It only makes perfect sense that they do this given the trajectory of feminism. they talk about liberating women from a lot of things, wouldn't the liberation of women from sex be the ultimate and inevitable and most noble goal? the ultimate gender role liberation? or do feminists not have the balls to do this?
this isn't an argument for nor against antinatalism, just speculation.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
I'm trans btw, if that matters.
it does!
Why?
because you don't have a uterus, freak.
Post breasts or GTFO
Why would anyone in their right mind want to see troony breasts?
People are willing to see fake breasts all the time what’s the difference
so would incorporate philosophical pessimist thought like Schopenhauer, cioran, zappfe?
Schopenhaurian feminism would be funny because of what he had to say about women
Women don't complain about not having enough rights because they have of them too little. They complain about having too little rights because they have rights in abundance. Ahh, the female brain and it's incomprehensibility.
>she's still on a single digit wave
zozzle mao
>fifth try
>things are five times worse
give it a break at this point, trannies
>give it a break at this point
You appear to make the assumption that the stated aims of feminism are the actual goals. I would argue that feminism has been very successful in every wave at getting us to precisely where we are now, both socially and politically.
feminism has very little cultural clout right now, it's all about race and wacky outre gender bullshit not limited to 'womanhood'
besides, as material conditions worsen for 90% of Westerners, this woke/idpol stuff will fall by the wayside
In the second wave there was a popular idea of lesbian communes with test tube babies. So the idea of stopping the responsibility of creating a new generation all on women has existed before. I think other 4th wave feminist, the tramshumanist ones, also think of something like that but without the lesbian aspect.
Not really, it's just that all social movements about race, wacky outre gender stuff, and sexuality, have been grouped together by intersectionalism. But a feminism limited to womanhood would probablly not be as popular since most women are not affected ONLY by their status as women, only those who aren't racially discriminated, or discriminated due to sexuality, or are poor. New feminists have to care about class issues, girlboss feminism was very misguided and helped only a minirity of women in power who probablly don't need social movements to prop them up
Agreed, feminists should reproduce
Westoids do not procreate already. Which was the point. Immigration is just more efficient. Why would the elites wait 16+ years to have work-capable slaves when they can just funnel abugubus and joses, adult age, ready to work for half the pay. Capitalism has finally turned humans into a pure resource and outsourcing is the way.
>feminism
No
Liberation of women from being anything that isn't a bunch of fat manlets
What about liberating women from life itself? It would be an act of ultimate emancipation.
nah they should just make another new word for machismo and find more failed concepts from the 1970s to revive that seems like a better use of their time and resources than trying to inn*v*te or adapt to rapidly changing conditions. they totally haven't lost all their credibility by capitulating to transsexual activists. Pussy Riot 2, coming soon !
1