Why Liberated Women don't understand men and their needs

[Winston]

Why Liberated Women don't understand men and their needs

American women are proud to say that they are "liberated" and expect everyone else to praise them for it too, as though it were some accomplishment to be proud of. They will accept no debate about it. But what do they mean when they say that? What are they "liberated" from exactly?

When you dig deeper, it gets disturbing. You find that what they mean is that they no longer have to be women anymore. Thus they are "liberated" from femininity, womanhood, and from the female gender itself. What they mean is that they no longer have to look or act like women or females anymore.

This is sickening and creepy, and threatens to undermine the human race. But because it's popular and trendy in America for women to be "liberated", they accept it unquestioningly like a religion, despite its disturbing implications.

But you gotta wonder, why is it that only women in America demand "liberation" and "equality"? How come women in most other countries are not demanding such things? How come most foreign women are PROUD of their womanhood and cherish their femininity?

The only logical explanation is that somehow, women in America must have been socially engineered, programmed and brainwashed, by feminism and corrupt American culture, to rebel against their femininity and to see it as oppressive.

But the truth is, femininity is natural. It is part of nature and meant to complement males. That's how nature intended it. So to rebel against femininity is to rebel against nature, which is not a good thing and leads to unhealthy consequences.

It is natural for women to be proud to be feminine and seek happiness in their womanhood. This is the way it's been throughout all of human history, and how it is today in foreign countries that are authentic and natural (unlike America).

If "liberation" from womanhood were natural, then women all over the world would demand "liberation" and women thousands of years ago would have as well. But they don't and they didn't. So something must have INTERVENED. It's the only logical explanation.

Now I'm all for liberation, freedom and human rights. But femininity is not oppressive. It is natural and beautiful. Only brainwashed women in America's fake upside-down toxic culture think it is oppressive. Trying to liberate women from being women, is like trying to liberate men from being men, or humans from being human. It's stupid and doesn't make sense.

I mean, if the organs and cells in your body wanted to be "liberated" and free from performing their functions in maintaining your health, would that be good for you? lol. Of course not. It would threaten your life. Duh.

Women should make the best of their femininity, which is beautiful and natural, and men should do the same with masculinity. It's better to go with nature than to go against it. There is no reason to view your gender as something oppressive. That's f***ed up and the dumbest thing. Only a sick twisted sociopathic elite would socially engineer people to view their own gender or nature as an enemy to combat.

The sad thing is that most women in America have fallen for it, because women are easier to manipulate than men are. Generally, women only care about what's popular and trendy, and what other women think. So they will follow bad and destructive ideas, as long as they are popular and trendy.

Men, on the other hand, are harder to manipulate, because they follow their conviction and principles more. They are more likely to care about what's good, what's right and what's natural, than about what's popular and trendy. That's why you do not see American men trying to "liberate" themselves from their masculinity or manhood, like "liberated" women are trying to do, which is sickening and disheartening.

This is because feminism has succeeded in convincing many American women that they don't need men, but it has FAILED in convincing men that they don't need women. This is because men are more down-to-earth and cannot be manipulated by trends and popularity as much as women can. As such, feminism has become a recipe for disaster. By neutering men and invalidating their needs, and turning women into angry she-beasts, feminism has resulted in the rise of violence, crime, insanity, and mental illness in America.

A major consequence of this is that "liberated" women have become very much out of touch with men and their needs, and out of touch with reality itself too. Below I will elaborate on that.

Why liberated women don't understand men like feminine women do.

You see, a liberated woman does not understand the needs of men, whereas a feminine woman does. (Foreign women in general are very feminine) That's because the creative force of life (God or Mother Nature) created the feminine to complement the masculine, so that both can have a symbiotic relationship.

In contrast, the "liberated woman" is out of whack with femininity, and thus does not understand the needs of men, nor the needs of humans in general. Instead, the "liberated woman" attempts invalidate the needs and desires of men and often condemns them as well.

So for example, if a decent man flirts with a feminine woman or tries to charm her, she will blush and giggle and react POSITIVELY to the flirtation, because that's how femininity naturally responds to courting gestures. A feminine woman is honored and flattered to be pursued, because it means that she is seen as beautiful and fertile by the opposite gender. Such is the nature of the feminine.

Look in the history books and you will see that this is the way real ladies have been for thousands of years, thus it's natural and normal. Even royal Queens in European history have always been flattered and honored by flirtation and charm, even by men of low social standing.

In contrast, if a decent man tries to flirt with a "liberated" feminist woman or charm her, she will view it negatively, as an attack and infringement on her "liberation" from the feminine. She will perceive it as creepy and violating, like a transgression on her boundaries. Since she feels that she has been "liberated" from her femininity, she therefore does not wish to be treated as a feminine being.

Thus she will feel violated by flirtation rather than flattered. She will interpret it as demeaning and exploitative, like being "treated like a sex object". Hence, flirtation with women is a taboo in modern America. It's something you see in the movies, but you aren't allowed to do in real life.

But think about this: If flirtation were a bad unnatural thing, as "liberated" liberal women think, then why was it more normal and accepted as natural in America's past? Even in the 1980's, flirtation was seen as a natural normal thing that men do. How do "liberated" women explain that? They can't. Therefore, this vilification of flirtation in America must be an unnatural aberration, and a turn in the WRONG direction.

Also, if a "liberated" woman finds out that you want to date women who are beautiful and feminine, she will claim that you are shallow and that you "see women as sex objects" which is demeaning to them. They will condemn you for desiring female beauty, as if it were wrong to fall in love with beautiful women.

But again, they are wrong, because it is natural for men to be attracted to feminine beauty. Look in the history books and you will see that that's how men have been for thousands of years. Men have been evolved to seek females that look fertile, and females are evolved to seek strong stable men who are good providers.

Therefore, it's natural and normal. So these liberals (who wish to turn nature upside down) are again out of touch with reality and out of touch with men's needs. They do not understand men, human nature, or the natural order of things.

Fortunately, a feminine woman will not condemn a man for desiring beautiful feminine women. They understand that that's how men are. And they will seek and strive to be beautiful and feminine themselves, so that they can try to match what men want. That's the natural way of things, and how it's always been. It's how male and female have always courted, mated and come together. To try to interfere with that, as liberals do, is seriously foolish and perverse, as well as downright disgusting and evil.

A "liberated" feminist woman also does not understand that men need love, romance, sex, and female companionship. These are natural needs and desires inherent in men. But a "liberated" feminist woman would tell such men that they should be "strong and independent", like they are, and not have such needs. They will tell such men to learn to be happy alone and not need others.

But in doing so, these feminists forget that humans are social creatures and meant to need others, not become isolated hermits. For thousands of years, humans have been part of clans, tribes and extended families. And men and women have always needed each other. Needing others has never been condemned before, except in modern America. Every other society and culture has understood and accepted that humans need others. Even in the Bible, the book of Genesis says that God created women to be a companion and helpmate to man.

Thus these feminists are advocating that we go against nature and all of human history, which is absurd if you think about it. They are obviously completely ignorant of human history and human nature as well.

Such liberal women will give men (and other women) bullshit self-improvement advice that doesn't amount to anything. For example, they will tell them that they should focus on improving themselves and developing nebulous artificial traits such as "confidence and self-esteem", so that they can attract what they want. They also falsely assume that filling your head with positive thoughts will fulfill your needs for love, sex and romance, which is bogus and untrue.

Here is something else I've noticed that's interesting: Feminine women abroad NEVER tell me that I lack confidence. Only "liberated" women do, the kind you find in liberal America. Here's why:

Feminine women abroad allow me to be myself, and I mean my sweet, charming, romantic self (which is considered creepy and taboo in America). They allow me to treat them like a lady. I can kiss their hand, flirt with them, charm them, flatter them, be like a chivalrous knight to them, etc. So I am comfortable around them, since they allow me to be me. As such, they usually describe me as "confident, charming, romantic, flattering and good with women." In fact, when I tell them that I am often told in America that I "lack confidence", they usually reply, "That's not true. You seem very confident."

But on the other hand, "liberated" women in America consider such behaviors to be creepy and violating, an infringement upon their "liberation" (from femininity). So they do NOT allow me to be myself. I cannot treat them like a real lady, nor can I treat them like a male buddy (since male buddies are down-to-earth, not angry, bitchy or fake). So I don't know what to do with them or how to treat them. As a result, I become naturally nervous or uncomfortable around them. So to them, I seem "unconfident".

Anyhow, a feminine woman will be much more understanding of a man's needs, and will not condemn them. A feminine woman will strive to provide what her man needs, as long as he is the man she loves. Feminine women can empathize and relate to men and their needs for love, romance and sex, because femininity was meant to complement masculinity by nature.

This is the natural way of things. Why condemn it or try to twist it upside down? The needs of men and women were designed by our creator to complement and fulfill each other. That is a beautiful and natural thing.

However, liberal "liberated" women, who are neither female nor male, do not fit into this equation at all. They are an aberration and wish to destroy nature. In that sense, they are evil and destructive. Consider this: If "liberated" cells came into your body and tried to convince all the trillions of cells in your body to go against their nature and function and become "liberated", what would that do? It would destroy your health of course! Duh. Would you want that?!

What's interesting to note is that such "liberated" liberal women do not look happy at all. Instead, they look cold, angry, antsy, and have quick tempers. They do not look healthy, natural or wholesome at all. Nor do they radiate warmth and joy. In fact, studies show that feminism has made women less happy than they were in the past when they were expected to fulfill traditional roles. See here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/opini ... uthat.html

This speaks volumes and is to be expected. After all, when you go against all that's natural and wholesome, what do you expect will happen? Happy people learn how to work with nature, not go against it.

In stark contrast, feminine women usually look sweet, natural and wholesome. I posted many examples in my forum here:

viewtopic.php?t=13698
viewtopic.php?t=18494
http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page61.htm

As they say, pictures speak a thousand words. Enough said.

[Cyrus]

Hey Winston,

Well here's my interpretation:

American feminists don't want to liberate themselves from femininity so much as the "patriarchy". They're taught that men control their lives and tell them how to live. Women's Lib is about overcoming the patriarchy.

... A patriarchy that exists in their imaginations.

What happens is that a byproduct of this belief damages femininity. They begin to believe all men are their enemies, and as consequence prefer the company of other females, and begin thinking less about nurturing attractive behaviors to men.

Now some women DO want to remove femininity intentionally. Lesbian / transgenders. Can't really blame them, though.

There's a great piece a contributor wrote at Developed Man this week about the difference between French Feminism and Western Feminism. Shows you how a women's interest group CAN exist without destroying what it means to be a woman, and it helps to explain why Europeans behave in a way that is a lot more enlightened than Americans: http://developedman.com/french-feminism ... -feminism/

Cy (http://www.cyruskirkpatrick.com)

[MrMan]

A good first date conversation is to tell a woman you are patriarchal. If she starts spouting feminist dogma, that means its the last date.

[Winston]

Hi Cyrus,
Welcome back. Great comments. Yes what you say is true too.

But what did you think of my explanation about why "liberated" women do not understand men or their needs? Isn't it pretty sad but true? Yet it's totally taboo as well, because you are supposed to see women being "liberated" as a positive and good thing. You are not allowed to say anything negative about it.

Not only are "liberated" women out of touch with men and their needs, but to them, a man's needs are UNIMPORTANT as well. It's very INVALIDATING to men to be treated like their needs are not important, and only women's needs are important. Where is the "equality" in that? lol

America is truly the land of bullshit. No doubt about it.

Also, have you noticed that around liberated westernized women, when you socialize with them, you get this feeling that you are NOT allowed to say anything flirtatious or romantic, and that you are obligated to keep everything PLATONIC with no flirtation at all?

Doesn't that suck? It's like around western women, you aren't allowed to have desires. And you have to PRETEND that you have no romantic desires too. Again, it's very INVALIDATING. It's like men are NOT allowed to have desires in America, unless a woman tells him to. lol

Isn't the truth so politically incorrect in America? lol

America is so insane and inauthentic, that's it's almost funny and too ridiculous to take seriously.

[matthewcoury]

Why Liberated Women don't understand men and their needs

American women are proud to say that they are "liberated" and expect everyone else to praise them for it too, as though it were some accomplishment to be proud of. They will accept no debate about it. But what do they mean when they say that? What are they "liberated" from exactly?

When you dig deeper, it gets disturbing. You find that what they mean is that they no longer have to be women anymore. Thus they are "liberated" from femininity, womanhood, and from the female gender itself. What they mean is that they no longer have to look or act like women or females anymore.

This is sickening and creepy, and threatens to undermine the human race. But because it's popular and trendy in America for women to be "liberated", they accept it unquestioningly like a religion, despite its disturbing implications.

But you gotta wonder, why is it that only women in America demand "liberation" and "equality"? How come women in most other countries are not demanding such things? How come most foreign women are PROUD of their womanhood and cherish their femininity?

The only logical explanation is that somehow, women in America must have been socially engineered, programmed or brainwashed, to rebel against their femininity and to see it as oppressive.

The truth is, femininity is natural. It is part of nature and meant to complement males. That's how nature intended it. So to rebel against femininity is to rebel against nature, which is not a good thing and leads to unhealthy consequences.

It is natural for women to be proud to be feminine and seek happiness in their womanhood. This is the way it's been throughout all of human history, and how it is today in foreign countries that are authentic and natural (unlike America).

If "liberation" from womanhood were natural, then women all over the world would demand "liberation" and women thousands of years ago would have as well. But they don't and they didn't. So something must have intervened. It's the only logical explanation.

Now I'm all for liberation and freedom. But femininity is not oppressive. It is natural and beautiful. Only brainwashed women in America's fake upside-down toxic culture think it is oppressive. Trying to liberate women from being women, is like trying to liberate men from being men, or humans from being human. It's stupid and doesn't make sense.

I mean, if the organs and cells in your body wanted to be "liberated" and free from performing their functions in maintaining your health, would that be good for you? lol. Of course not. It would threaten your life. Duh.

Women should make the best of their femininity, which is beautiful and natural, and men should do the same with masculinity. It's better to go with nature than to go against it.

There is no reason to view your gender as something oppressive. That's f***ed up and the dumbest thing. Only a sick twisted sociopathic elite would socially engineer people to view their own gender or nature as an enemy to combat.

The sad thing is that most women in America have fallen for it, because women are easier to manipulate than men are. Generally, women only care about what's popular and trendy, and what other women think. So they will follow bad and destructive ideas, as long as they are popular and trendy.

Men, on the other hand, are harder to manipulate, because they follow their conviction and principles more. They are more likely to care about what's good, what's right and what's natural, than about what's popular and trendy.

That's why you do not see American men trying to "liberate" themselves from their masculinity or manhood. But you do see American women trying to "liberate" themselves from womanhood, which is sickening and disheartening.

All this has negative, sad and disturbing implications. You see, "liberated" women are very much out of touch with reality and with men in general too.

Why liberated women don't understand men like feminine women do.

You see, a liberated woman does not understand the needs of men, whereas a feminine woman does. (Foreign women in general are very feminine) That's because the creative force of life (God or Mother Nature) created the feminine to complement the masculine, so that both can have a symbiotic relationship.

In contrast, the "liberated woman" is out of whack with femininity, and thus does not understand the needs of men, nor the needs of humans in general. Instead, the "liberated woman" attempts invalidate the needs and desires of men and often condemns them as well.

For example, if a decent man flirts with a feminine woman or tries to charm her, she will blush and giggle and react POSITIVELY to the flirtation, because that's how femininity naturally responds to courting gestures. A feminine woman is honored and flattered to be pursued, because it means that she is seen as beautiful and fertile by the opposite gender. Such is the nature of the feminine.

Look in the history books and you will see that this is the way real ladies have been for thousands of years, thus it's natural and normal. Even royal Queens in European history have always been flattered and honored by flirtation and charm, even by men of low social standing.

In contrast, if a decent man tries to flirt with a "liberated" feminist woman or charm her, she will view it negatively, as an attack and infringement on her "liberation" from the feminine. She will perceive it as creepy and violating, like a transgression on her boundaries. Since she feels that she has been "liberated" from her femininity, she therefore does not wish to be treated as a feminine being. Thus she will feel violated by flirtation rather than flattered. She will interpret it as demeaning and exploitative, like being "treated like a sex object". Hence, flirtation with women is a taboo in modern America. It's something you see in the movies, but you aren't allowed to do in real life.

But think about this: If flirtation were a bad unnatural thing, as "liberated" liberal women think, then why was it more normal and accepted as natural in America's past? Even in the 1980's, flirtation was seen as a natural normal thing that men do. How do "liberated" women explain that? They can't. Therefore, this vilification of flirtation in America must be an unnatural aberration, and a turn in the WRONG direction.

Also, if a "liberated" woman finds out that you want to date women who are beautiful and feminine, she will claim that you are shallow and that you "see women as sex objects" which is demeaning to them. They will condemn you for desiring female beauty, as if it were wrong to fall in love with beautiful women.

But again, they are wrong, because it is natural for men to be attracted to feminine beauty. Look in the history books and you will see that that's how men have been for thousands of years. Men have been evolved to seek females that look fertile, and females are evolved to seek strong stable men who are good providers. Thus it's natural and normal. So these liberals (who wish to turn nature upside down) are again out of touch with reality and out of touch with men's needs. Thus they do not understand men, human nature, or the natural order of things.

Fortunately, a feminine woman will not condemn a man for desiring beautiful feminine women. They understand that that's how men are. And they will seek and strive to be beautiful and feminine themselves, so that they can try to match what men want. That's the natural way of things, and how it's always been. It's how male and female have always courted, mated and come together. To try to interere with that, as liberals do, is seriously foolish, as well as downright disgusting and evil.

A "liberated" woman also does not understand that men need love, romance, sex, and female companionship. These are natural needs and desires inherent in men. But a "liberated" feminist women would tell such men that they should be "strong and independent", like "liberated" women are, and not have such needs. They will tell such men to learn to be happy alone and not need others. In doing so, they forget that humans are social creatures and meant to need others, not be isolated hermits. And they are advocating that we go against nature as well.

Such liberal women will give men (and other women) bullshit self-improvement advice that doesn't amount to anything. For example, they will tell them that they should focus on improving themselves and developing nebulous artificial traits such as "confidence and self-esteem", so that they can attract what they want. They also falsely assume that filling your head with positive thoughts will fulfill your needs for love, sex and romance, which is bogus and untrue.

Here is something else I've noticed that's interesting: Feminine women abroad NEVER tell me that I lack confidence. Only "liberated" women do, the kind you find in liberal America. Here's why:

Feminine women abroad allow me to be myself, and I mean my sweet, charming, romantic self (which is considered creepy and taboo in America). They allow me to treat them like a lady. I can kiss their hand, flirt with them, charm them, flatter them, be like a chivalrous knight to them, etc. So I am comfortable around them, since they allow me to be me. As such, they usually describe me as "confident, charming, romantic, flattering and good with women." In fact, when I tell them that I am often told in America that I "lack confidence", they usually reply, "That's not true. You seem very confident."

But on the other hand, "liberated" women in America consider such behaviors to be creepy and violating, an infringement upon their "liberation" (from femininity). So they do NOT allow me to be myself. I cannot treat them like a real lady, nor can I treat them like a male buddy (since male buddies are down-to-earth, not angry, bitchy or fake). So I don't know what to do with them or how to treat them. As a result, I become naturally nervous or uncomfortable around them. So to them, I seem "unconfident".

Anyhow, a feminine woman will be much more understanding of a man's needs, and will not condemn them. A feminine woman will strive to provide what her man needs, as long as he is the man she loves. Feminine women can empathize and relate to men and their needs for love, romance and sex, because femininity was meant to complement masculinity by nature.

This is the natural way of things. Why condemn it or try to twist it upside down? The needs of men and women were designed by our creator to complement and fulfill each other. That is a beautiful and natural thing.

However, liberal "liberated" women, who are neither female nor male, do not fit into this equation at all. They are an aberration and wish to destroy nature. In that sense, they are evil and destructive. Consider this: If "liberated" cells came into your body and tried to convince all the trillions of cells in your body to go against their nature and function and become "liberated", what would that do? It would destroy your health of course! Duh. Would you want that?!

What's interesting to note is that such "liberated" liberal women do not look happy at all. Instead, they look cold, angry, antsy, and have quick tempers. They do not look healthy, natural or wholesome at all. Nor do they radiate warmth and joy.

This speaks volumes and is to be expected. After all, when you go against all that's natural and wholesome, what do you expect will happen? Happy people learn how to work with nature, not go against it.

In stark contrast, feminine women usually look sweet, natural and wholesome. I posted many examples in my forum here:

viewtopic.php?t=13698
viewtopic.php?t=18494
http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page61.htm

As they say, pictures speak a thousand words. Enough said.

yeah like today on facebook some girl posted "the most attractive thing in a person whether they are male or female is independence" is this girl delusional??? i think so.....try gaining a hundred pounds being independent and see how attractive you are hahaha.....and of course, salivating guys were quick to agree......and whats crazy is this woman is a bodybuilder and has manly muscles and features....not feminine at all

[matthewcoury]

this is also an interesting video that someone posted in another thread....when the woman is attcked in public people including OTHER women....jump to her rescue....when the man is attacked by a woman in public not only do people hardly notice and do nothing some people JUMP IN and join in the bullying....what a sad state america is in...chances are if the man defended himself he would be stopped by others and blamed for defending himself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cywQhs_6iC4

[droid]

+1000
Holy smokes Winston! you should carve that piece in stone for posterity.

[TheTeacherWhoHatesLies]

Well here's the thing, Winston: these women couldn't have liberated themselves. Someone else liberated them.

And guess who did that? Yup, you guessed it: White Anglo and Western European men.

So while I don't dispute the argument of your article, it misses a much larger point. Don't get me wrong: I despise the very idea of liberated women, but I'm not sympathetic towards these American or European males either.

They wreaked havoc by liberalizing attitudes and mores in their own societies, which liberated their women, and they thought they were superior for it. And now they're fleeing overseas to Asia and elsewhere to find the kind of woman they destroyed in their own lands. So yes, they are failures due to their own arrogance and conceit. And they got what they deserved.

[Anatol]

Well here's the thing, Winston: these women couldn't have liberated themselves. Someone else liberated them.

And guess who did that? Yup, you guessed it: White Anglo and Western European men.

So while I don't dispute the argument of your article, it misses a much larger point. Don't get me wrong: I despise the very idea of liberated women, but I'm not sympathetic towards these American or European males either.

They wreaked havoc by liberalizing attitudes and mores in their own societies, which liberated their women, and they thought they were superior for it. And now they're fleeing overseas to Asia and elsewhere to find the kind of woman they destroyed in their own lands. So yes, they are failures due to their own arrogance and conceit. And they got what they deserved.

Hello,

[~} You are correct! It is the modern Western man that made all this possible. But I must reiterate ~ it was all done for only 2 reasons ~

{[/\]} One, the American male wanted to look 'different' from the rest of the world. He has always been obsessed with doing things that others don't ~ and his inventions are 90% good but 10% of the time he'll come up with bad ideas. Feminism was a HORRID idea that means the end of patriarchy. This is unacceptable to normal men.

{[/\]} He did it to stimulate the economy. After all, if half the potential labour-force is sitting in the house-holds doing nothing, he cannot make money from them.

Both these reasons were short-sighted and had he been less myopic, would have readily crushed feminism instead of encouraging it in every way.

[TheTeacherWhoHatesLies]

{[/\]} He did it to stimulate the economy. After all, if half the potential labour-force is sitting in the house-holds doing nothing, he cannot make money from them.

Terrible ideas beget short-term economic benefits. White Anglo males did a number on themselves (and everyone else), big time. And yes, vanity and self-pride were motives in liberating their women. I have no sympathy for these males.

[PandaMan]

Winston, you are a shining light in an otherwise dark world. Thank you for your bravery. I know the group-think idiots will say you're just bitter because you "can't get laid", but everything you say is really truth.