Men are effeminate, that's the issue.
So are the men who rule over us. Those aren't Alpha Chads who are ripped and raging with testosterone. Most of our (((masters))) are old and weak faggots who became fat and soft from their decadence, vice and lives of luxury. We may be weak, but we are still stronger than they are. Why does no one ever point out that they are weaker than us? The narrative is always calling us weak instead of showing how weak (((they))) are. Seems like a good psyop job that worked too well on us.
So were the men our alpha forfathers faught. So if they almost lost to kiddy fucking, wig wearing fags 250 years ago, how much easier will it be for them now? There’s a better argument to be made that our forfathers lost the 1st time and we’ve been colonized the whole time.
Take this not as an attack on you, only your comment:
So if they are the "weak" ones, why are they winning? It seems to me they are winning. Maybe they are not physically stronger, but they do appear to be stronger however one wants to describe it. Let's say sociologically stronger. And they have amassed enough mental nimrods that are physically strong (military; police) to counter us.
You even say at the end:
Seems like a good psyop job that worked too well on us.
Seems like you are even admitting that they are "stronger" than us.
E: Also, I'm bouncing the idea of [editted] constantly, I just got myself into a bind with resources the past few years that I am currently digging myself out of at the moment.
(post is archived)