DarkStar
R1bcel
★★★★★
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2022
- Posts
- 37,873
According to certain News articles by feminist & their allies & the such, if foids held more positions of power, the world would see fewer conflicts.
Here's an example of this, from within this article:
-Foids will utilize a crisis to extend their power & overreach, as exemplified by the pandemic
-Everything is twisted in a way to suite women, as hinted by the ": Muh pandemic was a crisis for gender quality"
However, let's try & compare this to historical accounts of foids holding power: Since oftentimes, history has a manner of "mirroring" itself or having many parallels throughout its accords.
In China, during the waring states period, foid leaders were notably more cruel to their subjects in comparison to their male counterparts.
Not to mention, her reign eventually ended in chaos:
Another example, would be that of Mary the First of England, more commonly known as Bloody Mary
Despite the short duration of her reign, it consisted of a high degree of violence:
Now, let's take a look at how this holds up in modERn day comparisons:
In 1982, Margaret Thatcher responded with military action when Argentina invaded and occupied the Falkland Islands. Thatcher made the decision to go to war to recover the islands, despite warnings from several male members of Parliament and her advisers; even Ronald Reagan intervened & urged for peace talks.
Instead, Thatcher went ahead with military action and personally ordered the sinking of the Argentine ship, Belgrano, killing more than 300 sailors.
In 2011, Hillary Clinton lobbied Obama for military action in Libya, going against the council of male leaders including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and national security adviser Thomas Donilon.
Today, much of the most reckless, backstabbing, myopic, and disdainful American foreign policy is the brainchild of Victoria Nuland and Samantha Power, who has quite the track record:
Now, how do any sort of biological factors play a role? well, let's take a look at some research:
This thread I did awhile back discerns information from a journal article as to how when foids are put into positions of power, they tend to exhibit more masculine traits: Of course, this is non-natural for them so it will ultimately, be problematic.
This article claims the following:
Of course again, they "said the quiet part out loud" & basically re-affirmed our beliefs, but then tried to cover it up with the ": Muh Gender stereotypes made them this way bro!1!1!"
Another plausible theory, lies within the fact that due to foids having a noticeably higher stress threshold, which when challenged always tends to run in a frantic disorderly manner- this can be exhibited by foids behavior under other similar circumstances.
Overall takeaway- foids don't belong in power, and are more prone to start and/or execrate conflicts.
Here's an example of this, from within this article:
Sandberg said that, if half the world were run by women, she believes the world would be “safer” and “much more prosperous.”
I love how they have to bring up facts which again, prove our talking points here:In the early days of the coronavirus pandemic, women-led countries such as New Zealand performed better than their male-run counterparts, according to the Meta executive.
Still, the pandemic has raised a number of challenges for gender equality, Sandberg said. Covid was a “complete crisis for gender equality,” she said, adding women’s participation in the labor force is “plummeting all over the world.”
-Foids will utilize a crisis to extend their power & overreach, as exemplified by the pandemic
-Everything is twisted in a way to suite women, as hinted by the ": Muh pandemic was a crisis for gender quality"
However, let's try & compare this to historical accounts of foids holding power: Since oftentimes, history has a manner of "mirroring" itself or having many parallels throughout its accords.
In China, during the waring states period, foid leaders were notably more cruel to their subjects in comparison to their male counterparts.
Chinese history paints Empress Wu as a demonic woman who connived her way to power through murder and deceit. In fact, historians at the time claimed that she “killed her sister, butchered her elder brothers, murdered the ruler, [and] poisoned her mother. She is hated by gods and men alike” (Dash). Historians also highlighted Wu’s scandalous personal life, portraying her as sexually promiscuous because her second husband (Emperor Gaozong) was her stepson, and she also had relationships with younger men in her later years.
Ah, le "empathetic gender" striking again.Apparently “Wu killed her own infant daughter and blamed the murder on Empress Wang. Gaozong believed this and soon dismissed his empress and promoted Wu [Zhao] to the position; she immediately put Wang and Xiao to death and exiled their relatives and supporters” (Lee).
Not to mention, her reign eventually ended in chaos:
Wu’s reign came to an end in a coup in 704. Members of her court forced her to yield power to her exiled son, Zhongzong.
Another example, would be that of Mary the First of England, more commonly known as Bloody Mary
Despite the short duration of her reign, it consisted of a high degree of violence:
It’s undeniable that Queen Mary I did authorize violence. For instance, she famously burned 258 protestants at the stake as part of her effort to reinstate Catholicism in England (Solly).
Wu Zetian and “Bloody Mary”: Examining History’s Most Demonized Female Leaders — Power In Place
By: Oliva Hom and Julia Price, 2021 Summer Collaborators at Power in Place It’s a sad reality that in this patriarchal world, female leaders face far more criticism when compared to their male counterparts. In addition to shouldering the standard challenges of the political world, female politici
powerinplaceproject.com
Now, let's take a look at how this holds up in modERn day comparisons:
In 1982, Margaret Thatcher responded with military action when Argentina invaded and occupied the Falkland Islands. Thatcher made the decision to go to war to recover the islands, despite warnings from several male members of Parliament and her advisers; even Ronald Reagan intervened & urged for peace talks.
Thatcher’s decision to go to war to recover the islands was at odds with several members of Parliament and close advisers, as well as U.S. President Ronald Reagan, who repeatedly urged peace talks.
How the Falklands War Cemented Margaret Thatcher's Reputation as the 'Iron Lady' | HISTORY
The 74‑day Falklands War became Prime Minister Thatcher's "moment" that burnished her reputation as the Iron Lady.
www.history.com
Instead, Thatcher went ahead with military action and personally ordered the sinking of the Argentine ship, Belgrano, killing more than 300 sailors.
In 2011, Hillary Clinton lobbied Obama for military action in Libya, going against the council of male leaders including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and national security adviser Thomas Donilon.
Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafi’s forces. In fact, Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a “51-49” decision, it was Mrs. Clinton’s support that put the ambivalent president over the line.
The consequences would be more far-reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven, a place where the direst answers to Mrs. Clinton’s questions have come to pass.
Today, much of the most reckless, backstabbing, myopic, and disdainful American foreign policy is the brainchild of Victoria Nuland and Samantha Power, who has quite the track record:
Alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, she convinced Obama to bomb Libya, an act that he later admitted to be the biggest mistake of his Presidency.
R2P was the main thrust of her argument in favour of bombing.
Even though the USA succeeded in its efforts at regime change in Libya, the fallout was a disaster.
Libya descended into anarchy, slave markets popped up, Salafis moved in, and the migrant spigot closed by Gaddafi and Berlusconi was reopened.
Samantha washed her hands of it.
Thread by @FistedFoucault on Thread Reader App
@FistedFoucault: Meet Samantha Power: a true believer in "humanitarian intervention" who was jointly responsible in destroying Libya while serving on Obama's National Security Council. She is now head of @USAID and ...…
threadreaderapp.com
Now, how do any sort of biological factors play a role? well, let's take a look at some research:
[Blackpill]Putting Foids In Positions of Power Increases Their Testosterone.
Link to scientific journal-article: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1509591112 Human biology is typically studied within the framework of sex (evolved, innate factors) rather than gender (sociocultural factors), despite some attention to nature/nurture interactions. Testosterone is...
incels.is
This thread I did awhile back discerns information from a journal article as to how when foids are put into positions of power, they tend to exhibit more masculine traits: Of course, this is non-natural for them so it will ultimately, be problematic.
This article claims the following:
Likewise,high-rankingfemaleforeign policymakers—like Jeane Kirkpatrick, Madeline Albright, Condoleezza Rice, and Hillary Clinton—often advocate more aggressive foreign policies than their male counterparts.50 In the medieval period, married queens were more likely than kings to be aggressors in interstate conflicts.51 Examples of modern “iron ladies”—like Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, and Golda Meir—and ancient “warrior queens”—like Cleopatra, Boudica, and Isabella of Spain—lend further credence to the view that female leaders have political motivations to pursue relatively hard-line policies to combat gender stereotypes.
Of course again, they "said the quiet part out loud" & basically re-affirmed our beliefs, but then tried to cover it up with the ": Muh Gender stereotypes made them this way bro!1!1!"
Another plausible theory, lies within the fact that due to foids having a noticeably higher stress threshold, which when challenged always tends to run in a frantic disorderly manner- this can be exhibited by foids behavior under other similar circumstances.
Overall takeaway- foids don't belong in power, and are more prone to start and/or execrate conflicts.
@wereq @WorthlessSlavicShit @based_meme @Chudpreet @Ron.Belgrade @Uggo Mongo @LeFrenchCel @NoIdeaWhatToDo @GeckoBus @Nograsscel @Copexodius Maximus @Biowaste Removal @AsiaCel @Stupid Clown @Grim_Reaper @KillNiggers @cvh1991 @ElTruecel