it also tracks in the millions of dead fetuses for convenience. Women have no true concept of violence because they have been allowed to attack men and kill children without recourse for decades in the US.
Are women by nature the most pro-war since they are not directly involved in conflict?
Eeeeh. I'd need some hard data, but my instincts tell me no. Women are just more easily led, so you'll get pro-war women, you'll also get strongly anti-war women. I don't know how it averages out to men, and I'd cynically imagine it also depends on which party is in power at the time. But I don't think they're necessarily more pro-war outright.
This reminds me a lot of Hillary Clinton.
She's a demon, and not representative of women. Also, women leaders are a whole other beast from mere women, and most are atrocious. Women given power seem to trend toward the tyrannical and absurd even harder than men do.
...they need to break their biological trends much more severely than men do to have that drive. This is probably what leads to Merkel and Hillary, for example.
That's probably part of it, but in some ways I think it's also the inverse; women trend more toward "empathy," and that's not always good in a leader. Empathy + "if it saves just one life" or "think of the children" ends up with some true believer bullshit. They think they know better, since they're in a position of power, and then anyone who questions them is an enemy who is harming the people. It goes back to that C.S. Lewis quote about moral busybodies and robber barons.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I would argue female leaders trend strongly toward the moral busybody side of things. The people they oppress are Bad People, and their oppression of them are Saving Lives. They're also not as used to exercising such powers, so often they don't even realize how freaking tyrannical they actually are. It's why they can laugh at their critics so genuinely; it's an absurd notion to these dictators that they might be behaving inappropriately...they're saving lives, after all! They've been entrusted by their country to power, they can't even imagine not exercising it all, and the people who question her are insane conspiracy theorists who hurt people. I think it gets all twisted up.
women, being (more) easily led than men, make good true believer puppets. This is probably the case for, say, at least a few of that all-female government from Norway or Finland or something, and Justin Trudeau (sorry).
It's funny, Justin Trudeau often gets thrown in there...but I think it's absolutely apt. This isn't even a dig out how wimpy and unmanly he is...he and his leadership style have extremely feminine energy. It genuinely makes sense to refer to Trudeau when talking about female world leaders.
I'll agree a surplus of single men is probably detrimental to society. But, rather than getting them killed perhaps the larger question should be what has happened in society to create a surplus of single men. Otherwise it will just happen again.
In this specific case, there’s terrible “cultural” shit (in the case of India, mainly), as well as poor politics, that created this situation…
It is simply not something that is likely to ever occur, in the developed world…
So, your point still stands, and you are correct, but the ChiComs and subcontinental primitives created this mess - they can sleep in it, as far as I’m concerned.
Also, notably, this situation was created due to cultural “trends” which directly resulted in fewer girls making it to adulthood, so it literally directly made women worse off…
There is literally nothing that any TRUE feminist (which discounts most middle class liberal “third wave feminists”, clearly), with even a cursory/superficial understanding of the situation, should be celebrating about this mess. Literally nothing…
Which, I suppose, shows just how out of touch these people are with material reality…
Abortion. Women want their first child to be male. Someone that can work hard to support them when they get old and won't whine and avoid work like a woman will. So they abort girls before they're born. In China, they were only allowed one child so way less girls if the first born is male.
China's problem is not a surplus of men, it's a lack of women. Deliberately killing off their young men would only exacerbate the problem of their aging population.
It’s also worth noting that Indian women like dating outside their own “race”. Chinese women do not.
This is not so much a cultural thing, as it is a political brainwashing thing (see: Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong, which, should, in theory, have a similar situation, but do not. Hell, it doesn’t even apply in Vietnam or Laos, which are similarly Commie, but much less racist, lol)…
As a result, Chinese men… Probably have “a better chance”, in that sense, because the women who are willing to date, will largely only date them…
Indian men, meanwhile? Lol, if an Indian woman can get out, and find herself a white/Arab husband, she sure as hell is going to. And that, honestly, is kind of fair, I feel, at this point…
Indian men… Are not great. And that’s coming from someone who lived there for a few months, so…
Yeah, I can kind of see why they might choose to… Go for the “out group”, let’s say…
I support the idea and hope India's glorious China Liberation Army will end up shitting the streets all over Peking while doing Bollywood dance numbers.
Someone should tell them that if we go down this road there's going to be nobody complacent enough left to pay taxes for gender studies and racist grifters like her.
Of all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these: "Imp was right again."
Are women by nature the most pro-war since they are not directly involved in conflict?
This reminds me a lot of Hillary Clinton.
it also tracks in the millions of dead fetuses for convenience. Women have no true concept of violence because they have been allowed to attack men and kill children without recourse for decades in the US.
And have their boys circumcised if they do live.
And now sometimes have their boy's penis chopped off by a "doctor."
Eeeeh. I'd need some hard data, but my instincts tell me no. Women are just more easily led, so you'll get pro-war women, you'll also get strongly anti-war women. I don't know how it averages out to men, and I'd cynically imagine it also depends on which party is in power at the time. But I don't think they're necessarily more pro-war outright.
She's a demon, and not representative of women. Also, women leaders are a whole other beast from mere women, and most are atrocious. Women given power seem to trend toward the tyrannical and absurd even harder than men do.
That's probably part of it, but in some ways I think it's also the inverse; women trend more toward "empathy," and that's not always good in a leader. Empathy + "if it saves just one life" or "think of the children" ends up with some true believer bullshit. They think they know better, since they're in a position of power, and then anyone who questions them is an enemy who is harming the people. It goes back to that C.S. Lewis quote about moral busybodies and robber barons.
I would argue female leaders trend strongly toward the moral busybody side of things. The people they oppress are Bad People, and their oppression of them are Saving Lives. They're also not as used to exercising such powers, so often they don't even realize how freaking tyrannical they actually are. It's why they can laugh at their critics so genuinely; it's an absurd notion to these dictators that they might be behaving inappropriately...they're saving lives, after all! They've been entrusted by their country to power, they can't even imagine not exercising it all, and the people who question her are insane conspiracy theorists who hurt people. I think it gets all twisted up.
It's funny, Justin Trudeau often gets thrown in there...but I think it's absolutely apt. This isn't even a dig out how wimpy and unmanly he is...he and his leadership style have extremely feminine energy. It genuinely makes sense to refer to Trudeau when talking about female world leaders.
Women rarely have skin in the game the way men do.
They also get to fuck the survivors, which the women are instinctively drawn to because that means they are stronger.
Read "Editha" by William Dean Howells to dig the American archetype of woman war-lovers.
I'll agree a surplus of single men is probably detrimental to society. But, rather than getting them killed perhaps the larger question should be what has happened in society to create a surplus of single men. Otherwise it will just happen again.
In this specific case, there’s terrible “cultural” shit (in the case of India, mainly), as well as poor politics, that created this situation…
It is simply not something that is likely to ever occur, in the developed world…
So, your point still stands, and you are correct, but the ChiComs and subcontinental primitives created this mess - they can sleep in it, as far as I’m concerned.
Also, notably, this situation was created due to cultural “trends” which directly resulted in fewer girls making it to adulthood, so it literally directly made women worse off…
There is literally nothing that any TRUE feminist (which discounts most middle class liberal “third wave feminists”, clearly), with even a cursory/superficial understanding of the situation, should be celebrating about this mess. Literally nothing…
Which, I suppose, shows just how out of touch these people are with material reality…
Regarding current feminism in the West: Yes, I unironically agree with you, here.
I disagree that it was always this way, but for at least the last 30-40 years, in Western countries..?
Yes. Unfortunately so…
Ever heard of the white feather brigade you muppet
It's one that I thought would be most readily known out of all the heinous shit 1st wave feminists did
Abortion. Women want their first child to be male. Someone that can work hard to support them when they get old and won't whine and avoid work like a woman will. So they abort girls before they're born. In China, they were only allowed one child so way less girls if the first born is male.
Yes, men are the problem. Not the women who set them against one another, the men.
Abortion has killed more people globally than all war and homicide combined. “Soft” violence is apparently the only allowed stance.
It also killed mostly women (female babies).
China's problem is not a surplus of men, it's a lack of women. Deliberately killing off their young men would only exacerbate the problem of their aging population.
Yeah, this guy gets it.
I tried to point this out, too.
I’m not quite sure some people here fully understand how this situation arose, lol…
It’s also worth noting that Indian women like dating outside their own “race”. Chinese women do not.
This is not so much a cultural thing, as it is a political brainwashing thing (see: Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong, which, should, in theory, have a similar situation, but do not. Hell, it doesn’t even apply in Vietnam or Laos, which are similarly Commie, but much less racist, lol)…
As a result, Chinese men… Probably have “a better chance”, in that sense, because the women who are willing to date, will largely only date them…
Indian men, meanwhile? Lol, if an Indian woman can get out, and find herself a white/Arab husband, she sure as hell is going to. And that, honestly, is kind of fair, I feel, at this point…
Indian men… Are not great. And that’s coming from someone who lived there for a few months, so…
Yeah, I can kind of see why they might choose to… Go for the “out group”, let’s say…
Is there a more laughably retarded sounding podcast than “female political strategy”
Bene Gesserit witches.
all women are misandrists
Haha, I'm amazed this creature is real!
I support the idea and hope India's glorious China Liberation Army will end up shitting the streets all over Peking while doing Bollywood dance numbers.
Yes and trans men are men right? And of course they are the manliest strongest men of all, so front of the line bitches!
Someone should tell them that if we go down this road there's going to be nobody complacent enough left to pay taxes for gender studies and racist grifters like her.
I wonder if this has anything to do with China and India sending troops to Russia to bolster the war effort.