Feminism never dies, it just invents an even more extreme wave. Each wave leaves some feminists feeling disenfranchised and even ostracised from the herd. The current wave is 'gender ideology' (essentially social construct theory + the 'battle of the sexes' which has been taught to children and internalised by them) and the disenfranchised feminists are the TERFs.
'Trans' is already giving way to 'non binary' and 'gender queer' (trans people who identify as men or women will soon be considered 'trad' and therefore problematic) and we are now seeing the concept of male/ female (sexual dimorphism) being erased from language, culture and the legal system.
Feminism's destination was always going to be transhumanism. Defining gender (sexual dimorphism) as the root cause of all social and personal ills (both real and imaginary) was always going to lead to the only logical solution: to erase gender. Thus a genderless cyborg population is the only way to truly achieve feminism's goal of 'gender equality'.
Washing machines and other mod cons liberated women from domestic chores, and artificial wombs will finish the job. Full liberation/ empowerment will be achieved and women will be free to fully join men in grey offices designing the next generation of robots and other nasty tech.
Children (or whatever we call the things that get grown in pods) will be raised and indoctrinated by AI. The oppressive nuclear family and 'parenting' will no longer exist. Everyone will be non binary, sterile (AKA 'fully vaxxed'), and will get to choose from a list of 100 non binary gender identities. Male and female will no longer be options, but those are outdated , patriarchal genders and so won't be missed.
I agree with you that men cannot reverse any of this. Gender roles (and their erasure) have always been primarily defined by, and enforced by, women - not least through mate selection, rearing and teaching children etc.
As with so many things these days, the solution seems to be home schooling.
Eventually a lot of the elite/leftist/feminist mentalities will have to grapple with reality, if only for the fact that they will continue to lose political capital
It will die when its practitioners can’t reproduce or corrupt those who do. You get to a point where you are so extreme you are basically part of a cult (already there at the far end). At that point it becomes low status and thats game over.
okay, i'm done with the feminist series and NO, never wait on women to bail you out. they/we are lost and confused and the more you mock and sell it and change the culture (as is currently happening) the more women will FOLLOW. women are followers.
men must lead the way and you all are by writing mocking thinking and developing your own verbal jujitsu moves. women have too long cornered the market on verbal slaughter.
one of your links had the guy running into the water and saying the one with most energy gets the girl. maybe, but i think it's the one who least gives a damn what ANYONE thinks because women's worst nightmare is being ostracized shunned stuck alone at the lunch table.
too long men have tried to be liked. as my friend said when we were in our twenties after going after a frumpy powerful much older man, "there's nothing hotter than a man who ain't interested."
back to your incel theory. I GET IT!
even i was the incel, koo koo kachoo.
nah, really. you're right about us bisexual girls who were scared straight. so true. i was sorry i'll be atoning for being a cunt the rest of my life, and i love men and gush over the closest ones like silky golden retrievers.
well, that was all wonderful. what a mind! but what LOVE. yes. you're sympathetic and you want the best holistically with balance and it's a beautiful thing that makes your writing soar.
a lot of folks aren't ready for you just yet. they will be. i'm working my corner as others are also working theirs.
Where does feminism come from? Who has lead feminism for the past 100 years? Unless we get to the root of the problem, nothing will change for the better.
1) Feminism was born out of the actual fact that women were considered property with the legal status of children. (1st wave)
This has not been the case for a very long time.
2) Feminism then pointed out that those roles considered to be in the female domain were valued less than those in the male domain, both public and private. (2nd wave)
This went wrong when it was instead asserted that women could do everything men could do exactly.
Giving birth to 3rd and 4th wave “gender is a construct” feminism which is where we are now.
So, it’s like the whole thing has been flipped upside down. With men being viewed as slightly defective humans (not by everyone) and the cause of everything bad in the world. (As women were for so much of history.)
"The truth is — a truth that is going to piss off a lot of men — is that men are nowhere near as capable of forming such coalitions as women. We don’t take time to write literature about systemic issues. We don’t ponder on the nature of gender relations. If there’s a problem in the world, we find solutions, and usually at the individual level. "
Thought I'd add this, though I see I've posted before.
They used to say the same thing about women being too busy competing with each other to unite. And we may not take time to write literature about systemic *gender* issues, because the feminist movement has taught us not to; but we write literature about systemic issues all the time. (Your article is, in fact, such an attempt.)
We find solutions at the individual level because we've been taught organizing at the collective is wrong and sexist and patriarchal. (Think about it: a male feminist is just the inverse of a 'pick-me' girl, someone who puts the interests of the opposite gender over their own.) But what if we didn't?
“If you’ve made it this far into the post, then I’m going to assume that you have the ability to empathize and reason with various perspectives, even if you don’t agree with them.”
I really enjoyed the series overall, so thanks for your work. I do feel that the point you repeat about a section of men being emotionally stunted is true but very narrow (making it seem like a male-only issue), since I think it's clearer every day that this 'stunting' which I'll sort of interpret as a lack of kindness, empathy etc. applies to a lot of women too (the constant sense of grievance and rage, for instance, or their casual cruelty to men in general and/or that they consider lesser). So I wonder whether it's of use to view this sort of thing as something to do wiith gender rather than a broader, society-wide issue. Both women and men seem to face major, growing problems in dealing with each other, and nothing I see seems to sound very promising for this changing at a societal-level, even if individuals themselves can behave more sensibly.
I’ve also noted that women externalize their issues while asking men to internalize their issues. In general, I think women have a greater external locust of control. To me, it’s our different emotional responses. Men get angry and fill up with energy. Women feel guilt and shame and withdrawal. Whenever I’m talking to a man who has an anger problem, I talk to him about guilt and shame. When I talk to a woman who is frozen in fear and self doubt, I try to help her see that, in actuality, she is angry. This works for most men. They will begin to turn inward and admit they are ashamed and in pain. It works for some women, but it can be counterproductive as well. I’ve had women be able to finally tap into their anger but they’re so devoid of identity—they see themselves relationally to the world—that they can’t take ownership for it. The feminism ends up being a placeholder for the identity crisis they can’t bear facing, usually because they perceive the crisis itself as being unfeminine. It’s a shit show for those women. I’ve never real seen one escape the logic loop. It almost mimics PTSD in its presentation which is why so many women self-diagnose their issues as being trauma based, imo.
However one divergence I’d make is with the words. Words such as patriarchy etc. I think we need to be more robust in how words affect us as really there is much policing on language already, so I would be hesitant to get rid of them. Infact, I’d want the user to explain really and exactly what such a word means, as often I think it is used in an under-determined way.
After reading various angles, I grasp what people think feminism is, but it is still something different to me. It is not just gender equality, it also has an imaginary dimension to it, an identity and historic realm that is semi mythic. I think most peoples have this mythic realm in their self conception, though it’s always hard to spot in oneself as you identify with it and believe it. My intention is to hold onto the words until I’ve really figured them out. To me it means ‘sexual difference’ but I’m not sure what that then means
It's not dead, just resting. The tariffs are costing Trump dearly *one month into his presidency* and the Democrats will be back in and ready to do woke stuff.
Feminism never dies, it just invents an even more extreme wave. Each wave leaves some feminists feeling disenfranchised and even ostracised from the herd. The current wave is 'gender ideology' (essentially social construct theory + the 'battle of the sexes' which has been taught to children and internalised by them) and the disenfranchised feminists are the TERFs.
'Trans' is already giving way to 'non binary' and 'gender queer' (trans people who identify as men or women will soon be considered 'trad' and therefore problematic) and we are now seeing the concept of male/ female (sexual dimorphism) being erased from language, culture and the legal system.
Feminism's destination was always going to be transhumanism. Defining gender (sexual dimorphism) as the root cause of all social and personal ills (both real and imaginary) was always going to lead to the only logical solution: to erase gender. Thus a genderless cyborg population is the only way to truly achieve feminism's goal of 'gender equality'.
Washing machines and other mod cons liberated women from domestic chores, and artificial wombs will finish the job. Full liberation/ empowerment will be achieved and women will be free to fully join men in grey offices designing the next generation of robots and other nasty tech.
Children (or whatever we call the things that get grown in pods) will be raised and indoctrinated by AI. The oppressive nuclear family and 'parenting' will no longer exist. Everyone will be non binary, sterile (AKA 'fully vaxxed'), and will get to choose from a list of 100 non binary gender identities. Male and female will no longer be options, but those are outdated , patriarchal genders and so won't be missed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvm0IaKA5I
That's my analysis anyway :)
I agree with you that men cannot reverse any of this. Gender roles (and their erasure) have always been primarily defined by, and enforced by, women - not least through mate selection, rearing and teaching children etc.
As with so many things these days, the solution seems to be home schooling.
Eventually a lot of the elite/leftist/feminist mentalities will have to grapple with reality, if only for the fact that they will continue to lose political capital
It will die when its practitioners can’t reproduce or corrupt those who do. You get to a point where you are so extreme you are basically part of a cult (already there at the far end). At that point it becomes low status and thats game over.
It sounds eerily like the plot of Brave New World.
The photo with the HP calculator made me laugh. If the woman involved cant do 50-30= in her head, I wouldn't imagine she could operate an HP in RPN.
Jesus Christ, I was hoping that it would be nothing.
Good analysis. Prof. Scott Galloway has written on the topic on how young men are in crisis https://www.profgalloway.com/the-testosterone-election/ .
I’ve been reading his analysis for sometime, the only problem is that I don’t see any meaningful change any time soon.
Not sure either, although perhaps everyone not viewing themselves as victims of everyone else would be a start.
okay, i'm done with the feminist series and NO, never wait on women to bail you out. they/we are lost and confused and the more you mock and sell it and change the culture (as is currently happening) the more women will FOLLOW. women are followers.
men must lead the way and you all are by writing mocking thinking and developing your own verbal jujitsu moves. women have too long cornered the market on verbal slaughter.
one of your links had the guy running into the water and saying the one with most energy gets the girl. maybe, but i think it's the one who least gives a damn what ANYONE thinks because women's worst nightmare is being ostracized shunned stuck alone at the lunch table.
too long men have tried to be liked. as my friend said when we were in our twenties after going after a frumpy powerful much older man, "there's nothing hotter than a man who ain't interested."
back to your incel theory. I GET IT!
even i was the incel, koo koo kachoo.
nah, really. you're right about us bisexual girls who were scared straight. so true. i was sorry i'll be atoning for being a cunt the rest of my life, and i love men and gush over the closest ones like silky golden retrievers.
well, that was all wonderful. what a mind! but what LOVE. yes. you're sympathetic and you want the best holistically with balance and it's a beautiful thing that makes your writing soar.
a lot of folks aren't ready for you just yet. they will be. i'm working my corner as others are also working theirs.
good night and godspeed,
x
Wow, thank you again for taking the time to read all of this, I really do appreciate it!
Don't get too guilty. Lots of men love tomboys.
This is so true! Partially because “tomboys” really *like* men — as people. And the liking adds dimension everything.
Where does feminism come from? Who has lead feminism for the past 100 years? Unless we get to the root of the problem, nothing will change for the better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_feminists
1) Feminism was born out of the actual fact that women were considered property with the legal status of children. (1st wave)
This has not been the case for a very long time.
2) Feminism then pointed out that those roles considered to be in the female domain were valued less than those in the male domain, both public and private. (2nd wave)
This went wrong when it was instead asserted that women could do everything men could do exactly.
Giving birth to 3rd and 4th wave “gender is a construct” feminism which is where we are now.
So, it’s like the whole thing has been flipped upside down. With men being viewed as slightly defective humans (not by everyone) and the cause of everything bad in the world. (As women were for so much of history.)
Feminism is female nature politcised, it will never die.
"The truth is — a truth that is going to piss off a lot of men — is that men are nowhere near as capable of forming such coalitions as women. We don’t take time to write literature about systemic issues. We don’t ponder on the nature of gender relations. If there’s a problem in the world, we find solutions, and usually at the individual level. "
Thought I'd add this, though I see I've posted before.
They used to say the same thing about women being too busy competing with each other to unite. And we may not take time to write literature about systemic *gender* issues, because the feminist movement has taught us not to; but we write literature about systemic issues all the time. (Your article is, in fact, such an attempt.)
We find solutions at the individual level because we've been taught organizing at the collective is wrong and sexist and patriarchal. (Think about it: a male feminist is just the inverse of a 'pick-me' girl, someone who puts the interests of the opposite gender over their own.) But what if we didn't?
Something to think about.
“If you’ve made it this far into the post, then I’m going to assume that you have the ability to empathize and reason with various perspectives, even if you don’t agree with them.”
Well shucks. Thanks.
I really enjoyed the series overall, so thanks for your work. I do feel that the point you repeat about a section of men being emotionally stunted is true but very narrow (making it seem like a male-only issue), since I think it's clearer every day that this 'stunting' which I'll sort of interpret as a lack of kindness, empathy etc. applies to a lot of women too (the constant sense of grievance and rage, for instance, or their casual cruelty to men in general and/or that they consider lesser). So I wonder whether it's of use to view this sort of thing as something to do wiith gender rather than a broader, society-wide issue. Both women and men seem to face major, growing problems in dealing with each other, and nothing I see seems to sound very promising for this changing at a societal-level, even if individuals themselves can behave more sensibly.
I’ve also noted that women externalize their issues while asking men to internalize their issues. In general, I think women have a greater external locust of control. To me, it’s our different emotional responses. Men get angry and fill up with energy. Women feel guilt and shame and withdrawal. Whenever I’m talking to a man who has an anger problem, I talk to him about guilt and shame. When I talk to a woman who is frozen in fear and self doubt, I try to help her see that, in actuality, she is angry. This works for most men. They will begin to turn inward and admit they are ashamed and in pain. It works for some women, but it can be counterproductive as well. I’ve had women be able to finally tap into their anger but they’re so devoid of identity—they see themselves relationally to the world—that they can’t take ownership for it. The feminism ends up being a placeholder for the identity crisis they can’t bear facing, usually because they perceive the crisis itself as being unfeminine. It’s a shit show for those women. I’ve never real seen one escape the logic loop. It almost mimics PTSD in its presentation which is why so many women self-diagnose their issues as being trauma based, imo.
This is great, I’m glad it is being spoken about.
However one divergence I’d make is with the words. Words such as patriarchy etc. I think we need to be more robust in how words affect us as really there is much policing on language already, so I would be hesitant to get rid of them. Infact, I’d want the user to explain really and exactly what such a word means, as often I think it is used in an under-determined way.
After reading various angles, I grasp what people think feminism is, but it is still something different to me. It is not just gender equality, it also has an imaginary dimension to it, an identity and historic realm that is semi mythic. I think most peoples have this mythic realm in their self conception, though it’s always hard to spot in oneself as you identify with it and believe it. My intention is to hold onto the words until I’ve really figured them out. To me it means ‘sexual difference’ but I’m not sure what that then means
An all male society
It's not dead, just resting. The tariffs are costing Trump dearly *one month into his presidency* and the Democrats will be back in and ready to do woke stuff.
My God, this is SO GOOD. How do you know/see all this stuff???
Wow hella WOW.