New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
Went to get my daughter's birth certificate yesterday, and when I got to the screen to put my husband's name in, it gave me the option to put father is unknown. I seriously cannot fathom the logic behind not only having sex with someone I did not know, but get pregnant by them willingly. It's because of these women that my husband is treated so horribly when our children are born, and has to fill out a form to claim his children as his own, even when they both came out looking just like him. Sickening. I really hope one day that we can go in, have our child, and not be treated like the degenerates that plague the world. Whore shaming needs to be brought back again.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
15
WeedleTLiar on scored.co
1 year ago 15 points (+0 / -0 / +15Score on mirror ) 4 children
Women are inherently valuable in the they can grow children. The corresponding responsibility is that they need to ensure that the man they have sex with is father material.

When they don't, you get single moms, living off the government teat or voting for abortion.
15
ViagraFalls on scored.co
1 year ago 15 points (+0 / -0 / +15Score on mirror )
It takes a whole society to manage and confine women. I’m talking about mothers and fathers. I’m talking about their peers slut shaming. I’m talking about young men needing to put a ring on it if they want to put a dick in it. That’s how it used to be done.
they-see-me-trollin on scored.co
1 year ago 8 points (+0 / -0 / +8Score on mirror ) 1 child
exogenesis (artificial wombs) will be the worst thing to happen to women and the gynocracy in the history of humanity. a shitload of countries have already banned it, and increasingly more countries are banning surrogacy. if women stop being gatekeepers of procreation, every single man who wants a kid will have one without needing anyone else. it's a massive power blow.
americathegr888 on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
Assuming it were legal I think it would just breed more/similar problems as single motherhood. Protecting the volk starts with protecting the family from the vagaries of larger organizations (government, corporations, etc).

Any time man defiles the natural order you end up with shitty results.
they-see-me-trollin on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
child outcomes of single fathers are nowhere near as bad as single mothers. shit, single fathers are largely better than the entire bottom half of dual parent families. that's because the standard for a guy to get full or primary custody is so much higher. but it's no different with exogenesis... he has to make a lot of affirmative acts to show his interest, that just don't exist for natural.
americathegr888 on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
Yeah I was going to mention that I don't think the outcomes are the same or as bad with single fathers but it's still not ideal is what I mean.
HyperboreanDNA on scored.co
1 year ago 8 points (+0 / -0 / +8Score on mirror ) 1 child
Close but women can never be given the responsibility of picking suitable men. When you give that responsibility to women not only do they provably fuck it up, you're also giving all the power to dictate what a quality man is to women. Men's value becomes entirely linked to what women want and in this way men become nothing more than extensions of women's desire. Men should be the ones to determine what a quality man is not women.

In modernity the best way to ensure it's the men who determine who the quality men are is to reduce taxes next to 0, reduce government regulations considerably while removing all welfare and social programs and abolishing the civil rights act. Then abolish child support and alimony while making division of assets equal to what you bring in you get out rather than 50/50. This way the better quality men will be given more resources and that will allow the men more power to only accept suitable women rather than demeaning oneself such that women have all the power in picking the men.

Women pick simp/soy boys for fathers or degenerate no life losers that never show up. The more power we give to women to pick the men they want the worse quality men the fathers always turn out to be. Women cannot be given this task and we cannot expect them to ever rise up to the responsibility.

Edit - Just to give an example of why what I described matters. I know a single mother with 3 kids. She's decent looking but not anything special. Her ex-bf who she had the kids with is a good looking guy but he's also a meth addict. She of course picked him for the looks alone and he was "low quality". Well, she has been living entirely on government funding with 3 kids and he's not paying any child support. She has never had a job in her life. Why can a single mother with 3 kids not receiving help from any man live on welfare with 3 kids no problem? What incentive is there then for women to pick quality men when the government taxes quality men and gives the proceeds of these taxes to single mothers? Women can pick good looking meth addicts to fuck and there's no consequences for them. Even when she was living with him she still received money from the government which she depended on to live because he couldn't hold a job down being a meth addict and all. The incentive structure is such that there's 0 incentive for women to pick quality men. Women are picking the biggest losers around that have physical features they like and getting knocked up by these men with 0 care because daddy government comes to their rescue every time. Women need to face consequences of picking bad men so women stop having this freedom to pick these low quality men. The only way to do this is take away the social safety nets. Abolish all welfare, all child support, all alimony and force women to have to pick quality men to survive.
BlackPillBot on scored.co
1 year ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror )
“Well, she has been living entirely on government funding with 3 kids and he's not paying any child support.”

It’s not government funding. It’s almost entirely white peoples stolen money/time.

This is my current dream in our kiked world, and should be what all whites aspire to do now IMHO. I’d like a decent woman to have a couple of kids with whom can stay home all day, while supplementing my income by sucking up bennies to get back some of my stolen “tax” dollars. I’d of course adopt the children at 18 when the bennies run out so they can take my name.
Viewer01 on scored.co
1 year ago 6 points (+0 / -0 / +6Score on mirror ) 1 child
I’m going to stop you right there. Historically women have not been the gate keeper of genetic lineage. First it was survival of the fittest. Man saw something he wanted and took it. Then it evolved into arranged marriages. Then in the Victorian era is when the concept of romance came into being and marrying for love.

Even so early as the ‘50’s fathers were still screening potential suitors.

It wasn’t until men were removed from it that the problems arose we see today.

Obviously this isn’t universal as peasants did whatever, but most of the lasting empires and religions patrolled the hell out of their women.

Keep in mind that most of our perspectives of those eras are the romance novelists and writers would likely be called soy beta cucks in the modern era if they were alive.

The chads were out and about and the wimps were in their bedrooms writing.
BlackPillBot on scored.co
1 year ago 3 points (+0 / -0 / +3Score on mirror )
Back then, the fathers could, and were willing to punish the daughters through shaming, and even banishing to some extent, and if the wife had, and was stupid enough to say anything about it, she’d get her ass beat figuratively, and literally if she pushed hard enough. Sean Connery knew the deal.
Toast message