Even honest leftists are now coming to grips with the fact that feminism is a failure

submitted by casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter from self.debatealtright

https://twitter.com/annakhachiyan/status/1285669352130453505

25% of all women born in 1990 are now childless, but only 5% wanted to be so.

https://twitter.com/carbolton/status/1285386244311207941

Actual number of children desired by women has actually increased in recent years.

Relentless cock riding and career chasing doesn't seem to help them in that regard. Well, at least they can tell their cats that they helped smash racism

all 99 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]TheJamesRocket 23 insightful - 5 fun23 insightful - 4 fun24 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

And the sad thing is, it doesn't really matter how miserable women become as a result of adopting feminism. It will still be relentlessly pushed by the mainstream, because it doubles the number of workers and halves the wages. Feminism also weakens the mother child bond, and allows the state to step in and get more control over the children. Most SJWs are from the so called 'daycare generation.'

Young women see how messed up and unhappy the older women are as a result of their partying, promiscuity, and bad attitudes. And yet, they will end up meeting the exact same fate. The allure of sex, drugs, and partys are too much for them to resist. Young women are drawn to that faux-freedom like a moth to flame. They are also herd creatures that conform to norms and bow to peer pressure.

[–]Wrangel 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Feminsm is like a drug addiction, it sucks you in. Feminism makes you bitter, unhappy and unattractive which in turn makes you more feminist. It is a feedbackloop that is difficult to break.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed. Well said.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Women are strange creatures. Their entire existence revolves around getting attention and validation from others. Even more than that, they're obsessed with showing off. Its all about showing off to them.

Who's husband is richer, who's boyfriend is hotter, who has more instragram followers, who gets more likes of FB...its all showing off.

Einstein probably said that the happiest man was he who earned more than the husband of his wife's sister. I think the converse is even more true: The happiest woman is she who's husband is richer than those of her girlfriends

[–]arainynightinskyrim 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're simply incapable of resisting instant gratification.

[–]cybitch 14 insightful - 4 fun14 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 4 fun -  (57 children)

Except ... https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert

[–][deleted]  (21 children)

[deleted]

    [–]cybitch 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

    wine drinking cat lady who's miserable with her life

    I don't drink and I hate cats, so yeah, can't lump me in with that charicature. Wine moms seem to be more of a thing. And don't forget the antidepressants and sleeping pills they swallow with it. A wholesome picture of happiness and health they are not.

    rediscover goodness, meaning, or simply the safety of their people

    Yeah, that's the thing. They might be trying to rediscover it for themselves, but I don't see them offering much of it to those of us who never had that in the more "traditional" times. The only way to save the white race would be to start thinking of ways for both sexes to be happy because you can pry my human rights out of my cold, dead hands. And my uterus won't be much good to you then.

    [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

    There's no need to convince women or concede anything to them. Power comes from a monopoly of force and women simply follow the powerful. In Iran during the 70s, there was a liberal wave and the men pressured the women to be ''free'' and wear miniskirts. In 1979, the revolution took place and a mullah regime took hold. They immediately kicked women into the Burka, and they silently obeyed.

    The same was true for Weimar Germany and Nazi Germany.

    The goal should not be to appeal to women with watered down third position or some sort of racist feminism. The aim should be to seize the reins of state power and force society to submit. Beat the rest into submission with force and terror, just like how the Bolsheviks did in Russia. No more homosexuality, no more female rights, no more communism, no more liberalism...and this must be enforced at gunpoint.

    You obey or you vanish.

    [–]three_biome 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    and then eventually the society inevitably changes its course towards liberalism, and you get the same set of problems we have today. limiting freedoms is not the option. feminism is a problem that takes care of itself by forcing those who embrace it to die out. whores that we have today are children of old whores who were forced into a marriage or raped. we don't want them

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    This is true but we won't need to force women to submit. Once we take power they will willingly submit, cheer the opportunity, and confess they always felt this way.

    [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    95% of women will obey, but there are always some upstart Jewesses and girls thoroughly brainwashed by Marxism

    [–]Questionablethe Dumpster Arsonist · 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

    A good cat is an indoor outdoor barn cat, that was raised with it's litter. They are highly affectionate, and independent. Cabernet sauvignon makes a nice wine for people who drink their coffee black.

    I'm sorry, I have little beyond that to contribute to this thread. I can't find a way to debate such broad reaching generalizations from everyone here. It seems no better than larping star wars novels.

    Now everyone go about your business pretending that the feminism movement wasn't corrupted by the CIA before we were even born, and continue using the broad label of feminism to support... Whatever, whatever you want to support here. Just like the good piece of propagandized fan fiction it has become.

    [–]Hadza 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    Feminism is literally jewish women used by jewish men for pushing opinions onto white women for their ulterior motives, be it selling product or subverting countries. Watch the Century of the Self and google feminists by religion

    [–]Questionablethe Dumpster Arsonist · 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    I've been trying to get through Century of the Shelf for about a month now. I know that there is substance in the documentary, but it's taking me a while to think my way though it's more dry presentation, since the first Adam Curtis documentary I watched was Hypernomalization, which as you may know, goes full throttle right out of the gate.

    [–]RuckFeddit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Happiness Machines is the only part I watched, as you said it's quite dry. Where I found Hypernormalization clearly biased and selective, Happiness Machines was straight to the point and absolutely destroyed modern feminism with simple facts relating to its revival in the early 20th century.

    [–]Questionablethe Dumpster Arsonist · 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I saw Hypernormalizaion as following a specific narrative thread through history, that way the concepts could more easily be understood. Could you point to a particular bias in the documentary that troubled you?

    [–]RuckFeddit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    The Egyptian revolution didn't fail because "there was no plan", they failed because they were betrayed by their politicians (surprise surprise), and the presentation of the Libyan invasion was awfully biased towards the west. That's all I remember from memory. The documentary speaks only in definites which leads to me to believe it's a gas-lighting operation to manage our perception on history and brainwash zoomers. Think of all the zoomers watching this who will get their opinion of what happened in the Middle East from this documentary.

    Here's a critique I just found on google, they'll probably say it way better than I can:

    https://lwlies.com/articles/adam-curtis-hypernormalisation-tricks-and-tactics/

    [–]Hadza 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Century of the Shelf

    Eheh, but I get you, it's a very large documentary.

    [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Feminism from its inception is an attack on civilization. It was led from the beginning by Jewish Marxists. Its just another grievance group that the marxist wished to enroll in their quest to take down the old aristocratic, gentile order. The Rockefellers and their CIA stooges joined in much later in the 1950s and 60s. Cosmopolitan for example is a CIA opeartion funded by the Rockefellers.

    Its clear that capitalists sought to gain much from its implementation and prominenece. Regardless, i'd like to hear what this real feminism is like

    [–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    One of the biggest problems with the "Red Pilled" Alt Right is always presenting their own views(which are a minority) as representative of white men in order to scapegoat others and nullify the degenerate nature of modern white males. Men as a collective also don't seem to long to return to tradition either and women don't know what the hell they want because are just extensions of this chaotic world that that weak men have given rise to.

    And you are wrong, a bachelor hedonistic life is far more likely to be fulfilling for a man than such a lifestyle for a woman.

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      Why put so much emphasis on a single study? Social studies are mostly unscientific garbage that usually fail replication attempts.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]DisgustResponse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        Studies != facts.

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Neither do anecdotes though. We can't just all toss around the miserable wino cat-lady stereotype and act like it's representative of reality. I like u/DeepCrimsonPill's perspective here because I think it does beg a deeper question of what really is at fault for our current situation.

        [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

        Study shows...

        Studies can show a myriad of different things that have no relation to the truth. There are studies that show that smoking cigarettes is good for health. There are studies that show that SSRIs harm you in the long term while others say that's not the case.

        Science is not neutral or objective. Its all about funding and corporations, NGOs and governments provide funding to produce '' studies '' that cater to their end. Race and IQ facts are viciously suppressed by the same academic establishment that is supposedly dedicated to truth.

        No study is worth a damn if its not reproducible and there's a huge crisis in reproducibility in modern science. Less than 20% of papers are reproduced successfully

        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

        Some women enjoy that life. But if you google that query, you'll find results favoring both angles.

        To be completely fair though, we decry hedonism being conducted by both genders. Any man that forgoes settling down and living a virtuous family life for a career in investment banking complete with coke-fueled orgies is a waste of a life.

        [–]cybitch 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

        As a woman who is planning to never start a family and never wanted to, it's just hilarious to see men online throwing that shit in women's faces, like "you will never find anyone". First of all, there are still people in my life that I love, and always will be, I don't need anyone with a dick around to have a fulfilling social/family life. Secondly, there are so many bitter older women who are bitter BECAUSE they were involved with men. Reproduction is just a natural drive people have because we're animals like any other, it's not some sort of guarantee you'll be happier and healthier, in fact statistics shows it's the other way around for a lot of women.

        [–]LetssavethefirsworldReturn to Jesus 13 insightful - 5 fun13 insightful - 4 fun14 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

        You will never feel fulfilled in life

        [–]DisgustResponse 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

        What a selfish and pathetic perspective.

        [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

        Fine and its good that woman like you don't reproduce. You're genetic waste and its best that you're purged from the genepool. The future women will be docile ones that love to make babies, those traits will be selected for and your kind will vanish from history

        [–]Aureus 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        I'm not going to claim that single life genuinely doesn't make you happy. I can't and won't persuade you one way or the other, and I'm not sure anyone's individual choices matter at this point.

        But I have to point out that this attitude doesn't work. The feminists who don't work with men aren't winning the culture. That's definitionally impossible, unless you can convince men to disappear, and somehow keep the human race going after that. It's the feminists who do work with men who win the culture.

        I'm not saying that feminists who work with men are necessarily good. I actually think that the current majority who do work with men are terrible, far worse than the current majority who don't work with men. Most feminists who work with men are the ones pushing hardest for trans insanity - claiming that mutilated males are women, brainwashing young men into rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria, forcing mutilated males into women's sports and locker rooms. The problem is, feminists who work with men win, and feminists who don't lose. It's a basic numbers game.

        Shutting out 50% of the population and refusing to reproduce aren't even guaranteed to be losing strategies, as long as you can convert others. It worked for monasteries, after all. However, these are guaranteed to be losing strategies if the dominant ideology (woke pro-trans progressivism) is against you, additionally embraces the entire population and accepts reproduction, and converts others to boot.

        Put more viscerally: trans-exclusionary feminists aren't keen on starting families, by and large. Look at who is keen on starting families (nothing crazy, just a Dove soap advertisement). There is a clear problem here.

        [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

        Ignore u/Letssavethefirstworld and u/disgustresponse, I wish we weren't so toxic towards new comers.

        With this subject, I agree that your mileage may vary. Where a lot of us get annoyed, is when "normalcy" is challenged. We've never had issue with uniquely talented women going into the sciences or a 1 in a million athletic talent pushing herself to greatness but why is this pushed as the default now? Why are women (and men) encouraged to completely forego child rearing and family? 25% childlessness is a lot! And not sustainable. In functional countries, the vast majority of men and women should live quiet wholesome and proper lives and of course there is room for outliers, but that's what those people are; outliers.

        [–]cybitch 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        Men have always been pushed to make something of themselves, not just to live quiet lives, but to be an important, respected part of society. Nowadays, women also want that for ourselves, we want to do work that is considered important to society. Even if you want a family as well, having a child takes a lot more out of a woman than it does out of a man. It doesn't help that chores are still divided in an unbalanced way. The vast majority of men still expect women to be doing everything at home as well. Even when women do agree they wish to be homemakers, the salary of one person is no longer sufficient to have the sort of lifestyle most people desire. The solution of governments everywhere seems to be to import more people from somewhere else. We'll see how it works out.

        [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        Men have always been pushed to make something of themselves, not just to live quiet lives, but to be an important, respected part of society.

        You're going to get mad at me for saying this but this is a good thing for women and I'd argue is almost "feminist". Males live in hierarchies and compete with each other for dominance and this gives women something to judge her potential offspring viability. I know it sounds like social darwinism (and it is) but it's just the model that homo sapiens follow.

        You need to bear in mind a few things when you mention this- mating more or less follows the Pareto principle of 80:20. 80% of women will go after 20% of men where as men are not very picky. This creates HUGE amounts of men who simply lose at life. When men crash and burn, they crash and burn hard and all of this explains why men are pushed to strive for dominance more than women. It also explains incels...

        Even if you want a family as well, having a child takes a lot more out of a woman than it does out of a man. It doesn't help that chores are still divided in an unbalanced way. The vast majority of men still expect women to be doing everything at home as well.

        I mean, speaking as someone who is married and has four kids, this isn't necessarily the rule. And I'm not sure where you get this idea that chores are asymmetrically divided- in my household and community, men tend to do yard work, hard labor, and building/repairing. Myself and my kids can all cook too, we love doing it and this seems to be the norm; I want to squash the boomer trope of men being helpless buffoons which I think is what you are basing this off of.

        That's kind of going by the wayside now. Most young men today have stiff competition with things like social media and dating apps and have to be as able as possible. Men being fat lazy Archie Bunkers is being phased out of culture because frankly, it was pathetic from the get-go and is no longer tolerable.

        Nowadays, women also want that for ourselves, we want to do work that is considered important to society.

        And that's fine, but why can't homemaker be the default? My wife has a psychology degree that she uses whenever she wants to work again, but for the most part she enjoys being a homemaker. Women should have the flexibility to do either but not feel obligated to work. Where you run into problems is thus:

        the salary of one person is no longer sufficient to have the sort of lifestyle most people desire.

        And here we are 100% in agreement. This is fucked. And it broke society.

        [–]cybitch 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        And I'm not sure where you get this idea that chores are asymmetrically divided

        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/us/the-household-work-men-and-women-do-and-why.html

        I want to squash the boomer trope of men being helpless buffoons which I think is what you are basing this off of.

        A lot of that trope is kept alive by men who pretend to suck at household chores so women won't ask them to do it again. Combine that with the complaints about "nagging" whenever women tell them to do something that's awfully difficult and unreasonable, such as suggesting they might try changing a diaper sometimes, and it's easy to see why women just accept their husbands are morons and do everything themselves. This breeds resentment and soon you'll get the stereotypical marriage where both parties hate each other.

        why can't homemaker be the default?

        Well, what kind of attitude did society used to have towards women, back when they were mostly homemakers? That they were important? That they had to be respected, their voices heard and their opinions taken seriously? Or was it more like "what do you say to a woman with two black eyes?" I'm sure you can finish the joke yourself. Is that what you want for your daughter, assuming your kids aren't all boys?

        [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Is that what you want for your daughter, assuming your kids aren't all boys?

        No absolutely not, and I want my daughters to marry men like me who are able bodied functional adults that put the needs of their family first. I don't have any broad disagreements with anything that you have said, but I don't think the answer is to burn down the family unit and create a daycare society with two parents working. Tbh none of the tropes that you have mentioned are true of my household at all (lol I just changed a diaper). I'm all for creating a more equal household in terms of child rearing and chores- none of those complaints are unreasonable and I like to think myself and my neighbors are all a force of change in that department. I mean part of "being a man" is just getting shit done ("I have spreadsheets to fill and sports to coach, so that fucking diaper needs to be changed").

        I think you just hate shitty men. My issue is that society seems to have thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

        [–]LetssavethefirsworldReturn to Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        I don't think it's toxic to tell someone they won't be fulfilled without children

        It literally says in the Bible that women are saved through child birth

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        It's definitely not true of everyone. Humans are a weird species with savant individuals that pour their efforts into strange things. Isaac Newton never had children, his efforts were in his studies. Nor did Amelia Earheart or many other individuals who devoted their life to their craft.

        I do think it should be the norm though.

        [–]LetssavethefirsworldReturn to Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        You're right about not everyone. For women the generalization definitely has more potency, however. Also in today's world having children is grossly out of balance.

        Is what I said toxic, probably, I don't know the person so I shouldn't make such statements in absolutes

        [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        Aversion to having children comes from self-hatred. You don't want them because you don't want more people like yourself around you. If you're still a self-hating person in adulthood then perhaps it's best not to reproduce.

        [–]cybitch 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        That's odd, I thought it was from my hatred of snot and stepping on legos :) I also have this weird thing about not having my vagina literally tear itself in two. Maybe you can get to the bottom of what causes that too?

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        Just wait until you get old.

        Little by little, you will struggle to do the most basic things. There's not going to be around to help you and there's not going to be anyone around who cares. You will be at the complete mercy of total strangers.

        [–]cybitch 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        As opposed to old women now, who have so many people that help them...Oh wait, they get put in nursing homes all the same. The husbands die before they do, so that's of no help either. Just because you have an adult child doesn't mean they're going to agree to being your caregiver. I plan on taking care of my mother of course, but it's far from a guarantee for everyone, and if she, god forbids, develops something like dementia or some other very disabling condition it might be that I won't be able to look after her. So, sad as it is, this is not an issue that's unique to childless old people.

        [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Oh wait, they get put in nursing homes all the same.

        Because the families are selfish.

        The husbands die before they do, so that's of no help either.

        It's not as big of a problem if you have kids.

        Just because you have an adult child doesn't mean they're going to agree to being your caregiver.

        They will if you raise them right.

        [–]EuropeanAwakening 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        Yes, when you are a promiscuous woman and you spent your 20s and 30s sleeping around with pick up artists and players who never had an intention of a long term relationship and just see women as a vagina, you will be abused and end up psychologically damaged and bitter towards men.

        Not all women can or need to have children. There have always been women that never had children. I hope you can have happiness, though.

        [–]cybitch 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        I don't know what women you're talking about that are sleeping around all over the place. The majority of women I know irl are university students and noone seems to be living that sort of lifestyle. The other group of women I have interacted with, feminists, have some older women who have families and they don't seem too happy. I agree with you though, I don't think casual sex is good for women either. We didn't evolve to compartmentalize sex the way men do. Pregnancy is a serious risk to our health even now, let alone back when there was no civilization yet. We also didn't evolve to have the same sex drives men do though, so I'm sure I can be happy with or without a man.

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]arainynightinskyrim 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          (((studies)))

          [–]AidsVictim69 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          It's of course more complicated than that https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is_marriage_really_bad_for_womens_happiness , there are a lot of personal variables that go into whether someone is happier single or married.

          But just being "happy" is not (or rather shouldn't be) the ultimate goal of society - that's just recasting hedonism (pursuit of personal happiness over everything else) as a virtue. There is no guarantee that marrying and having white children is going to make you the happiest you could have been anymore than it might make a man happier than sitting in his apartment smoking weed and jacking off to porn, but it's necessary to preserve society against degrading into a third world country.

          I believe a lot of it just comes down to personal ideology and attitude - if you view children as a burden over the life you could have lived then of course you will be less happy married with kids. If you view having white children as something to celebrate, as part of your duty and mission in life then fulfillment of that is likely to bring you joy.

          Feminisms main mission is to fight for the rights and independence of women. Alright, but I almost never see any feminist solution to issues like collapsing birthrates and replacement with more conservative people who are typically more anti feminist, misogynist, violent etc than the native white population. They just choose not to engage with it or actively support the replacement because they believe fighting against the white patriarchy is more important.

          In the end there are simply people who are willing to sacrifice something (like a hedonistic single life) to build and preserve society and those who either throw off any responsibility or actively take part in it's destruction. There is no guarantee that it will bring someone ultimate happiness, only that they have a chance to fight for what they believe is right.

          [–]cybitch 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          While I believe ideology is important to a lot of people, that is not why anybody of any race has children, nor do I believe it can make someone happy raising children they would otherwise see as a burden. Reproducing is the natural consequence of falling in love with someone, no more no less. Humans are smart though, and we have invented ways to avoid reproducing if we think it'll be too much of a burden for us. It doesn't have to be, we have the tools to make life a lot easier for mothers. It just so happens the rich and powerful think it'll be more cost effective to just ship in new people to replace the natives instead.

          Alright, but I almost never see any feminist solution to issues like collapsing birthrates and replacement with more conservative people who are typically more anti feminist, misogynist, violent etc than the native white population.

          This is something that has been bothering me for a while. Personally I hate that shit and think the borders should be closed asap, but the rich have convinced women globalism is the way to some sort of utopia where everyone is equal. Most women seem to believe in that deluded sort of SJW feminism that thinks socialization is everything and there are zero innate differences in the behavior of men and women, whites and blacks etc. I think it's BS but I'm very much in the minority. Most men have also started to believe it so while it used to be a feminism thing it seems like your fellow men are also SJWs now.

          [–]AidsVictim69 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Reproducing is the natural consequence of falling in love with someone, no more no less.

          It's the consequence of sex, sometimes people are in love and sometimes not. For most of human history you just married and had kids with the first person you had sex with, likely one of your village neighbors. The harsh reality is that marrying and having children for an abstract idea of love probably suppresses fertility quite a bit. At some point you have to consider whether it's possible to have a society capable of sustaining itself if everyone is neurotically searching for an idealized partner over just having children with an otherwise good partner.

          It doesn't have to be, we have the tools to make life a lot easier for mothers.

          True, capitalist economies are oriented around maximizing profit to the point that they become unable to reproduce themselves without importing masses of foreigners. Any healthy society must be oriented around its own health and at least replacement levels of fertility of the native population which requires more support for parents in the modern world.

          Most men have also started to believe it so while it used to be a feminism thing it seems like your fellow men are also SJWs now.

          Many are and there is enough blame to go around for both genders, but let's be honest there is much stronger support for immigration in general among white women than white men, especially younger women.

          [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          Even Vox knows that's bullshit: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/6/4/18650969/married-women-miserable-fake-paul-dolan-happiness.

          [–]cybitch 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          I didn't learn about bitter old married women from some book lol. Some of us actually interact with people outside of the internet. And I just haven't met that elusive bitter single cat lady stereotype. Miserable married women are much more common, I'm sure everyone knows some.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          That's some alternate reality you're living in. Humans have literally evolved to find babies attractive and childbearing good. Otherwise, evolution would've eliminated the species from the face of the earth. Women feel more elated during pregnancy and childcare. Men have an instinctual drive to protect women and children, as they are menes to continue their genetic line.

          Aversion to children comes from self hatred.

          [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Anecdotes aren't data.

          [–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Until they're middle aged and/or old.

          [–]Hadza 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Experts say you're wrong about being unhappy, experts know better

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

          Is it feminist, or:

          • the reduced fertility of both genders?
          • The corporate structure that forces both men and women into the work force to make ends meet?

          In the 50's/60's there's was a very real concern about what would people do in the future because they wouldn't have to work from there advancements in automation.

          Instead the wealthly kept all of the profits, and the overwhelming majority of household is mired in debt.
          Most do not have enough saved for a $500 emergency.

          Corporate America intentionally created "the nuclear family" by creating conditions when it was necessary to move to advance a career.
          This was done to isolate young families, and reduce familiar support networks.

          HOAs were created to control what people do with their land, so families couldn't grow food in their own gardens.

          Today vegetables are similarly priced with meat. It's the opposite of capitalism, and it's insane. Feeding your family is unaffordable for many household.

          Trans national corporations have socially engineered the west every bit as much as "the socialists" (they were never communist) did in the east. They intentionally inflicted an unbelievable degree of suffering upon the global public.

          We're currently in the opening stages of a Depopulation agenda. No one is prepared for what is coming.

          The propaganda was top dollar, so most of us never noticed.

          Do you see the writing on the wall?
          Do you believe the Coronavirus is an existential threat to all humanity?
          Did you notice the controlled demolition of the economy?

          At this point any debate about the failures of feminism is the least of our worries.
          This divisiveness advanced the Depopulation agenda.
          That's the globalists endgame.

          No one asked to be born, or choose their gender. So what is the end game of this attack post?

          Do everyone a favor, get over your fear.
          Go talk to the girl down there hall, and be nice to her. If she's rude, then it's possible she's the female equivalent of yourself, so give her a couple of chances.

          Her life isn't easy either.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Read my posts, i've said all these things. Feminism is just another tool for the Jewish plutocrats.

          And as for women having it tough, never in history have women had it so good. They are a privileged class by law. They get quotas, preferential hiring and admissions. There are thousands of NGOs, foundations and charities, excluisively catered to their needs. How many charities cater exclusively to men who make up 65% of the very poor?

          And then the court system...if testosterone hadn't been lowered by plastic pollution and endocrine disruptors in food, the courts would've been burnt down ages ago. 90% of child custody is given to women despite them being the majority of abusers. Women are given lighter sentences and are entitled to alimony. A woman can literally cheat on you or just divorce because she's bored, and then take your house, your kids and half your paycheck every month while she's riding some new cock. You have no say in how she uses your alimonty and child support checks, none. And she can restrict you from visiting your children any time by just making up some bogus accusation

          If you are a divorced man, you are essentially an indentured servant to your ex.

          And women have the gall to say they have it bad?

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          i've said all these things

          You and I are not saying the same thing

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

          I usually don't like your posts but this is an interesting perspective and I agree with a lot of it. De-population is openly the goal and I don't think it's all bad especially in the third world where families have more children than the carrying capacity of their environment.

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

          De-population is openly the goal and I don't think it's all bad especially in the third world where families have more children than the carrying capacity of their environment.

          I haven't seen the evidence that demonstrates that the "carrying capacity" of the environment has been exceeded by 3rd world families.

          The Malthusian theory has been debunked thoroughly, but the eugenicists continue to push it..

          It would be interesting to hear your feedback to one particular source who has gathered significant sources of evidence to debunk the idea of "overpopulation".

          Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan

          The evidence speaks for itself.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          How has it been debukned? Its simply been postponed by advances in science. But there is a physical limit to how much industrial production and population the earth can handle

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Don't take my word for it. Watch the video.

          Source material is provided on the page below the video.

          [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

          Stop with this nonsense. Infinite growth on a finite planet is lunacy.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          The Malthusian theory has been debunked thoroughly

          How can you even say this?

          People consume resources, resources are limited. Both of those pre-suppositions are airtight and I really can't take anyone seriously who argues otherwise. Plus, we should always strive to consume less resources anyways so....... yeah you completely lost me.

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          That is a good question, and it's easy to oversimplify the situation.

          There was a panic in the 1880's or so, when the whales were almost hunted to extinction because whale oil was needed for lamps, etc.

          It seems laughable today, because alternatives are always identified and substituted.

          Summary: In the med/long term (5-10 years) commodity prices of every non-regulated resource continue to go down over time (adjusted for inflation).

          Innovation always outpaces demand.

          People and human ingenuity are the greatest resources on the planet.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          That's not scientific and whale oil limitations are a bad example. Try oxygen instead, can human innovation conquer that? Will an entrepreneur make the switch to nitrogen and market it?

          This is a huge fallacy that a lot of "free market" libertarians fall under and it's this idea that everything exists in a vacuum and that economics has no constraints. The truth is that not every market force has competition and not every resource has viable alternatives. So both of these axioms:

          Innovation always outpaces demand.

          People and human ingenuity are the greatest resources on the planet.

          are false. We are mortal and we are limited.

          If you want actual proof that the third world is at carrying capacity then I recomend you visit Africa and bear witness to the ecological collapse that many regions are undergoing particularly around lakes and water systems. And while more efficient tech could improve this situation, the reality is that the regions are simply overburdened with consumers.

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          That's not scientific and whale oil limitations are a bad example.

          Here's an omnipresent solution.

          Limitless energy is easily available and environmentally safe with local implementation small scale thorium reactors (and 1990's tech). Thorium is as common a material as nickel. Free quasi-eternal energy. Solved.

          When energy is free, then there are very few limitations to what can be done.

          The root-cause of our "scarcity" condition is the psychopaths/sociopaths who have manipulated and enslaved the public, with their PR propaganda operations. From their perspective, If there are no "have-nots", then they wouldn't be as special.
          They're still not special, they are corrupted and delusional.

          Propaganda is intended to set the limits of debate, and exclude options that would serve to further liberate us all.

          We need to recognize the problems, and then we can resolve them. The problems are not insurmountable.

          First we need legitimate information to base decisions off of. The first video is a good start for the population fraud that is being used to brainwash people into a hysterical fear of future possibilities. The source material is provided below on the same page.

          Here's another high-quality recommendation. It's equally relevant.
          Interview 1563 – Keith Knight and James Corbett Dissect Voluntary Servitude
          From the same source.

          the reality is that the regions are simply overburdened with consumers.

          You think Africa is overburdened with consumerism? It's not even remotely industrialized. It's like the US in the 30's.

          Year-round sunlight, combined with green house production. Regions in Africa could easily increase production by 100x. Easily.

          We would first need to invest in the region, instead of exploit it. Add in some Thorium reactors, and it could be a modern paradise in ~20 years.

          Africa has been exploited for centuries, and deserves a win.

          Every person on every other continent has somewhere around ~2-4% neanderthal DNA.
          Africans are objectively the most human among us.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          Do you believe in climate change?

          [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          I'm not OP, but yes, I do.

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          The actual evidence suggests they planet is not warming.

          Why Who do you ask?

          [–]bald-janitor 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Nah

          [–]VarangianRasputin 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          "What? You mean wasting my prime years that nature equipped me to get a man with was a BAD IDEA?!"

          You get what you fucking deserve.

          [–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          Relentless cock riding and career chasing doesn't seem to help them in that regard. Well, at least they can tell their cats that they helped smash racism

          I imagine the saddest moment in a feminist's life is the death of their cat when they are 40. Can you imagine the feeling of sitting alone in your wonderfully decorated apt when your only companion just died at 17, your only solice is you can distract yourself because you still having to finish that presentation for tommorrow's 7 a.m. meeting.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          They made their bed, now they must lie in it. I'd go even further, i'd force all these childless career women to live in black ghettos and Homosexual ''communities''. Let them live with the people they love so much

          [–]Maly_Querent 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          It's not a failure. It's just been co-opted by mass mainstream media and consumerism.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 13 insightful - 5 fun13 insightful - 4 fun14 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

          Real feminism hasn't just been tried yet

          [–]LetssavethefirsworldReturn to Jesus 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Judge a tree by it's fruit

          [–]arainynightinskyrim 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Well, that was the objective of femminism in the west, to decrease white birth rates and destroy the family and it succeded. You have to thank our fellow whites for that.

          [–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

          It's not fairness and authentic feminism, men's rights, children's rights, or human rights that are the problem.

          It's the CIA/Mossad social engineering feminist 2nd wave, 3rd wave, and insane 4th wave that are the problem and destroyers of families, communities, culture, and civilization to divide and conquer for the benefit of the ruling class.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

          What does good feminism look like?

          [–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          Excellent question.

          Ask any woman who is against feminism what it should be instead. I'd guess they'd say a more measured, balanced, approach, less about dominating and suppressing others, more about cooperating, keeping the family together, building on the strengths of each other, rather than focusing on the weaknesses or imbalances and inequities of nature. Being fair.

          It's been a long time since we've seen that kind of rational thinking from people who identify as "feminists", so maybe go back to the 60s before the CIA's Gloria Steinem infiltrated, subverted, and changed the course of feminism.

          [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

          A society resembling Aryan pastoral tribes probably, a good medium. Both the current degeneracy and Islamic arranged marriages with your cousins are highly dysgenic. Parents don't tend to pick the genetically best mates but the most socially convenient ones. Letting people pick their own partners early on is key. Media should be eliminated to get rid of the pressure to fuck around especially with other races, and the modern implementation of college as a luxury orgy mandated by corporate employers should be cast off.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          Aryan tribes were patriarchal. Just because women rode horses, didn't mean that they were equal or feminist

          [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          What I'm saying is that rapewaffen/islam is not the solution to degeneracy because it's dysgenic. Sexual selection is necessary to ensure better offspring in each generation. I wouldn't call it feminism though women were given more autonomy in these tribes than elsewhere.

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Who? The Persians?

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          The steppe tribes that settled Russia and became slavs. or the ones that settled Western Europe and became North-west Euros.

          Eg: the Germanic tribes that fought Rome or the vikings that raided Christendom. Rome and Greece would be other examples

          [–]DisgustResponse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          What exactly is the endgame of anti-woke leftists? They make an entire career/brand out of criticizing the left, yet insist they are not conservatives.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          They're liberals in denial. They know that libearlism and its degenerate elements are toxic but don't want to admit it. They don't want to be racist, sexist, homophobic etc. They don't want to be mean and want to remain among the cool kids. Libearlism is the fashion of the day and they're scared of ostracization from the annual AIDS party at the DSA

          [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Yes, there are tons of leftist males who are getting redpilled on feminism every single day. Too bad they're not getting redpilled on race.

          [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          Leftist males are the post pathetic creatures on Earth. Imagine shilling for blacks and wahmen, only for them to relentelessly mock and denigrate your very existence. Basic self esteem calls for them to leave the left by now.