themoralmindset

themoralmindset:

queenofthecloudss:

queenofthecloudss:

themoralmindset:

Feminism is benevolent sexism.

Feminism reduces the agency and responsibility of women to less than that expected of children.

Feminism pours scorn on women who make lifestyle choices outside of their manifesto.

Feminism scoffs at the notion of…

Poop is magical and has the ability to turn normally possibly intellectual posts into something that spreads toxic bullshit and is 100% untrue. 

See, you could have used your obvious intelligence to promote quality through justice, but you instead, however, decided to make a post that has a pretty misogynistic philosophy and almost encourages anti-feminism. It’s actually pretty sad. I wish I knew exactly why you think these things, but I’m sure I can’t sway you.

In what way was my post misogynistic?

I’m of the belief that women are capable of achieving success without the need for quotas, special initiatives or men “leaning back”. Feminism doesn’t agree.

I believe that women have the strength of character to not need coddling, protection from things that might hurt their feewings (#banbossy, #likeagirl), and the general hardships that come with everyday life. Feminism doesn’t agree.

I believe that a woman has the right to express whatever views she wishes without being mocked, derided and accused of betraying Tha’ Sisterhood (Women Against Feminism). Feminism disagrees.

I believe that a woman who chooses to have children and be a stay at home mother deserves all the respect in the world, not derision from those who see her as an indentured servant of an overbearing man in a microcosm of the Patriarchal construct. Feminism disagrees.

The way I see it, Feminism is far more misogynistic towards those that it pretends to represent than I could ever be. I have respect for and faith in women. Feminism sees them as children that require guidance, solicited or not.

If that makes me a misogynist, so be it. 

general-westergaard

arkaimcity:

  • The Founding Nations

The regions of the U.S. were settled by fundamentally different (both genetically and culturally) peoples of the Old World, and these cultures persist today. As outlined in Albion’s seed:

From 1629 to 1775, North America was settled by four great waves of English-speaking immigrants. These four groups differed in many ways—in religion, rank, generation and place of origin. They brought to America different folkways which became the basis of regional cultures in the United States. They spoke distinctive English dialects and built their houses in diverse ways. They had different ideas of family, marriage and gender; different practices of child-naming and child-raising; different attitudes toward sex, age and death; different rituals of worship and magic; different forms of work and play; different customs of food and dress; different traditions of education and literacy; different modes of settlement and association. They also had profoundly different ideas of comity, order, power and freedom which derived from British folk-traditions.

[…] The concluding section of Albion’s Seed explores the ways that regional cultures have continued to dominate national politics from 1789 to 1988, and still control attitudes toward education, government, gender, and violence, on which differences between American regions are greater than between European nations.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/32081.Albion_s_Seed

Virtually, America today is still culturally 60% northern European. The main reason America has remained so British culturally is because the millions of German, Irish, Scandinavians, Dutch, and other Europeans who came to the shores, along with their descendants, were close enough racially to assimilate culturally. Millions of Americans who are not ethnically Anglo-Saxon are culturally Anglo-Saxon:

New Englanders really were puritanical; Southern gentlemen genuine aristocrats; Quakers were very pious; and Southern highland clans feuded as they had in the old country. Fischer’s basic thesis is that although less than 20% of the present U.S. population has British antecedents, our British genesis is still the dominant factor determining our culture. This formative British culture, however, was not monolithic. America still reflects the regional, religious, and class divisions of 17th and 18th century Britain. […] The book for instance, lends weight to those who see a Teutonic/Celtic split between the American North and South. The theory is that the Puritans and Quakers came from the areas of England with heavy Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian influences while the cavaliers and southern high-landers originated from the more Celtic areas. […]
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p114_Rosit.html

Colin Woodard’s map of the “11 American Nations” (colourised version above):Data continually finds that all psychological and behavioural traits are in fact heritable; from political ideology, to criminality, to religiosity, to depression, etc. These regional, clan-like cultures that are present in the U.S., as in other regions of the world, shouldn’t seem surprising: they differ in their fundamental beliefs because of their genes. Genetic differences persist from the descendants of these initial settlers (suffused with the genes of subsequent immigrants, particularly in the old North). For this reason, attempting a broad psychological change in the American population would be a futile endeavour. The religious Deep South would not transition into Liberal New England/greater Yankeedom, just by making the former give up fundamentalist Christianity, for instance. Persuading the same Americans to accept further gun control policy? Not a chance.

There are in fact no shared “American values” in the U.S. There has never been a unified "American people." Only an American class. With differences greater than between European nations, the U.S. has always been divided:

[…] America’s most essential and abiding divisions stem from the fact that the U.S. is a federation composed of the whole or parts of 11 disparate regional cultures — each exhibiting conflicting agendas and the characteristics of nationhood — and which respect neither state nor international boundaries, bleeding over the borders of Canada and Mexico as readily as they divide California, Texas, Illinois or Pennsylvania. The differences between them shaped the scope and nature of the American Revolution, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution and, most tragically, the Civil War. Since 1960, the fault lines between these nations have been growing wider, fueling culture wars, constitutional struggles and those ever-present pleas for unity.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/11/08/which-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/

Much of this stems from the book, Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America, as well as in a later book by Colin Woodard, who describes his work in an article in Tufts Magazine (the source of the maps):

[…] For generations, these Euro-American cultures developed in isolation from one another, consolidating their cherished religious and political principles and fundamental values, and expanding across the eastern half of the continent in nearly exclusive settlement bands. Throughout the colonial period and the Early Republic, they saw themselves as competitors—for land, capital, and other settlers—and even as enemies, taking opposing sides in the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and the Civil War. There’s never been an America, but rather several Americas—each a distinct nation. There are eleven nations today. Each looks at violence, as well as everything else, in its own way.
http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html