Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Seriously. Single motherhood is f*cking terrible.IYO, is women entering the workforce and being able to earn a paycheque and vote, commensurating the increase in social safety nets for single mothers, a damaging thing to the working class of the West? I am also taking into account the effect on wages with the sudden influx of economically viable tax-paying workers. I don't know if it is a causation, but there is definitely a strong correlation with the inability of a single earner being able to support a household with women entering the workforce. And the decrease in marriages, increase in divorces, and decrease in happiness in women and men.
I am talking from a purely data-driven point of view. Talent is so rare, and our lives are so short, we should try and give every human being the right to become an economically productive, and functioning member of society to live out their dreams.
This seems almost like an individual vs. collective argument.
Too bad human beings are so shit with positions of power and terrified of change. Men or Women can't be trusted having economic power over the other gender and keep everyone happy. Although, data suggests a majority were happy vs. now.
I recently learned, that there is no biological imperative for sexism (Unlike racism). I'm talking about classic sexism. So this war between the sexes that is currently ongoing almost seems manufactured. Fracture the working class. Being a stay at home mom is seen as a problematic choice by some. Which I don't really understand why. The older I get, the more I read, the more data I examine, the more I'm starting to realize that either there is a major conspiracy or more likely, the system that created the golden age of the West was so fragile, so goddamn unlikely, that changes are made to it at our own peril. And humans tend to take things for granted and be rash.
Thoughts? I wouldn't broach such a subject with anyone but yourself, because you'll have no problem tearing me apart if my facts are incorrect and won't get emotional about the topic.
You're mostly correct.
Funnily enough, the limited information we have on properly conducted Universal Basic Incomes resulted in LESS single-motherhood. It's because women were less likely to enter into relationships. Something about having a stable income resulted in more conservative relationship choices.
And you're not the only one to think that the women's liberation movement had the unintended consequence of creating single motherhood. All of the privileges but not of the responsibility of that liberation is what we have now.
You can't just liberate women in Western society but have no social safety nets for them. We need universal healthcare and a UBI (Fair Tax plan has this). You'd see far less single mothers. And that means much better outcomes for children.
Guess what? Same exact reasons exist for Black Americans. We went from 97% dollar to dollar parity between working age black men vs. working age white men in 1905 to something like 55%. That was specifically due to the Civil Right Movement. That's what the CRM got us: poorer, less-educated, less-functional, black people. You can't liberate a demographic but not take responsibility for post-liberation.
Many people would say my positions are racist and sexist. But the facts are indisputable. They are not even controversial in the psychology, criminology, and sociology circles. Becomes morons keep calling out these things as sexist and racist, we are unable to have true dialogue about them. And that means we cannot make progress.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You're mostly correct.Funnily enough, the limited information we have on properly conducted Universal Basic Incomes resulted in LESS single-motherhood. It's because women were less likely to enter into relationships. Something about having a stable income resulted in more conservative relationship choices.
And you're not the only one to think that the women's liberation movement had the unintended consequence of creating single motherhood. All of the privileges but none of the responsibility of that liberation is what we have now.
You can't just liberate women in Western society but have no social safety nets for them. We need universal healthcare and a UBI (Fair Tax plan has this). You'd see far less single mothers. And that means much better outcomes for children.
Guess what? Same exact reasons exist for Black Americans. We went from 97% dollar to dollar parity between working age black men vs. working age white men in 1905 to something like 55% at present. That was specifically due to the Civil Rights Movement. That's what the CRM got us: poorer, less-educated, less-functional, black people. You can't liberate a demographic but not take responsibility for post-liberation.
Many people would say my positions are racist and sexist. But the facts are indisputable. They are not even controversial in the psychology, criminology, and sociology circles. Because morons keep calling out these things as sexist and racist, we are unable to have true dialogue about them. And that means we cannot make progress.
Corrected some of the mistakes in my post. I wish I could edit after 15 minutes.
Re: Adam has everyone fooled, he's not actually a good person.
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
So I asked Adam today how that collusion was going and he says "Hows raising someone else's child." Meaning it as an insult.Just goes to show you Adams social concern and, do good to other people etc, is just full of crap.
The guy is a fraud. Attacking me over helping raise a kid without a father.
Disgusting
My own thread, dedicated to me? I am honored!
But I suppose I did not leave you much of an alternative, since I blocked you for sending me unsolicited and harassing private messages.
Tell me, what is it like being a literal cuck?
Originally posted by Putinbot1
So you tried to provoke him and he said something nasty Broly.
He started sending me harassing, unsolicited private messages again, just as he did before the last time he was banned—a time he admits he was deeply-troubled, and his life was out-of-control.
It should come as no surprise that he is back in that place, because his deranged posting behavior has returned as well; creating 50 new threads a week on the same subject, and averaging over 80 posts a day.
At one time, he was fond of calling his political opponents "cucks." I just pointed out to him that technically, he is a cuck, because his girlfriend has convinced him to raise and provide resources for the child of another man.
I did not place a value judgment on it one way or another. He is the one who took offense to it, so he must think there is something wrong with it. If you are cuck, be proud of it, I say.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He started sending me harassing, unsolicited private messages again, just as he did before the last time he was banned—a time he admits he was deeply-troubled, and his life was out-of-control.It should come as no surprise that he is back in that place, because his deranged posting behavior has returned as well; creating 50 new threads a week on the same subject, and averaging over 80 posts a day.
At one time, he was fond of calling his political opponents "cucks." I just pointed out to him that technically, he is a cuck, because his girlfriend has convinced him to raise and provide resources for the child of another man.
I did not place a value judgment on it one way or another. He is the one who took offense to it, so he must think there is something wrong with it. If you are cuck, be proud of it, I say.
This is why I stopped reading/replying to his post weeks ago. He’s back to his old unhinged self and that only leads to one outcome and I don’t want to be part of that again.
Re: Re: Adam has everyone fooled, he's not actually a good person.
Originally posted by Adam_PoEthat's not what cuck means
My own thread, dedicated to me? I am honored!But I suppose I did not leave you much of an alternative, since I blocked you for sending me unsolicited and harassing private messages.
Tell me, what is it like being a literal cuck?
Cuck : a weak or servile man (often used as a contemptuous term for a man with moderate or progressive political views).
He should be looking at himself😂