The Lost, Angry, and Hurting Feminists

 …As an economist, Reichart thinks in the language of marketplaces. His most pertinent and helpful observation is that there used to be only a “marriage market” for both men and women, to which all their sexual thinking was directed, and in which sex and morality were inextricably linked. Reliable contraception, however, created a separate, morality-neutral “sexual market,” which all young men and women now feel bound to explore before marriage, resulting in a decline in the marriage market and therefore a decline in women’s and children’s well-being.

In the marriage market, the costs and benefits are equally divided between men and women. But in the sex market, while young women flourish for a while, men’s benefits eventually rise and women’s fall. That’s because women in their thirties defer to their biological clocks and actively seek to enter the marriage market, while men have no such constraints.

So, forced by their biological clocks (one of nature’s few remaining trump cards in the battle between technology and natural law), women leave a market where they had bargaining power to enter a market of male scarcity, where marriage-minded women are in oversupply. The competition for available men is intense, which results in women striking bad deals at the margins in order to satisfy their need for children. Reichart argues that such marriages, embarked on with a lower level of commitment than pre-Pill days, leave little wiggle room for disappointment, which, coupled with greater opportunity for infidelity, especially for men (women in the sex market like older men), in turn produces higher divorce rates. All observers agree that divorce hurts women and children more than it does men.

Only one institution stood, and stands, foursquare against the Pill. The Roman Catholic Church predicted that foolproof contraception would lead to the classic “tragedy of the commons”: family breakdown, the early sexualization of children, rampant abortion and women’s disinvestment from the home….(Source)

The fact is that the old guard feminists of today don’t really believe in true emancipation or happiness for women much younger than they are.  The feminists want their “daughters” to drudge through the same misery, bitterness, and loneliness that they are now experiencing.  Their goal has never been about true gender rights.  If it were, they would oppose abortion on the basis of gender – which they don’t.  And they would be disburbed by the fact that contraception is really for irresponsible men and not ultimately for women who have to settle for some loser later on in life because that’s the “sex economy” which contraception has created.  Why would a heathen man want to get married with all of the responsibilities and duties that that entails, when he can get sex for “free”, by playing the younger market now?  And when he gets older, he can parachute into marriage with a younger woman in her mid to late 30s  because the 20-year olds won’t look at him any more.  As we see in society today, there are more and more marriages between an older man and a younger woman.  This confirms Reichart’s thesis in spades.  If it wasn’t for lads like yours truly, there wouldn’t be any equitable marriages around. :mrgreen:   What the feminist fools did not realize is that marriage was there to protect women, not men!

So, why do the feminists keep droning on about “women’s rights” when they really don’t care about happiness for their “sisters”?

It’s a simple answer:  justification.  They bought into the lie that feminism was the ticket to happiness.  They might have had one or two abortions.   They’ve never been successful in a long term relationship.  They’re pushing 55 or 60.  They are now alone.  They have no kids.  Their only consolation is the internet and pounding into a key board or yelling at a computer screen.    It’s about justifying the poor choices they’ve made in their lives.  The ideology serves their own self righteousness.  It’s all they’ve really got left. And it’s really very, very sad.

Even now, though, they have an opportunity to turn and accept healing and forgiveness. But sadly for most, their hatred and pride is too great for God’s love to reach them.

But even sometimes, even very successful women let down their guard and yearn for the life that was not lived.

One thought on “The Lost, Angry, and Hurting Feminists

  1. “If it were, they would oppose abortion on the basis of gender – which they don’t. ”

    That is an outright lie. I have never, never, never heard a feminist condone gender-based abortion, and I have very, very frequently heard them screaming blue murder about it.

    And you seem to assume that nothing else has changed in the last 40 years to account for girls’ unhappiness, which is an assumption roughly the size of the national debt. For a start, galloping materialism was never likely to make people happy, especially not combined with the increasing gap between the rich and poor.

    And you assume that every marriage used to be happy – that nobody married very young and then found themselves stuck with a violent loser with no escape. Another huge assumption.

    And that no men long for kids or a soul mate, just for sex.

    And that no women ever felt forced to get married to survive economically.

    And that age-gaps in marriage are a new thing. They aren’t. They’re still very popular in male-dominated societies, like India. In fact more women are marrying younger men, at least in the UK, (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3312377.stm)

    It would be nice if people checked their facts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
26 − 16 =