Name a shitty political movement. BLM, Feminism, fat positivity, Intersectionalism, the tranny movement, etc. You can literally just list them off, and they are all primarily supported by women.
You're not even actually considering whether what I'm saying is true and thinking about it. You are just automatically defending women. Which is what most people do, whether left or right.
They are supported by corporations to foster division. Such as the division of man versus woman. Can you imagine convincing a rational adult male to go against their spouse? That's just crazy that any rational man would fall for such. Because men are smart. Am I right fam?
I agree that division between men and women is being fostered, but it's not what this is about. This isn't going against women. It's acknowledging women's evolutionary history, and their biology.
Women advocate for themselves. They advocate for taking resources from men and giving it to themselves. It makes a lot of sense why when you consider the evolutionary history of the sexes. Women needed to do so, because that was how they secured resources for their offspring.
They had to have very strong traits for this because there were lots of things stacked against them. Men were more competent, and also much stronger. In modern society, nothing tempers women's imperative to take resources from men. They no longer have to fear anything from men because of how civilization is set up.
They also don't have any responsibility to worry about either. If a woman decides to have a kid with some random loser, or she behaves terribly and is a terrible wife and partner, the government takes money from men by force and gives it to her. Not even just from the man who is the father of her children, but from all men through taxes. What incentive does a woman have to temper her inclination to advocate for herself? Absolutely none. All of women's bad behaviors and negative biological traits have nothing inhibiting them anymore. There is no incentive for a woman to be realistic or treat men nicely. Couple that with the fact that they innately do not have a problem with taking resources from men, and you have a big problem. The women in evolutionary history who had a problem with taking resources from men or just advocating for themselves did not have as successful offspring, so through the process of natural selection, the genes for endless advocacy are what flourished.
The biggest problem in my opinion is that no matter which side of the aisle, nobody likes these biological facts. They just pretend things aren't this way because acknowledging it makes them feel badly.
Nice thread. I'm glad other people are noticing this.
The hilariously sad hypocrisy/stupidity of it too, is that feminists want women to be "empowered", not needing a man, while advocating for larger and larger government, which is just replacing the traditional role and responsibilities that individual men would play in women's lives, as protectors and providers, creating the largest institution of patriarchy on the planet (government), while simultaneously wanting to smash the patriarchy, and ruin all men. It started out that most of the women pushing for feminism were old and ugly (most of the uber feminists still are), because they couldn't attract a man to earn his protection or resources, and they managed over time to convince more and more women to go along with them, to empower government to give them what they couldn't earn on their own. Unfortunately, government is faceless, and when overgrown, will crush both men and women under its boot. A bad government is a hell of a lot harder to tackle than one bad man.
This goes much further and deeper, too, connecting to philosophy and evolutionary genetics. As a foundation, the two highest priorities must be truth and life, with truth being the highest. If you prioritize life over truth, the first casualty is truth, and the second is inevitably life (I shouldn't have to explain this further, it should be self evident among our long history). Men, as a biological necessity, value truth, logic, and reason above all else. I imagine this was spurred on because men who didn't value truth were less likely to survive in dire situations (common when close to nature, and failure meant death), and those that did were better able accrue more resources, better enabling them to pair bond, protect their family and community, survive, and pass on their genetics. Women, as a biological necessity, value life, emotion, and empathy above all else because it makes them better mates, mothers, and caretakers, better enabling them to survive and pass on their genetics. Thus, as a philosophical necessity men must hold higher position than women, by simple virtue of our differing priorities. This means all natural and successful communities of people is patriarchal. If women hold power over men, or feminine values are held over the masculine, destruction follows.
This, of course, doesn't mean I believe women are inferior and men superior, just that we're different, and each is better suited to their traditional role than the other. The farther away from truth and nature we go, the more we fail. Nature teaches really quick what works and what doesn't. Unfortunately, western society has become so successful we abandoned our traditions, often based off hard won lessons from nature, and we're now doing things that if we were closer to nature, would rightfully kill us off. This will play out on the small and large scale, even though the large scale will fall more slowly, because truth is true regardless of scale. Societies based off of lies cannot last. We will repeat the cycle, and relearn the lessons nature taught us. Unfortunately, there will be a lot of death and misery between now and then.
Another way of putting your first paragraph. Women now have their own unique powers through sexual attraction, persuasion, social value from birth, etc, and they have coopted men's superior force and now wield their power as well through the monopoly on violence in the government. The government is used to secure resources from men, and does not work in favor of men whatsoever. Men's superior force is now women's.
Exactly. The way systems have been set up over thousands and millions of years are not happenstance or randomness. Things naturally became setup that way for a reason. And you see men as leaders regardless of society through time and across the globe because it's the system that works.
I am also very pessimistic. I don't see the inertia ever being stopped or the course reversed. Women will continue to advocate for more until collapse. The new system that rises up will not have any sort of feminist thinking, something only possible in first world conditions, which people will no longer live in. And then they will either inoculate themselves from this craziness, or else repeat the same pattern, slowly giving more and more to women until collapse again.
Name a shitty political movement. BLM, Feminism, fat positivity, Intersectionalism, the tranny movement, etc. You can literally just list them off, and they are all primarily supported by women.
You're not even actually considering whether what I'm saying is true and thinking about it. You are just automatically defending women. Which is what most people do, whether left or right.
They are supported by corporations to foster division. Such as the division of man versus woman. Can you imagine convincing a rational adult male to go against their spouse? That's just crazy that any rational man would fall for such. Because men are smart. Am I right fam?
I agree that division between men and women is being fostered, but it's not what this is about. This isn't going against women. It's acknowledging women's evolutionary history, and their biology.
Women advocate for themselves. They advocate for taking resources from men and giving it to themselves. It makes a lot of sense why when you consider the evolutionary history of the sexes. Women needed to do so, because that was how they secured resources for their offspring.
They had to have very strong traits for this because there were lots of things stacked against them. Men were more competent, and also much stronger. In modern society, nothing tempers women's imperative to take resources from men. They no longer have to fear anything from men because of how civilization is set up.
They also don't have any responsibility to worry about either. If a woman decides to have a kid with some random loser, or she behaves terribly and is a terrible wife and partner, the government takes money from men by force and gives it to her. Not even just from the man who is the father of her children, but from all men through taxes. What incentive does a woman have to temper her inclination to advocate for herself? Absolutely none. All of women's bad behaviors and negative biological traits have nothing inhibiting them anymore. There is no incentive for a woman to be realistic or treat men nicely. Couple that with the fact that they innately do not have a problem with taking resources from men, and you have a big problem. The women in evolutionary history who had a problem with taking resources from men or just advocating for themselves did not have as successful offspring, so through the process of natural selection, the genes for endless advocacy are what flourished.
The biggest problem in my opinion is that no matter which side of the aisle, nobody likes these biological facts. They just pretend things aren't this way because acknowledging it makes them feel badly.
Nice thread. I'm glad other people are noticing this.
The hilariously sad hypocrisy/stupidity of it too, is that feminists want women to be "empowered", not needing a man, while advocating for larger and larger government, which is just replacing the traditional role and responsibilities that individual men would play in women's lives, as protectors and providers, creating the largest institution of patriarchy on the planet (government), while simultaneously wanting to smash the patriarchy, and ruin all men. It started out that most of the women pushing for feminism were old and ugly (most of the uber feminists still are), because they couldn't attract a man to earn his protection or resources, and they managed over time to convince more and more women to go along with them, to empower government to give them what they couldn't earn on their own. Unfortunately, government is faceless, and when overgrown, will crush both men and women under its boot. A bad government is a hell of a lot harder to tackle than one bad man.
This goes much further and deeper, too, connecting to philosophy and evolutionary genetics. As a foundation, the two highest priorities must be truth and life, with truth being the highest. If you prioritize life over truth, the first casualty is truth, and the second is inevitably life (I shouldn't have to explain this further, it should be self evident among our long history). Men, as a biological necessity, value truth, logic, and reason above all else. I imagine this was spurred on because men who didn't value truth were less likely to survive in dire situations (common when close to nature, and failure meant death), and those that did were better able accrue more resources, better enabling them to pair bond, protect their family and community, survive, and pass on their genetics. Women, as a biological necessity, value life, emotion, and empathy above all else because it makes them better mates, mothers, and caretakers, better enabling them to survive and pass on their genetics. Thus, as a philosophical necessity men must hold higher position than women, by simple virtue of our differing priorities. This means all natural and successful communities of people is patriarchal. If women hold power over men, or feminine values are held over the masculine, destruction follows.
This, of course, doesn't mean I believe women are inferior and men superior, just that we're different, and each is better suited to their traditional role than the other. The farther away from truth and nature we go, the more we fail. Nature teaches really quick what works and what doesn't. Unfortunately, western society has become so successful we abandoned our traditions, often based off hard won lessons from nature, and we're now doing things that if we were closer to nature, would rightfully kill us off. This will play out on the small and large scale, even though the large scale will fall more slowly, because truth is true regardless of scale. Societies based off of lies cannot last. We will repeat the cycle, and relearn the lessons nature taught us. Unfortunately, there will be a lot of death and misery between now and then.
Another way of putting your first paragraph. Women now have their own unique powers through sexual attraction, persuasion, social value from birth, etc, and they have coopted men's superior force and now wield their power as well through the monopoly on violence in the government. The government is used to secure resources from men, and does not work in favor of men whatsoever. Men's superior force is now women's.
Exactly. The way systems have been set up over thousands and millions of years are not happenstance or randomness. Things naturally became setup that way for a reason. And you see men as leaders regardless of society through time and across the globe because it's the system that works.
I am also very pessimistic. I don't see the inertia ever being stopped or the course reversed. Women will continue to advocate for more until collapse. The new system that rises up will not have any sort of feminist thinking, something only possible in first world conditions, which people will no longer live in. And then they will either inoculate themselves from this craziness, or else repeat the same pattern, slowly giving more and more to women until collapse again.