Backlash after WC rape jokes flood Twitter

I've been asleep. Did I miss any bannings?

Good to see Scythe contributing. There's something admirable about his unashamed idiocy.
 
What if they don't have children?

If they don't have children is their choice. But if they do have children that should be their no.1 priority to look after their child. Unfortunately, they don't have a choice in that they have to work if they have a mortgage on a house. That's the problem with feminism in that the child doesn't get enough time with the mother, and that creates dysfunctional children, they grow and repeat the cycle.
 
Because he has to work anyhow. You need two incomes now. So how is that better?
You always needed two incomes, at least for the lower classes. The woman's income mostly came in the form of house work, tending the fields, etc. It's not a monetized income, but it's economic production nevertheless. That idea of the woman that only needs to cook and care for the baby is for the select wealthier ones. These can still opt to not to work (the woman or the man), and a few, a distinct minority, chose not to.
 
If they don't have children is their choice. But if they do have children that should be their no.1 priority to look after their child. Unfortunately, they don't have a choice in that they have to work if they have a mortgage on a house. That's the problem with feminism in that the child doesn't get enough time with the mother, and that creates dysfunctional children, they grow and repeat the cycle.
But why can't dad stay at home while mum works?
 
If they don't have children is their choice. But if they do have children that should be their no.1 priority to look after their child. Unfortunately, they don't have a choice in that they have to work if they have a mortgage on a house. That's the problem with feminism in that the child doesn't get enough time with the mother, and that creates dysfunctional children, they grow and repeat the cycle.

My mother worked. Still does. And I love her dearly and consider her a great, inspiring and loving parent. And aside from the drink, the drugs, the women, the nervous ticks and the constant, never ending GOOD GOD PLEASE MAKE IT STOP night terrors, I'm not remotely dysfunctional.
 
If they don't have children is their choice. But if they do have children that should be their no.1 priority to look after their child. Unfortunately, they don't have a choice in that they have to work if they have a mortgage on a house. That's the problem with feminism in that the child doesn't get enough time with the mother, and that creates dysfunctional children, they grow and repeat the cycle.

How do you mean dysfunctional?

How have you measured this?
 
But why can't dad stay at home while mum works?

He can't if he wanted to and it's not in a man's nature anyhow. Why? Because a man is natural provider. This is in our DNA to be that way. Men are the providers and woman are the nurturers.
 
He can't if he wanted to and it's not in a man's nature anyhow. Why? Because a man is natural provider. This is in our DNA to be that way. Men are the providers and woman are the nurturers.
My mum works much harder than my dad. Like, its not even close. There is nothing in mens dna to provide more than women. That kind shit went of the window thousands of years ago as we developed farming and built cities.
 
Ok feck it, lets go all out for the win here. In a gay marriage, who's role is it to raise the children?
 
My mum works much harder than my dad. Like, its not even close. There is nothing in mens dna to provide more than women. That kind shit went of the window thousands of years ago as we developed farming and built cities.

My DNA really, really wants to sit around doing feck all all day. But then my mum worked, so I'm probably broken.
 
My mum works much harder than my dad. Like, its not even close. There is nothing in mens dna to provide more than women. That kind shit went of the window thousands of years ago as we developed farming and built cities.

Yes it is in a man's DNA help provide for a woman with the child they have together.
 
He can't if he wanted to and it's not in a man's nature anyhow. Why? Because a man is natural provider. This is in our DNA to be that way. Men are the providers and woman are the nurturers.

I've seen many a brave soul go down the path you currently tread young lad. Their e-gravestones lie along the path therein.

What I'm saying is, just step away from the keyboard, return to fight another day
 
Absolutely.

Reminds me of a young Al, eloquently explaining why poor people should be beaten with sticks.

If I was suggesting that women should be beaten with sticks then your analogy would be fine. As it is you're just spouting garbage.
 
*hears knock on door*

Please be a serial killer...
 
If I was suggesting that women should be beaten with sticks then your analogy would be fine. As it is you're just spouting garbage.
Ahh, composure slipping a bit here. Was meant to be good natured ribbing, Scythe. Al doesn't really say poor people should be beaten with sticks (he just thinks it).
 
Yes it is in a man's DNA help provide for a woman with the child they have together.

True. But what if he can't have children, possibly because he's been out fighting men and raping wolves too much (it takes its toll on a man's juices, you know)? What to do with him then?
 
Ahh, composure slipping a bit here. Was meant to be good natured ribbing, Scythe. Al doesn't really say poor people should be beaten with sticks (he just thinks it).

Not really. I'm in debate with a bunch of feminists here. I win by default since feminism is completely unnatural.
 
Not really. I'm in debate with a bunch of feminists here. I win by default since feminism is completely unnatural.

Yeah but if we weren't all out at work, we'd beat you.