The feminists have started to push for the majority (read ‘female’) elected government to use tax dollars (much of them taken from men) to pay for women to be mothers. In other words, as women continue to eliminate men from the family, they will have their governments take money from men and give it to women and their children to live on.

No kidding

This is exactly what Warren Farrell explored The Myth of Male Power, in the aptly titled “Government as Substitute Husband” section.

Once I believed the idea that, on principle, women “deserve” to vote. However, it is now plain to me that the situation described is the inevitable consequence of women voting.

Women expect to be taken care of

This is not “social conditioning,” it’s genetic programming, going back at least to the avian level of evolution, where pair-bonding was invented. Male birds have to bring something, usually food or a built nest, to females to induce them to mate. Among humans, this arrangement was “formalized” somewhere around 50-100,000 years ago, anthropologists conjecture (see, among other sources, Helen E. Fisher, The Sex Contract), when women began emulating sexual receptivity even when not fertile, to induce men to bring them food, protect them from sexual and other predation, etc., while they were tied up with nursing infants they had to haul around. Women instinctively expect to be taken care of.

When women begin taking part directly in the political process

I.e. voting, they naturally begin to transfer this expectation of care and protection from the imperfect men in their personal lives (fathers, brothers, suitors, husbands, and sons) to the State, which, as a relatively distant, conceptual entity, can be imagined, in minds that don’t think very hard, to be perfectible. And the new arrangement works, in the short run, anyway. Since all politicians need from (most) women is votes, they’re happy to give them everything they want in return; and when women learn this, their desires quickly become unlimited. They don’t just want “equality”–whatever that may mean–now they “want it all!” Not just “the vote,” but affirmative action and every other form of guaranteed outcome, heavily skewed divorce and related laws, welfare (supplied by single, working men) for “female heads of household,” etc. etc. Like a horse that’s got into the oats, they’ll literally keep eating until they bloat up and explode. They have no internal self-restraint, because they’ve never had to develop any before; previously they were restrained by men, and by circumstances, but now in the artificial world of political power they’re restrained by nothing.

Frankly, at this point I don’t see any way to stop it.

A Brave New World populated by “gender-transitioned” (Farrell’s term) perpetual pre-adolescents is the inevitable result of feminism. In the words of the late, lamented Edward Abbey, “A world of androgynes, encapsulated in beehive cities, fiddling with buttons penile, electronic and clitoral – that is the future beloved alike by the technocratic futurologists and throroughtly logical radical feminists. Cut off from their primordial animal natures, denying the biological wellspring of life, reproducing themselves through artificial insemination of laboratory wombs, the inhabitants of this glittering metallic city will live to the full the existence of rationally programmed robots. And what is the ideal robot but a properly processed human being?” (“The Future of Sex: A Reaction to a Pair of Books” [by Susan Brownmiller and Gloria Steinem], in One Life at a Time, Please )

Sure, “men” nowadays prolong adolescence to their 30s and 40s. They have no incentive to do otherwise; in fact, should they try to become men, i.e. developed adults, they’ll catch hell for sure, from the perpetually-preadolescent “women” (“Boys. Yech.”) Of Sex and the City.

For my part, I’m happy I’m finally old and tired enough not to be entirely under the domination of my hormones, and thus of the females who control the supply of what my hormones tell me I can’t live without. I know it’s nearly inconceivable to younger men–which I was myself not so long ago–but the only solution I see is for men to simply turn away from these women. Should I get close to another woman in this life, I very much doubt it’ll be an American woman. I saw an interesting website (don’t have the URL handy) from a guy who went to Southeast Asia to find a wife who was willing to give him a little respect in return for the traditional love, support and protection. Nothing’s perfect, of course, but this sounds at least doable.

Backed Up and Credited by – no-maam.blogspot.com