>It is always ok to kill jews, leftards and shitskins.
>Kill all women.
First of all, nope - not an easily attainable and feasable solution. Also stop hitlering around - for a simple reason, you're a fucking brainlet.
Remember: those who tried failed in the past with exactly such bs. Many times, no matter the specific groups, whoever went against them. We (the righteous ones) need more than that to overcome this spiral of moronic action-reaction (if you can think of building societies anew, not 'rebuilding'/trying to fix them, you got close I guess). But this is for another topic, I might share some good news I believe.
>replace them with artificial wombs.
Is technologically possible (they successfully bread animals in artifical uteri already). Will be a solid way for the future. About time man takes over responibility for reproduction, and oc it will be men who do.
Addendum: always found it weird they market 'potency pills' (viagra a.o.) for males but 'contraceptive pills' for females (for sth euphemistically called 'birth control', as if the intellectually challenged of our species are able to achieve just this - those with a working brain ought to have more kids imo), and not vice versa - stimuli inducing substances for females and procreation-regulating substances for males.
But I perceive a glimmer of hope has finally appeared on that front:
To cite the intro: Women have many choices for birth control, ranging from pills to patches to intrauterine devices, and partly as a result, they bear most of the burden of preventing pregnancy. [...]
...I am very much in favour of taking 'thar burden' away from those females. Positive thing is, it is a non-hormonal contraceptive, so you won't grow titties or turn gay or sth. They tried developing drugs based on hormonal influence in the body, for males too. Did not work out. Could really be the answer this time. Prepare for a mother lode of salty crocodile tears IF it actually is - females will truely hate it, even some feminists. Curious what they will come up with to 'forbid' the 'real men' to be so 'self-absorbed'. Probably need to 'invest' more into laying cuckoos' eggs, kek - so be careful to save yourselves from frauds out there.
However, I would ask you for sth else, to refrain from using 'woman' when what you actually mean is mostly a 'female'. A common error made. What I like to stress, to put simply:
There is a big diff between a 'woman' and a 'female' - I like to define it as: 'Every woman is a female, but NOT every female is/will be also a woman.'
Means a 'woman' is a physically AND mentally grown, somewhat capable of making her own decisions (and one to have to live with the results), which happens to be of the female kind/sex of our species. A female is none of this, young or old, and a sex - just a threehole, to keep things simple.
I make the same diff for 'male' vs 'man' btw. ...uk, equality 'n' shit. No prob with challenging males about their 'manliness', if they rather act like cockhungry faggots. Is what to 'man up' should mean - 'become a man, ffs. Stop being a whiny little shit.' Again, another topic, another time.