feminist?
Out of context: Reply #324
- Started
- Last post
- 683 Responses
- georgesIII0
so you are telling me you read the entire feminist history pdf I posted,
you read the first 15 pages of the book I posted..didn't I annotate the rotk link, and especially said I was sorry but that it was a good summary, why do people always want to ignore more than 100k years of evolution because for them it's old school and doesn't apply to basic biology concepts, if you look at it, this family structure is the only reason the human specie made it that far, the reason most of you are here and this same family structure is still practiced by the majority of earthling without any problems,
I could post a paper about human biology and anthropology that says the exact same thing rotk says but it will be 100+ pages, will you read it? Why are you trying to be obtuse just to be obtuse,
you guys are so stuck in your ism, that you will never ever take the time to study those social movements did to destroy what some people call the family unit, if you read the book link I posted, at least the first 15 pages, it would have given you an overview of why feminism only actually work in western countries, now you read this very detailed book then read the rotk link again and you will start to understand why feminist wasn't ever meant to include every "races", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bla…
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10…
http://www-a.ibit.uni-oldenburg.…"Socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism aim to destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and impoverish the state through large welfare entitlements."
maybe before taking the eugenicist stand and saying "The world has too many people already last time I checked." you could have actually checked if that statement was based on any real factual research, and realize that fertility rate are dropping across the entire western world..