Skip to comments.Liberal women turning men into less successful wimps?
Posted on 08/10/2013 10:45:46 AM PDT by usalady
Is there a difference between politically liberal men and those who hold right wing views? Are physically weak men more likely to support the welfare state and wealth distribution while men who are strong more likely to support right wing policies?
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Right wing or left wing.
A must see.
Macho Man vs. Sissy-Boy
Putin vs Obama
> A study by scientists from Aarhus University in Denmark collected data on bicep size, sociology-economic status and support for economic distribution from hundreds of men in America, Argentina and Denmark. It showed that men with less upper body strength are more likely to support the welfare state. At the same time, men who are physically strong are more likely to take right wing stands on politics
In other words real men workout, are self reliant, and can’t stand the current bisexual narcissist in chief dictator in power...
Females, metrosexuals, homosexuals.. Who will fight the police state? NO ONE. That's where we are NOW.
One, I would I hit.
One, I would not hit.
Figure it out.
We should be careful applauding Putin...(not that u r). But at least he is a real man. I cant stand pansy-weak men! Love the link....
Feminist single mothers turn boys into emasculated, p*ssy-whipped metrosexuals (or homosexuals).
...true of course, but I wouldn’t classify homosexuals as complete wimps...I recently saw a report about a brave, sign bearing individual who interrupted a gay pride event, and well, suffice it to say the assembled faggotry was neither impressed, nor gentle, when they confronted him...
With feminist concepts like “testosterone poisoning” or “too much testosterone” is it any wonder?
These are actual, biological reproductive strategies.
Liberalism is an r-selected reproductive strategy in humans, designed to exploit conditions of free resource availability. In nature, when you find r-strategists, such as rabbits, the females are agressive and physically imposing so they may better provision and protect the offspring they raise alone. By contrast, males become diminutive, and more about flash than ability, since all they are desinged to do is attract a mate, impregnate her, and flee.
I have a blog post linked below, which links to my other articles on this. This is actually biology manifesting, down to phsyicality of the individual, and most terrifying to liberals, the science is pretty convincing.
Liberals do not like to see themselves cast as the rabbit people in our populations, or cast as foreign enemies within our populations, so different they might as well be a different species. They more we make them different from normal people, and cast them as the other, the more likely we are to regain our nation back.
Check the post here, and look at the other links.
It’s like I told one young lady I work with.. You are too much of a man to have another one in the house. She was complaining about her whimpy husband. Just looking at the Obama’s wife is clear evidence I am on the right track here. Besides, have you seen the liberal women? I am not talking about the lost twenty somethings, but the one’s in the over forty crowd? What swaggering man would chop wood for them, when honestly they declare day in and day out how they are better at it. O I was surprised we made it this far without pictures of other prominent liberal men-women.
What was their numerical advantage?
“Feminist single mothers turn boys into emasculated, p*ssy-whipped metrosexuals (or homosexuals).”
It is terrible for boys to grow up with single mothers, but while they may hate men such women are rarely “feminist” - they subsist on gubmint handouts and/or monthly maintenance payments from some poor schmuck.