Discussion: Why have the people in power let feminism become so powerful?

Demonspawn · 2015-10-02T23:11:20+00:00

Maybe I'm cynical or paranoid, but I believe that the people on top stay on top because they are willing to do whatever is necessary to keep them in power.

Including taking mostly male-paid taxes to fund services which go to mostly women, earning votes from women's 55% control of suffrage.

There's a reason the US government has increased in size by 2000%, relative to GDP, since the 19th Amendment.

They do these things because opposing them will get them voted out of office by women.

2015-10-02T22:48:58+00:00

Moral hazard.

Franchise should never have been granted without responsibility.

HotZone_ · 2015-10-02T23:27:48+00:00

The push for women in STEM etc. is really about wage reduction. Two drivers of higher wages are low supply and longer experience. By pushing women into STEM, the supply of workers is increased. Many will retire early, or take leave to have children. They thereby contribute to a drop in the average experience level.

Disagree with this. I think feminists are simply running out of issues, so the gender imbalance in STEM is a logical area of focus.

The push for education of women in 3rd world countries is really about population control. This is clearly communicated through the materials from the U.N. and others. A higher level of education among women leads to a lower birth rate.

Agree with this. Henry Kissinger once said, “Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries”.

Education and birth control are of course good things. But pushing feminist ideology ("patriarchy" etc.) will harm the social fabric of poor nations by breaking up families.

Divide and conquer: A society divided by internal conflicts based on gender, race or sexual orientation are distracted from the real problem. The struggle between the rich and the poor.

This is the big one. Westerners have a very naive and pollyanish view of their rulers, and by rulers I mean the 0000.1 percent that controls most of the wealth. The term "conspiracy theory" is a form of psychological warfare. We're supposed to believe that the people who rule over us just sort of stumble around blindly with no foresight. That's absurd. As Michael Parenti put it in his essay "conspiracy-phobia on the left":

Often the term “conspiracy” is applied dismissively whenever one suggests that people who occupy positions of political and economic power are consciously dedicated to advancing their elite interests. Even when they openly profess their designs, there are those who deny that intent is involved.

Those who suffer from conspiracy phobia are fond of saying: “Do you actually think there’s a group of people sitting around in a room plotting things?” For some reason that image is assumed to be so patently absurd as to invite only disclaimers. But where else would people of power get together – on park benches or carousels? Indeed, they meet in rooms: corporate boardrooms, Pentagon command rooms, at the Bohemian Grove, in the choice dining rooms at the best restaurants, resorts, hotels, and estates, in the many conference rooms at the White House, the NSA, the CIA, or wherever. And, yes, they consciously plot – though they call it “planning” and “strategizing” – and they do so in great secrecy, often resisting all efforts at public disclosure. No one confabulates and plans more than political and corporate elites and their hired specialists. To make the world safe for those who own it, politically active elements of the owning class have created a national security state that expends billions of dollars and enlists the efforts of vast numbers of people.

Naturally there are quacks who propagate outrageous conspiracy theories, but there are also credible researchers like Peter Dale Scott.

Feminism seems to have developed organically. Then, at some point, elites recognized they had a good thing with the whole "war of the sexes" and began funding the movement both directly and indirectly. It seems to have happened during and after the FBI's COINTELPRO against the "New Left" in the 60s and 70s. Thus we find the head of the San Francisco field office writing in a classified memo:

"The Women's Liberation Movement may be considered as subversive to the New Left movements as they have proven to be a divisive and factionalizing factor."

The primary architect of the American constitution, James Madison, was particularly concerned about what he termed the "majority faction." Specifically, he was concerned that the majority might come together in a united front and re-appropriate wealth from the rich. Nothing has changed since that time. Elites maintain power by keeping their populations divided. The sex war is a perfect way of accomplishing this. Both the "left" and the "right" are essentially acting as useful idiots for the ruling class.

ZimbaZumba · 2015-10-03T06:15:50+00:00

Feminism has little affect on the powerful such as the Koch brothers, Clintons or the Bush family. Such people live in a different world, pretty much in a different dimension.
Men have traditionally been the threat to those in power, keeping men subdued is to their advantage.
Feminism has doubled the work force, removing women from their children and into the work force. What capitalist oligarch would object to that?
Anything that polarises a people is a windfall for politicians.

Lethn · 2015-10-02T22:44:53+00:00

I think it's a very real possibility, if you divide up the populace and make them believe they're being represented based on ethnicity, class and gender then the become much easier to control.

Especially if you have money flowing to just about every corner of the political compass. If you guys really do care about genuine equality be extremely wary of endorsements from mainstream politicians I suspect now that MRA positions and issues are getting popular you'll see these people sensing and opportunity to get elected.

SlashSero · 2015-10-03T00:26:30+00:00

Because feminism is a powerful way to herd the female vote. In the past there were politicians that wanted to give certain races exclusive rights while punishing others. Now that is no longer accepted by the majority of society, so they move towards other now popular methods like granting exclusive rights to women while punishing men at random.

Pornography_saves_li · 2015-10-04T02:21:51+00:00

Who funds feminism, the government, or the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation?

Trick question, it's both.

When all levels of government and the richest people on the planet, wholeheartedly support something that makes no sense, and destroys society, only a fool refuses to take note.

DavidByron2 · 2015-10-03T01:39:53+00:00

I usually answer this question with your point (3) there. Makes sense. After all the US government is very right wing (both democrats and Republicans) and yet here they are funding and endorsing a supposedly left wing movement. What's up with that?

The answer is that feminists are not left wing at all by right. They divide the Left and drive a wedge between different parts of the working class. That's the one thing that the elites care about most: not waking up to an armed revolution because the workers decided maybe they don't need asshole psychopaths to take all their money and spend it on crap for them.

The historic record shows the elites did the same thing with race differences, by encouraging racism to divide and conquer. Now they are doing it with sex. Not that the feminists are necessarily "in" on this. There's no need for a conspiracy theory. Elites simply are backing something they see is doing them good.

xNOM · 2015-10-03T00:56:36+00:00

LOL. Dude... The politicians and CEOs are not running the world for their own benefit.

EDIT: Your are asking the wrong question. The correct question is: why have women let men run the world for them? Answer: Men are better at it, and western female voters choose the ones who take care of women.

ThePigmanAgain · 2015-10-03T08:44:28+00:00

Floods women into the workforce and therefore lowers wages. It also damages the common man psychologically. And that's only the start. Here's a piece i wrote last year. Sooner or later i will get round to doing the followup pieces...

http://thepigmancometh.com/2014/05/21/feminism-the-plutocracys-lapdog/

Edit: Naked tit below fold, hence slightly NSFW.

v573v · 2015-10-03T18:42:50+00:00

Probably the single biggest contribution is that there's been 22 years of first daughters in the White House and no first sons.

There's nothing more hostile to boys and men than the father of a daughter.

ThePigmanAgain · 2015-10-03T16:07:27+00:00

Because the people in power on the left are essentially communists.

Neofeminism is really Feminism Plus, meaning feminism plus cultural marxism. Neofeminists are their political shock troops.

Title	Discussion: Why have the people in power let feminism become so powerful?
Author	Sinisus
Upvotes	12
Comments	27
Date	October 2, 2015 10:39 PM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3na5uy/discussion_why_have_the_people_in_power_let/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/discussion-why-have-the-people-in-power-let.970179 https://theredarchive.com/post/970179

Comments