Many societies are going to have to have a reckoning soon about the actual role of women in society very soon. You cannot allow women to pretend that making babies isn't their most important role and responsibility. If they don't fulfill that role then they should be actively scorned and ostracized for it.
It’s kind of… Odd when you think about it that we’re constantly told that “progress” is essentially linear, and society is ever-moving to some sort of “liberal utopia”, in spite of a few “road bumps” along the way…
This, despite every indication to the contrary.
Even 100 years ago, “making babies” was the default position for women everywhere. Even 50 years ago - living memory for many people - it was still the norm. We’ve completely inverted that, among so many other things, and we’re told “Things will always continue this way. That’s just how they are, now”…
Well, if history teaches us anything, it’s that this sort of mindset, of “civilizational continuity” and, in essence, “seeing oneself as the pinnacle of human progress” tend not to last, in the very long term…
Who knows?
Everyone seems to know that something is very, very wrong with the way most of human society is headed - it’s just that none of us can seem to agree on exactly what that is…
Almost as if there were a unifying idea that something is inherently wrong with the human being and soul, causing us to not be able to maintain goodness on our own. If only there were some word to describe that concept…
With that in mind, I think it would be a good idea to ask women "What would it take to make having children worthwhile for you?"
The article explicitly mentions a bad job market and brutal hours; why do women want that? If they could stay home and only raise kids, is that not better than wage slaving? Or, rather than shaming the single, is there a problem with how "popular" culture portrays mothers?
Personally, I don't think women tend to understand their own motivations for doing things (and the article doesn't seem to mention anything specific that women do want in exchange for having kids), which suggests to me that this is the same result that feminism and "gender equality" have acheived in the West; women are propagandised into thinking that they want to be men.
They didn't. A bunch of overprivileged, bored and rich women a bunch of decades ago decided they did. But because women need social acceptance, they framed it as "all women" want this and convinced the rest that they were slaves who secretly wanted liberation. Mostly through the sexual revolution, because being a stay at home mother was stopping them from getting dicked by every hot guy they saw and that's what they really wanted.
Now, even if they wanted to stay home and make babies they cannot. The cost of living for most of the world is designed for dual income, and the vast majority of men will not be able to support a family entirely on an achievable income. Because those bored rich bitches played right into the hands of the corporations and government who knew they could be a huge market for siphoning taxes/money.
We asked them what they wanted, and their infantile minds is what got us into this mess. Just the same as asking "where do you want to eat" gets you nowhere, neither is asking civilization level questions about what they want.
Because those bored rich bitches played right into the hands of the corporations and government who knew they could be a huge market for siphoning taxes/money.
They played their support role perfectly of furthering the interests of their rich husbands.
I'm gonna disagree on that point. It wasn't their own rich husbands they were furthering the interest of. It was the other rich husbands who were exciting and new and hotter.
(and the article doesn't seem to mention anything specific that women do want in exchange for having kids),
Only some vague statements about wanting to be treated more equally. Mind you, this essay was written by a Korean feminist, so it's unsurprising that its utter tripe.
You can push women to have kids all you want, but if nobody wants to sacrifice their life and freedom to provide for a glorified parasite for the nebulous concept of a higher birth rate, then nothing will come of it.
I think you forget that SK has open male genocide movements rally in the streets. Women will never, ever be forgiven there, no matter what changes. They're the only country that has a true male awakening.
The only measure of success on a geological timescale is propagating your genome.
Men who are too short-sighted to realize this are already lost.
Most women are lost as well, and will not realize they are off the path until it is far too late for them to return to the road, at which point they'll declare the grapes as sour as their remaining eggs and wallow in misery until their death.
Many societies are going to have to have a reckoning soon about the actual role of women in society very soon. You cannot allow women to pretend that making babies isn't their most important role and responsibility. If they don't fulfill that role then they should be actively scorned and ostracized for it.
It’s kind of… Odd when you think about it that we’re constantly told that “progress” is essentially linear, and society is ever-moving to some sort of “liberal utopia”, in spite of a few “road bumps” along the way…
This, despite every indication to the contrary.
Even 100 years ago, “making babies” was the default position for women everywhere. Even 50 years ago - living memory for many people - it was still the norm. We’ve completely inverted that, among so many other things, and we’re told “Things will always continue this way. That’s just how they are, now”…
Well, if history teaches us anything, it’s that this sort of mindset, of “civilizational continuity” and, in essence, “seeing oneself as the pinnacle of human progress” tend not to last, in the very long term…
Who knows?
Everyone seems to know that something is very, very wrong with the way most of human society is headed - it’s just that none of us can seem to agree on exactly what that is…
Almost as if there were a unifying idea that something is inherently wrong with the human being and soul, causing us to not be able to maintain goodness on our own. If only there were some word to describe that concept…
With that in mind, I think it would be a good idea to ask women "What would it take to make having children worthwhile for you?"
The article explicitly mentions a bad job market and brutal hours; why do women want that? If they could stay home and only raise kids, is that not better than wage slaving? Or, rather than shaming the single, is there a problem with how "popular" culture portrays mothers?
Personally, I don't think women tend to understand their own motivations for doing things (and the article doesn't seem to mention anything specific that women do want in exchange for having kids), which suggests to me that this is the same result that feminism and "gender equality" have acheived in the West; women are propagandised into thinking that they want to be men.
They didn't. A bunch of overprivileged, bored and rich women a bunch of decades ago decided they did. But because women need social acceptance, they framed it as "all women" want this and convinced the rest that they were slaves who secretly wanted liberation. Mostly through the sexual revolution, because being a stay at home mother was stopping them from getting dicked by every hot guy they saw and that's what they really wanted.
Now, even if they wanted to stay home and make babies they cannot. The cost of living for most of the world is designed for dual income, and the vast majority of men will not be able to support a family entirely on an achievable income. Because those bored rich bitches played right into the hands of the corporations and government who knew they could be a huge market for siphoning taxes/money.
We asked them what they wanted, and their infantile minds is what got us into this mess. Just the same as asking "where do you want to eat" gets you nowhere, neither is asking civilization level questions about what they want.
As soon as humans discover an effective, mass-marketable method for medically curbing pussy thirst, this world is going to change big time.
They played their support role perfectly of furthering the interests of their rich husbands.
I'm gonna disagree on that point. It wasn't their own rich husbands they were furthering the interest of. It was the other rich husbands who were exciting and new and hotter.
Women, and most men, do whatever they are told to do.
Only some vague statements about wanting to be treated more equally. Mind you, this essay was written by a Korean feminist, so it's unsurprising that its utter tripe.
"Can you make sure I only have girls, have everything paid for me, get to treat my partner like shit and can divorce for a huge child support payoff?"
Stay at home mothers are parasites.
I swear, the only thing that would satisfy you is the extinction of the human race.
To "own teh wimmenz."
I'm just telling you their demands. It's up to you if you want to accept that.
You can push women to have kids all you want, but if nobody wants to sacrifice their life and freedom to provide for a glorified parasite for the nebulous concept of a higher birth rate, then nothing will come of it.
I think you forget that SK has open male genocide movements rally in the streets. Women will never, ever be forgiven there, no matter what changes. They're the only country that has a true male awakening.
The only measure of success on a geological timescale is propagating your genome.
Men who are too short-sighted to realize this are already lost.
Most women are lost as well, and will not realize they are off the path until it is far too late for them to return to the road, at which point they'll declare the grapes as sour as their remaining eggs and wallow in misery until their death.