The Death of Feminism and the Matriarchy

[Eodnhoj7]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/n ... ender/amp/

The feminists are getting raped by PC now. LOL. Funny how things "cycle". Let's see how "empowered" they are.


So the feminist condemned the patriarchy and want a matriarchy.

The transgenders come along and condemn the patriarchy and the matriarchy...so that women are now the oppressors and not just men.

So the patriarchy and matriarchy, both crushed, will have to join to crush the oppression of the transgenders.

We are entering a post patriarchal/matriarchal era, and the only way to deal with the transgender threat (as all extremes are a threat) is to create a "triarchy" where men and women have respective roles to form civilization through a family unit where the "child" is the third element.

Where the father was in charge before, then the "mother" (as evidenced by the single parent patriarchal structure) now the father and mother have to work together to ensure the survival of the child.

[Frank N Stein]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/n ... ender/amp/

The feminists are getting raped by PC now. LOL. Funny how things "cycle". Let's see how "empowered" they are.


So the feminist condemned the patriarchy and want a matriarchy.

The transgenders come along and condemn the patriarchy and the matriarchy...so that women are now the oppressors and not just men.

So the patriarchy and matriarchy, both crushed, will have to join to crush the oppression of the transgenders.

We are entering a post patriarchal/matriarchal era, and the only way to deal with the transgender threat (as all extremes are a threat) is to create a "triarchy" where men and women have respective roles to form civilization through a family unit where the "child" is the third element.

Where the father was in charge before, then the "mother" (as evidenced by the single parent patriarchal structure) now the father and mother have to work together to ensure the survival of the child.

You appear to be confusing 1950s American sitcoms with all of human history. Women have been bringing up their children alone for as long as they have been having children.

[Eodnhoj7]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/n ... ender/amp/

The feminists are getting raped by PC now. LOL. Funny how things "cycle". Let's see how "empowered" they are.


So the feminist condemned the patriarchy and want a matriarchy.

The transgenders come along and condemn the patriarchy and the matriarchy...so that women are now the oppressors and not just men.

So the patriarchy and matriarchy, both crushed, will have to join to crush the oppression of the transgenders.

We are entering a post patriarchal/matriarchal era, and the only way to deal with the transgender threat (as all extremes are a threat) is to create a "triarchy" where men and women have respective roles to form civilization through a family unit where the "child" is the third element.

Where the father was in charge before, then the "mother" (as evidenced by the single parent patriarchal structure) now the father and mother have to work together to ensure the survival of the child.

You appear to be confusing 1950s American sitcoms with all of human history. Women have been bringing up their children alone for as long as they have been having children.

Actually prior to the industrial revolution, where fathers went off to work, the child would work/hunt/farm with the father. Add in the fact business's such as winemaking or blacksmithing were often pass down through families, we cannot equate a blip in history (the 1950's) as the foundational premise of "the good life".

We don't know what "the good life" is. We can observe certain ideological boundaries which define reality; hence patriarchy and matriarchy existed while "existing" in various fragmented barely identifiable forms today.

[Frank N Stein]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/n ... ender/amp/

The feminists are getting raped by PC now. LOL. Funny how things "cycle". Let's see how "empowered" they are.


So the feminist condemned the patriarchy and want a matriarchy.

The transgenders come along and condemn the patriarchy and the matriarchy...so that women are now the oppressors and not just men.

So the patriarchy and matriarchy, both crushed, will have to join to crush the oppression of the transgenders.

We are entering a post patriarchal/matriarchal era, and the only way to deal with the transgender threat (as all extremes are a threat) is to create a "triarchy" where men and women have respective roles to form civilization through a family unit where the "child" is the third element.

Where the father was in charge before, then the "mother" (as evidenced by the single parent patriarchal structure) now the father and mother have to work together to ensure the survival of the child.

You appear to be confusing 1950s American sitcoms with all of human history. Women have been bringing up their children alone for as long as they have been having children.

Actually prior to the industrial revolution, where fathers went off to work, the child would work/hunt/farm with the father. Add in the fact business's such as winemaking or blacksmithing were often pass down through families, we cannot equate a blip in history (the 1950's) as the foundational premise of "the good life".

We don't know what "the good life" is. We can observe certain ideological boundaries which define reality; hence patriarchy and matriarchy existed while "existing" in various fragmented barely identifiable forms today.

And if there was no father to 'work/hunt/farm' with? (Hardly an uncommon occurrence).

[Eodnhoj7]

You appear to be confusing 1950s American sitcoms with all of human history. Women have been bringing up their children alone for as long as they have been having children.

Actually prior to the industrial revolution, where fathers went off to work, the child would work/hunt/farm with the father. Add in the fact business's such as winemaking or blacksmithing were often pass down through families, we cannot equate a blip in history (the 1950's) as the foundational premise of "the good life".

We don't know what "the good life" is. We can observe certain ideological boundaries which define reality; hence patriarchy and matriarchy existed while "existing" in various fragmented barely identifiable forms today.

And if there was no father to 'work/hunt/farm' with? (Hardly an uncommon occurrence).

Matriarchy, or an adoptive patriarchy through a mentor. The point lends itself to probabilism, relative to absence of father, because where the father is present we are still left with an inherent patriarchal structure.

[Frank N Stein]

Actually prior to the industrial revolution, where fathers went off to work, the child would work/hunt/farm with the father. Add in the fact business's such as winemaking or blacksmithing were often pass down through families, we cannot equate a blip in history (the 1950's) as the foundational premise of "the good life".

We don't know what "the good life" is. We can observe certain ideological boundaries which define reality; hence patriarchy and matriarchy existed while "existing" in various fragmented barely identifiable forms today.

And if there was no father to 'work/hunt/farm' with? (Hardly an uncommon occurrence).

Matriarchy, or an adoptive patriarchy through a mentor. The point lends itself to probabilism, relative to absence of father, because where the father is present we are still left with an inherent patriarchal structure.

I'm pretty sure that makes no sense whatsoever.

[Eodnhoj7]

And if there was no father to 'work/hunt/farm' with? (Hardly an uncommon occurrence).

Matriarchy, or an adoptive patriarchy through a mentor. The point lends itself to probabilism, relative to absence of father, because where the father is present we are still left with an inherent patriarchal structure.

I'm pretty sure that makes no sense whatsoever.

Sometimes there is a father.
Sometimes there is not.
The presence of a father reflects a patriarchal structure.
Sometimes there is a patriarchal structure.
"Sometimes" observes probabalism.
The patriarchy exists probabalistically in time, but exists none the less.

[Frank N Stein]

Any feminist worth her salt would be taking a stand against the idea that all a man has to do to become a woman is put on a dress and say he 'feels' like a woman. I imagine that many women would find that extremely insulting--a bit like the way painting on a black face and saying it makes you a black person could be insulting to actual black people.

[Eodnhoj7]

Any feminist worth her salt would be taking a stand against the idea that all a man has to do to become a woman is put on a dress and say he 'feels' like a woman. I imagine that many women would find that extremely insulting--a bit like the way painting on a black face and saying it makes you a black person could be insulting to actual black people.

They are "empowered"...I am sure they will sort it out...or not.