both me and
@WorthlessSlavicShit have shown that women were allowed to work and provide for themselves in the past. Only recently,
@WorthlessSlavicShit posted this thread on the matter:
Beatrice Moring, the volume’s editor, draws upon a broad array of sources to examine women, family and family property in Stockholm in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. She demonstrates that while women enjoyed fewer individual rights than their male counterparts, they were regularly...
incels.is
...
And then there is this from a thread of mine:
Even in earlier times, like ancient egypt, women were known to dominate certain trades.
Some quotes from the site greenpill.net
England in the late middle ages and after too:
View attachment 1403890
greenpill.net
What this suggests is that for most of history, both genders had to work out of sheer necessity. Women and men. Contrary to popular belief, women were not driven out of the workforce due to most work being physically too taxing for them. That's just a bias stemming from granting women hypo-agency, aka underestimating their capability to work and be pro-active, responsible agents of their own fate.
Only with the advent of the industrial revolution came the possibility of delegating work to only half of society (men) while the other half rotted in giant puppet houses, designer made for them.
Now on the topic of "patriarchy."
First off, the concept of patriarchy did not originate with christianity or arose naturally in culture. Its western origins can be found in ancient rome and greece. After the decline of these two cultures, the concept of the patriarch ruling over his family sovereign, disappeared. It was only revived during the enlightenment era, as interest in christianity faded and western society began idealizing the romans and greeks again.
A book that tackles this is "Those Terrible Middle Ages: Debunking the Myths" by Regine Pernoud. She points out that prior to the enlightment, women enjoyed far more priviliges and power in society than people imagine. The typical "oppression" ideas we associate with the time period actually came AFTER the middle ages, with roman/greek ideals of patriarchical leadership re-emerging in western culture, quote:
I have talked about this before, people have a narrow minded view of history. History in retrospect, seems monolithic. For 1000s of years, everything was the same. People lived in the same way apparently, there were no massive culture shifts etc. This is ludicrous when you write it out like this, yet most of us think like this unless challenged to reflect on it. What is it that we call "tradtionalism?" The period of the 1950s? The 1800s? The 1400s? Vastly different times.
The victorians pretended to be prudes, while being highly sexually charged. And in the time prior to the victorian era, public sexual stunts such as the ones performed by famous whore Priss Forthingham were completely permissiable. Every city had a red light district, often labeled "grope-cunt lane" (oddly somewhat reminiscient of Donald Trumps famous "grab them by the pussy" incident).
So, why not anchor "traditionalism" in that highly "degenerate" era of the pre-victorian morals, where at times one-in-five london women were playing the harlot? Yes, why not pick, let's say, ancient greece as the standard and allow sodomy of little boys again? Oh and this is being charitable of course, since there is no monolithic thing such as "ancient greece." Which time period of greece for instance, are we talking about? The time of the peleponesian war? The period of Alexander? The period under roman rule? What location in greece, and what customs are we basing ourselves on? Spartan, Macedonian, Athenian, Minoan?
There is no monolithic "traditionalism." We tend to view our time period as special, because it is closer to experience. Things seem to move faster when you are closer to them. But the further in the past or future something is, the slower it seems, the more distant, the more static, monolothic (if i say that word again you have permission to flay me alive). It is now march 8th 2025, 01:37PM where I live. If we turned back the clock to 1825, the average person would probably tell you some stupid current news event, how terrible the election was, bla bla bla. Shit that has been forgotten by our time. Only major events remain. Covid, Donald Trump, Star Wars - in 100 years it will all be forgotten.
What was the most popular play of the 1800s again? What was the most successful novel from the late 1800s? The richest person? Nobody knows. Google a list of these things and be astonished. Our time will be washed out just like that. Ukraine vs Russia, in 50 years nobody will give a fuck, they wont even know it happened. And then people may look back at our time and view it exactly like we view the 1800s now, in a weird, almost comically distorted way.
Do you every think about the "1810s?" - fuck no. So why would they think about "the early 2000s?" Their time scale will be something like "the 2050s." When you study history, notice how we glance over massive timespans like that. If I tell you to wait ten years for anything, you would lol at me. If I say, "the war of XYZ lasted ten years" we just glance over how long that would be if we had to experience it. Start noticing more of these archetypical thinking patterns:
- In every time period in human history, people believed in a soon collapse of the world or culture
- in every period, people believed their time period was especially bad (golden age myth)
- in every period, people complained about the youth being degenerate and cultural degredation through the youth
- in every period people believed in an "golden age" and/or "a dark age" that was to come or lay in the past (i.e. "the enlightenment" vs "the dark ages" or "before feminism" vs "after feminism" or "traditionalism" vs "after traditionalism). This is primitive black and white thinking we all fall for.
- in every period, people identify some sort of over-arching enemy/problem that is
currently responsible for the worldS woes (human nature, climate change, communism, capitalism etc). Notice I put currently into cursive. The threat has to be immediate, or it doesnt matter. Humans only emotionally care about immediate shit.
- you will be killed by a murder in your house at 12AM in two years - no reaction
- there is a murder in your house rn - instant panic
This is why propanda and manipulation always tries to get you with immediate threats and promises. Also study cults. Cults are just a micro-cosm version of normal society. Society is essentially just a giant cult, its just that since the cult behavior is normative and supported by a large majority, it is not seen as abnormal. Notice cults use the same type of doomsday thinking, in-group vs out-group tribalism, focusing on arch-enemies, specific ritualistic behaviors to keep you retarded, hazing/induction ceremonies followed by "re-christening" or baptising of the person followed by giving them a new name (i.e. I am XYZ, trans-queer afirming non-binary - or on this forum "i am 5'2 currcel, bananacel, ethnicel).
All groups operate like cults with baptisms, new names for new initiates, a trial period (greycels have to get 500 posts before being accepted) etc.
Our time is not special. Study things like negativity bias. Humans over-focus on negative events.
Example: In current cultural surveys, most people believe society is falling apart, crime is getting worse, "its not safe out there anymore."
In contrast however, crime statistics have shown a massive and consistent drop in criminal activity for the last 300 years, and a literally ridiculous acceleration of this phenomenon since the 1990s. Just google "the great crime drop." It has never been safer out there. Rape, murder and all the like are at an all time low in human history.
