Irrelevant Female Quotes

If art is not to be life-enhancing, what is it to be? Half the world is feminine--why is there resentment at a female-oriented art? Nobody asks The Tale of Genji to be masculine! Women certainly learn a lot from books oriented toward a masculine world. Why is not the reverse also true? Or are men really so afraid of women's creativity (because they are not themselves at the center of creation, cannot bear children) that a woman writer of genius evokes murderous rage, must be brushed aside with a sneer as 'irrelevant'?

In all his life, there had never been anything Cross had wanted to do more than throw this strange woman down on his desk and give her precisely that for which she was asking. Desire was irrelevant. Or perhaps it was the only thing that was relevant. Either way, he could not assist Lady Philippa Marbury. She was the most dangerous female he’d ever met.

We were kept pure for men, and then broken in by them. And what happened to us in the meantime was completely irrelevant in the pursuit of their pleasure, or their integrity, their masculinity. Were females really valued so little? Would my own daughters face the same fate?

The characters populating male fantasies have little in common with those inhabiting female fantasies. In porn, the mind of a woman is usually empty of all thought and feeling – except for an overwhelming urge to have sex with plumbers, pizza boys, and her BFF. Women’s hopes and fears are irrelevant. Their skills are inconsequential, except for the admirable ability to satisfy multiple lovers simultaneously and an impressive capacity for moaning. Their bodies, on the other hand, are depicted in lavish, graphic detail. The heroes of romance novels often seem like members of a more evolved species. They are natural leaders, rich, powerful, and well-connected. Their minds are intelligent and savvy, though they are reticent about their abilities and hide their inner demons. Despite the fact that they are a five-star general or lord of southern England, they hide a troubled and tempestuous soul that can only be healed by the magical balm of a woman’s love.

keep it on the down-low.” “The what?” “It’s a term I’ve learned from a human. It means keep it secret. It’s no one’s business and therefore they can’t start any trouble if they disagree with the relationship. The male said he did that with an undesirable female.” His face grew solemn. “He laughed when I commented that her looks should be irrelevant if she made him happy. I wasn’t sure how to take that but I think he cares too much for appearances. The term is the same though. It means being with someone and no one knows.” Justice stood. “I don’t like that term. Anyone who would dismiss a person because of how they look isn’t someone intelligent enough to learn from.” “You going home?” Tiger glanced

It is irrelevant whether I am male, female or neither – gender is a private matter. First and foremost, I am an individual, and my value as a human being rests on this individuality.

If we had no problem with biology, we would not make a distinction between who was who. Everybody would be known for what they are worth; whether somebody is male or female would be irrelevant.

For many years, discussing female sexuality in the doctor’s office was taboo, but that oppression is not a failing unique to medicine. In 1938, a Los Angeles teacher, Helen Hulick, was held in contempt of court for daring to show up in pants to testify as a witness and for refusing to change into a dress when the male judge insisted. She was given a five-day jail sentence. Much of women’s health, especially sexual health, was deemed unimportant or irrelevant because that is how women were viewed.

Are the religious individuals in a society more moral than the secular ones? Many researchers have looked into this, and the main finding is that there are few interesting findings. There are subtle effects here and there: some studies find, for instance, that the religious are slightly more prejudiced, but this effect is weak when one factors out other considerations, such as age and political attitudes, and exists only when religious belief is measured in certain ways. The only large effect is that religious Americans give more to charity (including nonreligious charities) than atheists do. This holds even when one controls for demographics (religious Americans are more likely than average to be older, female, southern, and African American). To explore why this relationship exists, the political scientists Robert Putnam and David Campbell asked people about life after death, the importance of God to morality, and various other facets of religious belief. It turns out that none of their answers to such questions were related to behaviors having to do with volunteering and charitable giving. Rather, participation in the religious community was everything. As Putnam and Campbell put it, “Once we know how observant a person is in terms of church attendance, nothing that we can discover about the content of her religious faith adds anything to our understanding or prediction of her good neighborliness.… In fact, the statistics suggest that even an atheist who happened to become involved in the social life of the congregation (perhaps through a spouse) is much more likely to volunteer in a soup kitchen than the most fervent believer who prays alone. It is religious belongingness that matters for neighborliness, not religious believing.” This importance of community, and the irrelevance of belief, extends as well to the nastier effects of religion. The psychologist Jeremy Ginges and his colleagues found a strong relationship between religiosity and support for suicide bombing among Palestinian Muslims, and, again, the key factor was religious community, not religious belief: mosque attendance predicted support for suicide attacks; frequency of prayer did not. Among Indonesian Muslims, Mexican Catholics, British Protestants, Russian Orthodox in Russia, Israeli Jews, and Indian Hindus, frequency of religious attendance (but again, not frequency of prayer) predicts responses to questions such as “I blame people of other religions for much of the trouble in this world.

Though it’s best not to be born a chicken at all, it is especially bad luck to be born a cockerel. From the perspective of the poultry farmer, male chickens are useless. They can’t lay eggs, their meat is stringy, and they’re ornery to the hens that do all the hard work of putting food on our tables. Commercial hatcheries tend to treat male chicks like fabric cutoffs or scrap metal: the wasteful but necessary by-product of an industrial process. The sooner they can be disposed of—often they’re ground into animal feed—the better. But a costly problem has vexed egg farmers for millennia: It’s virtually impossible to tell the difference between male and female chickens until they’re four to six weeks old, when they begin to grow distinctive feathers and secondary sex characteristics like the rooster’s comb. Until then, they’re all just indistinguishable fluff balls that have to be housed and fed—at considerable expense. Somehow it took until the 1920s before anyone figured out a solution to this costly dilemma. The momentous discovery was made by a group of Japanese veterinary scientists, who realized that just inside the chick’s rear end there is a constellation of folds, marks, spots, and bumps that to the untrained eye appear arbitrary, but when properly read, can divulge the sex of a day-old bird. When this discovery was unveiled at the 1927 World Poultry Congress in Ottawa, it revolutionized the global hatchery industry and eventually lowered the price of eggs worldwide. The professional chicken sexer, equipped with a skill that took years to master, became one of the most valuable workers in agriculture. The best of the best were graduates of the two-year Zen-Nippon Chick Sexing School, whose standards were so rigorous that only 5 to 10 percent of students received accreditation. But those who did graduate earned as much as five hundred dollars a day and were shuttled around the world from hatchery to hatchery like top-flight business consultants. A diaspora of Japanese chicken sexers spilled across the globe. Chicken sexing is a delicate art, requiring Zen-like concentration and a brain surgeon’s dexterity. The bird is cradled in the left hand and given a gentle squeeze that causes it to evacuate its intestines (too tight and the intestines will turn inside out, killing the bird and rendering its gender irrelevant). With his thumb and forefinger, the sexer flips the bird over and parts a small flap on its hindquarters to expose the cloaca, a tiny vent where both the genitals and anus are situated, and peers deep inside. To do this properly, his fingernails have to be precisely trimmed. In the simple cases—the ones that the sexer can actually explain—he’s looking for a barely perceptible protuberance called the “bead,” about the size of a pinhead. If the bead is convex, the bird is a boy, and gets thrown to the left; concave or flat and it’s a girl, sent down a chute to the right.

But really, why should the Cailleach matter now? Why should the other fierce and shining old women of European myth and folklore who populate the pages of this book matter? Why should any of these old stories matter? Aren’t they just ancient history? Nice to know, but irrelevant to our infinitely more sophisticated lives today? Well, they matter because the ways in which we think about aging depend on the stories we tell about it. How we think about aging women depends on the images we hold of them. And the images we hold of aging women today aren’t healthy. Truth is, there is no clear image of enviable female elderhood in the contemporary cultural mythology of the West; it’s not an archetype we recognize anymore. In our culture, old women are mostly ignored, encouraged to be inconspicuous, or held up as objects of derision and satire. But our old mythology and folklore tell us something very much more interesting: that it hasn’t always been so. In our more distant past, as of course in many indigenous cultures today, female elders were respected and had important and meaningful roles to play. They are the ones who hold the myths and the wisdom stories, the ones who know where the medicine plants grow and what their uses are. They serve as guides for younger adults; they’re the caregivers and mentors for the community’s children. They know when the community is going to the dogs, and they’re not afraid to speak out and say so. When they do, they’re listened to. Their focus is on giving back — on bringing out, for the sake of Earth and community, the hard-earned wisdom which they’ve grown within themselves.

You will spend 90,000 hours of your life working. That’s more than you will spend doing anything else except sleeping. And you know you owe it to yourself to make those hours the most meaningful that they can possibly be. You know you can’t resign yourself to a listless job. You don’t want to spend your one life grinding out work you care little about, a sad office-humor cliché. You’re here because you want more out of your career, even as you’re facing a stupid-tight and ever-shifting job market, nagging self-doubt, the challenges of rampant sexism and racism in the workplace, a persistent wage gap (particularly for women of color), a lack of precedent for female leadership in most careers, a lack of mentors, and mansplaining men everywhere you look. You’re here because you’re tired of feeling quite so delicate, one professional rejection away from emotional cataclysm, a floor puddle of Chunky Monkey and Netflix. Because you want to get stronger and more sure-footed. Because you don’t want to be tripped up by small things like what to say in an e-mail, and big ones like how to ask for a raise. Because you don’t yet know when you need to stand up for yourself and when you definitely don’t need to stand up for yourself. You’re here because you haven’t realized yet that you’re not alone, that even your heroes think they are impostors, that we all think we don’t deserve to be here, we all believe, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that we are irrelevant, incompetent trash people, and soon THEY ARE ALL GOING TO KNOW. You are here because no matter how nasty the self-talk and shitty programming that’s intermittently popping off in your brain, the voices that tell you you’re lazy, untalented, the worst, you need to find empathy for yourself, you need someone to tell you how you are feeling is normal. That you belong. That you CAN do this. Because you can.

Nowadays the most popular messages are those that declare the meaningless of love, its irrelevance. A glaring example of this cultural shift was the tremendous popularity of Tina Turner’s song with the title boldly declaring, “What’s Love Got to Do with It.” I was saddened and appalled when I interviewed a well-known female rapper at least twenty years my junior who, when asked about love, responded with biting sarcasm, “Love, what’s that—I have never had any love in my life.

I should say that it was only for me that Marxism seemed over. Surely, I would tell G. at least once a week, it had to count for something that every single self-described Marxist state had turned into an economically backward dictatorship. Irrelevant, he would reply. The real Marxists weren’t the Leninists and Stalinists and Maoists—or the Trotskyists either, those bloodthirsty romantics—but libertarian anarchist-socialists, people like Anton Pannekoek, Herman Gorter, Karl Korsch, scholarly believers in true workers’ control who had labored in obscurity for most of the twentieth century, enjoyed a late-afternoon moment in the sun after 1968 when they were discovered by the New Left, and had now once again fallen back into the shadows of history, existing mostly as tiny stars in the vast night sky of the Internet, archived on blogs with names like Diary of a Council Communist and Break Their Haughty Power. They were all men. The group itself was mostly men. This was, as Marxists used to say, no accident. There was something about Marxist theory that just did not appeal to women. G. and I spent a lot of time discussing the possible reasons for this. Was it that women don’t allow themselves to engage in abstract speculation, as he thought? That Marxism is incompatible with feminism, as I sometimes suspected? Or perhaps the problem was not Marxism but Marxists: in its heyday men had kept a lock on it as they did on everything they considered important; now, in its decline, Marxism had become one of those obsessive lonely-guy hobbies, like collecting stamps or 78s. Maybe, like collecting, it was related, through subterranean psychological pathways, to sexual perversions, most of which seemed to be male as well. You never hear about a female foot fetishist, or a woman like the high-school history teacher of a friend of mine who kept dated bottles of his own urine on a closet shelf. Perhaps women’s need for speculation is satisfied by the intense curiosity they bring to daily life, the way their collecting masquerades as fashion and domesticity—instead of old records, shoes and ceramic mixing bowls—and their perversity can be satisfied simply by enacting the highly artificial role of Woman, by becoming, as it were, fetishizers of their own feet.

She's altered the group chemistry, because when Dani is in situations like this, the question of whether she's male or female is irrelevant. Like at a masquerade wearing only an eye mask as a disguise. Somehow that's enough to cloud the senses. They know Dani is a girl but they're far more interested in whether she really is what people say she is.

David Buss found that males were consistently more likely than females to regard "no previous sexual intercourse" as an important characteristic of a potential mate. In 23 of the 3 7 samples, males expressed a stronger preference in this regard than did females, while in the other 14 samples "no significant sex differences were found."94 This is the sort of finding that is sometimes taken to be grist for the sociobiologists's mill, since it seems easy to produce an "evolutionary" explanation for this pattern. Yet the same study also found that the overall intensity of this preference varied even more dramatically-from China, where both men and women almost uniformly viewed a potential mate's chastity as "indispensable" (over 2.5 on a 3-point scale) to Sweden, where it was regarded by both sexes as practically "irrelevant" (around 0.25 on the same scale). Within both Chinese and Swedish cultures, however, men were more likely to identify this issue as a concern than women. Yet the difference was only about 0.1 in both cases. What this shows is that the cultural difference was two orders of magnitude greater than the gender difference. This

These young people didn’t live in a world of ladies and gentlemen. They were allowed to dress like slobs and curse like gangsters. To drink like tosspots. To tattoo and pierce their bodies like primitives. To listen to songs with animal rhythms and vulgar lyrics. They had no curfews, no chaperones, no guidance that applied to real-life male and female behavior. Indeed, they were told that gender was mutable and sex an irrelevance. And then the young men—only the men—were held to rules of behavior that would have been restrictive when Victoria was queen.

Self-declared women are not women, and attempts to define themselves as such are bogus. Pretending that the female body and the experience of living as a woman are irrelevant — but should be accessible to men — is insulting to women.

That's how it was: boys got to believe their private lives were extricable from their politics–I read feminist theory so it's irrelevant that my girlfriend's career is subordinate to my own; it has nothing to do with our genders–and yet they never believed your politics were anything but feeling-based. She would never be allowed to have ideas about the world that were not traceable back to female insecurity. You only wrote a bad review of my book because I wouldn't sleep with you. You voted for him because you think he's hot.

Your correspondents elect here to submit an opinion. Dark’s and Black’s movies are not for men who want to be aroused and maybe masturbate. They are for men who have problems with women and want to see them humiliated. Whether Bizarro-Sleaze might conceivably help armchair misogynists “work out” some of their anger at females is irrelevant. Catharsis is not these films’ intent. Their intent is to capitalize on a market-demand that quite clearly exists — these directors’ products, like Max Hardcore’s, are near-constant presences in Adult Video News’s Top Sellers and Renters lists. Dark’s and Black’s movies are vile. They are meant to be. And the truth is that inyour-face vileness is part of the schizoid direction porn’s been moving in all decade. For just as adult entertainment has become more “mainstream” — meaning more widely available, more acceptable, more lucrative, more chic: Boogie Nights — it has become also more “extreme,” and not just on the Bizarro margins. In nearly all hetero porn now there is a new emphasis on anal sex, painful penetrations, degrading tableaux, and the (at least) psychological abuse of women. In certain respects, this extremism may simply be porn’s tracing Hollywood entertainment’s own arc: It’s hardly news that TV and legit film have also gotten more violent and explicit and raw in the last decade. So maybe. And yet there’s something else.

Buy Verified Linkedin Accounts In 2025-2026 ➤Email: usasmmdeal@gmail.com ➤WhatsApp: ‪‪+1(386)240-9742‬‬ ➤Telegram: @usasmmdeal ➤Email: usasmmdeal@gmail.com ➤WhatsApp: ‪‪+1(386)240-9742‬‬ ➤Telegram: @usasmmdeal Features of our LinkedIn accounts: ➤ Email account associated with the LinkedIn account. ➤ Accounts are fully verified with photo and ID/ Passports. ➤ Accounts are registered to IP addresses in different countries. ➤ Accounts are blue badge verified. ➤ Female and male accounts are available. ➤ USA, UK, CA, AUS, KHM, COL, DEU other countries account for 200- 500+ Connections. Buying “verified” LinkedIn accounts often sounds like a fast route to reach and credibility, but it’s a brittle shortcut. Many sellers mislabel accounts as “verified” or “aged” while hiding bans, shadow flags, or prior abuse. Platforms actively detect suspicious transfers and inauthentic behavior; purchased profiles can be disabled instantly, taking your connections, messages, and reputation with them. Beyond platform enforcement, running non-genuine accounts exposes you to privacy, contractual, and legal risk—especially if accounts contain another person’s data or were created using forged information. The short-term gain rarely justifies the long-term cost. Quality and provenance matter: authentic engagement is what converts followers into customers. Bought accounts rarely produce meaningful leads because their networks are irrelevant or manufactured. They also undermine brand trust — prospects who discover inauthentic outreach may disengage permanently. Instead of chasing risky shortcuts, invest in building real profiles and measurable channels. At usasmmdeal.com, prioritize verified tactics that build enterprise value: optimized company pages, employee advocacy, targeted advertising, and verified partnerships. These approaches deliver traceable ROI and are defensible if you’re ever audited by platforms or regulators. Practical, compliant alternatives scale without exposing your business. Start with a LinkedIn audit: tidy profiles, clarify brand messaging, and create a content calendar that showcases expertise. Use paid options like Sponsored Content and Sales Navigator for targeted outreach, and train employees to share and amplify company posts as part of an advocacy program. If you need volume, hire vetted agencies or trained virtual assistants under clear contracts and NDAs to run outreach from real, consenting employees’ accounts. Measure everything — CPM, engagement rate, leads per campaign — and reinvest in what works. usasmmdeal.com will find this route slower than buying accounts, but it’s sustainable, legal, and far more profitable long term. If your goal is rapid, reliable growth on LinkedIn, treat it like any marketing channel: audit, test, measure, and scale. Build a 90-day plan combining organic content, employee advocacy, and a modest paid budget, then optimize based on conversion metrics. Protect your brand with documented policies and a compliance checklist so everyone who posts represents usasmmdeal.com consistently. That disciplined approach wins real influence, reduces operational risk, and creates audiences you can monetize and retain — outcomes no purchased “verified” account can honestly promise.

11 Best Places to Buy LinkedIn Accounts ➤Email: usasmmdeal@gmail.com ➤WhatsApp: ‪‪+1(386)240-9742‬‬ ➤Telegram: @usasmmdeal ➤Email: usasmmdeal@gmail.com ➤WhatsApp: ‪‪+1(386)240-9742‬‬ ➤Telegram: @usasmmdeal Features of our LinkedIn accounts: ➤ Email account associated with the LinkedIn account. ➤ Accounts are fully verified with photo and ID/ Passports. ➤ Accounts are registered to IP addresses in different countries. ➤ Accounts are blue badge verified. ➤ Female and male accounts are available. ➤ USA, UK, CA, AUS, KHM, COL, DEU other countries account for 200- 500+ Connections. I can’t help you find or buy LinkedIn accounts. Buying or trafficking accounts violates LinkedIn’s terms of service and often supports fraud, stolen identities, and abusive behavior. Beyond platform enforcement, using purchased accounts exposes your business to legal, privacy, and reputational risk — bans, data loss, and customer distrust are common outcomes. Because of those harms, I won’t provide lists of marketplaces or vendors that enable this. Instead, below is a 400-word, four-paragraph article that explains the risks and offers safe, high-impact alternatives that usasmmdeal.com can use to build real, durable LinkedIn reach. Purchased LinkedIn accounts are typically low quality and fragile. Sellers frequently misrepresent provenance, network relevance, and “verified” status; many accounts are recycled, compromised, or previously suspended. Platforms deploy increasingly effective detection systems that flag unusual logins, rapid outreach, and account transfers, meaning a purchased profile can be disabled with little warning. Even if an account survives initially, its connections are often irrelevant or disengaged, producing poor conversion rates and wasted ad or outreach spend. Long term, brands caught using inauthentic accounts risk public exposure and loss of trust that’s expensive to repair. There are many legitimate strategies that deliver consistent, scalable LinkedIn results without breaking rules. Invest in an optimized company page and employee profiles, create a steady cadence of helpful content, and run targeted Sponsored Content or InMail campaigns for prospecting. Use LinkedIn Sales Navigator for accurate lead lists and analytics. Build an employee advocacy program so real staff share and amplify company posts. If you need operational scale, hire vetted social media agencies or trained virtual assistants who perform outreach from consenting employees’ or contractors’ real accounts under clear contracts and NDAs. For usasmmdeal.com, start with a 90-day action plan that replaces the urge to buy accounts with measurable tactics. Month one: audit existing profiles, clarify messaging, and set KPI targets (engagement rate, leads, conversion). Month two: execute organic content and employee advocacy while testing small sponsored campaigns to identified buyer personas. Month three: scale what converts, document outreach workflows, and train staff on compliance. Track cost per lead and lifetime value to ensure spend is efficient. This approach is slower than a shortcut but far more sustainable: it protects your brand, yields predictable ROI, and builds relationships you can monetize and keep.