Kiwis, Ex-Kiwis, and Non-Kiwis are welcome. We are politically non-partisian. You don't need to explain or justify your political orientation (left or right) to us. Onionfarms gets us. All of us.

Freeze Peach πŸ‘ π–‘𝖾𝖺𝗋 𝖧𝖺𝗆𝗆𝖾𝗋'π—Œ π–»π—…π—ˆπ—€ Κ• ● α΄₯ ●ʔ

Used for controversial topics that hinge upon 1st amendment concerns vs. Fed posting. Please Note: Genuine threats advocating violence that are in violation of federal law will not be tolerated.
The only autistic women that exist to me are the ones who have a 80 iq or below and can't speak besides grunts and screams, and need a care taker following them around.

I figured out long ago that unless the so called "autistic woman" isn't so retarded she needs to wear a helmet around, that no matter how fucked up they may be (physically and otherwise), there lives are just simply completely unaffected by it on the count of them being women.

They will always have a man wanting to date them, they will always be able to make friends with easily, they will get to enjoy all the female privileges normie women enjoy

It's just not like that for men for obvious reasons.

Is it even worth diagnosing these bitches with autism if they are not completely retarded? What's the reason? How is them liking hazbin hotel and browsing tumblr debilitating for them in a meaningful way?

383737838383.png



 
Last edited:
>the foulest brony of all time
>tier 2 basic beginner level degeneracy


837373838373837.png
 
Seeing a lot of beta males getting extremely mad at this tweet.

Getting mad at women for liking anti social dominant men is the same as feminists getting mad at 60 y/o guys who are attracted to 18 y/os.

You're getting pissy over things that women simply cannot control.

It's just apart of evolutionary biology, there's really no reason to get mad at it. Women just like that because men like that were usually the ones who adapted really good in almost any environment they were in.

Just adapt and change yourself, learn from what women find attractive and learn from it.

Because crying about it is just going to make you feel bad for no reason, and it's not going to make women like you.

 
Seeing a lot of beta males getting extremely mad at this tweet.

Getting mad at women for liking anti social dominant men is the same as feminists getting mad at 60 y/o guys who are attracted to 18 y/os.

You're getting pissy over things that women simply cannot control.

It's just apart of evolutionary biology, there's really no reason to get mad at it. Women just like that because men like that were usually the ones who adapted really good in almost any environment they were in.

Just adapt and change yourself, learn from what women find attractive and learn from it.

Because crying about it is just going to make you feel bad for no reason, and it's not going to make women like you.

I dunno bro this seems kinda retarded.

Women and their poor judge of character will throw themselves to awful people, get treated poorly become a feminist and say crazy shit.

Theirs nothing wrong with people pointing out the stupidity.

Also how does "women liking anti-social dominant men" an evolutionary mechanism? Didnt humanity form society for better chances of survival? This seems like an evolutionary misstep similar to how men simping is also an evolutionary misstep.

Most importantly; how did you get any of this from a post of a woman talking about rejecting three men?
 
Also how does "women liking anti-social dominant men" an evolutionary mechanism? Didnt humanity form society for better chances of survival? This seems like an evolutionary misstep similar to how men simping is also an evolutionary misstep.
I think the issue with that take is you're treating sexual attraction like it evolved to optimize society, when it didn't. It evolved to optimize individual gene replication, even when that conflicts with group stability.


Humans forming societies doesn't mean every instinct got rewritten to favor good citizens. A lot of traits that helped genes spread in chaotic, violent environments are actively bad for modern life.


Women are attracted to antisocial/dominant men, i'm not saying society works better that way or that it's morally good. But there is an obvious pattern in sexual selection (to where it's even kind of a meme that women like assholes), a small minority of dominant, aggressive men historically reproduced way more than average men. That's just how power worked for most of history.

There's a reason broad shoulders are consistently rated as the most attractive male trait across cultures. Upper-body strength correlates with fighting ability. Women obviously aren't consciously thinking "this guy would be good at raiding a village," but attraction isn't run by the conscious mind anyway.
 
Last edited:
Also how does "women liking anti-social dominant men" an evolutionary mechanism? Didnt humanity form society for better chances of survival? This seems like an evolutionary misstep similar to how men simping is also an evolutionary misstep.
You're missing the point.

Sexual arousal doesn't evaluate character the way morality or long-term planning does. Womens libido responds to cues tied to dominance, power, and threat potential, even if those traits make someone a bad partner or a bad person. That's why what women say they want and what actually turns them on often don't line up.


Calling this an evolutionary misstep doesn't really mean much either. Evolution isn't trying to produce enlightened, cooperative modern humans. It's really fucked up, slow, and full of tradeoffs. Humans still crave sugar and novelty for the same reason, it used to be adaptive. Now it causes problems.

Same thing with men simping, honestly. Both sexes have instincts that don't map cleanly onto modern society anymore. That doesn't mean they're imaginary or socially constructed.

But overall, I am just trying to say that you can either seethe about the men women are attracted to, which gets you nowhere, or take notes from them.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom