a discussion on this broken society ( Archived) (6)

do you notice the division between men and women in modern society?
do you notice all the broke families/single parent familes...mostly female run?
do you notice how men and boys are being beaten and battened by misandry?
do you notice how many people are alone and unhappy?
do you notice how the cost of living is far higher than it was in the days of traditional family units?
do you notice how political correctness has crushed the freedom of thought and expression?
do you notice how the state is now bringing up children instead of parents?

the agenda of feminism was to always...Get the man out of the family home...get the single mother into the work place and get control get the children...in brainwashing centres...that used to be know as schools

feminism = karl marx = communism = poverty = dictatorship = the end of freedom = the end of hope = the end of humanity as we know it....1984 and a brave new world were less scary...but we are still here...yes the ones who will always say it how it is and not sugar coat/

Do you think a matriarchy is a bad or good idea?
Can men and women ever be united again or is this division here to stay?
feel free to share your views?

And the reason working class women have faired comparatively well are obvious. Becoming a mother meant they always had at least one way of doing something with their life. Men didn't have this when the mill closed down. And then there's an aging population. What man is going to go around cutting old people toe nails for a living? Useful things the working class can still do are much more amiable to the woman.

And so we have this divide between the haves and the have yachts where the degenerated gender switches around. The have yachts are justified by the achievements of the men, and the haves justified by the contributions of the women.

It's the lower class men going to the dogs but the nobel prize for physics goes to those three chaps.

And if they bring in equal Nobel prizes for all this wouldn't actually change much men and women in the working class. No, it would be taking the prize away from better male scientists and giving it to a worse female scientist so that all of humanity loses apart from elite women. And maybe not even those if all of humanity loses. Perhaps the better way of putting it is that elite women would lose least by equal noble prizes for all.

Nobel*

Interesting points! Thank you!


My assumption so far is, the division as it is shown today is possibly (just) the outcome of a wider and deeper long term strategy which is applied in the course of specific political aims in order to re-design the pillars of a society and a social community, as it is represented by a state order finally.

One of the most obvious initial motives for this transformation is of an economic nature according the principle of the division of labor.
In addtion, now, the sought social impact out of this labor division results simultanously also into total individualisation.
Not only for economic reasons but for better control of the population by advanced division in terms of social and cultural means.

Interestingly, we can find some evidence of your points and of my above assumption in some established thought models in most of relevant humanity and social science sources.

In my view so far, in contrast to this supposedly scientific knowledge, and in particular as far it applies to political systems, all the theoretical models according the human science system and logic, include a massive capital error:

The whole system is based on `Wetern´ thought and theory models. Usually they do not consider sufficiently - and never mind - not saying, equal conditions by involving other civilisational and otehr culural findings.

In so far, I think, the whole founding concepts for gender politics and policies pretend a sort off universalism and universal standard but without appropriate inclusion of all findings of humanity.

Therefor, it may be highly potentially fair to say, the applied system and theories which fosters and promotes the advancement of the division of gender is possibly exactly the opposite of what it pretends by saying, womans are to be set on a par.

In fact, equality exist in other cultures but according different values, standards and measuring methods.


Just my opinion so far, and as a possible ad-hoc summary out of some few sources.