Female Empowerment Is Slavery

Here’s a bedroom conversation I had with an empowered woman…

Woman: “Do you want to get married?”

Me: “I’m not ready to get married, but I am ready to hold on—at least temporarily—to the good girls I meet. When I’m older I think I want to be with one great woman and occasionally cheat on the side to keep things fresh. This is how they do it in South America. The guy provides for the family while the wife turns a blind eye. I know you think that’s unacceptable, but I believe being able to cheat, without openly disrespecting my wife, is a way to ensure a marriage’s long-term success.”

Woman: “That’s what my grandfather did to my grandmother. She actually knew the girls he was sponsoring, but she didn’t have any options. This is why it’s better these days. Women have options.”

Me: “What do you mean by options?”

Woman: “I don’t have to be enslaved by my husband.”

Me: “So instead of being enslaved by your husband, a man who is not perfect but provides for you and loves you, you want to be enslaved by the corporation you work for? You want to depend on a company that can fire you at will, that values profits above everything else, and that would commemorate your death with a three-line email mentioning how you were a pleasant and obedient worker? How important can your job—excuse me—your career really be if they can find your replacement in the time it takes to post an ad on Craigslist? It sounds like you’re trading loyalty of the most important man in your life for a faceless entity that has little stake in your happiness as a woman. I rather depend on my spouse for bread and shelter than a board of directors who identifies me as an expendable entry on an accounting spreadsheet instead of a human being with wants and dreams.”

Woman: “But you would want your wife to stay at home and do nothing with her life?”

Me: “How long does it take to cook three healthy meals and keep the home clean? Not more than four hours. If she is awake for 16 hours a day, and spends four hours of quality time with me, that means she has eight hours to do whatever she wants, at least until the kids start rolling in. She can pursue her hobbies and passions, go to the gym, read books, and enjoy her leisure time. As long as it doesn’t come at the expense of maintaining the home, and she does her best to please me, she is free to do what she wants.”

Woman: “But I want to accomplish something. I don’t want to be just a housewife.”

Me: “Pushing papers in an office is accomplishing something? Let’s be real, no woman is going to win a Nobel Prize with her work as a human resource associate, middle manager, or government bureaucrat. If you owned your own business or ran a charity that fed starving kids, I’d agree that you were accomplishing something, but spending all your days in meetings, dealing with dumb office politics, and being a standard-issue wage slave sounds a lot less fulfilling than being able to pursue your interests while satisfying a man who takes good care of you.”

Woman: “But if I don’t have a job and my husband has an affair, I’ll be helpless. I want to have a backup plan in case he neglects me.”

Me: “So you’re going to marry someone with the expectation of failure? If you already have divorce in the back of your head before you walk down the aisle then I guarantee it won’t work. It’s having the need for options and a way out that ensures the marriage will fail. It’s only when both parties are unconditionally committed to the marriage that it has a chance of success. You don’t think the man has stake in the marriage when he knows that his wife’s survival solely depends on him? You have to have made a horrible decision to marry a man who is willing to put you on the street. In that case it’s as much your mistake as it is his failure as a husband. It’s having too many options, too many outs, that has made marriage a joke that it is today. Either you depend on each other for everything or do what everyone else does and form a business partnership that can be severed with two lawyers over afternoon coffee. It takes serious commitment and sacrifice to make it work, something that people don’t do as long as they have their call-this-law-firm-in-case-of-emergency Plan B.'”

Woman: “You want to force your wife to stay home?”

Me: “I don’t know any woman who would rather put up with rush hour traffic and a job that doesn’t move humanity forward than stay home and raise a good family. You’re telling me you rather work than be provided for and not have to worry about money? There are billions of women in the world right now who would think you’re insane for preferring to work in a padded cubicle box for forty hours a week. Unfortunately, you’ve been brainwashed to think that it’s a better idea to make shareholders rich through your labor than to dedicate yourself to family. Consider that this whole full employment movement for women is less than 100 hundred years old, a blink of the eye in the hundreds of thousands of years of human history. It’s one of the greatest tragedies committed to women of the world, and it will not be reversed.”

Woman: “You’re going to provide for a woman so that she doesn’t have to work? You can afford that?”

Me: “I will only get married if I’m able to provide for her and two future kids with solely my income. This is becoming impossible in declining societies like America and Britain, but it can be done in South America and Eastern Europe, which works out fine for me since I prefer those women anyway. They still have what it takes to be a good wife and mother.”

Woman: “I just don’t want to be bored at home.”

Me (smiling): “Don’t worry, I’ll find you some nice hobbies. Maybe you can start your own side business. In America, a lot of women get burned out with their soulless careers and become bakers or sell arts and crafts on the internet.”

Sadly, female empowerment is nothing more than a form of disempowerment. It forces women to dedicate their lives to capital, not husbands, gradually destroying society in the process. Men’s rights guys and game guys are nothing but symptoms of the disease, manifestations of a dying body.

Soon after the above conversation, she gave me a real compliment without a hint of sarcasm, the first time she had done so. She held me tighter and sweetly asked me if I wanted to see her again. While Western corruption has made women like her absolutely despise provider men, deep down they want a strong man who can take care of them and make them forget about being mere little machines in the creation of wealth for others. Thankfully, there are still women in the world who will completely and unreservedly dedicate their lives to men instead of their little office jobs.

Related Posts For You

newest oldest most voted
DW
Guest
DW
Offline

Great article, Roosh. Western women don’t realize just how foolish they’re being by giving up the life of a housewife and instead working for a corporation. Who ever did anything great by working as a cubicle drone?

Jason Mendelson
Guest
Jason Mendelson
Offline

Women work because they get bored at home and want their own money. If neong a housewife is so good, why do sharia muslims like it?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

So the only jobs that are fullfilling involve ownership or charity? That is a pretty lame view. What about a nurse or doctor or teacher? I agree with the part of having a woman that supports you and your family and is devoted, helpful and affectionate is a good thing. I dont really understand how it is eaither that they are a corporate whore or stay at home.

[Roosh: What percentage of women have a calling to contribute to society instead of picking a whatever major in psychology or communications? For most women, “opportunity” is just about making a buck for dining, shopping, smartphone unlimited data package, etc..]

JST
Guest
JST
Offline

Where were you during this dialogue?

JST
Guest
JST
Offline

And who and where is this girl from?

Johnny Milfquest
Guest

She was Polish wasn’t she?

Roosh, do you really want to get married and have kids one day?

Paging Susan Walsh!

dragnet
Guest
dragnet
Offline

This is real talk.

The truth is that women were lied to. Women were told that work was this wonderful, amazing and fulfilling thing that men were depriving them of. Bullshit. Most jobs suck—always have—and women are now waking up to this.

But they should have known better—the working woman is actually an invention of “the patriarchy”. Ask women 500 years what work was like and they would’ve told you how much it sucked as they toiled in fields and shit. Women have always provided substantial economic value to their families. Feminists like to act as if women didn’t do shit in the workplace before they came along, but it’s not true.

Now these bitches are complaining about “burnout”. Guys haven’t been able to complain about “burnout” as they were expected to work themselves to death for their families. It’s not “burnout”, bitch, it’s just you beginning to figure out what it’s finally like to be a man. It’s not powerful. It’s not glamarous. It’s hard. Oftentimes it sucks. And, nope, most times you don’t even get a thank you. This is what the world of men has always been like.

You mess with the bull and you’ll get the horns.

TheWiseMan
Guest
TheWiseMan
Offline

Roosh, you made one mistake. Don’t you ever talk to a girl with logic, common sense, rational mind. Such message will always fail.
Girls will not even understand what you were trying to say.

Once you’ll become a bit older and will have more conversations like these, you’ll know its pointless to discuss with women. Just have fun and bang hard!

j d
Guest
j d
Offline

note that the period of women staying at home (1950s) was a very short one existing mostly for your grandparents. prior to that women were doing jobs outside the home as nurses, teachers, maids in between giving birth and caring for children.

the idea that masses of women would just stay at home is a Western one made possible by the economic boom of the post-war period.

this is a great article regardless.

kitty
Guest
kitty
Offline

My mom is Latin and divorced her first husband for cheating on her. This was in Latin America.

Now she’s married to my father, an Anglo American who provides for her and doesn’t cheat.

I think you should really question the blind eye thing. That worked in Latin America 50-60 years ago, but stopped working in the 70’s, and has gradually declined over the years.

Chad Daring
Guest

Were already doomed to this system now. Economic times have changed and the corporations hcve adjusted to.feminism. two incomes are almost mandatory now if you wish to live comfortably with a family. Now the “freedom” woman wanted has become a shackle for all of us because they skewed the system. Now perpetual bachelorhood is.the better choice in all regards.

A_Stranger
Guest
A_Stranger
Offline

More clear than water!!
Excellent post.

Dirt Man
Guest
Dirt Man
Offline

Great post Roosh

Ollie
Guest
Ollie
Offline

@The Wise Man

You are absolutely right about that logic vs. emotion thing.

So are all of Roosh’s points.

What to do?

I think the trick lies in creating the psychological association.

Instead of telling a lady why he “empowerment” is a kind of slavery, you must show her.

Images of strong willed, wildly successful career gals having the time of their lives and being the center of attention pervade our society. As we know, much like the beautiful, leather bodysuit clad femme fatale who can dispatch a platoon of marines with her bare hands, this is utter BS – a complete fabrication dumped into the collective conscious by Hollywood on a daily basis.

Repeat the lie enough, and people start to believe it.

To subvert the programming, one must present striking images of the world as it is. You need to place the subject into the loneliness and despair, into the feelings they want to avoid.

Thankfully, this job is being done by the ladies themselves. Their sense of disenchantment, their solipsism, access to mainstream media outlets and desire to air their complaints has combined to create the requisite imagery. Lori Gottlieb, Kate Bollick (to a lesser extent – she’s still rationalizing), and Tracy MacMillan are but a few of the growing number of sources for the content needed to deprogram someone.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tracy-mcmillan/why-youre-not-married_b_822088.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/feb/06/lori-gottlieb-feminists-marriage

All you need to do is plant the seeds of doubt, coupled with a few heart-rending anecdotes about ladies who died miserable and alone atop piles of shiny baubles.

Some of whom ended it themselves, a la Rachel Wetzsteon:
http://eumaios.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/the-solitary-yet-defiant-lives-of-single-women/

They’ve all seen Gone With the Wind. Remind them of the scene at the end, where Rhett Buttler “frankly doesn’t give a damn”.

Let them know that you may not either.

Tajik
Guest
Tajik
Offline

FIXED:

Female Empowerment is — Male Slavery (or mangina-enforced female supremacy)

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

Come on…

You’re saying that a woman is enslaved because she’s dependent on the whims of a corporation rather than a man who provides for her. Yet all the while, that man’s ability to provide is dependent… on the whims of a corporation.

Is this a joke?

Women, more so than men, want security.

Many men aren’t willing to provide for a woman ’til death do them part. Many men won’t be able hold up their end of the bargain. There’s no doubting that anyone, man or woman, has more security than when they have the ability to generate their own income.

Contrary to the notion that female empowerment is slavery, options are power and there is no doubt that women have many options today. If she’s pretty but dumb, she can find a provider and be a homemaker. If she’s homely but capable, she can provide for herself. If she’s pretty and capable, she can do whatever she wants. Whether having more options is good for “society” or nets the average woman more happiness may be up for debate. There’s little doubt, however, that female empowerment has given more women access to achieve security.

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

And in any of those cases, a woman will throw a man out of the house faster than a man will throw a woman out simply for not having a job. Women can’t be trusted to be providers any more than you clearly cant trust men

ersatz
Guest
ersatz
Offline

Going into a marriage without thinking how it could fail and having a plan to deal with it is like driving a motorbike without a helmet and armor, or a car without a seat belt, air bags and ABS breaks and staying safe by ‘never getting in an accident’. It’s just stupid and naive and does not provide any benefits.

I feel like the modern divorce court and child support system is what causes a lot of human misery when people do divorce, basically incentivizing women to burn bridges in order to get more money instead of reconciliation and having the family stay together.

rationalist
Guest
rationalist
Offline

this post seems a little extreme to me. whilst I think that a woman pursuing a family AND and high-powered career as a lawyer or doctor is silly, I also think it is silly to recommend that women should depend on hubby entirely. what about her having a part-time job? or a job which is low stress with long breaks (like being a teacher at a private school).

I mean I want a feminine woman as a wife, and I want her to not be stressed and overworked, so yes I agree that manly careers are bad, but I also don’t want to marry a glorified house pet.

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

Hubbies have always been more trustworthy in that they won’t throw their wifey out for not having a job. Women have and do. Also, women are far more picky when they’re in power.

Basil Ransom
Guest
Basil Ransom
Offline

j d
note that the period of women staying at home (1950s) was a very short one existing mostly for your grandparents. prior to that women were doing jobs outside the home as nurses, teachers, maids in between giving birth and caring for children.

the idea that masses of women would just stay at home is a Western one made possible by the economic boom of the post-war period.

This is complete bullshit. The participation of married women in the workforce, in employment outside the home, increased every decade for over 100 years. It was 2.2% for married white women in 1890, 20.7% in 1950, 29.8% in 1960, and 61% today. The Fifties wasn’t a golden age, but the bookend of an era.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/GenderGap.html

Going into a marriage without thinking how it could fail and having a plan to deal with it
Roosh meant the mentality that “if the marriage isn’t perfect, if I’m not *happy*, then it’s okay if I leave.” Expecting and enabling failure as an exit strategy is different from creating an exit strategy in the event of failure. I don’t expect that women can maintain this distinction emotionally either.

Plus, Roosh makes marriage sound worse than it is. Roosh is not most men; most American neither plan nor actually do have a serial stream of affairs like Roosh would.

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

Before feminism, before 1950, men could actually trust their wives not to walk out on them or throw them out for whatever reason. Men have no good reason to trust women with that kind of power today.

Noa
Guest
Noa
Offline

Most American men are also most likely betas and cuckolds with no sexual experience. While their wives have fucked the whole football team :/

Anon
Guest
Anon
Offline

Capitalism is a disease that destroys everything it touches.

Throughout history, men provided for their families via agriculture or skilled trade passed from father to son. Capitalism came and promised easy money and an easier life. Instead, men gave up their skills and became subservient to corporations and loss whatever security they had. Capitalism destroyed men.

So women had to go to work outside the home. Capitalism came to women and promised security and independence. Instead, women gave up the home, neglected their children and spouses and became subservient to corporations. Capitalism destroyed the family.

spandrell
Guest
spandrell
Offline

Damn right you are. Don´t get married if you can´t afford for your wife to stay home and serve you. Why should she respect you if you force her to drive every morning to some goddamn office where horny betas will flirt with her, where she spends her time in doing some liberal shit for some corporation.

Just earn enough for her to eat and buy some nice clothes, it aint that hard.

Black Rebel
Guest
Black Rebel
Offline

‘Being a woman is so hard, staying home, spending someone’s money and raising kids (note: it’s really not). All men have to do is go work at jobs where they’re paid based on their performances and how much they work, and they can come home to a nice meal and a clean house, they have it so much easier (note: we do not). I should just become a man!’

What’s the opposite of self-awareness?

Jevioso
Guest
Jevioso
Offline

@Anon

Before capitalism, farmers didn’t own the land they produced on. Before capitalism, there was no such thing as property rights; what you owned was assigned to you by the monarchy and could be taken by force anytime they felt like it.

Like many people today, you’ve managed to mix-up corporatism and capitalism. Unlike capitalism, where markets are free, and whoever offers the best goods at the cheapest prices is king; corporatism favors whoever has the most money and influence over governments.

That all being said, capitalism didn’t destroy the family, corporations did. Corporations funded the feminist movement, and corporations fund them till this day. To go further, was it not beta male politicians who passed legislation that destroyed the family? Was it not legislators who gave “incentives” (or preferably subsidies) to corporation that gave money to them if they hired women over men (white women have gained more than any other group from Affirmative Action, even though black people are the ones mostly stereotyped by it)?

Be careful, when you criticize capitalism; a system that is totally dependent on freedom and rewards hard-work, intuition and efficiency. If there is any hope for men in our day and age, it is in capitalism. Capitalism was what our forefathers believed in, it was the conclusion of the best ideas of the enlightenment era, which helped bring Europe out of the Dark Ages. It is the greatest invention of mankind, and is the best way of fighting corruption that runs rampant today. To denounce capitalism, is to denounce freedom and embrace slavery, which is what too many women have embraced as Roosh alluded to in this article.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

@15, female empowerment, with attendant free falling birthrates, has given females increased security the same way socialism have given all people more security: By building a system of forced wealth extraction from those who do, to those who don’t.

As long as a ponzi scheme of ever increasing debt camouflages the deleterious effects this has on the doers, things can hold together. But once the Ponzi’s up, so is doer’s willingness to work more than for what they get to keep.

Historically, men has not needed to be pointed a gun at by the tax man to provide for the good, virtous women bearing their children. And neither have children needed armed thugs in government costumes to force them to care for their mothers in old age. But what man with options wold ever want to work to provide for some feminist whore? And since she has no kids, who will bother caring for her in old age? Hence, her only out is “the government”, i.e. a thug band enslaving others to work for her in exchange for her vote.

Problem is, slaves aren’t particularly productive workers. And hence, a society of slaves pitted against a society of volunteers in a battle for limited resources, will see the society organized to encourage voluntarism win every time. Which is exacatly why feminist Europe is become Islamist Europe as we speak, and the Americas, unless we drastically change our ways, are not far behind.

International Banker
Guest
International Banker
Offline

This is unacceptable. We need both men and women working overtime for low wages and paying high taxes. Who else would pay off the interest on the fiat money debt that the government has accumulated from our private central banks? Who else would pay for the imperialist wars abroad that were never meant to be won but to generate revenue for as long as possible? Who would fund the surveillance state that is so necessary to keep all you silly lowlifes in check? And how are you gonna fund all the flashy electronic gadgets and mindless fashion fads that our want creation departments have made your mouth salivate over? Come on, you are our slaves and you always will be!

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

Yeah but we don’t need these women feeling so empowered / cocky and arrogant that she walks out on her husband for reacting to stress like a human. Men aren’t going to throw a woman out and break up the family because the wife has a breakdown over bills. BUT men cannot trust modern women not to do that to them. Before feminism liberated women, men could trust and rely on their women to be there, even through the worst of the worst. Afterward, every feminist likes throwing out words like “oppression” or “misogyny” or “abuse” far too often.

(R)evoluzione
Guest
(R)evoluzione
Offline

@Jevioso,

Great comment.

The world won’t improve for shit until we either get rid of corporatism (also called fascism in earlier dictionaries–they’re synonymous), or until it falls on its own. The former is not likely, since it’s so well-entrenched. The latter is bound to happen as the house of cards gets more and more unstable due to resource depletion and social instability. Both are happening. We’re gonna see some shit go down in our lifetimes. Occupy Everything is merely the beginning.

whatmeworry
Guest
whatmeworry
Offline

Give me a woman with an MRS degree that’s smart enough to talk to, cooks so well I have to fight to keep slim, raises kids to be better than me, and sexes me up like a babylonian whore and I’ll storm the walls of Troy for her.

No?

Pumping and dumping liberated sluts is fine too.

speakeasy
Guest
speakeasy
Offline

Career driven woman = pant suits and short, boyish haircuts.

Steve
Guest
Steve
Offline

Roosh this is one of your best posts in a while and yet another reason women should accept their natural role.

CC
Guest
CC
Offline

Roosh, quit supporting the entitlement bitch regime god damn it. That’s what happens when you don’t make a woman work and provide for her.

Latvian woman racist
Guest
Latvian woman racist
Offline

This is a dead end for you. You are too spoiled to have normal relationships with each other. Your utter selfishness has made you undesirable (and useless) to each other.

Doc
Guest
Doc
Offline

Excellent article Roosh. As I’ve gotten older, and the women I’ve dated have stayed in that early 20’s sweet spot, I’ve actually found that more women today actually want what their grand-mother’s had. Probably because it is a dream that they will never be able to attain. Women always want what they don’t have – it doesn’t matter what it is, they want whatever they see as a better option – till they live it, then they want what they gave up – of course, it’s never their fault.

I’ve seen women divorce because they wanted something more, then when they are alone and their ex-husband is remarried to a younger woman and starting another family, they rant and rave how it’s all his fault – when they are the ones that wanted a divorce. The difference is that men generally accept their lot in life – or change and stick with it and don’t regret what they do. Men only regret what they don’t do – women on the other hand constantly regret what they try because it’s not what they wanted.

I learned the above long ago, and stopped listening to what women say they want. I give them what I want to give them, and demand that they keep me happy. If they don’t, there are always other women out there. Letting them see that you have options is important – if they are always fighting to keep you, it doesn’t give them time to do anything other than complain and they are happy to have you, since they are worried about losing you. And women love to complain – as long as you never make the mistake of giving in to what they say they want, you can live quite pleasantly, at least that has been my experience…

Marco
Guest
Marco
Offline

Well, I liked the post, but I’m afraid that genie’s not going back into the bottle anytime soon.

And on a completely different note, don’t go Marxist, it would make me sad. smile

Anon
Guest
Anon
Offline

“Be careful, when you criticize capitalism; a system that is totally dependent on freedom and rewards hard-work, intuition and efficiency. If there is any hope for men in our day and age, it is in capitalism. Capitalism was what our forefathers believed in, it was the conclusion of the best ideas of the enlightenment era, which helped bring Europe out of the Dark Ages. It is the greatest invention of mankind, and is the best way of fighting corruption that runs rampant today. To denounce capitalism, is to denounce freedom and embrace slavery, which is what too many women have embraced as Roosh alluded to in this article.”

Hard work & private ownership is NOT capitalism.

Capitalism is the accumulation & deployment of capital WITHOUT MORAL regard to nations. The goal of capitalism is MONOPOLY. America, now more than ever, is moving toward pure capitalism.

The American Revolution was a revolution AGAINST CAPITALISM: against the removal & redeployment of American capital (labor, tobacco, cotton & other natural resources) to Britain.

Capitalism does not care if 1 person makes $100 million by outsourcing 10,000 jobs & destroying communities. Capitalism does not care about borders or the wholesale importation of cheap, illegal labor that undercuts your capacity to earn a living. Capitalism does not care if weapons are sold to others who will use them against Americans. Capitalism does not care that American democracy is a whore to the highest bidder. Capitalism corrupts. Capitalism only cares about power and controlling The Market. The founding fathers would be appalled at today’s America.

What brought Europe out of the dark ages was Christianity (it was the monks who saved & copied books of knowledge) and the rediscoverable of nationalism.

Capitalism (and its straw-man brother, Socialism) is a disease. It destroys everything it touches.

Is it a wonder that nations where Roosh finds women to be appealing, sexy & feminine are those where capitalism is not embraced wholesale?

International Banker
Guest
International Banker
Offline

@Revoluzione & Jevioso

Yes, we don’t have real free market capitalism but actually fascist corporatism that is more accurately a form of socialism for the big money elite.

But the real challenge is in the money system. As long as you allow the limitless creation of fiat money (backed by nothing) by private and semi-private central banks you will not be able to fully solve the problems. This is something that the the Occupy guys don’t seem to have figured out yet. A flawed money system is at the root of it all. Not just “greed” and “lack of regulation”.

hydrogonian
Guest
hydrogonian
Offline

This is one of the best posts I’ve read of yours. I really enjoyed it for it’s depth of analysis. You have a real talent for that and should flex it as much as possible, especially in big picture issues. The game stuff is good as well, but it’s nice to change it up.

The delayed positive reaction of your empowered woman friend is very telling. You cracked her idealistic shell, that was foisted upon her, and spoke to her real wants and needs as a woman. Family. For a family man, that’s his primary want as well, but he makes the necessary sacrifice for it by working eight or more hours per day. The woman not having to make this sacrifice is a true privilege and a denotation of higher status. The feminist tragedy is that it convinced women that not having to work was lower status. Convincing women, that losing was winning, was a huge victory in the war for the western mind.

@ Jevisio

Be careful lecturing people on capitalism, as you clearly think that there is only exists degrees of socialism and capitalism as economic systems, similar to how people only believe that there are only liberals and conservatives. These perspectives are patently false, and capitalism in not the only way to maintain corruption free governments, private property and the other benefits that you ascribe to it. The problem with modern capitalism, and to a greater extent democracy, is that it allows small independent political groups to gain control over anything that they would like, and change the system for their benefit and to the detriment of the greater good. A prime example of the result, of such a detrimental political coup, is feminism. There are other examples. Feminism was the logical result of our capitalist system, as engorging the workforce with females benefits capital in every way. It is the fault of capitalism, or the default free market agents of capitalism, corporations. One wouldn’t exist without the other, and so they are interchangeable as far as the result of their existence is concerned. Arguing that it “isn’t capitalism’s fault, but the fault of corporations” is invalid, as the differences are only semantic.

I’m no socialist, either. Feminism was brought here through a socialist political force and ideals, but the primary beneficiary is capital. hmmm….think about that for a moment. In this instance, the socialist modeling of our social fabric and ideals primarily benefits big capital. The people at the very top. Perhaps socialism and capitalism aren’t two polar extremes after all. Perhaps they are two sides of the same coin. Think and research.

Peter Phoenix
Guest

Wow you really mindfucked her on that one.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

What about finding a hard-working sugar mamma to take care of us? I’d love to find a strong willed business woman who stresses out all day competing in a ruthless, male dominated world, and then she comes home to me where I treat her and fuck her like a woman. And with all that free time during the day, I can have multiple mistresses on the side.

derango
Guest
derango
Offline

Um… supporting wife and children is easier in eastern europe than in the states? People are living from week to week and trying to flee the zone and get to western europe.. They decide not having children because of the more and more difficult life conditions… so, what do you mean exactly?

a hungarian reader (go to hungary man!)

ken
Guest
ken
Offline

Capitalism was a term invented by Marxists. We should not embrace that term. What most free markets libertarians are in favor of is Free Enterprise.

tp (anon #15)
Guest
tp (anon #15)
Offline

@23, you’re blowing things out of proportion, and your missing the point. It’s dumb to say that female empowerment is slavery.

The average Western woman has alot more options, and hence power, than at any time in history. An educated girl can choose to be tethered to a man for provision or she can choose to have a career. She can choose to have a family or she can remain single with her pathetic cougar gal-pals. Fuck…in the USA a young girl can become slightly obese, dress sloppy, and still have eager suitors.

There is simply no denying that many woman have unprecedented decision-making over what type of lives they want.

Even if you assume that this level of female choice is bringing about the decay of society, it’s silly to call the current situation ‘female enslavement’. For better or worse, women are not enslaved.

Jevioso
Guest
Jevioso
Offline

@Anon (33)

A couple of questions:

1. Can you please tell me what were the economic principles this nation was founded on or the ones our forefathers believed in?

2. Can you tell me how a monopoly is developed from scratch or the process by which a company becomes a monopoly?

3. Can you mention, by your definition of capitalism, some examples of men who exemplify what a capitalist is?

I’m asking these questions because I want to know the foundation of your belief of what capitalism is before I respond, and possibly take your statements out of context.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

Many bad ideas have been wrapped up in the idealism of women’s rights. When the Lucky Strike Cigarettes wanted to get women to pick up smoking, they hired Edward Bernays. He had females smoke during a parade in NYC. After that, women saw no reason not to smoke, since men did it.

There are bad ideas that we figure out and change our path. Then there are bad ideas that send our lives in the wrong direction. Those ideas we can’t fix because time has run out. Worse yet, those who have made the wrong decision fail to share their discovery with others for fear of admitting they wasted their life.

Jevioso
Guest
Jevioso
Offline

@40

I think women are enslaved today not physically, but mentally. Feminism has created a sex of victims. They are victims of their own natural weakness; they are victims of violent men; they are victims of patriarchy; they are victims of dead beat fathers; they are victims of the media; they are victims of online trolls, they are victims of gender; they are victims of their careers; they are victims of sexual harassment; they are victims of their children; they are victims of societal expectations…and the list goes on.

All that being said, women have achieved a lot more power and yet feel more victimized than ever before. In a time period, where women apparently make up a larger piece of the workforce than men, what do you think will be the “consequence” of having a workforce driven by victims? The answer is cognitive dissonance; and that is the slave master of most American women today. A powerful ego and a victim-oriented ego can never occupy the same consciousness without there being some form of an existential civil war going on in the mind. This is what guys are talking about when they same women are crazy nowadays.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

the only thing i can say is some men dont want women to work so they can be dependent on men, and whoever holds the money holds the power thus giving men the power gives them control over women

women are getting jobs now and some women are no longer dependent on men like the old days, where they have the power and dont have to marry.

saying women working is a capitalist slaveship is stupid because men also participate in capitalism so either way its a new day get your game up !!

Luke
Guest
Luke
Offline

Yes but regardless of who is making the money, women will always have more power. They’re all far less rational, far less cooperative with men and far more sensitive. So why tempt fate?

tomtud
Guest
tomtud
Offline

FANTASTIC!!!!

Ryu
Guest
Ryu
Offline

That’s true, the genie can never go back into the bottle, not for PUAs. Not with you level of experience.

It’s not just here that I’ve heard that, but from Jlaix. I also believe that this is a push-pull method with the audience; one post talk about fucking and sucking, the next marraige and little babies. It introduces the element of surprise.

doclove
Guest
doclove
Offline

The problem is most women think that what they see the top 50% of men get is what all men get. They never look at the bottom 50% of men. These are the women who try and fail to see what a man’s world is really like.

Most women look at the top 20% of men most or all the time, ignore the middle 60% of men half the time and completely or almost completely ignore the bottom 20% of men. This is especially true in today’s Western world and is certainly true in the USA. They all have fantasies about being in the top 20% and when it doesn’t happen in reality, they resort to their default position: FURIOUS!!! Hypergamy at work as one might say.

It has become impossible for most men to support a wife and children on their own income these days. Capitalism is a good system but as it’s recognized founding philosophical father, Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations in 1776, might say, it is only meant for a moral people. Most of us aren’t moral and in some ways we’ve become less moral since then. One of the Popes of the Catholic church in the late 19th century warned us that it must consider human beings. This too will collapse just like Communism did because of its lack of morality and humanity. It is a only a matter of time. Mind you, I’m a believer in capitalism, but the current system we have is heading for a collapse. Actually what we have is corporatism more than genuine capitalism, and this will collapse. Capitalism morphed into corporatism. Corporatism sponsors a lot of socialism to include feminism. It will collapse.

Most men in the past went to whores when they wanted strange pussy if they could afford it. Sluts were harder to find. Moronic Feminism along with idiotic moral religious crusaders have ended that especially the Christian ones in the USA despite St. Augustine of Hippo and St. Thomas Aquinas telling people that even though prostitution was a sin it was a necessary evil to be tolerated in this world. Now most women act like sluts and the worst of whores of yore, and more men are starting to treat women like sluts and whores. Thank moronic feminism and overly idiotic religious zealots for that. St. Augustine of Hippo and St. Thomas Aquinas predicted or at least almost predicted it would happen centuries ago.

The problem is women have too many choices at the expense of men. Men have less choices now. This is especially true in marriage. I know most of you shout at no fault divorce, but it isn’t going away soon. The smartest thing to do is not get married, not procreate, not live with a women and protect yourself as best you can. The next thing you should do is spread the word and maybe advocate that whover files for divorce first loses the house and the kids and pays child support. Alimony as a rule should be done away with with no or at least few exceptions. If the couple files jointly, then they must have an agreement that they settle on without interference from the court, family law or any other law. This is much more likely to gain traction as you can convince people about basic fairness which men and children are not getting at the expense of women deciding to intentionally or untintentionally trying to harm them. Women usually hurt themselves in a divorce too, but they don’t care because they hurt men and children more. More people will get behind this than reversing to fault divorce and the elimination of no fault divorce because most people believe marriage should be free and not bind eachother, and you can always make the person opposed to this as a sadistic inhumane monster who cares not for justice, equality and fairness.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

Many men aren’t willing to provide for a woman ’til death do them part. Many men won’t be able hold up their end of the bargain. There’s no doubting that anyone, man or woman, has more security than when they have the ability to generate their own income.

Contrary to the notion that female empowerment is slavery, options are power and there is no doubt that women have many options today. If she’s pretty but dumb, she can find a provider and be a homemaker. If she’s homely but capable, she can provide for herself. If she’s pretty and capable, she can do whatever she wants. Whether having more options is good for “society” or nets the average woman more happiness may be up for debate. There’s little doubt, however, that female empowerment has given more women access to achieve security.

You must be a woman.

*Oh, and btw, f off… wink

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

@40
While women today may well seem to have an unprecedented number of choices, this is not the result of their own “empowerment.” Virtually all the “choices” they have, are simply due to many productive men willingly enduring a regime that robs them, for the benefit of “empowered feeling” women.

After all, women choosing to push paper in some publicocracy, rather than having and raising kids, are only in the very rarest of cases (Marie Curie and Mariah Carey) creating an net increase in real wealth. Hence, their choice not to have children are, in sum, making society poorer.

That there exists a sufficiently large number of gullible male saps to enable (actually promise to enable) wealth transfers in the direction of these women large enough to mask this, is not due to “female empowerment”, but rather to widespread male idiocy.

For women in their teens, 20s and 30s today, which are the only ones who matter on a game blog (and, The Maries and Mariahs aside, really the only ones who matter, period, unless they are mothers), this system won’t last long enough for all these choices to be meaningful ones. The social security payments and medicare they were promised, will never materialize. If they can sucker some third world immigrant into caring for them with whatever chump change they have left, he’ll likely stop by, take the change, and leave her bruised, beaten and even poorer. After all, neither handbags nor empty promises made by her erstwhile alpha politician, will stick up for her the way a child or twelve would have.

Having the choice of hundreds of different guns with which to shoot herself in the head may well be a lot of choices, but if you restrict yourself to look only at beneficial ones, nothing gives a women (again, leaving the Maries and Mariahs aside) more options, security and happiness throughout a long life than an army of children and grandchildren raised well enough to love her virtually unconditionally.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

women are getting jobs now and some women are no longer dependent on men like the old days, where they have the power and dont have to marry.

The poetic justice to this scenario is that said women are going to grow old and most importantly alone for **trying to be a man** instead of being ashamed for being a female — without any children, and descendants, to leave behind.

Remember ladies, as cute as cats are, they are still are not your kids.