RE: Kiss Me Now, You Nazi! Refusing to Date Woke Women Makes You ‘Dangerous’ and ‘Far-Right’, Apparently
What about househusbands? That's a badge I happily wear.
What about them? They score between 0-1 on a 1-10 attractiveness scale .
It would drive me insane to have a househusband.
”Because that is what she WANTS to do. Feminists are not against women being housewives if they want.”
Yes they are. I cannot tell you how many nasty, hateful screeds I’ve read online about housewives. They say we’re lazy, stupid, worthless, slaves to men, etc. They only want women to do what they want, if it fits in with the liberal ideology.
Feminists resent domestic women despite lip-service to "women's choice."
Domestic women, unless rich-by-daddy, automatically depend on a man for their livelihood. This irks feminists to no end, but not because they think those women will be enslaved to a man, as folklore would have you believe; but because they know men willingly enslave themselves to those domestic wives by bringing them livelihood and protection on a platter - something an authentic Feminist could have never inspired in a man to begin with.
Because that is what she WANTS to do. Feminists are not against women being housewives if they want.
This is because:
1. Feminists are individualists, not holistic, civilization-oriented thinkers. Civilizations are not built strictly with what individuals WANT (their whims).
2. Feminists know their aggressive ideology and propaganda denigrates individual choices they personally despise anyway (Fems DO despise the housewife role and they resent women who can afford to choose this role).
Note how it is increasingly difficult for family with traditional values to choose to keep the wife in a strictly domestic role. They tell you you have a choice; but with enough women coaxed in the workplace, the provider/homemaker option becomes an unrealistic economic options for many. Only theoretical.
Generally speaking, when everyone is told that they can do whatever suits them, personally, and that their society should accommodate every individual with the widest possible array of choices - you end up with no civilization.
The bottom line is that, with very rare exceptions, most women contribute best to civilization by fulfilling reproductive and domestic roles, not "professional/technical."
Just like most men contribute best in the public sphere, not when they change diapies.
In fact, if you examine closer the so-called "workplace" (as if the domestic area is not a "workplace") most women mess around in frivolous, bureaucratic, paper-shuffling, make-work, resource-wasting, water-cooler gossiping jobs, not in value-adding jobs.
Women's value remains in the private sphere. It always has, it always will. The rare, highly competent female surgeon (or what not) can easily be replaced with an equivalent male. Keep the rare Anna Coulter in the public world - that one would probably explode if confined to domesticity.
Otherwise, it's not worth messing up your civilization for very rare individual exceptions to the rule.
Bring women back home. Make the Private Sphere Great Again!
Unfortunately, guys do not have a choice in what we want to do; same goes I suppose for most women. The 'elites' who have destroyed this once great country have made sure of that by importing tens of millions of illiterate turd worlders, ordering LE to let them run wild as they destroy the civilization that white people built over the last 500 years, and then their corporate world refuses to employ white people as anything other than fry cooks, toilet cleaners and floor sweepers. Jeff Sessions observed that 60% of all white STEM graduates never work in their field 5 years after graduation, or effectively, NEVER. This is because the corp world like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, et al employ h2b types, illegals and worse. But of course the MSM blames YT for anything that is wrong in this country. That record is getting very old and after 3 or 4 generations we have gotten wise to who is that bunch of clowns behind the curtin in the OZ throne room.
Yes. And what feminists do not want the public to understand is that when you hurt most men, you automatically hurt most women too.
Women are not attracted to weak, vulnerable, dispossessed men - whether they have enough money/power of their own or not. Just like men are not attracted to ugly, fat, fighter-type, non-feminine women.
It's nobody's fault. It's not that the sexes are mean to each other. It's what we have evolve to look for. A better world is a world where both sexes are encouraged and helped along to become the most of what the opposite sex looks for in a partner. That's kind, humane and beautiful.
It is why every young woman secretly dreams of being an inspirational princess who leaves glitter behind as she walks. It's why every guy dreams of being James Bond - who leaves bodies behind (as needed) as he walks.
Most leftist women are feminine conforming.
Originally, maybe. Increasingly less so, as feminism continues to weave its works. Most people with minimal observational acumen, who have had the chance to compare and contrast female populations in various feminist and non-feminist cultures (aka "perspective"), can recognize the subtly masculine traits of most contemporary western women when compared to women elsewhere.
Outspoken (translate loud), assertive (translate aggressive), confident (translate full-of-themselves or just nonchalant), trying hard to be funny (translate 'not funny'), cool (translate cold), comfortable and buddy-like around men (translate slutty), etc. They may wear lipstick and sport mermaid hair but their subtly masculine traits are less subtle with every decade. Western men and women are now pushed to converge in a gray area of androgyny.
Though the pretty feminine women see nothing wrong with what their non-feminie conforming sisters are doing.
Ever heard of virtue signaling? They don't want to act "judgy" because the culture says it' not cool; but I can promise you they they DO recognize plenty wrong with what their overtly non-feminine "sisters" are doing (non-feminine as in more or less butchy). On this point, this only means less sexual competition for them. Btw, there's no "sisterhood."
You appear to have little understanding of the depths of female hypocrisy and manipulation abilities.
Really? I’ve never met a feminist that didn’t double down on the lunacy and tried to emotionally castrate their sons and turn them into “feminist men”.
It can be confusing to distinguish all the conscious and subconscious motivations behind a woman's feminist identity. Not all declared feminists are created equal. There are authentic feminists (true genetic failures as women); there are popularity-driven feminists (women as herd creatures opt for what seems most popular); there are vanity-driven feminists (attention whores/ celebrities of the Me Too persuasion); there are defensive feminists (afraid of the rigors and upward pressures patriarchal societies often impose on women), etc. I'd say most female feminists fall in the latter two categories.
The popularity-driven ones usually don't know their left from right and just parrot back whatever sounds "cool" and "with it."