30 Thursday Mar 2017
Posted in Fempire
Tags
battle of the sexes, culture, family, feminism, modern woman, politics, red pill, society, women's rights
Hello all, I am still very busy with real life projects but all is going well, GREAT in fact! 🙂
So to keep things going, here’s a video from Marion Le Pen (the even more outspoken niece of Marine Le Pen, who is running for the leader of France) and her take on feminism. Watch. Consider. Discuss.
Do you think she is right? Too much? Not enough? Please share in the comments!
06 Monday Feb 2017
Tags
(Ladies, empowerment, gender roles, red pill, strong independant female, warriors, women warriors
A post on a friend’s Facebook page caught my eye. Here’s the image:
Now I am sure my friend just thought, “That’s right, you go guuuurl!” and re-posted it without much thought. She likely didn’t mean any harm.
But let’s talk a closer look, and think more critically about the message in the image. (I was relieved to see the comments attached to the image did point much of this out, yay red pill commenters!)
First of all, the image has a “Mad Max” type feel. This is not an image of a little girl living in a safe and stable civilization. So that right there is not a good thing, as girls in such a situation would most likely be subjected to abuse, rape, kidnapping, and other horrible treatment in such a doomsday scenario.
Secondly, women are designed to bring life into the world, and to nurture and sustain life, not to take life. If this little girl were to die in battle, her tribe loses far more than if she was able to reach adulthood and help her tribe gain in number and strength.
There’s a red pill saying that, “sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive.” What that means is that men are more “expendable” from a biological standpoint. One male can impregnate many women, carrying on his genetic lineage, while a female can only bear one child at a time, and at great personal risk and cost, especially in a scenario like the above where there likely would be no medical help!
Now, expendable is not the same as unnecessary or unimportant or optional. Men are certainly a key part of a functioning, safe society. Their natural role as provider and protector is a noble one. (As is the female role, as the giver of life.)
To die in battle for your tribe is indeed the highest sacrifice a man can make. Likewise, a female having children for her tribe is the highest sacrifice she can make. This is why females dying in battle is not a gain to the tribe, it is a huge loss.
This is true in many cases in the animal world as well. For example, I keep chickens. In a flock, the rooster is the only one who looks around and up for danger. The hens are completely oblivious, relying on him to sound the alarm if trouble approaches. When it does, the rooster will literally throw himself in the path of danger to allow the hens to escape safely back to the coop. I have had several roosters give their life in this way, trying to fight off a coyote or wayward dog. Interestingly, the hens (whose eggs are fertilized weeks before they are laid) will then immediately start a nest, I assume to replace the missing rooster they have just lost. It’s also important to note, without a rooster, the coyote or dog will kill the entire flock of hens, who do not even see it coming.
And finally, encouraging women to be fighters instead of lovers does not prepare them well for the role of wife or mother. Brash argumentative uppity women are unpleasant to be around, and struggle to maintain relationships. Not good for her, her mate, or her children! (Also note, being a lady has the exact opposite effect!)
Not that women can’t fight if needed, but it is usually not the go to. Even the strongest women have trouble holding their own against an average man. If it is down to women doing the fighting, things are very bad indeed!
In any case, while such images today are meant to “empower” women to be strong and self sufficient, under examination such thinking really isn’t in the best interest of anyone, including the little girls being told to “be a warrior!”
Let those who have ears hear.
What do you think? Please share in the comments!
01 Wednesday Feb 2017
Posted in Fempire, Uncategorized
Remember when it was considered a GOOD thing to act like a lady?
Apparently these days the feral woman is more the cultural standard, and IMHO it is a real loss.
My advice is to not sink to the level of the average woman, but rise above and be a class act. Not only will you stand out among the shrieking masses of hysterical women shouting expletives right in front of small children, you’ll also be taking a small personal stand for decency.
And when other women act like they have been raised on the streets, please join me in calling them out (constructively) on their bad behavior. Somebody has to! And let’s face it, these women are not going to listen to anything a man has to say.
I know it is like trying to fight the tide, but a civilization without civility just doesn’t work.
Let those who have ears hear.
Have some stories of women behaving well or badly to share? Please add them in the comments!
23 Monday Jan 2017
Tags
Was the Women’s March really about women’s rights?
One poster featured a Muslim woman with her head draped in an American flag. Did any of the marchers proudly brandishing that poster stop to think what would likely happen to a woman in many Muslim countries who did such a thing? Or even in the US?
But I digress. American women actually have it pretty good, as far as rights go. More than pretty good. Much better than many women on the planet.
But rather than focusing on them, American women demanded, “What about us?”
What about you? Well, for one thing, there sure was a lot of offensive profanity about at an event where many brought their children. Not to mention all the vagina images, imagine explaining that one to your preschooler!
I suppose the point was to NOT be ladylike, because after all that is somehow now taboo, it seems. (Meanwhile the ladylike women of the day shined like beacons of light, in comparison, looking even more so by contrast, but I digress.)
The thing I find most interesting is how if the messages and signs and images were reversed, if let’s say HRC had won and men around the country marched in mass with signs saying, “Kill the Matriarchy!” and “She’s not MY president!” how would that have been received? Much less them dressing up and parading about as penises or sporting penis hats?
When one reverses the message, it suddenly sounds a lot like hate speech, doesn’t it? Interesting…
It’s a good litmus test. If a group’s message isn’t also acceptable in reverse, maybe it is not acceptable at all?
Let those who have ears hear.
07 Wednesday Dec 2016
Posted in Fempire
A recent post by a commenter got me thinking… Does feminism actually say boys are better?
On the surface one would likely say, “Of course not!” It’s all about building women up, right? It’s about girl power!
Except feminism largely pushes girls to be more like boys. Hummm. That’s odd.
Girls are told to act less like girls. Dress less like girls. Avoid activities and topics that are deemed, “girl stuff.” To shun traditional girl roles in favor of more masculine ones.
When you think about it, doesn’t feminism actually encourage women (starting as girls) to ape traditionally male behavior rather than celebrate the uniqueness of being female?
I would agree with feminism that boys are better… at being boys. Women, however, are better…at being women.
But in a world where boys have been encouraged to act more “female” and girls have been encouraged to act more “male” for decades now, isn’t that counterproductive? What’s so wrong with boys being boys and girls being girls? Men being men and women being women?
Personally, I like being female. I don’t consider it a disadvantage. I don’t consider it a bad thing. I don’t consider myself “lesser” because of it. I don’t feel like I am a victim. I don’t feel held back. I don’t feel like I have missed out. I don’t want to be “something else.”
Why would feminists insist I (and other women) should see it otherwise?
Hummm….
22 Saturday Oct 2016
Tags
civility, debate, feminism, Nasty, nasty woman, nasty women, politics, power, red pill, strength
During the final debate, Trump told Hillary, “You are a nasty woman” after she delivered one of several low blows during the event.
Not surprisingly, women on Twitter took up the torch, claiming if being a nasty woman meant smart, confident, and powerful count them in.
Thing is, he didn’t call her that for being smart, confident, or powerful. He called her that because of her throwing a jab and then expecting to get a pass because she’s a woman.
See if women want equality, and want to “act like men” along with that comes being treated equally. Which means not with kid gloves.
Even as young as preschool one can see that males and females settle disputes differently. Girls shame and ostracize each other, threatening “I won’t invite you to my birthday!” Such spats can go for days. Boys? They whack each other. Somebody “wins” and they are over it
Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying because preschoolers act this way, adults should. In fact a big part of early social education is teaching children how to not act on their basest natures, but to “be civilized.”
And of course boys especially are taught to never hit or act aggressively toward girls because girls are to be treated differently than boys.
However, this naturally is expected to be a two way street. If girls don’t want to be treated like boys, they historically have been taught in exchange to be polite, ladylike, refined.
Today, if a woman hits a man, yells at him, throws barbs his way, she still expects to be treated, “like a lady.” But guess what? One can’t have it both ways.
Women who demand the equality to act aggressively toward men should expect it to be met with aggression back, just like occurs between two men. That’s equality. Men don’t ignore aggression from another man, why should he from a woman who acts more like an aggressive man than a ladylike woman?
In short, it’s not good to be or act like a “nasty woman.” It’s not powerful, confident, or intelligent. It’s base. It’s low class. It’s embarrassing.
Women who want to be treated with respect and equality are far better to rise above than to stoop low.
It’s one thing to say, “When they go low, we go high.” Quite another to actually walk the talk.
What do you think? Please share in the comments below.
29 Thursday Sep 2016
Posted in Fempire
Tags
career, career woman, childbearing, college, fertility, infertility, parenting, pregnancy, red pill
The other day I was talking with a friend who is in her early 60s. She happened to mention, in passing, that her grandmother had been a doctor.
Yes, that’s right, her GRANDMOTHER had been a doctor, specializing in head injuries, no less.
Now considering my friend is a baby boomer, that means her grandmother became a doctor many, many years before feminism supposedly opened up such opportunities to women. How could that be? So naturally I asked more questions.
Interestingly, it turns out her grandmother followed the path currently advised by the red pill, she married young to a good man, had their four children young, raised them while her husband worked his career, and then once their children were grown (her early 40s) she went to college, became a doctor, and started her career. Her grandmother practiced medicine well into her 80s.
It had never occurred to my friend that what her grandmother had accomplished, becoming a female doctor, was perhaps unusual for her time until I pointed it out.
This story is a good example of how today’s thinking that women should put off marriage and children until after she establishes her education and career may not be the optimal path after all. Or that if she marries and has children young, she will “miss” her chance to have a career.
Traditionally women followed their ideal biological life path — having children in their early 20s during their prime childbearing years, then shifting gears toward career as they reached their perimenopausal and menopausal years — when they are unencumbered by children and also will not have to “pause” that career once it is underway, like a woman who aims to establish her career early in life likely will when/if she chooses to have children later in life.
I have known many women of my generation (including myself, I am in my mid-40s and have young children) who put off childbearing until the last possible biological moment because they were mislead that they had all the time in the world to have kids, but not a career.
I was lucky to concieve both times easily and quickly despite my advanced age. Two of three dear friends heartbreakingly never conceived despite expensive ($10,000+) infertility treatments. A third did finally succeed (happily!) after many tens of thousands of dollars and multiple attempts and is now finding just how difficult it is in reality to maintain a demanding career with an infant. Yet she’s afraid to take time off, lose her connections, and then be unable to restart her career later. A fourth friend didn’t start thinking of marriage and kids until she was in her mid 30s. She has yet to find a mate and at 45, children are now unlikely.
Sadly, these women followed the supposedly new and improved life script, only to find out it has some drawbacks they had never been advised of. No path is perfect. All paths involve possible trade offs. And they always have. And they always will.
It’s something young women of today would be wise to ponder. Does the path recommended to women today really make the most sense based on what she wants in life?
Perhaps the path my babysitter has chosen (to get her degree, have kids, then pursue her career with some additional refresher training when her children are older, then pursue her career in earnest for the second half of her life) lines up more naturally with a woman’s seasons of life?
The thing about life paths is there often aren’t do-overs later when one regrets the path chosen or is unhappy with the trade-offs. So best to figure it out early, and be sure you have thought things through. Both paths involve risk and uncertainty, is one path riskier and less certain?
Discuss. Deliberate. Ponder.
17 Wednesday Aug 2016
Posted in Fempire
Tags
battle of the sexes, date rape, eye rape, feminism, hate crime, hate speech, Julie Bindel, rape, red pill, sexism
An article recently linked to a post by a feminist on Twitter claiming all men are rapists and should be shot.
Think about that. All men should be shot? All men are rapists?
Now imagine someone saying all women are (X) and should be shot. Or all people of color? Or all gay people? Or all transgender people? Certainly there would be an outcry.
Hate speech is hate speech, no matter who is saying it. And it’s not OK.
In fact, it’s more than not OK. Anyone (including women) saying such things are a threat to a functional and orderly society.
First of all, all men ARE NOT rapists. Clearly they are not. Rape is a violent and horrific crime and to call anything less than the true definition of that “rape” minimizes what true rape victims have experienced. This is rape. A guy looking at you in the cafeteria is not.
As one commenter raised, just who did she propose would round up and shoot all these men? Would she expect other men to do it for her? Then shoot each other at the end? Or was she imagining some posse of women rounding up and shooting all the men? Who exactly is going to commit this genocide?
Thing is why is it commonly accepted that negatively stereotyping and lumping a group of people who share one common characteristic is not OK, unless that group is men? How is that fair and equal? But it happens all the time, and nobody says a thing about it.
The crazy just needs to stop.
I for one acknowledge the many, many good men in this world. Wonderful men. Men who work hard to keep things working. Men who collect the garbage, fix the power lines, plumb the pipes, police the streets, defend the country, and all the other invisible and visible jobs good men who deserve respect and appreciation, not death threats, do.
The thing is, men don’t HAVE to do anything for women. They don’t OWE women anything. And the more women act so blatantly unappreciative and entitled, the less men will want to do for women. I don’t think that is in anyone’s best interest, including that woman’s.
So listen up sister — shut it! And perhaps you should be charged with hate speech and encouraging hate crime and lose your job and all status in society while we are at it. Just like a man would be.
Hate speech is no more acceptable from a “minority” or “disadvantaged group” than from a majority. And how someone who supposedly is for equality and human rights could possibly believe otherwise is beyond me.
What do you think? Please share in the comments, and remember to respect other commenter’s views even if you disagree. Thanks!
13 Saturday Aug 2016
Posted in Fempire, Uncategorized
Tags
Like many women of my generation, I was raised with ridiculously high expectations.
I cannot remember anyone ever saying, “when you are a wife or mom…” but I can recall plenty of times where I heard, “When you go to college, when you have a career, etc.”
So I went to college. I had a lucrative and impressive career. And apparently when that wasn’t good enough, I decided to open my own business. I work all the time. People admire all I have accomplished. I’m “a somebody.”
Yep. I am a success by all accounts. Except more and more often lately I am wondering if what I should really do is give up the superwoman act, hang up the cape, and “just” be a mom and wife?
What good is being a superwoman if I am missing my children’s childhoods because I am always working? What good is being a superwoman if all I ever seem to talk or think about is my business and career? What good is being a superwoman when that quest has led to failed relationships and out of wack priorities?
I am seriously toying with the idea of chucking it all and being a nobody. Yep. A failed superhero.
I feel guilty even thinking about it. And yet I am thinking about it more and more and more.
Yep. I might just go ahead and waste my potential, go back to the kitchen, and while I am a little old for being pregnant, I could at least be barefoot.
I have lived the superwoman life and to be honest, I am over it.
First female president? Not me.
Nope. Super hero out!
01 Monday Aug 2016
Posted in Fempire, Uncategorized
Tags
children, heartbreaker, parenting, princess, red pill, relationships, sassy, self confidence, self esteem
I was cleaning out my car and something about my youngest’s booster seat caught my eye that I had never noticed before, the word “Fabulous!” in the middle of a heart on the headrest.
I guess I had chosen the seat simply because it was pink, but had never given much thought to the fabric. Lo and behold as I looked closer I saw in other hearts all over the chair these words, too:
It made me ponder the “go girl” culture that would put such words on a female toddler chair, and how early the “You are fabulous because you are a female” indoctrination begins and how widespread and almost invisible it has become in our culture.
Now don’t get me wrong, I think females can be fabulous, but being female alone does not automatically make one so. Fabulous is a title earned, not a title granted.
And, I don’t especially think “sassy” and “heartbreaker” are good qualities to encourage in a girl. I am not sure why anyone would?
The self esteem movement aimed to make kids (especially girls) feel better about themselves with external validation and unearned accolades such as these. But I would argue they are a double edged sword, subtly implying one is a victim rather than a victor.
True self esteem comes from inside, not outside. It is forged by overcoming struggle, mastering skills, and by proving oneself to oneself and the world. Internal based self esteem is solid, it is not based upon what OTHERS think, but rather what one thinks of SELF.
Self esteem based on external validation, in comparison, is a bottomless pit needing fuel from never ending accolades. It’s unstable. Not real. Dangerous, really. It’s the stuff drama queens, materialists, Facebook “like” trolls, and selfie obsessed gals are made of. “Tell me again, and again, and again you like me, I am fabulous, and worthy!” It lasts as long as the words hang in the air and then more outside validation is needed to keep propping up the externally-based self image.
Luckily my daughter can’t read the words on her car seat. And by the time she can, it will thankfully be obsolete.
Of course I will tell her she is fabulous, and that I love her, but I will also tell her when she is not being so fabulous, and will encourage her to develop a solid internal self confidence and self esteem so that she doesn’t need to be told over and over she has value. She’ll know that she does, and that part of that value is what she brings to the world, not just what she gets from it.
Kind of reminds me of that old tale about building one’s house upon the rock, and not upon the sand.
What do you think? Please share in the comments.
