Feminism, civilization, birth rates and the future.

From the dawn of civilization to the dawn of feminism, every culture more advanced than hunter-gatherers has relegated women to a second-class role in political status.

For a while, it was not clear why this is the case. Hunter-gatherers are sexual egalitarians (see https://libcom.org/files/EGALITARIAN%20SOCIETIES%20-%20James%20Woodburn.pdf ), so it would not be ridiculous to assume that when a hunter-gatherer culture adopts agriculture, it would preserve sexual equality. So it was a puzzle why 100% of all civilized societies adopted hard-line sexism.

Now, it's not really a puzzle any more. For the first time ever, a very large number of civilized nations have enforced sexual equality on their populations, with large democratic majorities even among men supporting this move. And the correlation with falling birth rates is extremely obvious.

All of the countries which brought in feminism have seen immense collapses in native birthrates. In these advanced nations, much of the births that do occur come from recent immigrants from nations where feminism is weak or nonexistent.

We can now propose a universal hypothesis that is in accordance with the facts to date, and also falsifiable: In a civilized nation-state, and barring extreme resource windfalls, if the state implements real equality for women, birth rates will contract to a point where depopulation will become a chronic and ongoing problem.

If this hypothesis is correct, we know where the "mysterious" plague of sexism came from. Without sexism, no civilized culture was able to replicate its population.

There probably were feminist proto-civilizations, we may speculate with justified confidence, but the collapse in birth rates meant that they never got to make any imprint on history.

If true, this has implications for the future of the race. Many feminists might say "so? Is there really anything so wonderful about humanity anyway?" That's a value judgement.

But the fact remains that there will be a human race, for the next several thousand years (barring use of WMDs), and the prospects for feminism in future centuries is not bright, based on the data available to us right now. Population growth remains highest in those zones where feminism is illegal or very unpopular.

While the feminist movement is close to all-powerful now, it is literally not going to reproduce itself into future generations.

This subreddit, TRP, foreveralone etc. are all mere symptoms of this macro-syndrome. While feminism is arguably wonderful for the individual women involved (apart from the ones who wanted a large family) it is demonstrably fatal for the culture within which those same feminists live.

Again, I'm not making a value judgement. If you think it's a good thing for a culture to disappear, who am I to say you're wrong?

We can take the hypothesis above and make a generalization about the human species, true at the present moment but perhaps not for future generations:

Homo sapiens is maladapted to any situation where women are free agents and their method of survival requires civilization.

This is also falsifiable. To falsify the statement, you need to show me a feminist, civilized state that can sustainably replicate its population without importing people from non-feminist regions or by means of unsustainable hand-outs. (This last condition is to counter possible uses of Norway as an example. Norway has managed to slow the bleeding, but that's because the nation has a population smaller than New York, and a trillion-dollar petroleum-wealth fund which it uses to pay for stunningly comprehensive childcare. Not an option that the USA could emulate even if it wanted to.)

So we can say with a high degree of confidence that the currently-feminist parts of the world will have much smaller populations or they will have populations largely composed of immigrants from the non-feminist world (assuming the non-feminist world does not switch to feminism).

These immigrant populations might convert to feminism, which means they will shrink too over time as feminism works its birthrate-destroying magic. Or they'll stay non-feminist and maintain population levels, forever changing the culture their forebears moved into.

The point is, in future generations (definitely not this one) humanity will probably really evolve.

Up until now, humanity has "resolved" the problem of women's liberation killing birthrates by simply reducing all women to chattels of their male relatives.

Now, we're letting women do as they please, birthrates are collapsing as a result, but we're staying the course so far. Ultimately, it's best for the species if the women who choose not to have kids follow their bliss and remove themselves from the gene pool.

We'll have to euthanize billions of old people (yeah, that means you guys reading this, sorry!), because there won't be enough resources to care for us in our old age, but once that's over with, humanity can really evolve.

The women who choose to have kids will, by definition, be the ones who are not maladapted to living freely in a civilization. So, for all that it's difficult for the incels and tumblrinas to live life today, and for all the horrific suffering they'll experience in old age, something wonderful is going to finally come out of it.