Street Fighter said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

this is only true if your definition of "death and suffering in war" is limited to combat deaths. in most modern conflicts it isn't; indirect deaths from collapsed healthcare, malnutrition, displacement, and disease usually exceed direct ones, and they don't split the same way.

---

So men aren't exposed to any of that, just women.

---

They are. That's the entire point.

Average Joe said:

---

Several people stated that men are better because they had to fight wars and that women should be "eternally grateful" for that. My point was that it was illegal for them to, so they couldn't even of they wanted. AND YOU WANT THEM TO BE GRATEFUL FOR THAT? That's insane logic.


The fact that so many of you are getting so hot about something that was never said just because it was suggested a women might be allowed to do something they wanted just proves my point over and over.

---

No one said men were better because they are typically who fight in wars. No, they are who throughout history, get sacrificed in war. Doesn't make men better, just much less valued. Always has been, always will be.

Average Joe said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Women have been oppressed for the vast majority of history and the second they gain any kind of upper hand y'all are calling it the end of society and the world.

For alpha males y'all sound pretty damn scared and weak.

---

That's not correct. Women have, for the most part, been protected. Men have always been disposable.

---

History is longer than 60 years.

---

His point is amplified by history.

---

Why is Average Joe kicking self-goals?

---

I'm not. That poster doesn't really know what they are saying.

At what point in history did women become protected?

---

Literally all of it.

One of the fundamental cornerstones of a successful society is protecting the members who generate offspring.

Do you understand basic biology?

---

Some of y'all REALLY need to brush up on actual history.

---

im sorry but you dont seem to have any clue what you are discussing here.

---

Ok.

Pick up a history book.

---

for what reason Im already well versed in History?

---

Oof, our education system has really gone to *****

---

so now you are hurling insults ? Be specific what era of history do I need to re-study? Come on Professor

---

I have several times. A lot of the things y'all complain about women not doing that men did were things women were not legally allowed to do. I think being restricted from activities by law due to your sex counts as oppression. Add voting to that list, as well.

---

women at the time didn't even want to vote do you know your history?

Quote:

---

Absentee fathers are leaving kids with only one parent to get influences from. As a result, you're leaving all roles to one person. That's a recipe that results in a successful upbringing being the outlier.

---

why are women choosing to have kids with deabeats? Women control access to sex...Marry before you carry is something that should be adhered to..

Hardcore Greg said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

If you find yourself arguing that your sex has a much harder life than the other, you are likely doing something wrong.

Women faced high health risks with pregnancy, were treated as property, couldn't own property and were often denied an education.

Men fought in wars, settled the frontiers and did dangerous jobs. Men had the role of provider and protector.

They both sound tough. Life is tough. Im not sure what value there would be to prove one was harder than the other. Unless you want sympathy. You want someone to feel bad for you. Eh that seems pathetic to me.

---

But women disproportionately are. And they tend to have a very shallow grasp of politics and cultural issues to begin with...hell, many will vote based on "looks".

---

My sister in law in Toronto voted for Justin Trudeau because "he is so cute".

I am sure many NYC women voted for Mamdani because of his winsome smile and good looks. Same for Bill Clinton and JFK.

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Several people stated that men are better because they had to fight wars and that women should be "eternally grateful" for that. My point was that it was illegal for them to, so they couldn't even of they wanted. AND YOU WANT THEM TO BE GRATEFUL FOR THAT? That's insane logic.


The fact that so many of you are getting so hot about something that was never said just because it was suggested a women might be allowed to do something they wanted just proves my point over and over.

---

No one said men were better because they are typically who fight in wars. No, they are who throughout history, get sacrificed in war. Doesn't make men better, just much less valued. Always has been, always will be.

---

The person I originally responded to with that point said exactly that. It was others that continued on arguing about women not wanting to fight in wars, which was not the point of my argument.

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Several people stated that men are better because they had to fight wars and that women should be "eternally grateful" for that. My point was that it was illegal for them to, so they couldn't even of they wanted. AND YOU WANT THEM TO BE GRATEFUL FOR THAT? That's insane logic.


The fact that so many of you are getting so hot about something that was never said just because it was suggested a women might be allowed to do something they wanted just proves my point over and over.

---

No one said men were better because they are typically who fight in wars. No, they are who throughout history, get sacrificed in war. Doesn't make men better, just much less valued. Always has been, always will be.

---

Even when the Titanic sank, women and children were given lifeboats and the men sank with the ship. No woman busted out her feminist card and said she was better than a man and wanted to die also, or asked a man to take her spot. They gladly use their woman privilege, even today.

John J Astor, among the richest men in the world, died on the ship. He could have used influence to get on a lifeboat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jacob_Astor_IV#Titanic

Quote:

---

When Second Officer Charles Lightoller later arrived on A Deck to finish loading Lifeboat 4, Astor helped his wife, with her maid and nurse, into it. He then asked if he might join his wife because she was in "a delicate condition;" however, Lightoller told him men were not to be allowed to board until all the women and children had been loaded. Astor did not protest, and simply kissed his wife, telling her that he would follow in another boat. According to Titanic passenger Archibald Gracie IV, who also helped Astor's wife into the boat:

---

Quote:

---

Colonel John Jacob Astor, his valet, Victor Robbins, Kitty and Futrelle perished.

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Absentee fathers are leaving kids with only one parent to get influences from. As a result, you're leaving all roles to one person. That's a recipe that results in a successful upbringing being the outlier.

---

why are women choosing to have kids with deabeats? Women control access to sex...Marry before you carry is something that should be adhered to..

---

They were all raped n sh**. None of these women are gaming the system for $$$. Our hard earned $$$ to be more specific. We're funding this lol.

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Several people stated that men are better because they had to fight wars and that women should be "eternally grateful" for that. My point was that it was illegal for them to, so they couldn't even of they wanted. AND YOU WANT THEM TO BE GRATEFUL FOR THAT? That's insane logic.


The fact that so many of you are getting so hot about something that was never said just because it was suggested a women might be allowed to do something they wanted just proves my point over and over.

---

No one said men were better because they are typically who fight in wars. No, they are who throughout history, get sacrificed in war. Doesn't make men better, just much less valued. Always has been, always will be.

---

I would strongly disagree that sacrificing means one is less valuable. Sacrifice is an act of love. It is the highest act. It is why Christ sacrificed his life for us. Does that make Christ less valuable than us sinners whom he died for? No, just the opposite it makes Christ MORE valuable.

Ultimately life should be viewed as the opportunity to express love. Sacrifice is the highest. A mom dying in child birth is a very high sacrifice. And likely more comman than a man dying in a war. In just 2023 about 260k women died from pregnancy related complications.

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Absentee fathers are leaving kids with only one parent to get influences from. As a result, you're leaving all roles to one person. That's a recipe that results in a successful upbringing being the outlier.

---

why are women choosing to have kids with deabeats? Women control access to sex...Marry before you carry is something that should be adhered to..

---

It's not limited to just deadbeats. And marry before you carry applies to both sexes. I'm pretty sure I control where I stick it, too.

The feminist movement has robbed women of the natural dignity of their sex and turned them into lesser men.

-not my quote, but facts nonetheless

Average Joe said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Women have been oppressed for the vast majority of history and the second they gain any kind of upper hand y'all are calling it the end of society and the world.

For alpha males y'all sound pretty damn scared and weak.

---

That's not correct. Women have, for the most part, been protected. Men have always been disposable.

---

History is longer than 60 years.

---

His point is amplified by history.

---

Why is Average Joe kicking self-goals?

---

I'm not. That poster doesn't really know what they are saying.

At what point in history did women become protected?

---

Literally all of it.

One of the fundamental cornerstones of a successful society is protecting the members who generate offspring.

Do you understand basic biology?

---

Some of y'all REALLY need to brush up on actual history.

---

im sorry but you dont seem to have any clue what you are discussing here.

---

Ok.

Pick up a history book.

---

for what reason Im already well versed in History?

---

Oof, our education system has really gone to *****

---

Yeah no kidding. You don't understand history or basic biology, and your are arrogantly convinced of this fantasy you have concocted yourself.

TxSquarebody said:

---

The feminist movement has robbed women of the natural dignity of their sex and turned them into lesser men.

-not my quote, but facts nonetheless

---

The idleness of man has led him to invite sin in and abandon his masculine calling.

I've said this before, masulculinity fails first. Then feminism fails. Our society wont get on track because women "get their act together" it will get on track because men get their act together and create a space for feminism to blossom. (This is a biblical idea)

Street Fighter said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Several people stated that men are better because they had to fight wars and that women should be "eternally grateful" for that. My point was that it was illegal for them to, so they couldn't even of they wanted. AND YOU WANT THEM TO BE GRATEFUL FOR THAT? That's insane logic.


The fact that so many of you are getting so hot about something that was never said just because it was suggested a women might be allowed to do something they wanted just proves my point over and over.

---

No one said men were better because they are typically who fight in wars. No, they are who throughout history, get sacrificed in war. Doesn't make men better, just much less valued. Always has been, always will be.

---

Natural selection favors societies that reproduce.

If 90% of a country's men died, the other 10% would become polygamists and fertilize the same number of women.

But if 90% of a country's women died, that's 90% fewer babies.

Thus, it's in a society's collective interest to have men be the soldiers, miners, construction workers, garbage collectors, and other dangerous jobs, because we're biologically disposable.

Agreed. Two things can be correct.

infinity ag said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

If you find yourself arguing that your sex has a much harder life than the other, you are likely doing something wrong.

Women faced high health risks with pregnancy, were treated as property, couldn't own property and were often denied an education.

Men fought in wars, settled the frontiers and did dangerous jobs. Men had the role of provider and protector.

They both sound tough. Life is tough. Im not sure what value there would be to prove one was harder than the other. Unless you want sympathy. You want someone to feel bad for you. Eh that seems pathetic to me.

---

But women disproportionately are. And they tend to have a very shallow grasp of politics and cultural issues to begin with...hell, many will vote based on "looks".

---

My sister in law in Toronto voted for Justin Trudeau because "he is so cute".

I am sure many NYC women voted for Mamdani because of his winsome smile and good looks. Same for Bill Clinton and JFK.

---

My grandfather, who most in this thread would probably idolize, voted Democrat until he died all because that's what his dad always did. The only problem was the platforms had changed and he wouldn't listen to the fact that he was actually Republican through and through now.

texagbeliever said:

---

If you find yourself arguing that your sex has a much harder life than the other, you are likely doing something wrong.

Women faced high health risks with pregnancy, were treated as property, couldn't own property and were often denied an education.

Men fought in wars, settled the frontiers and did dangerous jobs. Men had the role of provider and protector.

They both sound tough. Life is tough. Im not sure what value there would be to prove one was harder than the other. Unless you want sympathy. You want someone to feel bad for you. Eh that seems pathetic to me.

---

I don't want sympathy. I want to correct the record because feminists have brainwashed several generations into thinking that women, and only women, faced hardships throughout history.

Men, unquestionably, had the larger burdens of society placed on their shoulders. Which is okay. Men are better at dealing with those burdens, and are more accountable to their mistakes.

But they sacrificed and took them on only to have feminists piss all over them for building the society they only benefit from.

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

You realize that goes for the majority of men too right? I mean women have been spared the horrors of war for the most part not men they have been cannon fodder through the ages.

Women only have "power" that men have given them...hth

---

uh… you may want to do a little homework on what happened to women during war for much of human history

---

---

i suggest starting with the rape of nanjing and working your way back from there

---

Yes, we all know that women have been included in some atrocities. Many have been raped and even killed or enslaved in wars. The numbers still pale in comparison. The death and suffering in major wars is not even remotely close in terms of male vs. female. You might as well be saying, "women in modern society could not possibly ever be privileged, because sometimes women are raped in dark alley ways or sometimes bad things happen to them". Just liberal gibberish.

---

this is only true if your definition of "death and suffering in war" is limited to combat deaths. in most modern conflicts it isn't; indirect deaths from collapsed healthcare, malnutrition, displacement, and disease usually exceed direct ones, and they don't split the same way.

---

I would rather be hungry then have my head blown off....

Silent For Too Long said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

If you find yourself arguing that your sex has a much harder life than the other, you are likely doing something wrong.

Women faced high health risks with pregnancy, were treated as property, couldn't own property and were often denied an education.

Men fought in wars, settled the frontiers and did dangerous jobs. Men had the role of provider and protector.

They both sound tough. Life is tough. Im not sure what value there would be to prove one was harder than the other. Unless you want sympathy. You want someone to feel bad for you. Eh that seems pathetic to me.

---

I don't want sympathy. I want to correct the record because feminist have brainwashed several generations into think that women, and only women, faced hardships throughout history.

Men, unquestionably, had the larger burdens of society placed on their shoulders. Which is okay. Men are better at dealing with those burdens, and are more accountable to their mistakes.

But they sacrificed and took them on only to have feminists piss all over them for building the society they only benefit from.

---

If you dont think men benefit in our society you are wrong. Or you have a very very poor appreciation for life before the booming middle class in America came about. Your opportunity and any boy in this country's opportunity is better than 99.9% of the world. Even with it favoring women slightly. You arent a victim!

I never said anything you just said I said.

Both men and women benefit from the blood, sweat and sacrifices made by our predecessors.

Both men and women faced hardships throughout history.

The vast majority of consequential hardships were shouldered by men.

Feminists would literally have no society at all if it wasn't for men.

Then why did you say
"Building a society they only benefit from". They being in reference to women.

The defense attorney in the case is looking pretty smart by guessing that you simply cannot put 9 women in a jury room and not get at least one BSC enough to hang the jury. Actually mathematically impossible. This is called "progress".

Gender equality end's here 🙂‍↕️ pic.twitter.com/QyUXkMCXuI

— AnuCreate.in_ (@Imdead108_ybc) August 31, 2026

texagbeliever said:

---

Then why did you say
"Building a society they only benefit from". They being in reference to women.

---

Ah, I understand how that could have been a bit ambiguous.

"Only" referred to the word "benefit" not to the word "they."

infinity ag said:

---

Gender equality end's here 🙂‍↕️ pic.twitter.com/QyUXkMCXuI

— AnuCreate.in_ (@Imdead108_ybc) August 31, 2026

---

Sheesh. I got get goosebumps just watching that.

TxSquarebody said:

---

The feminist movement has robbed women of the natural dignity of their sex and turned them into lesser men.

-not my quote, but facts nonetheless

---

Women had a much happier time when they were women. Now they've just become inferior/mediocre men. Earlier men would be gentlemanly to women and offer them seats and other courtesies. Now that has disappeared. Women complain but they brought it upon themselves with a boorish "I don't need no man" attitude. Men don't get such niceties from other men and now these fake men also do not.

PS: Even feminist women love being treated "like a lady". I have observed this myself with a friend who would talk about being a feminist but when I did gentlemanly things for her, she'd love it. It's all a facade to mask some deep hurt from childhood. Women absolutely hate being treated by men as yet another man, even if they claim that they want to be treated "like one of the guys".

I strongly suspect a large reason so many feminists are attracted to marxisms is because they want to replace the role previously filled by husbands with Daddy Goverment.

Feminists want all the privileges of "the patriarchy" with none of the responsibilities.

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

You realize that goes for the majority of men too right? I mean women have been spared the horrors of war for the most part not men they have been cannon fodder through the ages.

Women only have "power" that men have given them...hth

---

uh… you may want to do a little homework on what happened to women during war for much of human history

---

---

i suggest starting with the rape of nanjing and working your way back from there

---

Yes, we all know that women have been included in some atrocities. Many have been raped and even killed or enslaved in wars. The numbers still pale in comparison. The death and suffering in major wars is not even remotely close in terms of male vs. female. You might as well be saying, "women in modern society could not possibly ever be privileged, because sometimes women are raped in dark alley ways or sometimes bad things happen to them". Just liberal gibberish.

---

this is only true if your definition of "death and suffering in war" is limited to combat deaths. in most modern conflicts it isn't; indirect deaths from collapsed healthcare, malnutrition, displacement, and disease usually exceed direct ones, and they don't split the same way.

---

And yet you libs would have us suffer even more indirect death by not "oppressing" females and allowing them to serve in combat roles because of feelings. More direct death of females and more indirect death of everyone else because we get our asses kicked by the males-only army we are fighting.

Biology and genetics don't give a **** about your feelings!

Silent For Too Long said:

---

I strongly suspect a large reason so many feminists are attracted to marxisms is because they want to replace the role previously filled by husbands with Daddy Goverment.

Feminists want all the privileges of "the patriarchy" with none of the responsibilities.

---

You dont have to suspect, its known.

The Unforgiven said:

---

oh like you aren't being condescending yourself...lol

Because all of you leftests are the same.

Plus he is a sip. I have no respect for a sip on an Aggie message board.

---

I went to Angelo State. My wife went to Texas. My daughter went to A&M for both undergrad and grad school. The $160,000 my wife and I have paid to Texas A&M University over the last four years gives me more than enough permission to post on Texags.

My username is a natural combination of my status as both a proud Aggie dad and a lifelong fan of Texas Longhorn athletics. Shrug.

So you're a tshirt sip....


Figures

Logos Stick said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

HaroldShipmanAg said:

---

You realize that goes for the majority of men too right? I mean women have been spared the horrors of war for the most part not men they have been cannon fodder through the ages.

Women only have "power" that men have given them...hth

---

uh… you may want to do a little homework on what happened to women during war for much of human history

---

---

i suggest starting with the rape of nanjing and working your way back from there

---

Yes, we all know that women have been included in some atrocities. Many have been raped and even killed or enslaved in wars. The numbers still pale in comparison. The death and suffering in major wars is not even remotely close in terms of male vs. female. You might as well be saying, "women in modern society could not possibly ever be privileged, because sometimes women are raped in dark alley ways or sometimes bad things happen to them". Just liberal gibberish.

---

this is only true if your definition of "death and suffering in war" is limited to combat deaths. in most modern conflicts it isn't; indirect deaths from collapsed healthcare, malnutrition, displacement, and disease usually exceed direct ones, and they don't split the same way.

---

And yet you libs would have us suffer even more indirect death by not "oppressing" females and allowing them to serve in combat roles because of feelings. More direct death of females and more indirect death of everyone else because we get our asses kicked by the males-only army we are fighting.

Biology and genetics don't give a **** about your feelings!

---

ok? not sure what's so controversial about pointing out women also die during/as a result of war that it triggered this outburst

Aggie Dad Sip said:

---

The Unforgiven said:

---

oh like you aren't being condescending yourself...lol

Because all of you leftests are the same.

Plus he is a sip. I have no respect for a sip on an Aggie message board.

---

I went to Angelo State. My wife went to Texas. My daughter went to A&M for both undergrad and grad school. The $160,000 my wife and I have paid to Texas A&M University over the last four years gives me more than enough permission to post on Texags.

My username is a natural combination of my status as both a proud Aggie dad and a lifelong fan of Texas Longhorn athletics. Shrug.

---

OK, how about "Aggie Dad T-shirt Sip Fan"?

Pichael Thompson said:

---

So you're a tshirt sip....


Figures

---

Yeah, I am. I got accepted to Texas out of high school, but my old man told me if I went to ASU he would pay for it. If I wanted to go to Texas I was on my own. I went to ASU.