Zone1 Is Feminism Destroying the West?

[Leo123]

What is so stupid about it?

Indeed. Politics being what it is today, mostly emotional propaganda, has a way of ruining relationships. Shouldn't it be 1 vote for 1 family? Otherwise married couples experience friction in their relationship which is not good for the family.

 

[SaxonJackson]

This is a very interesting and controversial video discussing the decline of the West because largely of the Left's feminism.
I tend to agree. Birth rates are falling. The institution of marriage has become toxic to men due to no fault divorce laws and
the courts almost always awarding custody, child support, and even alimony to the wife. Women, especially young women, usually vote for progressive candidates, This has been disastrous for the West because the Left has been flooding the West with third world migrants to prop up the welfare state and dilute the native Western vote. Will the West survive this mass influx of Muslim migrants? How will women be affected by Sharia Law?

It certainly isn't helping. The attack on nuclear family comes in several forms. Feminism is but one. LGBTQXYZ is another. Making family life unaffordable is another.

 

[DonGlock26]

It certainly isn't helping. The attack on nuclear family comes in several forms. Feminism is but one. LGBTQXYZ is another. Making family life unaffordable is another.

All from the Left.

 

[initforme]

One would think if one knows everyone does not agree on a particular situation, it would behoove one to elucidate as to why instead of giving a stupid one word retort.

More and more women are not getting married because feminism has caused them to have to work, thus many 'liberated' women who get married and have kids find themselves having to work and take care of their children so they forego marriage and a family for a career. The evidence shows it's better for children to have a stay at home mom during their formative years. Somehow this is seen as women being slaves to men.

I never mentioned that women should be subservient to men, I said men and women are different. Generally, women care more about people and relationships while men generally care more about things. Feminism has given men what they want (free sex) and has done nothing for women.

I do think that feminism has given family and marriage a bad rap. I wasn't men denigrating housewives it was a feminist oriented society that relegated home makers to nothing more than slaves. You believe propaganda.

You failed to mention finances. So as a nation we want people to be more responsible. So now they are. They are having less kids because its taking 2 middle class incomes just to barely hang on financially. Then we expect them to have kids too? Cmon. Get real. And i frankly dont believe in asking them to live on alot less while their neighbors are killing it financially. That would be immoral and wrong in every possible way. Hey you live from paycheck to paycheck while watching your neighbors go on vacation. Nope, that is never acceptable. So you have a massive lift in front of you because rarely is one income going to do anything. And to blame feminism for that? Not buying it. Asking young people to live on strict financial boundaries is not going to work. Back to the drawing board.

 

[konradv]

This is a very interesting and controversial video discussing the decline of the West because largely of the Left's feminism.
I tend to agree. Birth rates are falling. The institution of marriage has become toxic to men due to no fault divorce laws and
the courts almost always awarding custody, child support, and even alimony to the wife. Women, especially young women, usually vote for progressive candidates, This has been disastrous for the West because the Left has been flooding the West with third world migrants to prop up the welfare state and dilute the native Western vote. Will the West survive this mass influx of Muslim migrants? How will women be affected by Sharia Law?

No, Trump is.

 

[MizMolly]

What is so stupid about it?

You don’t think it is stupid to think women should not be able to vote?

 

[22lcidw]

You failed to mention finances. So as a nation we want people to be more responsible. So now they are. They are having less kids because its taking 2 middle class incomes just to barely hang on financially. Then we expect them to have kids too? Cmon. Get real. And i frankly dont believe in asking them to live on alot less while their neighbors are killing it financially. That would be immoral and wrong in every possible way. Hey you live from paycheck to paycheck while watching your neighbors go on vacation. Nope, that is never acceptable. So you have a massive lift in front of you because rarely is one income going to do anything. And to blame feminism for that? Not buying it. Asking young people to live on strict financial boundaries is not going to work. Back to the drawing board.

We sent a huge percentage of women into the workforce starting in the early 1970's or so. it started to affect marriages. It also caused increases in taxes in a huge way while also stagnating wages. Along with that the economic growth slowed down. Eventually we have had less marriage and less children from white women.

 

[initforme]

We sent a huge percentage of women into the workforce starting in the early 1970's or so. it started to affect marriages. It also caused increases in taxes in a huge way while also stagnating wages. Along with that the economic growth slowed down. Eventually we have had less marriage and less children from white women.

and the trend is only going to grow with where things are at. Its not a pretty pucture for average workers.

 

[Dorian Mode]

It certainly isn't helping. The attack on nuclear family comes in several forms. Feminism is but one. LGBTQXYZ is another. Making family life unaffordable is another.

There seems to be a war against families now. It is almost like the powers that be don't want Americans to have families anymore and the population loss can be made up with immigrants, hopefully illegal immigrants. I still haven't figured out the benefit, but then I am not a democrap or a globalist. My best guess is that a lot of Chinese money has been spent eroding the foundation of America so that it can take over the role of global superpower without ever firing a shot. This is championed by the entire global left.

 

[Trickster]

Yes, the sexual revolution for women F’d them Over more than anything.. for women it’s easy to have sex. For men it’s generally difficult to get a woman to have sex.

The pill was a major victory for liberty as it meant women were no longer slaves to nature and instead fully in charge over their own bodies. Claiming anything else is misogynist purity culture.

Your equation does not add up- if women are now 'looser" and can have sex with "anyone" at "anytime", then how can it be "extremly difficult" for men to have sex?

Who are all these women having sex with?

Women are celebrating something that’s easy, and that subconsciously imprints on them whether they want it or not (unlike men, who can have sex without the deep emotional connection)

This is absolute nonsense.

now they are coping hard with ideological tropes but it won’t work over time

Like men coping with "red pill-incel" ideology?

 

[Trickster]

All from the Left.

And what are your solutions?

Conservatives are good at bishing over the "destructiveness of the left", but never offer anything positive in exchange.

Some people just don't want kids and LGBTQ have rights too, get over it.

 

[Trickster]

There seems to be a war against families now. It is almost like the powers that be don't want Americans to have families anymore and the population loss can be made up with immigrants, hopefully illegal immigrants.

What are you talking about?

If anything, there clearly is an attempt from the right a limiting the choice not to have a family with abortion bans or limiting adoption rights for the LGBTQ community.

And families apparently stop to be important if they happen to be immigrants.

Hmm...

it's almost like you are fullof sh-t.

I still haven't figured out the benefit, but then I am not a democrap or a globalist. My best guess is that a lot of Chinese money has been spent eroding the foundation of America so that it can take over the role of global superpower without ever firing a shot. This is championed by the entire global left.

We're doing anti-semitism too now, huh?

 

[Trickster]

The single mother problem started after welfare because of welfare. Before that the black family was intact.

Y'all have to make up your minds - a woman choosing career = bad, but a single mother is somehow bad too?

Cut the emotionalism and try to apply reason for once.

 

[Trickster]

Feminism is 100% misandry. Ironically, 'feminism' has taken the feminine out of women.

Define "femininity".

 

[Mr. Friscus]

The pill was a major victory for liberty as it meant women were no longer slaves to nature and instead fully in charge over their own bodies. Claiming anything else is misogynist purity culture.

It denied true womanhood and screwed up their behavioural psychology big time. Women and men are completely different, and a social contagion was put in to tempt women to act like men, and it's hurt them big time in many ways, no matter how much social engineering tries to convince you otherwise. Women report never being more unhappy, and anti-depressant use (specifically in 35+older women) is higher than all other subsets, and that's because they didn't have a family, were trained to never nurture, support, or cooperate, and never tapped into their psychological wheelhouse. They don't like working the long hours like men are fulfilled in doing. Women don't like the aggressive schedule, or not getting chivalry or protection from men and opening themselves to danger. They rely on the patriarchy to protect them, they couldn't survive on their own. Hell, the only reason women have rights is because men allowed it, or fought with them for it. It's not like women could overpower men.

Your equation does not add up- if women are now 'looser" and can have sex with "anyone" at "anytime", then how can it be "extremly difficult" for men to have sex?

Who are all these women having sex with?

From the numbers, they all seem to be screwing the same top 15-10% of men, giving those guys all the sex, but then are unable to get commitment from these high-demand guys. That frustrates them, and they get bitter, and attribute a high-demand guys' traits onto all men. They reward men who have the most options, and thus, aren't faithful, and aren't generally nice.

At the same time, today's women are coached by the sisterhood and feminist culture they should never “settle” for an “average man” even if they themselves are average (and they likely are, as most people are). So, they keep having sex with men out of their league, get frustrated that those guys don't keep them around, and refuse to "accept" the average guy who is normal, based, unexciting, and would make a good father.

Meanwhile, reported statistics show that more and more young men aren’t sexually active anymore, and that’s a bad thing for society in the long run. Thus, we know that basically the top 20% of men get like 80% of women's attention.

 

[Trickster]

It denied true womanhood and screwed up their behavioural psychology big time. Women and men are completely different, and a social contagion was put in to tempt women to act like men, and it's hurt them big time in many ways, no matter how much social engineering tries to convince you otherwise. Women report never being more unhappy, and anti-depressant use (specifically in 35+older women) is higher than all other subsets, and that's because they didn't have a family, were trained to never nurture, support, or cooperate, and never tapped into their psychological wheelhouse. They don't like working the long hours like men are fulfilled in doing. Women don't like the aggressive schedule, or not getting chivalry or protection from men and opening themselves to danger. They rely on the patriarchy to protect them, they couldn't survive on their own.

There's so much nonsense to unpack here that it is difficult to know where to even start. You make a lot of extraoridnary claims and without any elaboration, you just jump to the next one.

How exactly is any of this moralizing emotional rant connected to the introduction of the pill?

Women and men are not at all "completely different". That is a ridiculous claim no psychologist or social scientists would agree on. Because, truth is that cognitive and psychological differences between the genders are near to zero, if not exactly that.

Increase in depression among the young is worrying, but it is not like it is only seen in women. Quite the contrary actually.

And no, no one is demanding women "become men", that's just stupid.

From the numbers, they all seem to be screwing the same top 15-10% of men, giving those guys all the sex, but then are unable to get commitment from these high-demand guys. That frustrates them, and they get bitter, and attribute a high-demand guys' traits onto all men. They reward men who have the most options, and thus, aren't faithful, and aren't generally nice.

My dude, you have a drinking problem - cut the incel juice.

At the same time, today's women are coached by the sisterhood and feminist culture they should never “settle” for an “average man” even if they themselves are average (and they likely are, as most people are). So, they keep having sex with men out of their league, get frustrated that those guys don't keep them around, and refuse to "accept" the average guy who is normal, based, unexciting, and would make a good father.

No one should ever settle for "average".

Meanwhile, reported statistics show that more and more young men aren’t sexually active anymore, and that’s a bad thing for society in the long run. Thus, we know that basically the top 20% of men get like 80% of women's attention.

You're doing incel marxist economics at this point, lmao.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

There's so much nonsense to unpack here that it is difficult to know where to even start. You make a lot of extraoridnary claims and without any elaboration, you just jump to the next one.

How exactly is any of this moralizing emotional rant connected to the introduction of the pill?

Sexual behavior and psychology is drastically different between men and women.
1. Men can generally have many sexual partners and view it as just an act, and hold no emotion. This is even just after so long of being the one invading, not being the invadee in the act.
2. Women generally are far more emotionally impacted from the intimacy of sex, and develop connection and imprinting naturally. They are being heavily coerced to suppress this by our feminist society, but it clearly manifests on the back end, as women who have lots of sexual partners are often the most messed-up women with involvement in prostitution, drugs, or psychological problems. Hell, women still shame each other by calling each other "whores", suggesting that sexual promiscuity is a bad thing.. and for women it is.
3. The pill introduced a method for women to avoid the checks and balances that their brain/psychology needed that kept them based. They were selective of the men they had sex with, they made them earn it. This then checked men right back, forcing men to act right to earn sex. Now, women are just giving it up to mostly the higher value men, but cannot outrun their frustrations in not finding commitment/emotional support. Women having to consider the high risk of being pregnant was good for society, and good for them.

Women and men are not at all "completely different". That is a ridiculous claim no psychologist or social scientists would agree on. Because, truth is that cognitive and psychological differences between the genders are near to zero, if not exactly that.

Men and women's differences clearly manifest:
1. Men can tolerate longer, more dangerous, more physical jobs. Women prefer less hours, safer jobs.
2. Men are more likely to be physically aggressive, women are more likely to be manipulative and coercive
3. Men are more open to sex with less attractive partners, women are far more selective
4. Men are more independent, women are more communal (which is why communists so support feminism)
5. Men are more functional/logical, and can build societies, invent, innovate, and protect. Matriarchies don't exist for a reason, they wouldn't be able to fix their problems or protect their borders without the help of men.
6. Men are more likely to be rational, women will accept irrationality in order to be nice.. like with the trans movement or calling obese women "beautiful"

It's endless.

Increase in depression among the young is worrying, but it is not like it is only seen in women. Quite the contrary actually.

It's highest in women who have hit the wall. Young women get attention, so they get their fulfillment of attention. That's when they need to secure a guy they want, but our feminist sisterhood and society tells them to kick the can down the road until their 30's... and by then they have tons of emotional baggage, kids, developed masculine traits, disagreeableness, etc. that men don't really seek out. And men generally don't care about a woman's career or money at all.

No one should ever settle for "average".

Average people should date and marry average people. Most people are average. You're average, unless you have some photo shoot or modeling contract I don't know about.

You're doing incel marxist economics at this point, lmao.

That's just you throwing a tantrum. Address the points if they're so wrong.

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Augustine_]

I wonder why no conservative women are posting in this thread

 

[Trickster]

Sexual behavior and psychology is drastically different between men and women.

I know it's hard to believe, but women are human too.

You seem to think women are just preprogrammed, mechanical automatons who lack agency, individual preferences and values.

Romantic and sexual attraction among humans is something very complex and comparing it to animals who just sniff butts or kill each other to choose a mate is, well, r-tarded.

1. Men can generally have many sexual partners and view it as just an act, and hold no emotion. This is even just after so long of being the one invading, not being the invadee in the act.

"Invaded", hahahahaha.

2. Women generally are far more emotionally impacted from the intimacy of sex, and develop connection and imprinting naturally. They are being heavily coerced to suppress this by our feminist society, but it clearly manifests on the back end, as women who have lots of sexual partners are often the most messed-up women with involvement in prostitution, drugs, or psychological problems.

Both men and women connect emotionally through sex. However, both genders are equally capable of having sex for sheer pleasure.

there's nothing wrong with that.

Hell, women still shame each other by calling each other "whores", suggesting that sexual promiscuity is a bad thing.. and for women it is.

I did not expect you to speak up against slutshaming. I applaude that.

3. The pill introduced a method for women to avoid the checks and balances that their brain/psychology needed that kept them based.

No, son. This terminology ain't it.

The pill gave women control over their own destiny and ensured their right to purauit of happiness.

Parenthood should always be a choice.

They were selective of the men they had sex with, they made them earn it. This then checked men right back, forcing men to act right to earn sex. Now, women are just giving it up to mostly the higher value men, but cannot outrun their frustrations in not finding commitment/emotional support.

What's your solution? Arranged marriages?

Women having to consider the high risk of being pregnant was good for society, and good for them.

Absolutely not.

Sex is not a bad to be feared. Young people in religious communities and backwards theocracies are proofs of this.

Your problem is that you do not start with reality when drawing your ridiculous red pill conclusions. You abstract from abstractions, deductive reasoning and that is why nothing you say makes any sense.

Men and women's differences clearly manifest:
1. Men can tolerate longer, more dangerous, more physical jobs. Women prefer less hours, safer jobs.

Your
assertion first starts with claims about "inate tolerence", but you finish it off with reference to "preference".

2. Men are more likely to be physically aggressive, women are more likely to be manipulative and coercive

This is just misogyny.

3. Men are more open to sex with less attractive partners, women are far more selective

Raise your standards then.

4. Men are more independent, women are more communal (which is why communists so support feminism)

What? Lmao.

5. Men are more functional/logical, and can build societies, invent, innovate, and protect. Matriarchies don't exist for a reason, they wouldn't be able to fix their problems or protect their borders without the help of men.

You are not demonstrating that here.

6. Men are more likely to be rational, women will accept irrationality in order to be nice.. like with the trans movement or calling obese women "beautiful"

It's endless.

You really have OD'd on red pills.

Yikes.

It's highest in women who have hit the wall. Young women get attention, so they get their fulfillment of attention. That's when they need to secure a guy they want, but our feminist sisterhood and society tells them to kick the can down the road until their 30's... and by then they have tons of emotional baggage, kids, developed masculine traits, disagreeableness, etc. that men don't really seek out. And men generally don't care about a woman's career or money at all.

Are you just meme:ing now?

Average people should date and marry average people. Most people are average. You're average, unless you have some photo shoot or modeling contract I don't know about.

That's just you throwing a tantrum. Address the points if they're so wrong.

I am the one throwing tantrums? My dude, your brain is dead.