What do you think of the argument "women can't help it, it's in their nature"?

[WOTGMSpectator 749]

I have heard this argument A LOT lately when it comes to females in regards to relationships. Women love bad boys? It’s ok because it’s “biological” and they can’t help it. Women love money and not the man? No problem there, because “it’s evolution” and they can’t help it.

What are your thoughts? Is it acceptable for a woman to behave this way, and then say “it’s evolution”? Do you believe it? Or do you think it is more of a choice? And if it is “evolution” do we as men have a right to be upset about it? Personally, I don’t buy it. I think it’s an excuse for bad behavior. Yet women will usually counter with “ok then you have to stop being attracted to hot women. That’s just as bad” but to me that is a hormonal response. Am I off base? Hypocritical?

[a bananaParticipant 288]

no it’s not its bulls~~~

Men are more “aggressive” and violently competitive by nature but we f~~~ing hold it back and contain it. Women should do the same, the whole its just biology is good for understanding but cannot and should not be used to excuse these primitive behaviours. As mgtow we should transcend our “biology”(only to a certain extent with which is possible) and if women can’t or wont then f~~~ them.

[….Participant 305]

Welcome WOTGM !   I’d agree …it’s just another excuse they use for whatever s~~~ty behavior they may be currently responsible for.  And if that excuse doesn’t work they will resort to one of a million others in their inventory. That is why one must never argue with them..it is always fruitless. As for their nature…we KNOW their nature. Skunks spray when threatened…it’s in their nature…that is why most guys here avoid skunks ( and women ) whenever possible.

[Anonymous 42]

WOTGM wrote:

I think it’s an excuse for bad behavior

Modern women have developed the art of deflection in a deadly and deceitful way! Their hearts have always been evil and corrupt, however in today’s modern hive society they have granted themselves untold powers of persuasion in the government.

Gynocentric society has exposed to the fullest, the nasty deeds and intentions of liberated women. All restrictions on their nature have been lifted and dissolved. We are merely witnessing the wild and dangerous nature of women, unleashed on the world at large……

[Sam RavenParticipant 181]

There is definitely a highly manipulative aspect with women going on here, coupled with the nature’s way of making a man sexually attracted to a woman makes for a deadly combination. Especially with the complete and utter abuse of the idea behind the word ‘love’.

The eugenicists of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations and the Club of Rome who introduced this feminism to drive a wedge between the sexes, break up the family and therefore the basic unit of society and reduce the population to an androgynous glop have gotten their social engineering plans working brilliantly.

The argument is bulls~~~ as this is not women’s nature. Women’s nature is that they are programmable by propaganda and lies inserted as poison pills mixed with fact and easily swayed by emotions more than logic. It is how and why advertising works and why 80% of consumer spending is on women’s products.

[Smitty the Great OneParticipant 1535]

Anonymous wrote:

Gynocentric society has exposed to the fullest, the nasty deeds and intentions of liberated women. All restrictions on their nature have been lifted and dissolved. We are merely witnessing the wild and dangerous nature of women, unleashed on the world at large……

he nailed it. Yes, it is female nature, but not JUST female nature. It is female nature without ANY restraint. It is deadly to everything it touches, and is the very reason why women should never have political power of any kind. Female nature alone doesn’t have the ability to ruin a society, it has to be protected and encouraged (Feminism). With men unable put women into check society will eventually destroy itself. We are witnessing this happen before our eyes right now.

So, is it an excuse, no not an excuse more like an explanation. There is no excuse for female nature, it’s just abhorrent.

Life is too long to play by someone elses rules....

[meshugganatorParticipant 2]

in my not so humble opinion, psychology is responsible for the erosion of female moral value and hypergamy. mankind as a whole is not aware of any workable technology of the mind. so there for in order to fill the vacuum of being able to predict and gauge human behavior, psychologists used what we know called social Darwinism. his theory as a naturalist of survival of the fittest fit the theories of psychiatry and psychology since they themselves never figured out what human nature was all about. now witness modern third wave feminism. how they justify female nature as a natural selection that we call hypergamy. and how we as men are wrong for rejecting the not so hotties. the parallels are astounding.

 

they try to use psychology to gauge male  behavior and use Marxism and communism to try to control the male survival dynamic. the telling sign here is that it isn’t just NOT working but we have outed their behavior. without the need for the origin of the feces theories co opted by the out dated and useless doctrines of psychology and psychiatry. it has never occurred to women that we as men don’t BELIEVE that the uglies CAN”T reverse their physical appearance ( with a little hard work). to justify it and say we are shallow is an attempt to cover up their own responsibility on the matter. MGTOW is an extension of male reason. and we have seen what they are doing.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

If women really are that dominated by their biology and not their brains WHY THE F~~~ ARE THEY ALLOWED TO VOTE?

[RennieParticipant]

I guess that means they can’t control themselves, therefore they need to be controlled by men.

[KahnParticipant 41]

Thank God someone brought this up, If you didn’t I was going to because its been p~~~ing me off so much lately.

The argument that a woman’s behavior is “ok” because it’s in her “nature” is complete bulls~~~.

This is like a feminist saying that its “ok” if men go raping women because male monkeys rape all the time; therefore its in the male’s “nature” to rape and is justified. No one in their right mind would f~~~ing say that, but this is basically what they’re saying when they give women a free pass for the damage of unrestrained hypergamy, outdated mating games/selection, and etc.

F~~~ THAT S~~~. If you do something to hurt someone, and you know its going to hurt them, I GIVE NO F~~~S ABOUT YOUR NATURE, IT’S WRONG TO KNOWINGLY HURT SOMEBODY BECAUSE YOUR BASE BIOLOGY (or “feelings”) “SAID”  SO.

Human society has only come to exist because we told nature to go f~~~ itself, and instead went and built civilization. Women got shielded from a lot of the hardship that was involved in that, and that is starting to show now, BUT THAT DOES NOT EXCUSE THEIR BEHAVIOR. ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Now, many of the theories that try to explain female behavior are OK. I don’t want to give them too much credit because at the end of the day we can’t go back to 10,000 BC and do case studies on our ancestors. But they are better than nothing, and for the most part make sense.

But this bulls~~~ idea that justifies women’s behavior comes mainly from the PUAs. They LOVE to tell guys: “it’s not her fault, you’re just not alpha enough!”

Never mind the fact that in the “herd” the animals these theories are derived from, the alpha is in a way MORE disposable than the betas, because the moment the alpha is too weak, or is simply overpowered by a competitor, the females will be mating with the new “alpha” before the old one’s corpse is even cold. Being “alpha” is sure a sweet deal huh?

Anyway, This has been spreading a lot among the youtube MGTOW, and I hope Barbarossa or somebody shuts this s~~~ down before it becomes to widespread. It’s utter crap. Women should be held accountable for their actions as a FULL ADULT would be, without bulls~~~ excuses to save them.

I guess I should also say that there is a difference between female nature and what women consciously decide to do, and women as a whole have consciously decided to do some pretty bad things (which many have theorized is due to female “herd-think” or “hive-mind,” which  does go back to their nature). All that said, I’m not sure which is worse; consciously deciding to hurt someone, or not having the self-control to not hurt that person.

Nature or not, women do not seem to give a s~~~ about men, and we need to be realistic about this rather than make excuses for them.

[mgtow_85Participant 752]

If “women can’t help it, it’s in their nature”…

Then why in the HELL would we want anything to do with them in the first place?

She can be allowed to cheat because “it’s her nature to do so”. She can be allowed to threaten you with a knife and then scream “rape” or “domestic violence” if you defend yourself by disarming her and pushing her away from you because “she can’t help it, it’s in her nature”. She can get 50 to 90 percent of all your s~~~ in divorce court because “women need to be taken care of and supported. It’s in their nature and you can’t blame her for wanting to stay on her feet and have a roof over her head”. She can be a constant bitch who needs extravagant, expensive gifts to satisfy her behavior because “it’s in her nature to want something nice done/bought for her.”

The line “women can’t help it, it’s in their nature” is the NUMBER ONE F~~~ING REASON why ALL guys should be going their own way…as far away from them as possible. If they are so naturally built to be nothing but greedy c~~~s who can get away with everything just because “it’s in their nature” to act that way, then that is a road that shouldn’t be traveled at all.

Who wants to be with a woman who uses her VAGINA and her irrational, female behavior to get away with anything that they want, and society defends them with “they can’t help it, it’s in their nature”???

[Soul ManParticipant 1856]

I think the nature of wimmenz only proves that they are not the highly evolved superior species they fancy themselves to be.  Just because one “can” doesn’t mean that one “should”.  This is where pretty much all women seem to lack the regulating factor of Freud’s “Super Ego”.  If the government all of the sudden made an announcement tomorrow on TV that all men are free to commit any random act of violence on women, I still would not participate in such a barbaric act because my conscience is guided by something higher than my Id and/or Ego.  I like to think I am evolved because just because I can doesn’t mean I would.  My moral convictions dictate that violence just for the sake of violence is wrong.  Also, my conscience dictates that reason should be the first line of defense with violence only as a last resort for survival.  However, if you flip the script on my hypothetical situation above, how many women do you think would grab guns, pitchforks, and knives and go looking for the closest male to murder?  Plenty of them I would surmise….

HISTORY...learn from it, memorize it, DON'T repeat it...

[KingOfTheSeaParticipant 1270]

It’s in my nature to slap a bitch when she gets in my face, doesn’t mean I get a free pass if I do it.

[WOTGMSpectator 749]

KingOfTheSea wrote:

It’s in my nature to slap a bitch when she gets in my face, doesn’t mean I get a free pass if I do it.

The problem is women do get a free pass for their bad behavior. Abhorrent is abhorrent. If you tell a woman wanting a man for his money is wrong, they will come back at you with “well I don’t want a rich guy for myself, but for my unborn children. You see, biologically speaking I need security for my dear little unborn darlings so they can thrive in this harsh world.” Of course that’s utter bulls~~~, and the real reason she wants a rich guy is so she can sit on her fat ass all day, watch her f~~~ing soaps, and have access to an unlimited amount of shoes or f~~~ing handbags.

Just how many f~~~ing shoes does a woman need anyway? What the f~~~ can one person do with so many goddamn shoes and how many are enough? Unreal. They’d rather have new shoes than a loving, lifelong companion who they actually connect with emotionally. Even a physical connection is somewhat respectable…but f~~~ing shoes and handbags? This is what their life goal is? It’s just so f~~~ing pathetic.

[AttonParticipant]

Its a clear cut f~~~ing excuse for them to have whatever they f~~~ing want, without having to pay for it like everyone else.

 

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[OutlanderParticipant 27]

The truth of whether or not they are capable of helping it is an issue different from how it should be addressed. If you take a look at how the prison system is set up – supposedly for rehabilitation and as a mechanism to prevent crime. The system obviously fails to address both of its’ original intentions with due care because of the lack of insight into circumstances of criminal behavior.

 

With this in mind, you do not necessarily have to care whether or not women are capable of addressing their biology – you do not care just as the majority of people do not care to reform the prison system despite it’s glaring failures. It’s similar to having empathy and compassion but exercising indifference – since our justice system is such in practice, it would seem to me to be completely acceptable to treat  female behavior accordingly.

[Darth SinParticipant 576]

If women cannot help it because it is their nature than it shows that they are nothing but primitive apes operating on an autopilot known as biological instincts. In other words, she is no different than any other animal out there.

Why would you bother f~~~ing an animal unless if you are a zoophiliac ?

[SargeslideParticipant 82]

It’s bulls~~~, just another excuse to flake off. I think the other one is “It’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind”. It’s all BS

[Anonymous 1]

This is an example of biology determinism that I loathe. Even if we assume that, fine, it is part of their nature to assess those things, they still should be ACCOUNTABLE for their freaking actions. This “they can’t help it” paradigm is what tradcons use to try to put women back to the kitchen, and disregard women from any RESPONSABILITY. It’s the other side of the “men OPPRESS women” coin, different side, but same bulls~~~.

If that was true, then MEN wouldn’t be able to help himself either, and we would still be living in CAVES, with the minimum requirements to survive, only eating, sleeping and f~~~ing. And yet, MEN were capable of accessing and USING the higher functions of their brains, MEN built CIVILIZATIONS with it, made LAWS, created RULES of CONDUCT and thrive to act with HONOR. And we now are to somehow accept that women are just INCAPABLE of such things? Of having the bear MINIMUM if SELF freaking CONTROL? F~~~ hell no. Now I am sold for EQUALITY and that means, EQUAL (or EQUIVALENT) RESPONSABILITIES.

Well, ladies, better step up your game, because just having a pussy doesn’t cut it anymore. You are welcome, cupcake.

[Author]

Posts