>>33716551
>quick Google search
Yeah ok I'll build your half-assed argument for you, that's gonna happen.
You could just name drop some of the key figures responsible for the decline in each of these examples but you were to lazy to even do that so I'm inclined to believe you have done zero research yourself and you just parrot what you hear.
>Disregarding everything else as inept male-minded unfactual bullshit.
Sexist and further indication of laziness. Likely indicating lack of accountability.
>Roman fell because of men.
>Roman
You ESL?
What did "men" do specifically do to contribute to the fall of Rome AFTER men built Rome?
>fell because of well, men
broken record
>Women blaming taintlicker
I only said Shang fell because of a woman, who tortured men AND women. I gave a good example of it too.
>Not possibly, it is once again, fact.
then why did you write "possibly due to"
>Not likely, facts.
and why did you write "likely due to"
These last two reinforce the notion that English is not your first language. Are you Korean?
>Maya fell due to
Again, no specifics given. The degree to which you don't cite sources or reference figures I could make a stronger argument that "the sky is blue because god made it so, and he told me himself."
>These are not supplications to emotion, these are heavily researched histories.
Provide literally any citation to support your position. A researchers name, anything. You don't even have to link it.
>women having never had any power
FALSE. I can easily name Queen Elizabeth the second as a recent example.
>I am not going to be pedantic about grammar or spelling, that is a tactic of the inferior minded
Holy shit I was commenting on my own shit grammar, you really don't speak English as a first language.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/soc/

Thread:

Does this kind of thing prime men into pursuing the woman who complimented him?