Feminisme

Bekijk deze video over het debat tussen Ana en Pearl. Zelfs als Pearl had kunnen scoren omdat ze politiek en moreel de juiste positie had delfde zij het onderspit. Ik ben het zeker niet eens met sommige progressieve denkbeelden van Ana, maar het is nu pijnlijk duidelijk dat Pearl door schade en schande heeft moeten leren dat monologen achter een microfoon alleen thuis iets heel anders zijn dan een debat in het echt met een geduchte tegenstander. Ze was extreem slecht voorbereid en is volgens mij sowieso geen goede debater.



Mike
 
Laatst bewerkt:
This is why it is better to empower men than to empower women.

empowering women was a strategic mistake because women, as a group, tend to prioritize individual benefit over collective or long-term social responsibility once empowered.

When women gain financial and legal independence, the incentive to cooperate with men in building families weakens, not strengthens.

A man with resources typically uses them to create and expand….a wife, children, a household, and eventually extended family. Women, once empowered, tend to consume and consolidate, focusing resources inward on personal comfort, lifestyle, and emotional satisfaction.

Every society that has maximally emancipated women has seen the same outcome:

Falling marriage rates
Declining birth rates
Population collapse

This isn’t coincidence…it’s pattern. Empowerment removed dependency without replacing it with obligation. Women were freed from men but not bound to society in return. The result is decision-making driven by short-term self-interest rather than continuity.

The issue isn’t that women can’t contribute….it’s that, when given unrestricted choice, they choose themselves first, even when that choice undermines family formation and demographic survival. Sexual liberation, economic independence, and state protection removed the cost of opting out, so many opted out.

Empowering women didn’t fail because men resisted it.
It failed because female decision-making, when unrestrained by family-centered incentives, does not prioritize societal survival.



Mike
 
The foundations of Western thought that led to so much success which was once built on rational thinking, individualism, merit and truth telling has given way to a female dominated irrational chaos. This virus affected social life, history, science, and of course politics.

Assisted by the corporate class’s short shortsightedness of doubling the tax base, feminists were given power. Hiding under the guise of equality, female empowerment created a toxic psychology that exploits empathy and turned a centuries old working system on its head.

Feminism illustrated how leveraging one’s group identity could lead to personal gains, paving the way for others to do the same by aligning with their own collectives as a means of advancement. As a result, individual merit ceased to be the primary measure of success or progress.

Intersectionality places group identity at the heart of political discourse, overshadowing shared ideas or principles rooted in reality. This shift has fostered tribalism over individualism, with moral standing now tied to one’s affiliations rather than personal character. In doing so, it undermines classical liberalism, which prioritized individual rights and equal treatment under the law for all.





Mike
 
At the end of last year, the UK government announced a program designed to tackle the radicalization of young men in schools. Teachers will be trained in how to spot misogyny in the classroom and children deemed to be at fault sent on ‘toxic masculinity’ courses…

But do we really have a crisis with young men drifting into the arms of dangerous, far-right influencers? The survey data suggests that a far bigger issue is young women being radicalized by the far-left.

Is it time to talk about the rise of “toxic femininity”?

From The Spectator:



Mike
 

Forum statistieken

Onderwerpen
4.654
Berichten
610.496
Leden
8.695
Nieuwste lid
FAGAgueda5
Word vaste donateur van dit forum
Terug
Bovenaan