Blackpill Women Opposed Female Rights, Not Men [Study]

[_meh]

women are in competition against other women

 

[Scatius Deletus]

This increased my IQ by 150 points

 

[Skyrim]

 

[Genetics_subhuman]

Just don’t agree society is matriarchal, bc we die but we also role (we as a gender)

 

[reveries]

Just don’t agree society is matriarchal, bc we die but we also role (we as a gender)

What power over women do you have as a man exactly?

 

[Diomedes_1112]

“Let women off the leash,” they said.

“It will be fun,” they said.

 

[m3nt4Lbl0ck3d]

Genuinely look forward to your posts, because clearly you dive deep and have a good ability to put it in layman terms. Thank you good sir, you truly are a treasure to this site. Whether that is a compliment or not I don't know but it is intended as one. Good stuff.

 

[GeckoBus]

Genuinely look forward to your posts, because clearly you dive deep and have a good ability to put it in layman terms. Thank you good sir, you truly are a treasure to this site. Whether that is a compliment or not I don't know but it is intended as one. Good stuff.

thank you
I need to clean up my writing though, too schizo. My hope is that someone reads it and then dives into it themselves, letting the sources I give guide them. There is much out there.

 

[SmhChan]

Other information showing that women were never kept from working or having power:

• From the 13th to the 17th Century most brewers were women, a survey in 1228 found 80% of brewers in towns were female [75].
• The norm of most women working lasted until the industrial era. A study of 1,350 working-class households from early 19th Century Britain suggests that the husbands’ proportion of family earning was as low as 55 percent.
• Between 1787 to 1815 in families with unemployed children (!) wives earned 41 percent of household income. [28]
• In this same period 66% of married women had a recorded occupation. [29]
• In 1833 Britain, women made up 57% – the majority – of factory workers. [30] [31]

Interesting stats, but I have found a conflicting article cited by the same source.
https://eh.net/encyclopedia/women-workers-in-the-british-industrial-revolution/
It seems foids mainly worked as maids or in textile factories. So, the above-mentioned stats could have artificial inflations.
According to 1851 Census of Great Britain, only 1060 men were unoccupied compared to 5294 females.
Then again, the article disputes with a claim that some foids were family members who worked in farms but weren't registered as such. But then again, the male children of a farmer also likely helped out at the farm without an official label.
I suppose what happened was that the nature of work in the past was much harsher which could explain why foids were happy to be "full-time housewives."

This in particular is another interesting part from the article...

A petition from Glasgow cotton manufactures makes the following claim, “In almost every department of the cotton spinning business, the labour of women would be equally efficient with that of men; yet in several of these departments, such measures of violence have been adopted by the combination, that the women who are willing to be employed, and who are anxious by being employed to earn the bread of their families, have been driven from their situations by violence. . . . Messrs. James Dunlop and Sons, some years ago, erected cotton mills in Calton of Glasgow, on which they expended upwards of [£]27,000 forming their spinning machines, (Chiefly with the view of ridding themselves of the combination [the male union],) of such reduced size as could easily be wrought by women. They employed women alone, as not being parties to the combination, and thus more easily managed, and less insubordinate than male spinners. These they paid at the same rate of wages, as were paid at other works to men. But they were waylaid and attacked, in going to, and returning from their work; the houses in which they resided, were broken open in the night. The women themselves were cruelly beaten and abused; and the mother of one of them killed; . . . And these nefarious attempts were persevered in so systematically, and so long, that Messrs. Dunlop and sons, found it necessary to dismiss all female spinners from their works, and to employ only male spinners, most probably the very men who had attempted their ruin.” First Report from the Select Committee on Artizans and Machinery, British Parliamentary Papers, 1824 vol. V, p. 525.

It's indeed silly to think men wouldn't be disgruntled at foids being employed. I believe there were a lot of workplaces (mills and factories) which exclusively hired foids. So, it resulted in loss of work for men.

I believe you mentioned in Iran, foids are some of the highest university attendees which is a result of families wanting occupied daughters for a better living standard for themselves. The govt seem to have taken some actions in that regard.

Women's education in Iran - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Women's education in Iran - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I believe foids in workforce is a double-edged sword, but for the most part it harms men and their status in general. For a poor economic state, it might seem like a good idea. A good idea for capitalist business-owners because cheap labor and a good idea for the individual because more financial contribution to the family. But further down the road, it harms men's status in society because "equal participation" in workforce still doesn't solve foids' SMV edge over men. Because of this SMV edge, they could complain about having to contribute to the family financially.

From the greenpiil.net article, I find this part especially delusional -

If society is serious about destroying gender roles we must:​

• Demand equal treatment in the family courts so men get equal custody, and sole custody is only give in exceptional cases;
• Make sure that child support is only paid in these exceptional cases;
• Make sure that in these child support is limited to only supporting the child, by using food vouchers and receipts.
• Remove all laws that still say men have to support women.

If these are implemented then we can expect to see the ‘pay gap’ disappear, equal numbers of female CEOs, engineers etc, and equal numbers of women studying STEM subjects.​

Foids don't care about CEO position, or STEM inclusion. They just cry about it to victimize themselves. As for money, they already make more money than average men. They can also resolve their money issue by larping as a trad-hoe or a hoe in general. You cannot simply impose policies of 'equality' and see changes. The Britain of 1800s cannot be compared 1 to 1 with the current world. Even then harshest jobs in comparison were all performed by men back then. It's all relative.

 

[GeckoBus]

Interesting stats, but I have found a conflicting article cited by the same source.
https://eh.net/encyclopedia/women-workers-in-the-british-industrial-revolution/
It seems foids mainly worked as maids or in textile factories. So, the above-mentioned stats could have artificial inflations.
According to 1851 Census of Great Britain, only 1060 men were unoccupied compared to 5294 females.
Then again, the article disputes with a claim that some foids were family members who worked in farms but weren't registered as such. But then again, the male children of a farmer also likely helped out at the farm without an official label.
I suppose what happened was that the nature of work in the past was much harsher which could explain why foids were happy to be "full-time housewives."

This in particular is another interesting part from the article...

It's indeed silly to think men wouldn't be disgruntled at foids being employed. I believe there were a lot of workplaces (mills and factories) which exclusively hired foids. So, it resulted in loss of work for men.

I believe you mentioned in Iran, foids are some of the highest university attendees which is a result of families wanting occupied daughters for a better living standard for themselves. The govt seem to have taken some actions in that regard.

Women's education in Iran - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Women's education in Iran - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I believe foids in workforce is a double-edged sword, but for the most part it harms men and their status in general. For a poor economic state, it might seem like a good idea. A good idea for capitalist business-owners because cheap labor and a good idea for the individual because more financial contribution to the family. But further down the road, it harms men's status in society because "equal participation" in workforce still doesn't solve foids' SMV edge over men. Because of this SMV edge, they could complain about having to contribute to the family financially.

From the greenpiil.net article, I find this part especially delusional -

Foids don't care about CEO position, or STEM inclusion. They just cry about it to victimize themselves. As for money, they already make more money than average men. They can also resolve their money issue by larping as a trad-hoe or a hoe in general. You cannot simply impose policies of 'equality' and see changes. The Britain of 1800s cannot be compared 1 to 1 with the current world. Even then harshest jobs in comparison were all performed by men back then. It's all relative.

high iq reply
I also like that he listed that book as a source at bottom and said most of the data is from that book:

467.2 KB file on MEGA

mega.nz

This is also interesting

Favoured or oppressed? Married women, property and 'coverture'in England, 16601800

In the eighteenth century, the condition of English wives under ' coverture ' was both defended as one of privilege and attacked as worse than slavery. This article suggests that married women were not in reality confined within

www.academia.edu

 

[Genetics_subhuman]

What power over women do you have as a man exactly?

well back in the day we could do almost anything with them, right? That what the whole incel revolution was about