Meanwhile, in reality, plenty of women accomplish their dreams and don’t kill their kids.
I wouldn't normally say this to you, but... go further than that. The problem is that we've trained women and girls to think that their real dreams involve being a valuable corporate asset in a white-collar syndicate.
Meanwhile, most little girls play with dolls of babies because when they are 5 and 6, the bludgeon of socialization doesn't have as much of an effect as the biological imperative of care does. They want to raise kids even as kids, simply because of a biological imperative. Our society beats that out of them to maintain a larger pool of corporate labor to drive down wage growth. We teach girls that it's stupid and childish to want kids; followed by teaching them that it's dangerous and ruinous to have kids. Until finally in their late 30's, biological imperative rears it's ugly head and screams at them to have kids, only realizing far too late that socialization can't simply block out biological imperatives.
Women of older generations grew up helping to raise their brothers and sisters. Eventually, they would realize that they could probably do the whole thing on their own and have their own family. Women would dream of being a loving mother, of a large family, at the center of guidance and status within a social community, made up of many of her own kin, or the family of her best friends. That was the dream of women. It's a good dream that we beat out of them.
If I had to pick out the happiest and most content women I know, it would definitely be the few that live that good dream. Their peers aren't usually all that nice to them about it either, as if they betrayed women by passing on the valuable corporate dream.
Even myself as a guy have put a lot more emphasis on family in the last couple years instead of just ignoring or disliking all but the most immediate family. It's really made me a lot happier. I don't know if there's something to the adage that blood is thicker than water, but some of these family relationships I've built from nothing in such a short time are closer than friends I've had for a decade and I wouldn't trade for anything in the world.
Their peers aren't usually all that nice to them about it either, as if they betrayed women by passing on the valuable corporate dream.
"Women hating other women that succeed." A tale as old as time.
I don't really understand why I don't see much in the annals of history about men protecting women from women. It seems like that should actually be a man's first priority. A man might try to steal your woman, but a woman wants to kill her.
I don't know if there's something to the adage that blood is thicker than water,
There typically isn't. It's certainly not thicker than money, because money stacks. You have to have a very good family for them to not start crawling out of the woodwork when they smell money, and we live in too degenerated of a society to rely on that.
some of these family relationships I've built from nothing in such a short time are closer than friends I've had for a decade and I wouldn't trade for anything in the world.
Yeah, the value of relationships are what gives life meaning. The issue is that most people don't know that living in an atomized society. The thing is, as you say, we'd have to build them from scratch.
I have some very good family surrounded by dysfunctional mess otherwise. I'm very selective as to which family I've gotten closer with. I'm the same way with friends I don't care to have a bunch of friends just a few good ones is fine. Sure, some have come around looking for money and I've told them no. Trying to play emotional games is the end with me. It's worked well because I can be distant and off putting naturally and there's enough others in the family sick of the backstabbing behind the back games to join me.
Primates instinctively pick out toys suited for their sex (aka gender - which has always been synonymous with sex despite leftist scrREEching, otherwise you wouldn't have 'IT'S A BOY'/GIRL! and gender reveals, etc.). The tested chimp females played with girls stuff like dolls and stuffies, and kitchen toys. Boys went for the "sTeReOtyPicAL" male toys.
I wouldn't normally say this to you, but... go further than that. The problem is that we've trained women and girls to think that their real dreams involve being a valuable corporate asset in a white-collar syndicate.
Meanwhile, most little girls play with dolls of babies because when they are 5 and 6, the bludgeon of socialization doesn't have as much of an effect as the biological imperative of care does. They want to raise kids even as kids, simply because of a biological imperative. Our society beats that out of them to maintain a larger pool of corporate labor to drive down wage growth. We teach girls that it's stupid and childish to want kids; followed by teaching them that it's dangerous and ruinous to have kids. Until finally in their late 30's, biological imperative rears it's ugly head and screams at them to have kids, only realizing far too late that socialization can't simply block out biological imperatives.
Women of older generations grew up helping to raise their brothers and sisters. Eventually, they would realize that they could probably do the whole thing on their own and have their own family. Women would dream of being a loving mother, of a large family, at the center of guidance and status within a social community, made up of many of her own kin, or the family of her best friends. That was the dream of women. It's a good dream that we beat out of them.
If I had to pick out the happiest and most content women I know, it would definitely be the few that live that good dream. Their peers aren't usually all that nice to them about it either, as if they betrayed women by passing on the valuable corporate dream.
Even myself as a guy have put a lot more emphasis on family in the last couple years instead of just ignoring or disliking all but the most immediate family. It's really made me a lot happier. I don't know if there's something to the adage that blood is thicker than water, but some of these family relationships I've built from nothing in such a short time are closer than friends I've had for a decade and I wouldn't trade for anything in the world.
"Women hating other women that succeed." A tale as old as time.
I don't really understand why I don't see much in the annals of history about men protecting women from women. It seems like that should actually be a man's first priority. A man might try to steal your woman, but a woman wants to kill her.
There typically isn't. It's certainly not thicker than money, because money stacks. You have to have a very good family for them to not start crawling out of the woodwork when they smell money, and we live in too degenerated of a society to rely on that.
Yeah, the value of relationships are what gives life meaning. The issue is that most people don't know that living in an atomized society. The thing is, as you say, we'd have to build them from scratch.
I have some very good family surrounded by dysfunctional mess otherwise. I'm very selective as to which family I've gotten closer with. I'm the same way with friends I don't care to have a bunch of friends just a few good ones is fine. Sure, some have come around looking for money and I've told them no. Trying to play emotional games is the end with me. It's worked well because I can be distant and off putting naturally and there's enough others in the family sick of the backstabbing behind the back games to join me.
Primates instinctively pick out toys suited for their sex (aka gender - which has always been synonymous with sex despite leftist scrREEching, otherwise you wouldn't have 'IT'S A BOY'/GIRL! and gender reveals, etc.). The tested chimp females played with girls stuff like dolls and stuffies, and kitchen toys. Boys went for the "sTeReOtyPicAL" male toys.
Babies did the same.