Shifting the cost

Here’s a comment I left on Robert Lindsay’s blog pertaining to female rule.

I wouldn’t really call this ‘female rule’ as women were never meant to rule. What feminists have done is merely shift women’s dependence away from men/husbands and onto the nanny state. What feminists are trying to do is create a new sort of ‘Eden’ and America is perfectly suited to this project. Resources are abundant (and siphoned through the state) and replace an authoritarian (albeit benevolent) God with the State.

The financial upkeep of feminism is now currently being borne by the male taxpayer and the state. If women were made to bear this expense themselves by taxing working women for the all social welfare programs that they are exclusively entitled to, feminism would be dead by next Friday. If women were taxed at a higher rate and were made to pay for the illegitimate children of other women, the stigma against single motherhood would make a radical comeback.

The reason for Western women running amok nowadays is due to the fact that the State (and society in general) are currently paying the social and financial costs for their shenanigans. If the social/financial costs of female bad behaviour could be shifted back onto women, they would fervently begin to police their own behaviour.

“Equality” is a lucrative business for professional victim groups (women/gays/visible minorities) when somebody else is paying for it.

This entry was posted in Feminism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Shifting the cost

  1. Janus says:

    I understand that you are making a rhetorical point, but what do you think it would take to bring about such a scenario?

    You would have to have a situation in which anti-feminists held the reins of government power (and could hold them in the face of a neighing and kicking feminine backlash) and where men would refuse as individuals to pay up for the affected women no matter how hard the women tried to seduce them. This suggests that a massive social change would have already taken place before such a scenario could be implemented.

    Is such a thing possible?

    • Dota says:

      In order to bring about this scenario, men will have to start acting in the manner that feminists accuse them – ie a marxist class. Western women already see men as a class in the Marxist sense, ie a class in opposition to women. The reason why feminism is winning is because feminists have rightly deduced that women can hurt men, but men cannot hurt women. As blogger Dalrock points out, the Church has almost entirely capitulated to feminism. For example, rather than condemning the epidemic of single motherhood, pastors now blame this problem on a lack of ‘good men’. Unlike non western women who see men as their brothers, fathers, and husbands; Western women view men as competitors and predators. It is time that men began viewing women in the same way – as competitors and predators. The legal system is obviously against us, but there are still steps we can take to protect our interests and resources.

      • Janus says:

        I can see where it might be useful for men to use the same Marxist tactics against feminists that the feminists use against men, particularly in work and social life, but would this be applied to all male-female relationships?

        It seems to me that such tactics, applied to all male-female relationships, would only further divide men and women into mutually incomprehensible, hostile classes, a society-wide divorce. Men would fall deeper into selfish pursuits, their sexual needs met with pornography or prostitutes. Women likewise would resort to vibrators or male prostitutes, forming social flocks with other women. Homosexuality would become more widespread, seemingly. Or perhaps some sexual version of Uber could arrange for one-night-stands between the sexes. Wouldn’t the outlook for society look worse?

        This scenario doesn’t seem very far-fetched; a growing segment of urban society already lives this kind of life.

        Probably my argument has already been hashed to death in the manosphere. I admit that I don’t follow the subject very much. What is your take?

      • Dota says:


        I don’t much care for the MGTOW movement, but I can see why it exists. Too be honest, I haven’t thought about this a whole lot.

      • BEAST GANON says:

        DOTA SAID:
        ‘Western women view men as competitors and predators. It is time that men began viewing women in the same way – as competitors and predators.’

        MGTOW men are already seeing females as an existential threat. What do you think of MGTOW, DOTA?

  2. nordica says:

    Race and gender are big business.
    But the details don’t matter now, as the building blocks to our world are being dismantled.

  3. BEAST GANON says:

    What do you think of the following video, DOTA?

  4. BEAST GANON says:

    The MGTOW videos below are also pretty good.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s