The pathetic thing about women is just how effective hitting them is. Like, when you're bluepilled, you think women are just scared of the violence, so they're making irrational decisions based survival instinct or something. Maybe it is instinct, but the violence compels them to not only quit whatever annoying behavior they were engaging in that pissed you off in the first place, they become completely compliant, even nice and submissive.
It really raises a lot of ethical questions regarding will. What if hitting women causes genuinely feelings arousal? She can claim that she doesn't consent to some incel causing the genuine arousal in her, but technically there is no consent giving to attractive men or rich men or affluential men. It is funny when you think about all the issues women have with regards to sex and achieving orgasm consistently. What if violence not only allows me to arouse a woman, but those women are more likely to achieve orgasm because of it.
Understand when I say violence, I'm not talking about beating a woman half to death. Just smacking and spanking is more than sufficient.
The more I think about it, the more I think a society's willingness to allow men to engage in this level of violence towards women is necessary for a thriving civilization. What is feminism fundamentally other than removing the ability for every man to assert his value toward every woman? Before feminism, the only thing that really separates men from cucks is the willingness to assert yourself physically towards any woman who disrespected. After feminism, notice that the only men allowed to do it consistently are those with elite levels of power. Chad and rich/affluent Brads get away with it more than everyone else, but even they are starting to feel the heat.