>> |
Anonymous
>>217247 Sounds like you're the one that doesn't know the similarities between traditional gender roles from many cultures, despite your unwarranted smugness.
They all do have a certain correspondence in key values, such as women watching the children and working at light jobs, if any at all, that allow them more time for nurturing and birthing. Meanwhile men are automatically assumed more capable for more risky, time-consuming, or high-pressure jobs. In Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, whose displaced populations will one day rule over Europe by current trends through their sheer democratic electoral majorities, the women often have no apparent purpose in society but breeding and nurturing. You may hate the "backwardness" of it all in those countries, but that is merely your subjective judgment--you cannot argue with objective evolutionary success: it is not the children of busy western women, many of whom (18% of healthy women in America alone where birthrates are actually quite good for a western society) will go completely childless into spinsterhood, but rather the children of those women trapped in traditional societies that will inherit the future of the world. Before western women had suffrage and the expectation of working outside the home, the whole West was also expanding outward continually: it was called the colonial times, when a mother might easily have eight children, many of whom would emigrate to colonies seeking better prospects. Wherever women are treated traditionally, populations burgeon and emigrate elsewhere.
They usually bring their culture with them as they emigrate: or do most Americans still speak Iroquois?
Feminism and gender equality will fail to propagate themselves to future generations in the Darwinian struggle of competing memes (used here in a context broader than standard 4chan usage, as a unit of intellectual evolution, like their physical analogue, the genes).
|