anti-federalism are not the left-wing Euro-Moscow communist freedoms of depravity and feminism.

DO NOT FUCKING CONFUSE   THESE CONCEPTS!


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Chivalry is not feminism!​






Romance is anti-feminism!​
*Get the left shit out of your head.
You are zombified by left swindlers.
You are disoriented in the matter of values.*


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

America inherits the patriarchal values of Free Austria-Hungary and the Free Kingdom of Poland in Europe.

The American system is a copy of the Austro-Hungarian patriarchal system with weak centralization and the system of Chivalry in Europe before the left absolutism, where "the vassal of my vassal is not my vassal", and where the king is only the first among equals.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

There were no women among the Fathers of America.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

All "arguments" in favor of "traditions of feminism" in the US are just childish babble of illiterate people.
These are the symptoms of the left decay


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

At the moment, the Americans are directed by the left to fight and destroy  American freedoms in the world (support for the Taliban terrorists and so on). To destroy American values in the world. Anti-Reagan line.

The leftists are good at manipulating the masses, the talent of swindlers in them is undeniable. They could always kill a brother with the help of a brother, they could always destroy right-wing values with right-like slogans.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

The East Coast is the source of feminism and anti-Americanism in the US.

Britain was feminist. They had queens on their thrones, they were ruled by women. And this has been happening since the days of old Europe with the cult of the mother goddess.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The leftists are good at manipulating the masses, the talent of swindlers in them is undeniable. They could always kill a brother with the help of a brother, they could always destroy right-wing values with right-like slogans.


This is also a property of leftist women - to manipulate men. Leftist men adopt this talent from leftist women.

The woman of the right culture has nothing to do with it. The right woman (including a real American woman) is graceful, beautiful, romantic, like a child (infantile) and needs the protection of a man.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Therefore, emancipation is unprofitable for a woman of right culture (a real American). Including from the point of view of evolutionary survival. This leads to their extinction, turns them into whores and outcasts, and so on.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

westwall said:


> Better not try and take my wife's guns from her.
> 
> You won't live long.



Amen!


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.



He absolutely did not.   What he did was to tell you that his wife is also capable of protecting the family.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I don’t know, but I read that the court found that it was about men.
> 
> Whether women were considered "the people" at that time, I do not know, this needs to be clarified.



I would love to see the quote you read.   Women are part of "the people".


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

The aesthetics of anti-feminism is based on the fact that a woman is subject to male power. This is the natural beauty of dimorphism, which brings society to harmony.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> He absolutely did not.   What he did was to tell you that his wife is also capable of protecting the family.


This means that he dumps the duties of a man on a woman.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is also a property of leftist women - to manipulate men. Leftist men adopt this talent from leftist women.
> 
> The woman of the right culture has nothing to do with it. The right woman (including a real American woman) is graceful, beautiful, romantic, like a child (infantile) and needs the protection of a man.



Perhaps your culture requires that women be wallflowers, and depend on a man to protect her.  But here the women stand beside their husband and BOTH can kick some ass.  Any woman who is worth her salt can stand on her own, but chooses to be a partner.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This means that he dumps the duties of a man on a woman.



No it does not.  It means that they, as a couple, share their lives and responsibilities.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Uh boy


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> No it does not. It means that they, as a couple, share their lives and responsibilities.


This is no different from delegating the responsibilities of a man to a woman. I'm sure the opposite is also true: they cook and wash the dishes together. An obvious leftist decomposition of the mixing of male and female roles, leading to chaos and disharmony.

Left Mother-godess is queen of chaos

Tiamat - mother of darkness, evil old woman Cailleach


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> First you show that real men are henpecked and feminists. Who thinks so?



The "henpecked" part is nonsense.  But feminist?  I fully support my woman and revel in her accomplishments.   The idea that she should be dependent on me for her safety is ridiculous.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

from Jan Cunen's last Red Hat


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Then don't talk more nonsense about "equality" for women in the US. It doesn't and never was.
> 
> Leftists illegally distribute weapons to women so that they shoot off men's penises stupidly. As a result, this discredits the idea and leads to the removal of 2 amendments.



Do you have any link proving what you claim?

Yes, American women will shoot the penis off abusive men and/or criminals.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The "henpecked" part is nonsense.  But feminist?  I fully support my woman and revel in her accomplishments.   The idea that she should be dependent on me for her safety is ridiculous.


Because you are a henpecked man and not a real man


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is no different from delegating the responsibilities of a man to a woman. I'm sure the opposite is also true: they cook and wash the dishes together. An obvious leftist decomposition of the mixing of male and female roles, leading to chaos and disharmony.
> 
> Left Mother-godess is queen of chaos
> 
> Tiamat - mother of darkness, evil old woman Cailleach



The responsibilities in a marriage or relationship is determined by the people in the relationship.    The roles you want have been replaced.

And yes, women have a right to bear arms.   That is why the Castle Doctrine includes the right of women to shoot an intruder or anyone who threatens their safety.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Do you have any link proving what you claim?


lol yes









						Suffragette - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Because you are a henpecked man and not a real man



LMAO!!

I am more than man enough.   But I do not try to prove that by subjugating women.   I am a real man who is not threatened by strength in a woman.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And yes, women have a right to bear arms.


There are no such rights legally, this is a left fraud. Their rights to weapons are not declared anywhere at all.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> lol yes
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I couldn't find the part of your "proof" that says women are illegally given guns with which to shoot off penises.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I am more than man enough


You are not a man in the traditional patriarchal sense of the word.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I couldn't find


It's because you're a stupid henpecked.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There are no such rights legally, this is a left fraud. Their rights to weapons are not declared anywhere at all.



"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

There is no mention of gender.   "The right of the people" is self-explanatory.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You are not a man in the traditional patriarchal sense of the word.



What a shame.   Whether I am a man in the traditional patriarchal sense of the word keeps me up at night.

I am a man who does not allow others to be demeaned or have their rights restricted.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Do you have any link proving what you claim?


I gave you proof, henpecked. Suffragism appeared after the amendment. If you don't understand something, ask your wife.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's because you're a stupid henpecked.



LMAO!!

Given up on an actual argument and resorting to childish name-calling?    Typical.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I gave you proof, henpecked. Suffragism appeared after the amendment. If you don't understand something, ask your wife.



And that changes nothing.   Women have rights.   They enjoy the same basic rights under the US Constitution that all citizens enjoy.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> LMAO!!
> 
> Given up on an actual argument and resorting to childish name-calling?    Typical.


A henpecked person differs from a man in that he has a low IQ and logical apparatus. Your left brain cannot compare facts, otherwise you would not carry this nonsense.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A henpecked person differs from a man in that he has a low IQ and logical apparatus. Your left brain cannot compare facts, otherwise you would not carry this nonsense.



My left brain compares facts just fine.   But I see you think attempted insults make an argument.   They don't.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> My left brain compares facts just fine.   But I see you think attempted insults make an argument.   They don't.


Why, then, did it not notice that at the time of the amendment there was no emancipation?
I think your left brain is bad at comparing facts, and your wife's heel thinks so too.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn 
The fathers did not mean women, there was no emancipation then. Why should we believe your leftist interpretation and not the opinion of the Fathers?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Why, then, did it not notice that at the time of the amendment there was no emancipation?
> I think your left brain is bad at comparing facts, and your wife's heel thinks so too.



The emancipation, as you call it, was simply giving women the right to vote.    They were citizens prior to that.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> The fathers did not mean women, there was no emancipation then. Why should we believe your leftist interpretation and not the opinion of the Fathers?



The founding fathers, in their wisdom, installed the means for changing the US Constitution.   We did that.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn 
Are you the author of the 2nd Amendment? What gives you the right to speak instead of the Fathers?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The emancipation, as you call it, was simply giving women the right to vote.


Right. No other rights for women are declared in the American Constitution at all. By default, they have no rights at all except voting


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

For example, if the state of Montana enacts a ban on pants for women, it will not be a violation of the constitution, and it is the right of the people of Montana and their representatives in local governmen


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> Are you the author of the 2nd Amendment? What gives you the right to speak instead of the Fathers?



I am speaking based on the consistent rulings of the courts, including the US Supreme Court.

You think that because the emancipation happened years after the US Constitution was ratified, that women's individual rights would have to be spelled out.    That is nonsense.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Right. No other rights for women are declared in the American Constitution at all. By default, they have no rights at all except voting



So the 13th amendment, which outlawed slavery, gave black men their freedom but no other rights at all?   Their right to freedom of speech, to bear arms, ect do not exist?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I am speaking based on the consistent rulings of the courts,


Illegal decisions of the Court are legally worthless fictions. Court cannot violate the constitutional basis.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> So the 13th amendment, which outlawed slavery, gave black men their freedom but no other rights at all?   Their right to freedom of speech, to bear arms, ect do not exist?


You're lying. There are several amendments that give blacks all rights on an equal with "whites".


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn 
Well, I agree that the law that gives the right to bear arms to women is not unconstitutional, because there is no ban there either. But then it should be explicitly written: we give the women of state X the right to bear arms. Where are these laws?


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Perhaps your culture requires that women be wallflowers, and depend on a man to protect her.  But here the women stand beside their husband and BOTH can kick some ass.  Any woman who is worth her salt can stand on her own, but chooses to be a partner.


The culture of Russia consists of two parts. Moscow-Lithuania-Prussia is the dominant culture that is being imposed. This culture is a legacy of the old European matriarchy. The second culture that dominates territorially is the culture of the eastern patriarchate of the Great Steppe. This culture did not even allow a woman to manage money.

It is a fusion of opposite cultures.

It's the same in America. British colonies impose old European culture on the Great Plains and Texas.
Therefore, the British colonies vote for the left, and the Great Plains and Texas for the right.

Although after the Republican Party was captured by RINO, this will no longer be relevant.
In fact, this means the death of American culture.

If the new Reagan doesn't come


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

As for gun rights. This will eventually lead to a ban, which is exactly what the left wants. Chaos in the sphere of circulation of weapons initiates the question of the right as such

The left does not need slaves with weapons.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Illegal decisions of the Court are legally worthless fictions. Court cannot violate the constitutional basis.



It is the court's job to interpret the US Constitution.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> It is the court's job to interpret the US Constitution.


People see that they are cheating or stupid. This means their illegitimacy and the illegitimacy of their decisions.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You're lying. There are several amendments that give blacks all rights on an equal with "whites".



Several?   After the 13th amendment was ratified, what amendments give blacks equal rights to whites?    The 15th gave blacks the vote.   But one amendment is not "several".


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> People see that they are cheating or stupid. This means their illegitimacy and the illegitimacy of their decisions.



Oh, so because you think you have found some point of "gotcha" all the courts are cheating?

The 2nd amendment says "the people".    That should be enough.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Communist infiltration into the Republican Party and the federal government should initiate an initiative to revive the McCarthy system.
This suggests the experience of American statehood


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> Well, I agree that the law that gives the right to bear arms to women is not unconstitutional, because there is no ban there either. But then it should be explicitly written: we give the women of state X the right to bear arms. Where are these laws?



For a free people, unless something is specifically banned, people are free to enjoy it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 25, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Communist infiltration into the Republican Party and the federal government should initiate an initiative to revive the McCarthy system.
> This suggests the experience of American statehood



There will never be a return to the witch hunts of the McCarthy era.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Several?   After the 13th amendment was ratified, what amendments give blacks equal rights to whites?    The 15th gave blacks the vote.   But one amendment is not "several".


The 14th amendment says that blacks have citizenship, which means equality with whites.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> There will never be a return to the witch hunts of the McCarthy era.


The witch-hunt was by left-wing churchmen, the forerunners of communist criminals. McCarthy caught left-wing criminals, it's not a witch-hunt, it's  hunting on witchunters


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Witches were Celtic women who worshiped the patriarchal Celtic god Saman, the adversary of the matron Kailech. They interfered to left Goth's power, which captured Europe after the plague.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

The evil old woman Kailekh, in Slavic mythology, is known as Baba Yaga, who ate young male warriors. Celtic women interfered with her.






This plot is used by Grimm in the tale of the snow queen.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Kaileh worshipers are equivalent to the ancient Chthonists who worshiped Tiamat, the mother of chaos who gave birth to snakes.


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

The snake that captured the Holy Grail


----------



## rupol2000 (Feb 25, 2022)

Wisdom of the Ages


----------



## whitehall (Feb 25, 2022)

It might be assumed that the Bill of Rights pertained only to men but it doesn't say that. To "assume" makes an ass of u and me.


----------



## woodwork201 (Feb 28, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The early American was a cowboy. He herded cows. The settlement was defended by a group of men who did not go to pasture, as well as sons.


Actually. very few were cowboys and the cowboy age didn't start until after the civil war.   And not everyone lived in a settlement.  And the police, where they even existed, were hours away.  Most women from the 19th century would kick your ass..  and mine.


----------



## Missourian (Feb 28, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.



You are absolutely wrong.

My wife has my back.

I don't know how many times we've gone to buy something from craigslist or a used car that she waited in the truck armed to the teeth.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 2, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Actually. very few were cowboys and the cowboy age didn't start until after the civil war.   And not everyone lived in a settlement.  And the police, where they even existed, were hours away.  Most women from the 19th century would kick your ass..  and mine.


Cowboys are native inhabitants of the American Great Plains. Brits are not Americans


----------



## Canon Shooter (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I don’t know, but I read that the court found that it was about men.



Where did you read that?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 7, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> Where did you read that?


I don’t remember where on Wikipedia there was this judicial case.

It could not be otherwise, because women have no rights other than voting, and at the time of the 2nd amendment, there were not even voting rights(it's the 19th amendment).


----------



## Canon Shooter (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I don’t remember where on Wikipedia there was this judicial case.



So, in other words, you have nothing to support the silliness you spew.

Got it...



rupol2000 said:


> It could not be otherwise, because women have no rights other than voting, and at the time of the 2nd amendment, there were not even voting rights(it's the 19th amendment).



So, do you normally smoke a lot of pot all at once, or do you space it out throughout the day?


----------



## Batcat (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Also, the logic here is that since the 2nd Amendment was passed long before emancipation (more than 100 years before begining of  emancipation movement), there could not have been any emancipation. And therefore, there can be no talk of any rights of women to bear arms (unless the constitutional court changes this)


Well perhaps the Democrats can pass laws to confiscate all firearms owned by women. Democrats are all for disarming citizens and this way they could disarm half the population in the United States. What a great opportunity for the Dems.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> However, it is only about the right to vote.


So you don't believe women have equal rights across the board?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 7, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Well perhaps the Democrats can pass laws to confiscate all firearms owned by women. Democrats are all for disarming citizens and this way they could disarm half the population in the United States. What a great opportunity for the Dems.


Impossible...no one has guns anymore because President Obama took them all as the NRA told us would happen if he was elected.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 7, 2022)

Batcat said:


> Well perhaps the Democrats can pass laws to confiscate all firearms owned by women. Democrats are all for disarming citizens and this way they could disarm half the population in the United States. What a great opportunity for the Dems.


They will never agree to this: it is a blow to emancipation.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 7, 2022)

bodecea said:


> So you don't believe women have equal rights across the board?


  Let Christians "believe". There are no such a rights in the law.


----------



## Batcat (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> They will never agree to this: it is a blow to emancipation.


Perhaps I should have tagged the post as 

.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?



The Second Amendment is not contingent on militias.  Leaving aside the fact that women can, and do, take up arms in defense on their homes and communities if necessary, you are basing your argument on a misreading of the Second Amendment which is not only debunked by an understanding of English sentence structure, but was also explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court.

No law NEEDS to allow women to carry guns, whether privately or while in the military.  The military is structured on the basis of its members having access to and carrying firearms.  Therefore, if the women are members of the military, they will therefore fall under the military structure of "members carry weapons".

I don't know what misogyny you're dealing with that has convinced you that women require explicit laws to be treated as the basic human beings that we are.  But I can assure you - as high school science classes obviously have not - that we are just as much functioning, adult human beings as you are, and have any and all natural rights that our laws assume you do on that basis.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

martybegan said:


> Women are considered part of "the people".



Possibly because we ARE part of "the people", since we're . . . y'know, people.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thus, you sign your inability to protect your family, you deny the masculinity in yourself.



No, fool, he just recognizes that his wife is also capable of kicking ass and defending herself.

Contrary to your obvious belief, masculinity is not measured by your fear and insecurity when faced with a woman who isn't forced into subjugation.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I don’t know, but I read that the court found that it was about men.
> 
> Whether women were considered "the people" at that time, I do not know, this needs to be clarified.



Perhaps you should stop reading "Tiny Dick Weekly" for your news coverage.

I can assure you that women could and did use firearms in the 18th century.  Unless they were wealthy, they did quite a number of the same things men did, and quite a lot of things that YOU, in your apparent self-conscious pride at "achieving" possession of a penis, would not be able to do now.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> USA is a right-wing state. Emancipation is not a value for the USA



Seriously, just how many restraining orders have been taken out against you, to make you so bitter?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Who among those who made the amendments was a supporter of emancipation?



Well, all the ones who voted to pass the 19th Amendment.  Or were you laboring under the uneducated delusion that the only Amendments were the first ten?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> Your logic sucks.  What does she do, when you're not around?  What do you do when the cops aren't around?  I think you have just revealed your sexism.



And if you ARE with her, and you're beset by more than one attacker, who the hell watches your back for you, if not her?  You know what's another word for a woman who stands helplessly in the background, screaming and wringing her hands, while her husband does all the fighting?  Widow.  And that's only if she's lucky enough to survive.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, it's straight logic. You're afraid you'll shit yourself, so you ask the left system and your wife to take your man's function



You confuse misogyny with logic.  Just because YOU fear and hate strong women doesn't make that "right wing".


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's better to be an incel than to hide under a skirt



Said the sad little boy who didn't actually have a choice in the matter.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Where do you nuts come from?



His parents' basement/garage.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Let Christians "believe". There are no such a rights in the law.



If the law says "people", then they most certainly ARE there.  Despite what your sexual frustration has told you, women are people, just as much as you are (probably more).


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Where is that written?



Where are YOURS written?  I don't recall anything stating that men, and only men, have recognized rights.  Pretty sure I recall all of our founding documents talking about "people".


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Also, the logic here is that since the 2nd Amendment was passed long before emancipation (more than 100 years before begining of  emancipation movement), there could not have been any emancipation. And therefore, there can be no talk of any rights of women to bear arms (unless the constitutional court changes this)



The ACTUAL logic is that gun ownership and usage was never restricted to just men at any time in our history, so it's irrelevant to the discussion when the Second Amendment was ratified.  Unless the Second Amendment says, "The right of the men to keep and bear arms" (spoiler alert for the illiterate:  it doesn't), no change is necessary and never has been.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> So you define masculinity by whether or not you are capable of using a gun?  I don't know what you've been smoking but your assertion makes no sense.



Since I can almost certainly outshoot him, does that make me a man?  Pretty sure it doesn't.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Any qualities that are considered traditionally masculine. A man is a defender of the family and his land, his people. He is strong, noble, honest and has the use of weapons, killing villains.
> 
> Take the classic American Superman hero as a model. Or Knight



Your personal, bigoted stereotypes derived from obsessive watching of comic book movies have no bearing.

A man may be the PRIMARY defender of his home and family, but he's not the ONLY defender.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Actually. very few were cowboys and the cowboy age didn't start until after the civil war.   And not everyone lived in a settlement.  And the police, where they even existed, were hours away.  Most women from the 19th century would kick your ass..  and mine.



Most likely.  I have no idea what he thought a farm wife did all day while her husband and older sons were out in the field.


----------



## martybegan (Mar 7, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Possibly because we ARE part of "the people", since we're . . . y'know, people.



Just going by the wording of the 2nd amendment.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

martybegan said:


> Just going by the wording of the 2nd amendment.



"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Again, we're people, so that's covered, and always has been.


----------



## martybegan (Mar 7, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
> 
> Again, we're people, so that's covered, and always has been.



The issue is some laws on some state books make the "militia" to be all able bodied *males* of certain ages, some anti-gun arguments revolve around the 2nd only for being the "organized" militia, and thus people outside that definition don't have the RKBA.

Not my argument, just one made by anti gun rights types.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 7, 2022)

martybegan said:


> The issue is some laws on some state books make the "militia" to be all able bodied *males* of certain ages, some anti-gun arguments revolve around the 2nd only for being the "organized" militia, and thus people outside that definition don't have the RKBA.
> 
> Not my argument, just one made by anti gun rights types.



Which is irrelevant on every front, since simple English AND the US Supreme Court already show that the 2nd Amendment isn't predicated on being in a militia.  And, as I've already said, only a damned fool thinks women can't and won't take up arms to defend their own homes and communities.


----------



## woodwork201 (Mar 8, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Cowboys are native inhabitants of the American Great Plains. Brits are not Americans


Ranchers, cooks, saddle makers, gunsmiths, shopkeepers, prostitutes, lawyers, doctors,  Indians, barkeepers, law enforcement, members of the US Army, blacksmiths, restaurateurs, dishwashers, waiters, farmers, dressmakers, (should I go on?) were all native inhabitants of the Great Plains.  

Many native British are, in fact, Americans.  It was that way from the founding of the colonies and is that way today and has been that way continuously in between.

You're pretty ignorant and have a very narrow mind.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 8, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Ranchers, cooks, saddle makers, gunsmiths, shopkeepers, prostitutes, lawyers, doctors,  Indians, barkeepers, law enforcement, members of the US Army, blacksmiths, restaurateurs, dishwashers, waiters, farmers, dressmakers, (should I go on?) were all native inhabitants of the Great Plains.
> 
> Many native British are, in fact, Americans.  It was that way from the founding of the colonies and is that way today and has been that way continuously in between.
> 
> You're pretty ignorant and have a very narrow mind.



Also, there were a lot of cowboys who weren't native to the Great Plains or the American West.  Can we say "Mexicans"?


----------



## JoeBlow (Mar 8, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Is that what happens in Russia?


----------



## martybegan (Mar 8, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Which is irrelevant on every front, since simple English AND the US Supreme Court already show that the 2nd Amendment isn't predicated on being in a militia.  And, as I've already said, only a damned fool thinks women can't and won't take up arms to defend their own homes and communities.



And we see plenty of damn fools in the gun control movement.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 8, 2022)

martybegan said:


> And we see plenty of damn fools in the gun control movement.



True story.


----------



## Concerned American (Mar 8, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Also, there were a lot of cowboys who weren't native to the Great Plains or the American West.  Can we say "Mexicans"?


No, but you can say "vaqueros"


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 8, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> No, but you can say "vaqueros"



And you think saying "cowboys" in Spanish somehow makes it a different thing because why?


----------



## Concerned American (Mar 8, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> And you think saying "cowboys" in Spanish somehow makes it a different thing because why?


I guess I was using the same logic that you employed when you spoke of cowboys being native to the great plains on a thread about second amendment and misogyny.  Excuuuuuuse me.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 8, 2022)

Concerned American said:


> I guess I was using the same logic that you employed when you spoke of cowboys being native to the great plains on a thread about second amendment and misogyny.  Excuuuuuuse me.



That logic involved responding to a conversation that started with Rupol asininely stating that cowboys are native to the Great Plains.

Pay attention.


----------



## Concerned American (Mar 8, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> That logic involved responding to a conversation that started with Rupol asininely stating that cowboys are native to the Great Plains.
> 
> Pay attention.


I am paying attention, don't get your panties twisted.  Are you usually this disagreeable with people who obviously support your point of view.  Truth of the matter is cowboys, and vaqueros, for that matter are not native to the great plains.  Horses, cows and those that wrangle them were introduced by the Spaniards long before the first cowboy was ever thought of in this country.  Ropol is a trolling moron.  BTW, ranch hand is not the only vocation at which Mexican people excel.


----------



## Dagosa (Mar 8, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Nor should there be. If you let them have guns, they’ll want the right to vote, be pro choice and before you know it, men who commit more then 3/4 of all the violent crimes now, would become wimps. Guys, be very afraid. Stand up for your status as a bully before it’s too late.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> To be honest, this behavior is quite typical for Russians. Even criminal authorities do not like it when a man decides something on his own. This is not stimulated by the state, and complaining has long become commonplace, both among children and adults.
> 
> In general, I think that in America it has not yet gone so far. There are quite liberal laws regarding self-defense and men's fights. In Russia, this can be given 18 years in case of death. There was at least one such precedent.
> 
> ...


Are you on LSD?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Are you on LSD?


NEVER DRUG FOR LEFT IDIOTS


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> NEVER DRUG FOR LEFT IDIOTS


Is that English?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Jarlaxle LSD is hippie shit of Kennedy. I am against LSD. If I took drugs, I would choose heroin or some kind of psychostimulants. Hallucinogens and alcohol are drugs for pigs.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Mar 10, 2022)

Why wouldn't they


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Deplorable Yankee said:


> Why wouldn't they
> 
> View attachment 613421


This is exactly what they are trying to achieve. First, stupid barbies shoot themselves in the mouth and shoot off their husband's balls, then the leftists say that Americans will be safer without weapons and take away guns


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is exactly what they are trying to achieve. First, stupid barbies shoot themselves in the mouth and shoot off their husband's balls, then the leftists say that Americans will be safer without weapons and take away guns



"...shoot themselves in the mouth and shoot off their husband's balls"???     If someone shoots themself in the mouth, they usually don't do anything else.   Ever.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> "...shoot themselves in the mouth and shoot off their husband's balls"???     If someone shoots themself in the mouth, they usually don't do anything else.   Ever.









But the left does: prohibit the possession of weapons


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> But the left does: prohibit the possession of weapons




Some leftist politicians want to prohibit possession of weapons.    Hmmm.....leftists want to prohibit possession of weapons and YOU want to prohibit possession of weapons by women.    Sounds like you are more leftist than you want to admit.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Some leftist politicians want to prohibit possession of weapons.    Hmmm.....leftists want to prohibit possession of weapons and YOU want to prohibit possession of weapons by women.    Sounds like you are more leftist than you want to admit.


Don't lie, the right has never smeared in feminism. It's just that the modern layman has left shit instead of brains in his head, they confuse everything. They now began to consider the Prussian slave owners right.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


>


.




_*"Leave Her Alone" ...* _

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> 
> .​


Looks like a clumsy dog.
There are women who can be like men, with cat plasticity and a figure of a goddess, patriarchal women, but this heron is not the case.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Looks like a clumsy dog.
> There are women who can be like men, with cat plasticity and a figure of a goddess, patriarchal women, but this heron is not the case.


.

Bless your precious little heart ... You're going to be okay.
A woman doesn't have to shoot your dick off ... Three center mass will do.

Aim Small - Miss Small ...  

.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Don't lie, the right has never smeared in feminism. It's just that the modern layman has left shit instead of brains in his head, they confuse everything. They now began to consider the Prussian slave owners right.


Leftists want to take away everyone's guns.   You want women to be unable to possess guns.  You follow the same leftist ideology, but with only half the victims.   

When you want to disarm people, you are not a rightwinger.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Leftists want to take away everyone's guns.   You want women to be unable to possess guns.  You follow the same leftist ideology, but with only half the victims.
> 
> When you want to disarm people, you are not a rightwinger.


Once again: the Right is not a feminist. I hope you're not an idiot not to understand this.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Once again: the Right is not a feminist. I hope you're not an idiot not to understand this.​



But the right is in favor of women being armed if they choose.   I hope you are not too stupid to understand that.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> But the right is in favor of women being armed if they choose.   I hope you are not too stupid to understand that.


No, I was wrong, you're an idiot.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, I was wrong, you're an idiot.


.


Short of caveman style, you aren't getting laid, and your frustration shows ... 

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

*The basis of the right order is a male warrior, a female keeper of the hearth. The possession of a weapon by a woman is as blasphemous as sodomy. 
This is a fucking fundamental question.








*


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Where are the women there?


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, I was wrong, you're an idiot.



Wrong again.

Tell me what I said that inaccurate.   You have said the left wants to disarm us.   And you have said you disagree with arming women


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Wrong again.


This time I'm definitely not wrong, rest


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This time I'm definitely not wrong, rest



There are many cultures that have women fighting alongside the men.

But the fundamental point is that the right does not want to disarm women.    You do.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> *The basis of the right order is a male warrior, a female keeper of the hearth. The possession of a weapon by a woman is as blasphemous as sodomy.
> This is a fucking fundamental question.*


.

I have a Hearth Room off the Kitchen ... Among other things, it has a poker table, gun cabinet and a wet-bar.
It's not gender specific ...  

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

As for the traditions of the military aristocracy and military estates in Russia: there were no women there. Only male hussars wore a uniform, only they mounted a horse. The women didn't even have pants. The touch of a woman to a saber was not allowed.

Among the serfs of the northwest there could be "equality" because there men were drunks. There is evidence that there women were powerful. But the serfs did not have military weapons and they did not fucking live in right-wing traditions.
And still only men were recruited.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Among the European knights, too, there were never women.
They could only be recruited into the army from the rabble of leftist regimes, just like children. But this is also rare.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

In a right society, a woman does not own a weapon and does not touch a weapon. A man does not touch the preparation of food if he is not on a campaign. 

The woman who touched the weapon is disgraced.
A man who began to do women's affairs is disgraced.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In a right society, a woman does not own a weapon and does not touch a weapon. A man does not touch the preparation of food if he is not on a campaign.
> 
> The woman who touched the weapon is disgraced.
> A man who began to do women's affairs is disgraced.


.

If you believe that ...
You are just pathetically insecure and afraid of women in general ...  

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Not only a woman, but not every man could be a warrior. If honor is hurt, it washed by blood.  The man could not afford weakness. He must be ready to give his life at any second on the war or in peace.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Valor was a knightly virtue. It means to be always ready for death and not to disgrace honor against any. The knight did not contact either commoners or merchants.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> If you believe that ...
> You are just pathetically insecure and afraid of women in general ...
> ...


Women should be afraid. Extra relationships should be avoided. A real man should not be dissolute, this is the nature of dogs who are trying to throw their filthy seed everywhere, precisely because it is filthy.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Women should be afraid. Extra relationships should be avoided. A real man should not be dissolute, this is the nature of dogs who are trying to throw their filthy seed everywhere, precisely because it is filthy.


.

You are so Neanderthal backwards.
Men have every right to be afraid of women.

As retarded, insecure and possessive as some men can be ...
Depending on who is watching, a woman can kill a man with a smile ...   

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> You are so Neanderthal backwards.
> Men have every right to be afraid of women.
> 
> As retarded, insecure and possessive as some men can be ...
> Depending on who is watching, a woman can kill a man with a smile


This is a wiring of whores who want to get the seed of any man. Or vice versa, the male dog wants to dishonor the right girl.

 This is how bastardity appeared in Europe


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In a right society, a woman does not own a weapon and does not touch a weapon. A man does not touch the preparation of food if he is not on a campaign.
> 
> The woman who touched the weapon is disgraced.
> A man who began to do women's affairs is disgraced.



In a society that has not existed for centuries, maybe.

The Viking women were as fierce as their male companions.   And they struck fear in the hearts of coastal Europe for a long time.

But the simple fact is, those roles are long gone.    The idea that women should only be "hearth keepers" is archaic and a waste of skill & talent.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Women should be afraid. Extra relationships should be avoided. A real man should not be dissolute, this is the nature of dogs who are trying to throw their filthy seed everywhere, precisely because it is filthy.



Women should not live in fear.   And when they learn to defend themselves, they don't live in fear.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is a wiring of whores who want to get the seed of any man. Or vice versa, the male dog wants to dishonor the right girl.
> This is how bastardity appeared in Europe


.

Of course ... You don't have to worry about that.
A woman isn't having sex with you ... Unless it involves duct tape, chloroform and a panel van ...  

.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> Of course ... You don't have to worry about that.
> A woman isn't having sex with you ... Unless it involves duct tape, chloroform and a panel van ...
> ...



rupol is the type of man that claims to want ancient values.  But it is just that he is scared of a strong, independent woman.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The Viking women


Vikings (Vitings) are servants of the Teutonic Knights. All that is said about them now is fairy tales for fools, they were never real warriors and they did not have patriarchy


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

The Cossacks had a strict patriarchy. The Cossacks woman were not even trusted with money. They took off the boots of the head of the family and washed their feet. But they were proud of their lineage, and they wouldn't marry commoners to be "Emancipe". This is to the question of how much the right values of the women themselves suited them: they suited them.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Where are the women there?



Defending the castle from a siege, so any of those idiots who survive have somewhere to go back to.

You're a fucking idiot.  Your need for women to be fluffy and helpless little harem girls so that you can feel like having a penis makes you special doesn't change reality.  The first reality it isn't going to change is that YOU will NEVER get laid, because it's impossible to oppress women enough to voluntarily tolerate you.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

She met her husband from the campaign, he walked in front, she took his horse and walked behind. When they came home, she took off his boots and washed his feet. Such were the traditions. And when she waited from the war, she cried and sang songs, their songs were very soulful, it is clear that they loved their husbands very much. Everyone was slim and beautiful, so everyone says.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Defending the castle from a siege, so any of those idiots who survive have somewhere to go back to.


The usual fantasies of liars. There were always men left for that. Garrison and youths


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The Cossacks had a strict patriarchy. The Cossacks woman were not even trusted with money. They took off the boots of the head of the family and washed their feet. But they were proud of their lineage, and they wouldn't marry commoners to be "Emancipe". This is to the question of how much the right values of the women themselves suited them: they suited them.


.

Women were not trusted with weapons, money or property in previous times ... 
Because those represent the tools of Independence, and the total inability to be held down as property by a man.

Your fear of women is born in your inability to accept rejection and/or failure, and your insecurities in competing against a woman.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> YOU will NEVER get laid


A nerd who dream to hold on to a boob lol. I can't imagine how ugly you have to be to be denied sex even by modern whores.

And the micropenis complex is also evident


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

Insignificant men benefit from the left system and emancipation. 
In the good old days, he would have been dust underfoot, but now he is just "like the others".


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Insignificant men benefit from the left system and emancipation.
> In the good old days, he would have been dust underfoot, but now he is just "like the others".


.

Men like you just need to figure out how to unshackle your tender little egos from your tiny little penises.
I mean you still aren't going to get laid, but you won't resemble a knuckle-dragger as much.

Maybe the real men will start letting you hang out with them ...  

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

In the old days, a leftist bastard would go out in a duel and show who he really is. Now he can team up with screeching whores and stick an awl in back and then pretend to be a man.
He is no different from a woman, but he has the right to be considered a man. And he will hold on to it.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> Men like you just need to figure out how to unshackle your tender little egos from your tiny little penises.
> I mean you still aren't going to get laid, but you won't resemble a knuckle-dragger as much.
> ...


There are no hangouts of guys, forget about it. Ten years ago, there were two fighters and three jesters in the youth party, the rest were adherents, and now there are five jesters and their adherents. This party of girls in pants, parties of guys in the past


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand 
Your republican president is a jester now too, there used to be cowboys


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand 
now you choose between two clowns


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> BlackSand
> Your republican president is a jester now too, there used to be cowboys


.

My current President is not a Republican ... 
Not suggesting I think it would make that much of a difference if he was ...   

.​


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> BlackSand
> now you choose between two clowns


.

You're not a clown ... Clowns can be fun to have around.
You have the charisma of a dust mite ...  

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> My current President is not a Republican ...
> 
> ...


It doesn't matter what they call themselves, they are both left clowns


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It doesn't matter what they call themselves, they are both left clowns


.

You deleted the part where I posted that, you nitwit ...   

.​


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> In a society that has not existed for centuries, maybe.
> 
> The Viking women were as fierce as their male companions.   And they struck fear in the hearts of coastal Europe for a long time.
> 
> But the simple fact is, those roles are long gone.    The idea that women should only be "hearth keepers" is archaic and a waste of skill & talent.



And anyone who believes that women have EVER been just housekeepers and ornaments in ANY society, no matter what their "ideal roles" were, is a moron.  Rich people can afford to play at that; regular women have always been too busy trying to survive.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> Of course ... You don't have to worry about that.
> A woman isn't having sex with you ... Unless it involves duct tape, chloroform and a panel van ...
> ...



Hey, even whores have standards.  When some man-wannabe runs around calling women, "Whores" every other sentence, that's a sure sign he's been told, "Sorry, there's not enough money in the world."


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> rupol is the type of man that claims to want ancient values.  But it is just that he is scared of a strong, independent woman.



And he's too damned ignorant to realize that the women of those ancient times would have treated him with just as much disdain.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Vikings (Vitings) are servants of the Teutonic Knights. All that is said about them now is fairy tales for fools, they were never real warriors and they did not have patriarchy



Never real warrirors?    LMAO!!!    You are delusional.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> She met her husband from the campaign, he walked in front, she took his horse and walked behind. When they came home, she took off his boots and washed his feet. Such were the traditions. And when she waited from the war, she cried and sang songs, their songs were very soulful, it is clear that they loved their husbands very much. Everyone was slim and beautiful, so everyone says.



Cossack men were considered elite troops in the Russian military, very highly valued.  They were away at wars for very long periods of time.  Cossack women were famous not only for taking over the leadership roles while the men were away, they also took up arms to defend their villages and even were known for leading successful raids to conquer and disarm neighboring villages.

Your movie-fueled fantasies notwithstanding, you're a whining little pussy in the face of modern women.  A Cossack woman wouldn't even eat you for lunch; she'd just chew you up and spit you out.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The usual fantasies of liars. There were always men left for that. Garrison and youths



The usual fantasies of incels. How many men do you think the typical medieval lord had under arms, that you imagine he could field a troop for battle AND leave the castle fully staffed for defense?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A nerd who dream to hold on to a boob lol. I can't imagine how ugly you have to be to be denied sex even by modern whores.
> 
> And the micropenis complex is also evident



Pinhead, I've already told you I'm a woman.  That's right, you have now extended your field for being disdained and mocked into the Internet.

But thanks for demonstrating so thoroughly by your existence that having an (alleged) penis conveys no superiority over women whatsoever.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Insignificant men benefit from the left system and emancipation.
> In the good old days, he would have been dust underfoot, but now he is just "like the others".



No, insignificant men whine and snivel about how women should be forced to treat them as though they matter.  If you were significant, Needle Dick, you'd be able to get the respect you mistakenly think you deserve without demanding that others be subjugated.

There are no "good old days" in which you wouldn't be the joke of the town.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In the old days, a leftist bastard would go out in a duel and show who he really is. Now he can team up with screeching whores and stick an awl in back and then pretend to be a man.
> He is no different from a woman, but he has the right to be considered a man. And he will hold on to it.



In the old days, you'd still laughed at.  Just be glad that in the modern time, it's not acceptable for people to throw horse dung at your ilk.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 10, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There are no hangouts of guys, forget about it. Ten years ago, there were two fighters and three jesters in the youth party, the rest were adherents, and now there are five jesters and their adherents. This party of girls in pants, parties of guys in the past



Translated:  "All the men keep kicking my ass and telling me to go away!"


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Hey, even whores have standards.  When some man-wannabe runs around calling women, "Whores" every other sentence, that's a sure sign he's been told, "Sorry, there's not enough money in the world."



rupol is one of those who defines a "whore" as a woman who fucks guys, but not him.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 10, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> rupol is one of those who defines a "whore" as a woman who fucks guys, but not him.


Rupol is bat shit crazy.



,,,,and by saying that, I mean no offense to the fecal material deposited by various members of the Family Nycteridae.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 10, 2022)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Rupol is bat shit crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,and by saying that, I mean no offense to the fecal material deposited by various members of the Family Nycteridae.



Yeah, that might give bat shit a bad name.   I hear it is great fertilizer.

Maybe "crazy as a shithouse rat" would be better?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> The usual fantasies of incels.


What is a fucking "insel"? Why doesn't he want to fuck you? He doesn't like you, do you have a bad figure or something else?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Cossack women were famous not only for taking over the leadership roles while the men were away, they also took up arms to defend their villages and even were known for leading successful raids to conquer and disarm neighboring villages.



This is a common lie that appeared among the left in the last 2-3 years.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

The leftists have come up with good templates for themselves: if you don’t want to fuck a man, then you are a homophobe, if you don’t want to fuck some kind of ugly whore, you are an “incel”. If this is a whore with whom no one wants to sleep and marry her, then she is an emancipated woman. What else do you have in store for idiots? lol


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 
Sexy guys like Thomas Anders or Banderas were constantly being thrown by whores's  underpants, but they didn't fuck every whore who threw their underpants at them. Are they incels?


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Cecilie1200
> Sexy guys like Thomas Anders or Banderas were constantly being thrown by whores's  underpants, but they didn't fuck every whore who threw their underpants at them. Are they incels?



Thomas Anders and Banderas are not celibate.   And if they are, it is by their choice.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)




----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

Look up the definition of INCEL.    Then you will see how laughable your posts are.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Look up the definition of INCEL.    Then you will see how laughable your posts are.


I'm not interested in defining vague concepts. Give me clear criteria for "insel"


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn 
Whores blame attractive guys for not wanting to sleep with them. Isn't that what it all comes down to?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn 
Tell me where in the constitution it is written that a man is obliged to sleep with someone at all? Why should this be "offensive" to anyone?


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I'm not interested in defining vague concepts. Give me clear criteria for "insel"



Of course not.  That would ruin your argument.

INCEL stands for Involuntarily Celibate.    It is not guys who won't sleep with someone.  It is guys who cannot get laid, and they want to get laid.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> Whores blame attractive guys for not wanting to sleep with them. Isn't that what it all comes down to?



No, not at all.   It is guys who whine about women not wanting them.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> Tell me where in the constitution it is written that a man is obliged to sleep with someone at all? Why should this be "offensive" to anyone?



Given the context of this discussion, your question us ignorant.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Of course not.  That would ruin your argument.
> 
> INCEL stands for Involuntarily Celibate.    It is not guys who won't sleep with someone.  It is guys who cannot get laid, and they want to get laid.


This is not yet clear. Why can't they? Are they impotent?


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is not yet clear. Why can't they? Are they impotent?



The lack of a willing woman.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The lack of a willing woman.


Women don't want to sleep with him? Why? After all, there is always at least a freak who is not fucked by men, wouldn’t she want to sleep with him?


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Women don't want to sleep with him? Why? After all, there is always at least a freak who is not fucked by men, wouldn’t she want to sleep with him?



Apparently not.

from:   Definition of INCEL
"Definition of _incel_
*: *a person (usually a man) who regards himself or herself as being involuntarily celibate and typically expresses extreme resentment and hostility toward those who are sexually activeThe term "incels" emerged from a Reddit group in which tens of thousands of users, most of them young men, commiserate about their lack of sexual activity—many of them placing the blame on women.— Josh O'KaneIn recent years, a number of these men have identified as so-called incels, short for involuntary celibates, an online subculture of men who express rage at women for denying them sex and who frequently fantasize about violence and celebrate mass shooters in their online discussion groups."


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn 
You have not been able to give clear criteria for this autistic concept. What you say is obviously paradoxical. A man in this sense is no different from a woman. Unattractive women have the same problems that unattractive men have, and they can fuck each other if they want. This is logical.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn
> You have not been able to give clear criteria for this autistic concept. What you say is obviously paradoxical. A man in this sense is no different from a woman. Unattractive women have the same problems that unattractive men have, and they can fuck each other if they want. This is logical.



I have given more than adequate explanations of what INCEL means.    If you cannot understand it, that is not my problem.   I even included the definition from Merriam-Webster's dictionary.

And unattractive women have an easier time getting laid.    Closing time as a bar will show you that.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I have given more than adequate explanations of what INCEL means.


You have to be autistic to "understand" the paradoxical concept. Autistic people don't analyze concepts, they just memorize what they are told and then preach it. If you are not a scammer then you are autistic


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You have to be autistic to "understand" the paradoxical concept. Autistic people don't analyze concepts, they just memorize what they are told and then preach it. If you are not a scammer then you are autistic



No, I am simply repeating what the dictionary and the INCELs themselves say.    The fact that you do not understand this specific sub-culture does not mean everyone else doesn't.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And unattractive women have an easier time getting laid. Closing time as a bar will show you that.


Unattractive women are easier to fuck anyway. The ugly Marilyn Monroe became a sex symbol due to the fact that she was able to sell herself in shiny packaging, and men are zombified by whores and are afraid to refuse, because then they will be called impotent.
This is exactly what feminists are after.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> No, I am simply repeating


do it 100 more times, so your faith will be stronger


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> do it 100 more times, so your faith will be stronger



I tried to help you understand what the word means.    Now you are just being willfully ignorant.    Which, come to think of it, is not a surprise.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Unattractive women are easier to fuck anyway. The ugly Marilyn Monroe became a sex symbol due to the fact that she was able to sell herself in shiny packaging, and men are zombified by whores and are afraid to refuse, because then they will be called impotent.
> This is exactly what feminists are after.



Marilyn Monroe was ugly to you?    I guess there is no accounting for taste.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I tried to help


Thank you, but you are not able to "help" a person with brains, I'm not one of your adherents, sorry


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Marilyn Monroe was ugly to you?


for anyone who has seen her face without makeup, bulldog jaw without a parted mouth and crooked legs without the "right" angle.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Thank you, but you are not able to "help" a person with brains, I'm not one of your adherents, sorry



If you had the sense to do a Google search for "INCEL" you would have gotten the info.    Apparently you think you know everything without having to do any research.

This situation proves you wrong.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn just fuck off, I'm not interested in your stupid nonsense


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> for anyone who has seen her face without makeup, bulldog jaw without a parted mouth and crooked legs without the "right" angle.



Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn just fuck off, I'm not interested in your stupid nonsense



Sorry.  You are posting on a public forum.  I don't just "fuck off" because you get pissed at being schooled.

But perhaps you could get back on topic.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Keep telling yourself that.


I have eyes. That's why I don't go to bed with every slut who wears too much make-up.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn
Among other things, all these "sexy blondes" paint their faces like brunettes, and make themselves slanted Asian eyes, lifting the outer corners. It's amazing that morons-men still haven't understood this scam - it's on the surface.
Do you love google? Find a blonde with white eyebrows and eyelashes on the request "sexy blondie"


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I have eyes. That's why I don't go to bed with every slut who wears too much make-up.



Marilyn Monroe was very attractive.   Perhaps less so without makeup, but still far from ugly.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Marilyn Monroe was very attractive.   Perhaps less so without makeup, but still far from ugly.
> 
> 
> View attachment 613935


Yes, ugly women look a little better in a black and white retouched photo than in reality.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn And where did you get the idea that there is no cosmetics? There is.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> WinterBorn And where did you get the idea that there is no cosmetics? There is.



Whatever.

Whether Marilyn Monroe is attractive or not (a personal opinion, at best) has no bearing on whether or not women have the right to bear arms.

You started this thread.   You, of all people, should be able to stay on topic.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> a personal opinion


if this were the case, she would not do everything to attract the attention of men with an unnatural appearance. If this is only an "opinion", let them show their natural "beauty"


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> if this were the case, she would not do everything to attract the attention of men with an unnatural appearance. If this is only an "opinion", let them show their natural "beauty"



You prefer the natural look.    Many men prefer a woman in a tasteful amount of makeup.   Once again you insist that what you like or want is what everyone should like or want.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> ... just fuck off, I'm not interested in your stupid nonsense



.

I wouldn't worry about it.

Demonstrating the behaviors of an Incel are merely a side effect.
It's evident in your constant and desperate search for a 'nobility' you will never achieve.

You have to support your delusions of grandeur by believing that you are somehow "better" ...
in the face of all your social inadequacies which are not restricted to sexuality alone.

A woman having a firearm would leave you utterly defenseless.
You couldn't even force your ideas on her.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> I wouldn't worry about it.
> 
> ...


It doesn't bother me. Having a gun still does not give you the right to shoot randomly, I don't care if they have a weapon or not. But this threatens the very foundations of a right-wing society, where a warrior is a professional with a weapon and a man, and not a sexless unit of a slave battle order.
If a man does not want to be a member of the militia, then he is a slave and he also does not need weapons.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It doesn't bother me. Having a gun still does not give you the right to shoot randomly, I don't care if they have a weapon or not. But this threatens the very foundations of a right-wing society, where a warrior is a professional with a weapon and a man, and not a sexless unit of a slave battle order.
> If a man does not want to be a member of the militia, then he is a slave and he also does not need weapons.


.

It doesn't bother you, but it renders you defenseless if you attempt to force your delusions on a woman.
You can tell yourself whatever you want ... But in doing so, you keep telling everyone else exactly how damaged you are.

We don't suffer from your psychosis ...  

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> It doesn't bother you, but it renders you defenseless if you attempt to force your delusions on a woman.
> You can tell yourself whatever you want ... But in doing so, you keep telling everyone else exactly how damaged you are.
> ...


A woman with a gun is worthless. She wants to threaten men to sleep with her.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A woman with a gun is worthless. She wants to threaten men to sleep with her.


.

A woman with a firearm is not a threat unless you threaten her.
Your insecurities regarding your inadequacies in the bedroom are not a requirement for discussion.

A woman doesn't actually have to threaten a man to have sex with him.
The fact that you so closely associate threats with sexual experiences, sheds light on how damaged you are.

.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It doesn't bother me. Having a gun still does not give you the right to shoot randomly, I don't care if they have a weapon or not. But this threatens the very foundations of a right-wing society, where a warrior is a professional with a weapon and a man, and not a sexless unit of a slave battle order.
> If a man does not want to be a member of the militia, then he is a slave and he also does not need weapons.



The foundations of the United States are not of professional warriors, but of citizens who put their plows aside and pick up a weapon to defend their nation in a crisis.   Then when the crisis is over, they relinquish their command and go back to being farmers and such.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A woman with a gun is worthless. She wants to threaten men to sleep with her.



A woman with a gun does not have to fear a man.   She does not threaten him to have him sleep with her.  She simply does not have to fear his violence.


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?



You suggesting women are not people?

"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, *the right of the people* to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

I dislike people who treat women as second class in a nation where freedom was Constitutionally established for everyone.

===

You write,

"Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?"

You write this stupid stuff since the Military have women it who were TRAINED to handle a large variety of handheld weapons and even weapons that needs to be transported by vehicles and they can do that because they are CITIZENS of the country.

What about all those SINGLE/divorced women with children, do we prevent them from defending themselves and from anti women creeps like you?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The foundations of the United States are not of professional warriors


Until now, this is the only professional voluntary army in the world, cretin.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> You suggesting women are not people?


I consider a woman a woman.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> since the Military have women it who were TRAINED


When did they have time? They were put into combat positions a few years ago.


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I consider a woman a woman.



Then by your own implied belief Men are men neither one is people.

Now you are suggesting that men and women are not human beings?

*People* according to Merrium-Webster

"human beings making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest"

You should slow down fella your strange logic isn't good.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Until now, this is the only professional voluntary army in the world, cretin.



It certainly beats having the nation run by professional warmongers.


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> When did they have time? They were put into combat positions a few years ago.



Now you are just being irrational since women just like men can chose to join a branch of the military as long as they meet the entrance standard.

You seem woefully ignorant here this is the standard ARMY entrance standard for Americans (yes women are human beings, citizens)

Qualifications for a Woman to Join the U.S. Army​
*The U.S. Army is available to all American citizens who qualify*. Women in the Army are allowed to go on combat missions, as of March 2011. If you are a woman considering enlisting, you may wonder what the qualifications are for a woman to join the Army. This information will allow you to go into the recruiter's office knowing what to expect.

General Requirements​The general requirements for women joining the U.S. Army are the same as for men in many respects. You must be an American citizen, pass an aptitude test and have a high school diploma. You can't have more than two dependents and must be between the ages of 17 and 34.

LINK

_red bolding mine_

Are you sure you have a mother? (a female human being) since you seem to treat them like aliens in your basement world.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I consider a woman a woman.



And you do not consider her the equal of a man.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Then by your own implied belief Men are men neither one is people.


Men and women have different rights. What is allowed for a woman is not allowed for a man.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And you do not consider her the equal of a man.


yes, an ant is not equal to an elephant, 1 is not equal to 2, a man is not equal to a woman. This is just leftist nonsense of idiots and slaves.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And you do not consider her the equal of a man.


.

That's like asking a shithouse rat their opinion of corn ... When the only corn that rat has ever had was in a turd.
He doesn't know much about women at all ... And what he does know hasn't been pleasant.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> That's like asking a shithouse rat their opinion of corn ... When the only corn that rat has ever had was in a turd.
> He doesn't know much about women at all ... And what he does know hasn't been pleasant.
> ...


Leftist protégé - stinky dogs love to eat poop. The left also has the "freedom" of coprophiles. Don't insult rats by ascribing leftist habits to them.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> yes, an ant is not equal to an elephant, 1 is not equal to 2, a man is not equal to a woman. This is just leftist nonsense of idiots and slaves.


,

Technically ... Nothing is equal to itself for more than a fraction of a second.
He wasn't asking you in a linear sense.

In the hierarchy of governance and structural requirements ... Would you place man above woman?

.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Men and women have different rights. What is allowed for a woman is not allowed for a man.



Bullshit.    If a gov't sees that women do not have the same rights as a man, that gov't should be removed or overthrown.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> yes, an ant is not equal to an elephant, 1 is not equal to 2, a man is not equal to a woman. This is just leftist nonsense of idiots and slaves.



No one is talking about vastly different species.

In the eyes of the gov't, they are equal or the gov't must be replaced.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Leftist protégé - stinky dogs love to eat poop. The left also has the "freedom" of coprophiles. Don't insult rats by ascribing leftist habits to them.



If a dog eats feces it is because of a nutritional deficiency in its diet.

And don't insult the rest of the rightwing people by thinking they dislike freedom, as you do.


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Men and women have different rights. What is allowed for a woman is not allowed for a man.



Utter nonsense!

There are no separate laws for men and women being lawfully applied anywhere,


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> What is a fucking "insel"? Why doesn't he want to fuck you? He doesn't like you, do you have a bad figure or something else?





WinterBorn said:


> Look up the definition of INCEL.    Then you will see how laughable your posts are.



He's full of shit.  He used the term to describe himself several days ago in one of the threads.  He's just trying to very clumsily parrot the same criticisms aimed at him.  Like all illiterate boobs, he figures, "Well, it really hurt me when you said this, so that means it's hurtful to EVERYONE!"  He's not smart enough to figure out that they aren't magical insult words; it's the ACCURACY of saying to him that hurts.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Utter nonsense!
> 
> There are no separate laws for men and women being lawfully applied anywhere,


Not in the leftist countries. But it has always been in the USA, there is no declaration of equality in the constitution.

In particular, before Obama's left-wing coup, women did not serve in combat units of the army.

Don't try to fool the people of US with such cheap tricks.


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Not in the leftist countries. But it has always been in the USA, there is no declaration of equality in the constitution.
> 
> In particular, before Obama's left-wing coup, women did not serve in combat units of the army.
> 
> Don't try to fool the people of US with such cheap tricks.



You haven't established anything in your denigration of women.

I destroyed your claim in POST 327 which you completely ignored because you ran away.

You are clearly a hater of women you are a low life pathetic creep.


----------



## MizMolly (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


You don’t believe a woman should have the right to shoot someone to protect herself or her loved ones?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> You haven't established anything in your denigration of women.
> 
> I destroyed your claim in POST 327 which you completely ignored because you ran away.
> 
> You are clearly a hater of women you are a low life pathetic creep


it is impossible to hate women more than leftist crooks: they stole their femininity from them and turned them into slaves of capital and feminism.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

MizMolly said:


> You don’t believe a woman should have the right to shoot someone to protect herself or her loved ones?


.

No ... He believes that someday the dutiful and subservient woman he imagines as his dream girl,
will run to greet him as he dismounts his steed in a shower of rose pedals and to the roar of an admiring crowd.

Then he will finally be recognized for the noble soul he really is ...
The rest of his bullshit is just bitter garbage born in the fact that will never happen ...  

.​


----------



## Sunsettommy (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> it is impossible to hate women more than leftist crooks: they stole their femininity from them and turned them into slaves of capital and feminism.



Just as I expected you have no credible counter arguments to offer, I am done here.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> as of March 2011


The left-wing scammers tried to claim that this was always the case, but not after the illegal decisions under the Obama left government. They allowed women to serve in the military and sold European defense to the European left - canceled the missile defense program.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I have eyes. That's why I don't go to bed with every slut who wears too much make-up.



No, you don't go to bed with "every slut who wears too much make-up" because they, like every other woman, laugh at you and then spray you with pepper spray.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A woman with a gun is worthless. She wants to threaten men to sleep with her.



Which just goes to demonstrate what I've been saying:  You've never been allowed to spend enough time around women to know jack shit about us.  All you've got is what you fantasized about while watching TV in your parents' basement.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> A woman with a gun does not have to fear a man.   She does not threaten him to have him sleep with her.  She simply does not have to fear his violence.



As if any woman ever would NEED to threaten men to get laid.    She might not get exactly the man she wants, but she can still get A man.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> No, you don't go to bed with "every slut who wears too much make-up" because they, like every other woman, laugh at you and then spray you with pepper spray.


It's good when a notorious nerd like you thinks like that, it saves him from depression. "I am not alone" lol


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I consider a woman a woman.



No, you consider women YOUR IDEA of women, which has fuck and all to do with real women, because real women won't allow you around them long enough for you to have clue one what we're like.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And you do not consider her the equal of a man.



He considers them to be objects of his hatred and bitterness who should be beaten down and subjugated so that he can demand respect for his micro-penis that he cannot earn for anything at all.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Men and women have different rights. What is allowed for a woman is not allowed for a man.



No, dipshit, men and women have the same rights.  Your bile-fueled delusions about what the world SHOULD be have nothing to do with what it IS.  The reality is that women have all the rights you don't want them to have, and you are powerless to stop us.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It's good when a notorious nerd like you thinks like that, it saves him from depression. "I am not alone" lol



I'm sure you're familiar with that sound you're hearing now, because it's everyone here laughing at you.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> it is impossible to hate women more than leftist crooks: they stole their femininity from them and turned them into slaves of capital and feminism.



No one would have to steal from me your putrid idea of "femininity".


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 All my life I had other problems: how to politely said "fuck off". This also has its costs. Those guys who are besieged by women do not have much happiness, this creates a lot of problems, including the jealousy of freaks like you who value their place under the heel.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Cecilie1200 All my life I had other problems: how to politely said "fuck off". This also has its costs. Those guys who are besieged by women do not have much happiness, this creates a lot of problems, including the jealousy of freaks like you who value their place under the heel.



Spoken like a true incel:  "I'm GLAD that I couldn't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a fistful of bananas.  All those men who women don't run away from are miserable, I just KNOW it!"

By the way, I'm still a woman.  I realize that you don't have enough experience interacting with one to be able to recognize one, and God knows you don't have the intelligence to comprehend having been told so.

Consider me the Internet avatar of the rejection that is your entire sad life.


----------



## surada (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


Why are you trying to lecture Americans?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 If I tell a whore to fuck off the nerd is not happy because I didn't appreciate the "beauty" of his wife. If I agree to let her suck my dick, the nerd gets jealous. What should I do? There is no choice, both options are bad. If I don't fuck them, at least I won't get syphilis.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> I'm still a woman


I'm sorry, I wouldn't be so rude if I knew you were a woman. This is another cost of emancipation, I can't distinguish you on the Internet.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> a true incel:


We were never able to figure out who "incel" is. If he's a freak, then why can't he find a freaked woman and have sex with her if he wants to. It's a mystery.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

.


rupol2000 said:


> I'm sorry, I wouldn't be so rude if I knew you were a woman.


.

She didn't ask you for Quarter ... Game On Bastard ... 

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> .
> 
> ...


I usually don't be rude to women the way I am to men. Firstly, I was not brought up that way, and secondly, you will still lose, because if this is a man, he will eventually get in the face, and the woman will shout you down and you will remain in the ass. Here she has an advantage.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I usually don't be rude to women the way I am to men. Firstly, I was not brought up that way, and secondly, you will still lose, because if this is a man, he will eventually get in the face, and the woman will shout you down and you will remain in the ass. Here she has an advantage.


.

A woman is not required to conform to your desired standards if it is ever used as an attempt 
to suggest she requires special treatment at your luxury to serve your selfish desires.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

I now clearly distinguish between normal women and feminists. Feminists began to behave quite frankly. They offer sex and throw a tantrum when you turn them down, even if you have a regular mistress.

You compliment the woman, and the second one stands nearby and screams that you insulted her because you singled out her friend, but didn’t say anything about her.

Before they were not so blatant.

Because of these bitches, a normal woman will never hear from a man that she is beautiful.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Feminists are primarily enemies not of men, but of normal women. They use men, and destroy normal women.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

A feminist can pull this trick: she offers you sex, you refuse, she tells her husband that you molested her. You arrange a fight among yourself, and she tells the public that she is beautiful and men cannot share her, they say she is an important person. She has nothing to lose if she is not caught in a lie.
In another case, a man may be frightened of her threats and fuck her, then she will fuck him anyway when she gets tired of him.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

If the bitch starts to press and provoke, harass, try to use, you must immediately clearly say "fuck off" otherwise she will impose her game and you will find yourself in hell.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

There are men who every day dream of getting rid of a feminist wife, but cannot do it to the grave.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

A feminist always benefits when her husband is an alcoholic. She will condemn him for his alcoholism, but if he finds the strength to quit, she will try to provoke him to start drinking again. She needs a infantil  husband who depends on her and who is puppet in her hands.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Normal women do not do all this, so a man is happy with her. In addition, they are often beautiful and slender.

Feminists won't allow it, a normal woman is challenging her "right" to own a man. Therefore, bitch will destroy a normal woman in the first place.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

The problem of a patriarchal man today is that, as a rule, he is not adapted to the mercantile world, and does not feel self-confidence, so he cannot protect his fragile patriarchal princess. He becomes the prey of a feminist, and the princess is sent to the brothel. Nevertheless, feminists prefer not merchants and slaves, but rather patriarchal men, in whom they see the remnants of the blood of a military aristocracy.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Spoken like a true incel:  "I'm GLAD that I couldn't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a fistful of bananas.  All those men who women don't run away from are miserable, I just KNOW it!"
> 
> By the way, I'm still a woman.  I realize that you don't have enough experience interacting with one to be able to recognize one, and God knows you don't have the intelligence to comprehend having been told so.
> 
> Consider me the Internet avatar of the rejection that is your entire sad life.



Damn you are fun to read!!


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I'm sorry, I wouldn't be so rude if I knew you were a woman. This is another cost of emancipation, I can't distinguish you on the Internet.



The fact that her name is a very feminine name should be a clue.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The problem of a patriarchal man today is that, as a rule, he is not adapted to the mercantile world, and does not feel self-confidence, so he cannot protect his fragile patriarchal princess. He becomes the prey of a feminist, and the princess is sent to the brothel. Nevertheless, feminists prefer not merchants and slaves, but rather patriarchal men, in whom they see the remnants of the blood of a military aristocracy.



One of the most ridiculous statements you have ever posted.   And that is saying something.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> .
> 
> ...



And Cecilie is shredding him!!!


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I now clearly distinguish between normal women and feminists. Feminists began to behave quite frankly. They offer sex and throw a tantrum when you turn them down, even if you have a regular mistress.
> 
> You compliment the woman, and the second one stands nearby and screams that you insulted her because you singled out her friend, but didn’t say anything about her.
> 
> ...



Absolute nonsense.    I have no problem complimenting a woman.   Funny that you do.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> A feminist can pull this trick: she offers you sex, you refuse, she tells her husband that you molested her. You arrange a fight among yourself, and she tells the public that she is beautiful and men cannot share her, they say she is an important person. She has nothing to lose if she is not caught in a lie.
> In another case, a man may be frightened of her threats and fuck her, then she will fuck him anyway when she gets tired of him.



I have numerous friends who are feminists.   None of them have ever behaved the way you described.    I think you wouldn't know a feminist if she burned her bra on your forehead.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There are men who every day dream of getting rid of a feminist wife, but cannot do it to the grave.



I guess those men cannot handle a strong, independent woman.

I prefer a woman who is with me because she chooses to be, not because she needs to be.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The problem of a patriarchal man today is that, as a rule, he is not adapted to the mercantile world, and does not feel self-confidence, so he cannot protect his fragile patriarchal princess. He becomes the prey of a feminist, and the princess is sent to the brothel. Nevertheless, feminists prefer not merchants and slaves, but rather patriarchal men, in whom they see the remnants of the blood of a military aristocracy.



Do you spend much time making this shit up?   Or does it just come to you in delusional waves?


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And Cecilie is shredding him!!!


.

I don't have a problem who men who respect women.

I have a problem with men who only respect women when it suits their own concerns ...
Or when it establishes women as being subservient to men.

Cecilie was in the fight and can hold her own ...
I was just acknowledging the fact I didn't think she was asking for anything less than that.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

This is the whole essence of the difference between the right and the left order. In the right order, strength is the source of power; in the left order, strength is a puppet in the hands of the priesthood or swindlers, just as a man is in the hands of a bitch.
The left order is women order by nature


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Do you spend much time making this shit up?   Or does it just come to you in delusional waves?


I've been thinking about this for a long time


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> I don't have a problem who men who respect women.
> 
> ...



I did not mean to imply differently.   My apologies.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

This is absolutely true and is confirmed by history. The right world always falls when merchants and swindlers appear. For example, the Royal Rome died under the onslaught of the plebeians.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is the whole essence of the difference between the right and the left order. In the right order, strength is the source of power; in the left order, strength is a puppet in the hands of the priesthood or swindlers, just as a man is in the hands of a bitch.
> The left order is women order by nature



Your version of the "right" is adolescent fantasies, nothing more.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> I did not mean to imply differently.   My apologies.


.

You didn't ... I was just emphasizing my initial comment in support of yours ... 
In the meantime ... We can enjoy more of rupol's enlightening posts.

I am no expert, but I have a Bachelor of Science (which is rare in the field) in Psychology and he is a specimen worth examination. 

.​


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> You didn't ... I was just emphasizing my initial comment in support of yours ...
> In the meantime ... We can enjoy more of rupol's enlightening posts.
> ...



Get him to the US.   There is a PhD thesis between that guys ears.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Your version of the "right" is adolescent fantasies, nothing more.


Only if you look from the standpoint of pseudo-conservative Europe of the left wing, like insignificant Prussianism, henpeckeds in knightly armor. Europeans don't know about the American right fucking at all, for them the right is a kind of communist. They conserve Prussianism and imperialism, something that the right anti-federalists, the fathers of the USA and Austria-Hungary, despised.

And that's where you look sucker. For you, the right is not Reagan, but the Trumpsters and the English Tories. You are the child of an autistic new wave of idiots.


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is absolutely true and is confirmed by history. The right world always falls when merchants and swindlers appear. For example, the Royal Rome died under the onslaught of the plebeians.


.

No it didn't ... Rome fell when it taxed its merchant class to a point it caused them to look for business elsewhere.
Then it could no longer support its military and was overrun.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> No it didn't ... Rome fell when it taxed its merchant class to a point it caused them to look for business elsewhere.
> Then it could no longer support its military and was overrun.
> ...


Rome had three phases. I'm talking about the fall of the first Patrician Rome, the second was the Republic, the third Empire (left Rome). The Huns of Attila finally killed Rome, that's another question.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Only if you look from the standpoint of pseudo-conservative Europe of the left wing, like insignificant Prussianism, henpeckeds in knightly armor. Europeans don't know about the American right fucking at all, for them the right is a kind of communist. They conserve Prussianism and imperialism, something that the right anti-federalists, the fathers of the USA and Austria-Hungary, despised.
> 
> And that's where you look sucker. For you, the right is not Reagan, but the Trumpsters and the English Tories. You are the child of an autistic new wave of idiots.



The Right is a set of basic concepts.

1) Individual Freedom
2) Smaller, less intrusive gov't
3) Lower taxes and Fiscal Responsibility
4) Rule of Law
5) Human Dignity


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Rome had three phases. I'm talking about the fall of the first Patrician Rome, the second was the Republic, the third Empire (left Rome). The Huns of Attila finally killed Rome, that's another question.


.

I was talking about what led to the actual destruction of the Roman Empire ...  
Literally and not Idealistically.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The Right is a set of basic concepts.
> 
> 1) Individual Freedom
> 2) Smaller, less intrusive gov't
> ...


It can agreed as a superficial judgment, but this is not what you were talking about before this, moron.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> I was talking about what led to the actual destruction of the Roman Empire


The Noble Huns killed the leftist slave-owning state of perverts, henpecked and cretins - that's the reason for its death.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> It can agreed as a superficial judgment, but this is not what you were talking about before this, moron.



Oh spare me the attempted insults.    You were the one trying to derail this thread over and over, posting things that had no relevance.

And given the drivel you have posted, I thought you needed educating on this topic like you did on the topic of INCELs.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Already at the beginning of the left period, it rotted


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> The Noble Huns killed the leftist slave-owning state of perverts, henpecked and cretins - that's the reason for its death.


.

The Huns destroyed what stood before them because they could not defend themselves from the onslaught.
The city of Rome was captured and looted by the Visigoths in 410 and the Vandals in 455.

Here's a clue Skippy ... This ain't the kiddie pool ...   

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

The plebeians are leftists who shared power with the patricians during the period of the republic. Foreign traders and rabble, feminists and swindlers. They achieved the fall of the military aristocracy and rolled into an abomination. The Parthians despised them, they said that their miserable soldiers could not go on a campaign without pornography. They crushed them like a flock of sheep. Attila valued the Roman army lower than any barbarian's.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> The Huns destroyed what stood before them because they could not defend themselves from the onslaught.
> The city of Rome was captured and looted by the Visigoths in 410 and the Vandals in 455


This is a lie. The Battle of the Nations was decisive.  Attila also defeated goths.
The goths were also worthless hucksters and henpecked


----------



## BlackSand (Mar 11, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is a lie. The Battle of the Nations was decisive.  Attila also defeated goths.
> The goths were also worthless hucksters and henpecked


.

No it isn't ... And you would be better served if you went back to trying to promote the nonsense you suggested in the OP.
At least that way we could keep laughing at your bullshit ... 

The tangent you are currently on has reduced you to just spouting garbage with no discernable relevance.

.​


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Propaganda tries to present the Goths as a warrior people, but everyone knows that they were merchants ruled by women and priests, they didn’t even have kings. They are the ancestors of the infamous Prussian herd army.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

Their own historian, Jordan, admitted that the Huns defeated them and threw their miserable remnants on the outskirts of Europe, and the leader committed suicide. Previously, they lived on the site of the Avar Khaganate, but remained only in Prussia


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 11, 2022)

All these events were masked by the left-wing swindlers with the concept of "dark ages", about which they supposedly know nothing. They threw out the entire pre-Romanesque and Romanesque periods, several centuries long, from history, and "returned" only after the plague, when bloody Gothic began.
Romania and Austrasia were out of business, they invented that the Merovingians were Germans


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> The fact that her name is a very feminine name should be a clue.



The fact that I TOLD him I'm a woman at least twice should also have been a clue . . . to anyone with a brain.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> The fact that I TOLD him I'm a woman at least twice should also have been a clue . . . to anyone with a brain.



I don't think he qualifies.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> And Cecilie is shredding him!!!



Admittedly, it's not hard.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Admittedly, it's not hard.



Maybe not, but it is fun to watch.

And you know losing to a woman will drive him crazy.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Do you spend much time making this shit up?   Or does it just come to you in delusional waves?



Let's face it, he has a lot of free time in his parents' basement.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I'm sorry, I wouldn't be so rude if I knew you were a woman. This is another cost of emancipation, I can't distinguish you on the Internet.



Chuckles, you can't afford to take it any easier on me, because you're already getting your ass kicked.  And I OBVIOUSLY don't need it.

It's not "emancipation" that makes you unable to distinguish, fool; it's brain rot.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I've been thinking about this for a long time



You need to get out in the fresh air, away from the basement full of your own Cheet-O farts, and observe some ACTUAL people, instead of the ones on TV.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

The truth is, regardless of the society or whatever traditional gender roles people adhered to, women have NEVER been the helpless, fluffy little pets Dipshit imagines they were.  Life simply doesn't allow for it.

Let's take a look at "traditional female roles" in a pre-industrial society (which would be every society prior to the early 20th century).  Cooking, cleaning, birthing and caring for children, right?

So . . . cooking involves cleaning the ash from the fireplace and stove and getting a new fire going.  Having food to cook means tending to a kitchen garden every single day for the produce, and feeding and caring for the animals, not to mention having to kill, clean, and dress the animals for cooking.  If they're larger animals, you and your husband probably kill and butcher them together, but poultry are a one-person job.  Guess who that one person is?  Once you've got the larger animal killed and cut into pieces, you have to prep some and hang them in the smokehouse, and brine others for storage for the winter.  Then you have to render the fat for use in candles and soap, by boiling it all day long in a pot over a fire.  In addition to cooking three meals a day, you ALSO have to can and preserve produce for the winter; that involves boiling all the jars to sanitize them, while also chopping, prepping, and cooking huge amounts of food to put in them.

Dairy?  Well, maybe your husband has time to milk the cow/goats in the morning, maybe he doesn't.  Depends on what his job is.  Either way, you still get to separate off the cream, churn the butter, make the cheese . . .

And then you get to clean the house.  You don't have a vacuum cleaner and 409 spray.  You get to sweep with a broom, and then scrub the floors and surfaces down by hand with a scrub brush and lye soap, which you made yourself back in the "slaughtering animals" phase.  Laundry involves a pot of water heated over a fire, lye soap again, and scrubbing by hands on a washboard.  Then you have to hang every piece of laundry on a line out in the sunshine to dry.

Kids?  Well, you get to give birth with no hospital, no doctor, and no drugs.  Maybe you have a midwife; otherwise, you have whatever family and friends are handy.  If you're extremely lucky, you have a female family member who can come stay for the birth and a week or so after the birth to take care of the house and baby while you recover.  Then you get to go back to all the above-listed work with a baby in tow.  

And that's not even a comprehensive list.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> The truth is, regardless of the society or whatever traditional gender roles people adhered to, women have NEVER been the helpless, fluffy little pets Dipshit imagines they were. Life simply doesn't allow for it.
> 
> Let's take a look at "traditional female roles" in a pre-industrial society (which would be every society prior to the early 20th century). Cooking, cleaning, birthing and caring for children, right?


Actually, this is all nonsense. Semites and Germans have always been matriarchal, to one degree or another, it does not depend on the "industry"


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

Cecilie1200 said:


> So . . . cooking involves cleaning the ash from the fireplace and stove and getting a new fire going. Having food to cook means tending to a kitchen garden every single day for the produce, and feeding and caring for the animals, not to mention having to kill, clean, and dress the animals for cooking. If they're larger animals, you and your husband probably kill and butcher them together, but poultry are a one-person job. Guess who that one person is? Once you've got the larger animal killed and cut into pieces, you have to prep some and hang them in the smokehouse, and brine others for storage for the winter. Then you have to render the fat for use in candles and soap, by boiling it all day long in a pot over a fire. In addition to cooking three meals a day, you ALSO have to can and preserve produce for the winter; that involves boiling all the jars to sanitize them, while also chopping, prepping, and cooking huge amounts of food to put in them.



Many words about nothing. Nobody said that work or slavery is a property of patriarchy. This is war, not slavery. A woman is just better adapted to long-term work, she is hardy. A strong man can show a hundredfold strength in a moment, but he quickly gets tired of the monotonous work.

Although the patriarchal women were also stronger and faster, this can be seen from their dances, there women also show quite complex acrobatics.


But not as complex as men, of course.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

There are still no women in rodeo. In American football, I also did not see them, although now it has become softer.

In martial arts they are, but most often in "ballet" varieties, in real forms, such as Thai boxing, they are also almost absent and they do not show anything there. They can't hit hard.

In shot throwing, women throw projectiles 2 times less for the same distance. This suggests that they have little of the explosive power inherent in the ancient warriors of non-slave troops.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There are still no women in rodeo. In American football, I also did not see them, although now it has become softer.
> 
> In martial arts they are, but most often in "ballet" varieties, in real forms, such as Thai boxing, they are also almost absent and they do not show anything there. They can't hit hard.
> 
> In shot throwing, women throw projectiles 2 times less for the same distance. This suggests that they have little of the explosive power inherent in the ancient warriors of non-slave troops.



There are women in rodeo.   They just have the good sense not to participate in bull riding.

Yes, women have slightly less upper body strength than men.  But a woman with a gun is far more dangerous than those "ancient warriors" you seem to worship.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> There are women in rodeo.   They just have the good sense not to participate in bull riding.
> 
> Yes, women have slightly less upper body strength than men.  But a woman with a gun is far more dangerous than those "ancient warriors" you seem to worship.


I'm not talking about the upper part, but the explosive power, cretin. Tyson's bottom is also not weak.

There is a connection with military thinking in general. The temperament is not the same. She cannot blow up the muscles, she  cannot blow up the brain, there is no nerve power.

The art of the warrior isn't just about shooting, cretin, that's what a baby can do.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

In classical Olympic athletics, all disciplines came from military skills, there was nothing that was available to a commoner or even a strong slave. There was nothing like powerlifting. All disciplines are designed for military explosive power.
The marathon appeared there much later. Initially, there were also races of war chariots.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

And in any sport of this kind, a woman always shows modest results, even despite the narrow specialization in training and favorable anthropometry, they never come close to men.
Especially feminists, who for the most part are just loud and fat and weak.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I'm not talking about the upper part, but the explosive power, cretin. Tyson's bottom is also not weak.
> 
> There is a connection with military thinking in general. The temperament is not the same. She cannot blow up the muscles, she  cannot blow up the brain, there is no nerve power.
> 
> The art of the warrior isn't just about shooting, cretin, that's what a baby can do.



Other than the upper body strength, there is no difference in the genders.   The mental aspects are the same.  The difference is in the way they are raised.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Other than the upper body strength, there is no difference in the genders.   The mental aspects are the same.  The difference is in the way they are raised.


Why are you saying anything if you are a complete layman in matters of sports? An Olympian weightlifter works from the bottom, not from the top. The strength of the arms and shoulders generally plays a significant role in few places, this is only gymnastics. You are as dumb as a feminist


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

By the way, the muscle mass of the shoulder girdle of the average man is also greatly exaggerated. I doubt that there is a difference in the average, given the growth.

The skeleton is formed a little differently, the shoulders are wider on average, but this does not mean that there is more meat there.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

For athletes, this difference is greater, but for ordinary people it is not. In natural athletes there, too, in fact, the difference is not critical


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Actually, this is all nonsense. Semites and Germans have always been matriarchal, to one degree or another, it does not depend on the "industry"



Actually, none of what I said was nonsense, and nothing you said did anything to contradict me.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

In general, the shoulders will in any case be wider if you load them. The muscles spread it from the inside. Especially on the crossbar and rings it will be noticeable.

It's not even surely to call the male type of skeleton by nature. And the hips of women also often narrow, it looks even better. Such hips have american and asian woman as a rule


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Why are you saying anything if you are a complete layman in matters of sports? An Olympian weightlifter works from the bottom, not from the top. The strength of the arms and shoulders generally plays a significant role in few places, this is only gymnastics. You are as dumb as a feminist



If we stopped talking about things we knew nothing about, you would have been silent a long time ago.

Why do you worship the warriors who bring death and destruction?    Are you one of those who is bloodthirsty but lack the courage to act on it?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

I think that this fairy tale about the male type of constitution was invented by feminists for PR of "their" type of women with a turn of the femoral neck or a wide pelvis. Most American women do not belong to this type, and their bodies, in fact, are not much different from male proportions.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> If we stopped talking about things we knew nothing about, you would have been silent a long time ago.
> 
> Why do you worship the warriors who bring death and destruction?    Are you one of those who is bloodthirsty but lack the courage to act on it?


Warriors bring death to villains. Predators are not warriors but canine stinking rabble. They were never real warriors


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Warriors bring death to villains. Predators are not warriors but canine stinking rabble. They were never real warriors



Warriors can be noble defenders.   They can also be the ones who slaughter, maim, and pillage.   This is what war in ancient times was all about.

But today there are women who are equally adept at the arts of war.    The firearm made us all more equal.

My girlfriend can hit targets at 100 yards with my .44 magnum.   My step-daughter from my second marriage could hit milk jugs at 250 yards with my M1A when she was 14 years old.   And she was an excellent hunter.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

for example, my beloved Brittany did not have any special forms, in the form of an hourglass. And it just looks much sexier than thighs with cellulite and a narrow waist.


In fact, most women in the gym want to look like this.
The classic American doll does not have this type either. The hourglass body is a predominantly northern European type, in fact, it is not needed in America.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> They can also be the ones who slaughter, maim, and pillage. This is what war in ancient times was all about.


These were not warriors, but forest dogs, swamp rabble. This is just the culture of henpecked.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> for example, my beloved Brittany did not have any special forms, in the form of an hourglass. And it just looks much sexier than thighs with cellulite and a narrow waist.
> 
> 
> In fact, most women in the gym want to look like this.
> The classic American doll does not have this type either. The hourglass body is a predominantly northern European type, in fact, it is not needed in America.



So you worship ancient tribes and dead celebrities.    And still nothing actually from you.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> These were not warriors, but forest dogs, swamp rabble. This is just the culture of henpecked.



Your ideas that warriors only defeated villains and refrained from all pillaging and mistreating people is laughable.    That is pure fantasy written by the victors.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

The Barbie doll has "male" proportions in their sense. It's just a scam, just like feminism.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Your ideas that warriors only defeated villains and refrained from all pillaging and mistreating people is laughable.    That is pure fantasy written by the victors.


This is a matter of terminology. I don't classify stinky dogs as warriors.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> So you worship ancient tribes and dead celebrities.    And still nothing actually from you.


I like women with "masculine" proportions, beautiful faces and angelic innocent souls. I consider such women to be the daughters of the patriarchy. Brittany is without a doubt a real patriarchal woman.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is a matter of terminology. I don't classify stinky dogs as warriors.



You seem to have your own classifications for almost everything.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I like women with "masculine" proportions, beautiful faces and angelic innocent souls. I consider such women to be the daughters of the patriarchy. Brittany is without a doubt a real patriarchal woman.



You are correct.   Both strict patriarchy and Brittany are dead.

But Brittany was a woman.   Therefore, in your world she was inferior.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 12, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> You are correct.   Both strict patriarchy and Brittany are dead.
> 
> But Brittany was a woman.   Therefore, in your world she was inferior.


No, the patriarchy is alive. It lives exactly in America. America is Babylon. There's a lot of big and masculine stuff out there, superman, bull, tough men's sports and a professional army. American women are patriarchal and beautiful, there is no gender equality in the American constitution: this is unique.

I like women. I don't think feninists are women, they are hermaphrodites.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 12, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> No, the patriarchy is alive. It lives exactly in America. America is Babylon. There's a lot of big and masculine stuff out there, superman, bull, tough men's sports and a professional army. American women are patriarchal and beautiful, there is no gender equality in the American constitution: this is unique.
> 
> I like women. I don't think feninists are women, they are hermaphrodites.



I doubt feminists care what you think.    But they battle for the equality of women.


----------



## woodwork201 (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?



Combat ready men do NOT have the right to form a militia.  They are, by virtue of the fact that they exist and meet the criteria specified by their state, part of the militia that is controlled and organized by the State.


----------



## woodwork201 (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is exactly what they are trying to achieve. First, stupid barbies shoot themselves in the mouth and shoot off their husband's balls, then the leftists say that Americans will be safer without weapons and take away guns



You don't even believe the stupid shit you're posting.  You are just trolling and stirring the pot.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> Combat ready men do NOT have the right to form a militia.  They are, by virtue of the fact that they exist and meet the criteria specified by their state, part of the militia that is controlled and organized by the State.


You're a liar. Firstly, the American police are not under the control of the feds, and secondly, the creation of a militia is a direct requirement of the 2nd amendment.


----------



## woodwork201 (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> You're a liar. Firstly, the American police are not under the control of the feds, and secondly, the creation of a militia is a direct requirement of the 2nd amendment.


The police are not the militia and you're an idiot.  Unsubscribing to the trolling thread.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> You don't even believe the stupid shit you're posting.  You are just trolling and stirring the pot.


If you were so drunk that you gave your gun to a woman to shoot at the cans, always stay behind her. A lot of people believe this, and that's the reason they're alive and haven't had their balls shot off.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

woodwork201 said:


> The police are not the militia


This is a de facto militia


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

woodwork201 
In leftist countries, the police are part of the feds. Feel the difference


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> In a right society, a woman does not own a weapon and does not touch a weapon. A man does not touch the preparation of food if he is not on a campaign.
> 
> The woman who touched the weapon is disgraced.
> A man who began to do women's affairs is disgraced.


This is approaching weapon-grade stupid...

Many cultures had female warriors. The naginata was mostly used by women.










Luyudmila Pavlichenko (aka "Lady Death") was one of the most successful snipers in WW2, with 309 kills.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Unattractive women are easier to fuck anyway. The ugly Marilyn Monroe became a sex symbol due to the fact that she was able to sell herself in shiny packaging, and men are zombified by whores and are afraid to refuse, because then they will be called impotent.
> This is exactly what feminists are after.


What sort of drugs would I have to take for this...fever dream...to make sense?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> What sort of drugs would I have to take for this...fever dream...to make sense?


cures for leftist fraud. Most autistic people won't get it.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Cecilie1200 If I tell a whore to fuck off the nerd is not happy because I didn't appreciate the "beauty" of his wife. If I agree to let her suck my dick, the nerd gets jealous. What should I do? There is no choice, both options are bad. If I don't fuck them, at least I won't get syphilis.


You might already have it...that would explain your delusions.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> cures for leftist fraud. Most autistic people won't get it.



Is "autistic" the current page on your word of the day calendar?


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)




----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> There are still no women in rodeo. In American football, I also did not see them, although now it has become softer.
> 
> In martial arts they are, but most often in "ballet" varieties, in real forms, such as Thai boxing, they are also almost absent and they do not show anything there. They can't hit hard.



You sound like a few of my wife's students. Most smartened up the third or fourth time she dumped them on the floor. (You wouldn't, of course.)


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Is "autistic" the current page on your word of the day calendar?


An autist is the first victim of communism. An autist is not capable of analysis, he takes the word of a swindler. Communist slaves are autistic by nature, as are those who believed the preachers of the Inquisition.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> If you were so drunk that you gave your gun to a woman to shoot at the cans, always stay behind her. A lot of people believe this, and that's the reason they're alive and haven't had their balls shot off.



My wife shoots as well as I do. (Better at long range, her eyes are much better than mine.) Her biggest limitation in shooting is that she is left-handed.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> An autist is the first victim of communism. An autist is not capable of analysis, he takes the word of a swindler. Communist slaves are autistic by nature, as are those who believed the preachers of the Inquisition.


You are getting less coherent with every post.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> You sound like a few of my wife's students. Most smartened up the third or fourth time she dumped them on the floor. (You wouldn't, of course.)


I don't fight women, it's beneath the dignity of a man. In reality, I have never seen a woman who could oppose something to me, when they kicked me, they gone to doctor with foot fractures. They can't even give a hard massage, I have to do it myself.

It's funny to me to listen to such nonsense of fagots

And not a single taekwondo ballerina of any gender is capable of a real fight, they fall from their own blows. If you are a man, go to thaibox.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> You are getting less coherent with every post.


For an autist, you need step-by-step instructions, ask the leftists, they will give it to you. Don't try to understand anything outside of that - you can't.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> This is approaching weapon-grade stupid...
> 
> Many cultures had female warriors. The naginata was mostly used by women.




This is the slave principle of the troops, there is no difference between the sexes.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)




----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)




----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Nixon destroyed it in the USA.

There is only professional volunteers now


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> What sort of drugs would I have to take for this...fever dream...to make sense?



I'm pretty sure the only way his bullshit would make sense to you is if you sustained a serious head injury of some sort.


----------



## Colin norris (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


I'm sensing a bit of chauvinism here.


rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.



It dies not say "combat ready men have a right to form a state militia". 
Read the fucking you idiot  

Also, because it doesn't say
Women, they are not  excluded.  In fact it say "people". 
Read it fool  



rupol2000 said:


> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


No there is not.  

What's your point? Do you want women excluded from owning guns? 
I sensing a bit if chauvinism here.


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Colin norris said:


> It dies not say "combat ready men have a right to form a state militia".


Yes, at that time they looked like this.






However, the "combat capability" of Barbie is also a fiction now. As soon as the real fight starts, they go to bake cookies.


----------



## Colin norris (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Yes, at that time they looked like this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So I was right.  You are a male chauvinist pig.  Guns are only for real men ay? 

Did you read the 2nd and realised you are wrong? Of course not. 

Take some advice idiot. Check your facts before you post. Do the research or I'll pick you off every time. You like taking candy from a kid


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Colin norris 
Strictly speaking, the word "man" means "male person", by the way. What makes you think that a legal document should be read "metaphorically?"


----------



## Colin norris (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Colin norris
> Strictly speaking, the word "man" means "male person", by the way. What makes you think that a legal document should be read "metaphorically?"


Here's a copy of the 2nd. 
Show me where it says man or woman. I know you can't and your a liar. 
Now you want to divert to stop further embarrassment. I'm all over you like a rash but you don't know when to give in. 
You are wrong so admit it and move on  


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

NOTE IT SAYS PEOPLE???


----------



## rupol2000 (Mar 15, 2022)

Colin norris said:


> Here's a copy of the 2nd.
> Show me where it says man or woman. I know you can't and your a liar.
> Now you want to divert to stop further embarrassment. I'm all over you like a rash but you don't know when to give in.
> You are wrong so admit it and move on
> ...


Okay. But at that time, there was no feminism yet. Why refer to the law if you spit on what it really means?


----------



## Jarlaxle (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> This is the slave principle of the troops, there is no difference between the sexes.



Are you on drugs?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 15, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Are you on drugs?



Judging from his posts, probably not nearly as many as he actually should be.


----------



## WinterBorn (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Yes, at that time they looked like this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The pic you posted was a cowboy.   They were not the militia.   They were simply workers who moved cattle.    I can see you get most of your ideas from movies and TV shows.  You do realize they are fiction, right?


----------



## Colin norris (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> Okay. But at that time, there was no feminism yet.


yes there was feminism.  Its because the make dominated arseholes suppressed it. Have a look at the op. 


rupol2000 said:


> Why refer to the law if you spit on what it really means?


I'm not spitting on anything. It is very clear what it says and as I pointed out a hundred times, you gun nuts are the ones deliberately misinterpreted it to suit your egos and masculinity. 

Why are you deliberately ignoring that fact? The 2nd is very clear.   Read the fucking thing idiot


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 15, 2022)

rupol2000 said:


> I think they don't.
> 
> The right to bear arms is enshrined in the 2nd Amendment, due to the fact that combat-ready men have the right to form a state militia. It says nothing about women.
> 
> Also, I don't know of any law that would allow women to carry guns when they serve in the federal army. Is there such a law?


why don't you ask if women have a right to life?


----------



## d0gbreath (Mar 15, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> why don't you ask if women have a right to life?


Ask my wife, she's a US Army Desert Storm veteran. I'd hand her the AR-556 and just lean on my side-by-side break open 12, and watch her shoot.


----------

