“Now, I know you’re a feminist, and I think that’s adorable, but this is grown-up time and I’m the man.” – Family Guy
My friend was a manager and hired a woman. He told her that her first job was to make him a sandwich. She quit. Subway® is so sexist! (FYI, most memes today are, “as-found”)
Feminism. It sounds so, well, reasonable from the start. “Women just want equal rights.” Sure, it sounds reasonable until you recall that the rise of feminism was the rise of the temperance movement, which made having a beer after work, umm, complicated. But it was women who were at the lead of that absolute failure, too.
The result was two atrocities: women got the vote, and you couldn’t get a beer. All they missed was a Constitutional Amendment mandating Fran Drescher’s voice doing every public announcement and commercial and sports play-by-play and the world would have been an absolute hell. Yes, it would have been worse than actual 2020. But not by a lot.
How much beer does it take to get an astronomer drunk? At least 4.5 light beers.
Again, it sounds reasonable. Don’t drink. Oh, wait, your humble purveyor of dank memes and attempted witticisms is maybe two glasses of wine in and I’m enjoying that. I’m not arguing that not drinking is better for you than drinking. Mormons and other people that don’t drink live until they’re essentially dust connected to other bits of dust by regret, but, hey, I’m not judging.
Mark Twain, though, had a few choice words: “Never refuse to do a kindness unless the act would work great injury to yourself, and never refuse to take a drink – under any circumstances.” But we’re not talking about booze here, we’re talking about feminism.
Again, I’ll reference Twain: “A woman springs a sudden reproach upon you which provokes a hot retort, and then she will presently ask you to apologize.” I honestly think that’s the history of feminism.
What’s the difference between a Sumo wrestler and a radical feminist? The Sumo wrestlers shave their legs.
I’ve attacked feminism several times in this post so far without any sort of backing. What sort of backing do I need? I mean, should we start all the way back at the 19th Amendment, which granted women “universal sufferage” – which I would have thought would have been a bad idea. I mean, The Mrs. suffers a lot, but that’s just because I’m me.
The difficult part of feminism is that it attempts to first create a division between women and men. And, the fair part of that is that women and men are fundamentally different. They’re different biologically down to the genetic level. When studies were done of the brains of women and men, it was found that those brains were fundamentally different. The Mrs. can see about 175,083 colors. I see seven or so. The Mrs. likes to be warm and comfy on a campout. I realize that discomfort is a transient condition and if the tent leaks, it might be irritating.
If you love someone, let her go. Hopefully, she won’t call the FBI.
But “science” assumed for decades that the brain of a dude was the same as the brain of a broad. It’s simply not so. It’s actually 100% provable that dudes and broads have different brains. When studying babies, baby boys like men toys – wheels, cars, machines. Baby girls like plush toys and fuzzy warm girl things.
Science had (and still has) a weird egalitarian streak that assumes that any baby created from any combination of parents on Earth might be shorter or taller, fatter or skinnier, browner or paler, and yet still has exactly the same brain.
Let’s pretend that utter fiction was true (it’s not). If so, what happens when those kids get flooded with the white-hot hormones of puberty, estrogen and testosterone?
Yeah.
This is your brain on feminism.
Men and women are different, and they’re born different, and develop differently. Dress a man up like a woman? That’s the same as turning a classic Pizza Hut™ into a bank. We all know that whatever color you paint it, or what sign you put on it, it’s still a Pizza Hut®.
Even worse? Men and women have utterly different motivations when it comes to mating. Why? Men are involved, but women are committed. A man can have nearly unlimited offspring in a lifetime (as Genghis Khan can attest, 35% – not a typo, 35% of Mongolian people today are his descendants) but women can only have a few kids so they are choosy and choose the best dude they can find. The result?
35% of Mongolian people are the descendants of Genghis Khan.
When women aren’t constrained by society, they’ll have the kids of the most macho dude they can find. Women practice hypergamy – they try to marry up in either social caste or intelligence or whatever floats their boat. Men practice, well, “Dude, did you see her? She’s hot.”
Hint: having a majority of young males that have no interest in the future of society isn’t a good thing.
I am a result of such hypergamy. As many of you know, I’m adopted. Unlike many adopted kids, I have a lot of data about my biological parents. My biological mother was at college and decided, “Whoa, that dude is really smart. I want to have his baby.”
Yes. This happened. The dude was a freshman. My biological mother was a senior. The poor guy never had a chance, and, thus, I exist, entirely due to hypergamy.
I say “the poor guy” because it was true. He was a mark in her game. She wanted his genetics in her child. That was it. There wasn’t a plan, there wasn’t love. Hypergamy isn’t about those things, it’s a transaction. For him, it was her saying, “Hey, baby, I like the way you fill out those genes.” The long-term result for her from this strategy is pictured below:
And . . .
But, when it came time to take care of me, my biological mom was not up to it. I assure you, that given the combinatory genetics of her willful and cunning plotting and his intelligence, I was probably the most capably evil baby born that year. Seriously. I was the most awful child in stunning ways. I could list them, but you’d be shocked. I mean, how many other seven-year-olds have convinced their grandmothers to buy them magazines with actual boobage in them?
Yeah. And that doesn’t include . . . . oh, so many things.
Hypergamy is a less-than-zero-sum game, though. Whereas conventional morals would indicate that a married couple should really try to stick it out unless it was a morally untenable relationship (see: my first marriage, which would have been dissolvable in any Christian year since ever) now the woman is encouraged to blow it all up for games and prizes. And demonize men in the process. Why? Because they’re there.
Also? Feminism. The laws used to be if you were the reason that the marriage didn’t work, you suffered. Later? Not so much. Now, women have the upper hand in nearly all facets, and in fact, start most of the divorces (70-80%) in the country. Why?
The laws are stacked in their favor, even more so if there are children.
This is a result of feminism. But beyond that has been the impact on society as a whole. What would the result of the 2020 election have been (even after the shenanigans) if only men voted?
Left for you: show how the federal deficit, abortion rate, divorce rate, rate of church attendance, number of single mothers, increase in welfare, and a dozen other things increased after women got to vote.
I want to make something clear: I really, really love women. I think they’re awesome and respect The Mrs. highly, and I think she’d trust me to cast a ballot she’d believe in, because we think alike. I also think that woman’s suffrage has only resulted in suffering and believe it can be shown mathematically (shhhhh, most of them aren’t so good at math). So, let’s put out a petition to end woman’s suffrage! I think we can get 70% of women to sign it . . . .
