Muh feminism - /pol/ (#510529424) [Archived: 333 hours ago]

Anonymous ID: Ymw7gbHMPoland
7/16/2025, 1:54:04 PM No.510529424
IMG_4044
IMG_4044
md5: f2d99fe5d2203587bc4ff691e69d538d🔍
The birth rate could easily be fixed by paying high quality parents for having children.

If your basedciety rewards boomers and fur parents, then imposes costs on young mothers... You can't blame women and feminism for not playing the losing strategy in the game you created.
Replies: >>510529630 >>510529782 >>510529804 >>510529956
Anonymous ID: QVVN1ncTItaly
7/16/2025, 1:56:21 PM No.510529537
many countries already tried giving gibs for children and this shit failed
you can't force people to breed if half of the population (bitches) refuse to do it because muh indipendence muh career
statistically men are more willing to start a family than women btw
Replies: >>510529769
Anonymous ID: I0hmbZsjUnited States
7/16/2025, 1:58:13 PM No.510529630
>>510529424 (OP)
Weird, I heard men's incomes actually rose after children because they start working overtime and chasing promotions to compensate for the lazy mother.
Even aside from that, how could you have no change on income for 8 years? How many people are still earning the same that they did 8 years ago?
Replies: >>510529822
Anonymous ID: 0IFyPn8R
7/16/2025, 2:00:37 PM No.510529755
Feminism_is_JEWISH
Feminism_is_JEWISH
md5: faae262077e3ce7bd4f657b3de365adb🔍
>defending feminism
Shalom.
Anonymous ID: Ymw7gbHMPoland
7/16/2025, 2:00:50 PM No.510529769
>>510529537
>giving gibs for children and this shit failed
Yes because you need to pay for the actual price of raising a child (400k USD in total for a middle-class child in the US, for reference - and it's just the direct cost, no alternative cost of time). Of course if you pay out 100$ a month only shitskins will pop out kids.
Anonymous ID: UK9kbmRR
7/16/2025, 2:01:14 PM No.510529782
>>510529424 (OP)
If you start paying women to have babies the last thing you're going to get is high quality parents.
Anonymous ID: 29LeRvOkAustralia
7/16/2025, 2:01:49 PM No.510529804
>>510529424 (OP)
>women who choose to have children have reduced income after childbirth
>paying women to have children will result in more women choosing to have children

those two statements don't automatically follow each other, also society hasn't imposed shit on women, nature did that.
Replies: >>510529873
Anonymous ID: ACNwjVn7
7/16/2025, 2:02:06 PM No.510529822
>>510529630
Its pure bullshit anon. Its not a study of actual income. Its a whimsical political projection from the feminists at Australias department for Social Services

https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/3562857/HILDA-User-Manual-Release-19.0.pdf
Anonymous ID: Ymw7gbHMPoland
7/16/2025, 2:03:08 PM No.510529873
>>510529804
In nature kids are a benefit, you only have to invest in them a few years and from 6 years old on they can start collecting berries for you and your tribe.
Anonymous ID: HPU0olFGUnited States
7/16/2025, 2:04:36 PM No.510529956
badass 7
badass 7
md5: a20816c897673aab83931ce6613ce13a🔍
>>510529424 (OP)
>I'm unemployed, unemployable and have wasted my life drinking cheap vodka and gooning to tranny porn on 4chan, so the state should pay women to breed with me so that my pure bloodline doesn't end!