@dont_log_me_out's banner p

dont_log_me_out


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 19:31:20 UTC

				

User ID: 686

dont_log_me_out


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 19:31:20 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 686

I think the decline in fertility below 2.1 (replacement rate) can be directly linked to modern day feminism and women's rights. However, what I have noticed is that rich female friendly nations do far better in terms of birth rate than rich conservative strict gender role societies.

For example - France has a fertility rate around 1.8. 1.7 for the US. Germany 1.4.

In the east with more strict gender norms the rich societies however have far more abysmal fertility rates - Japan 1.3, South Korea 0.8, Taiwan 1.1, Singapore 1.2.

Now one may argue that the decline in fertility rate is not due to feminism and women's emancipation but rather due to improvements in wealth of society. However, a counterpoint to this is that faster modernizing societies; in terms of becoming more feminist, tend to have declining fertility rates even when not wealthy nations.

Example- Nepal - 1.8, India - 2.0-2.1.

Based on the above data I would posit that feminist societies result in fertility rates declining to below replacement rates, but once a country is wealthy it is far worse for the population to remain conservative than for it to be a feminist nation due to the fact that conservative rich nations do far worse on population growth than feminist nations.

Conclusion - modern feminism doomed/ saved human civilization to constant steady population decline and that's the best case scenario for population demographics from all the options currently available.

Thoughts?

Could you explain please, I do not understand.

That's pretty much arguing that your thoughts have no influence on your actions and I disagree with that notion. Otherwise any mental abuse isn't real abuse.

Exactly. You get it.

Can you give me the standard that defines a high quality contribution? Thank you.

Doesn't have to be conspirational. You may want less jews for the same reason you might want less white men on a board representing a diverse city, or more support programs for underprivileged black youth. Sometimes being from the same ethnic group results in similar experiences which may blind one to the experiences of other groups.

LOTR is a fantasy genre, most of those thin women movies are action movies or thriller movies. I would argue that one requires a higher standard of realism than the other.

The sexuality and sexual experiences of our children is one of those few times where a clear bias exists within each and everyone of us and if the science gave us an answer the was counter to that bias then we would deny and burn down the science department. That is to say, it's one of the few dark spaces in scientific discourse where the science becomes irrelevant by the end of the day due to extreme public blowback.

So honestly by the end of the day all I can say on the subject is that you will almost likely never get a satisfactory discussion on the subject matter if you go against the current acceptable standard at any point in history, and arguing for or against even neutrally is not worth the social status loss risk of doing so.

And just to further clarify, my statements here are not from a they don't want to hear they are wrong about 16 being too young position, rather my lack of joy is from a I hate science having dark no go spaces when it clashes against social beliefs and comfort zones.

Utilitarian systems or practice styles seem to survive the longest in a competitive environment so even with no active intent that's what we end up with?

You are obviously uneducated too but I do not see how that is relevant to our conversation now. ( I jest dramanaut. )

If feminism misguided then why South Korea collapsing first?

My thoughts are that feminism began as a misguided quest to treat women like men

Disagree unless you mean be given the same basic rights as men. Then the same financial and social freedoms as men. Acting like men was a very 2010's thing.

then was adopted by bitter harridans and predatory men who realized the sexual revolution and increasing destruction of traditional mindsets would secure them steady supplies of consequence-free young pussy

Disagree. 1960's feminism had a whimsical quality to it which would have genuinely attracted many followers who wanted to see the world be a nicer place.

at the expense of the stability and health of our previous culture (a boon for the former).

There weren't enough harridans in that time period. Most incels actually came to be in recent decades only.

The goal of feminism is to let women be the type of men they've always hated. It's no surprise this suffocates fertility.

That appears to have been the trend of only the newest wave of feminism.

I believe you are making the mistake of taking current day attitudes and extending them through previous historical time periods to come to conclusions as to what they were about.

Because the show keeps on selling.

Hey I never said I was an exception to the rule, i am just further proof of the rule being true.

then I would argue that we should accept both black elves and skinny women in our lives.

no but nobody can spend their whole lives with their thoughts and opinions about someone desynched from how they treat them there will be leaks.

Could you tell me what is HBD?

Thank you for the encouragement.

Mocking the mentally ill or looking down on everyone around you.

more than 10%. I assume if you have more than 10% sociopaths in your society then its likely gonna collapse.

I may have come from means I come from. I believe that's a colloquial phrase?

I did familiarize myself with them, do you expect a baby to walk perfectly with its first step because you showed it a diagram and gif of how to walk?

last line acknowledged.

Friends with Rick, bad by associating with terrible people.

No, I clearly mentioned wanting less whites on a board how have you equated that with affirmative action for whites?

Agreed with your last sentence. Idk, names change over centuries. Pretty sure most South Koreans in US would still be having Korean names but be American in every other way.

It's less a I am identifying with my cultural group thing and more a fuck it, I was born in America, whatever name I got is an American name now as well.

Again, not saying you are wrong, just saying you could probably find better metrics for level of assimilation than first name preference.

Disagree with your final point. America's greatest export of the past century has been it's culture. Name one country without pizza or superman. ( You may argue that Pizza isn't American and I would reply exactly, their cultural propagation is so extreme we even give the Americans claim of non-American western inventions. )

Agreed with everything you said in first para. Cheap birth control makes sense, but birth control is available to every single one of these countries yet they have different fertility rates so birth control isn't the only thing. I don't know how your statement about more global connectivity explains fertility decline. More peaceful world more people can leave their homes harder to find mates in a different geographical environment makes sense. However, any of your points that work are an additional reason for fertility decline but in no way state that feminist ideology is not a part of this population decline.

Why does that matter when native born women are french by nationality and birth? Wouldn't that result in their children being fully assimilated into french culture as they are 3rd generation french citizens by this point and generally 3rd to 4th gen is when the complete cultural assimilation period is complete?

However in Israel there is an extreme poverty rate which would explain the high fertility rate. The rich israeli's aren't the ones reproducing a lot, its the majority poor ones.