Thread 82261162

I can't get over the fact that the natural endpoint of liberal feminist ideology is its own solution because it tanks the birth rates and opens up any society that adopts the ideology to getting outbred by those that are conservative and do subjugate their women, like Islamic societies. I guess Christianity and Western patriarchy were a bulwark against something potentially worse, but foids thought they could get rid of these time-proven cultural pillars consequence free.

Is this not funny to anyone else?

>>82261162 (OP)
Babirusa moment.

>>82261172

A most apt reference to the animal kingdom.

>>82261162 (OP)
>feminist ideology tanks the birthrate
nah, shit being expensive tanks the birthrate
most people want kids, but don't feel like they can afford them
>getting outbred by those that are conservative and do subjugate their women
shit being expensive affects conservatives too, and if by "subjugating women" you mean making them be housewives, that's gonna make affording children even harder
>Islamic societies
a lot of the people in those countries have historically had less than people in the west, and so they are more willing to have children in worse economic conditions

Blah blah blah

You masturbated to the thought of being replaced huh?

>>82261162 (OP)
No, it's not funny, literally all "intelligent" ideas are stupid as fuck and a waste of time and everyone would be better off living in the forest like animals. What do you gain from having complicated technical or mental ideas? Absolutely nothing other than more suffering

>>82261209
>nah, shit being expensive tanks the birthrate
most people want kids, but don't feel like they can afford them

If that were true then why are the Nordic social democracies also have falling birthrates? Giving women more money isn't going to change that because, so far as I have ever read, the only real determination for things like fertility rates (at least with the presence of birth control) is female educational levels.

>>82261223
In nordic countries they get over a year parental leave and it didnt help either. Such a joke.

>>82261223
NTA but if half of the population has to be relegated to dumbed down sex slaves for the race to flourish then it deserves to die out honestly

>>82261162 (OP)
what are you yapping about? most conservative muslim countries also have declining birthrates. feminism existed for a bit longer than the dramatic and noticeable effect of porn and sedentary lifestyles. most people with family values don't subjugate women at all, most of the parents from my kids school would be considered feminists.

>>82261209
>shit being expensive
countries where shit is cheap have declining birthrates. being poor actually increases your chances of having kids because in most countries, especially the US, having kids gives you more money rather than costing you anything.

>>82261238
Thats quite the overemotional exaggeration.

>>82261209
>most people want kids, but don't feel like they can afford them
That's true, in theory, but not in practice. Many high birth rate countries live in extreme poverty. The real difference is entirely cultural and explicitly because of feminism. You just don't want to own up to the fact that liberal feminism is the reason things are going wrong. More specifically it's the hubris of liberal feminism that is keeping things from ever going right.

why are moids obsessed with birthrate

most of them don't even want to take care of children and we have 8 billion people on the planet already, millions of kids who are starving and left to rot in orphanages and they vote for people who have a track record of tanking the economy and making it harder to afford shit

>>82261258
The birthrate argument is pushed by white nationalists the most. Groypers are not begging black women to have more kids. It's why I don't give a fuck

>>82261257
>it was communism!
>no wait it was feminism!
>no wait it was fascism!
why do you people never shut up? you don't even make an argument, you're just repeating some word you learned in high school recently

>>82261209

>nah, shit being expensive tanks the birthrate
most people want kids, but don't feel like they can afford them

People have been poor for a long time. Most people throughout history have been poor, yet they had kids. This argument does not hold up with even a little bit of scrutiny.

>shit being expensive affects conservatives too, and if by "subjugating women" you mean making them be housewives, that's gonna make affording children even harder

Having women in the workforce drives down the value of labor. It also takes away jobs from men. This double whammy imposes hardship on everyone because men can't be the single-income breadwinner once the economy adjusts to a two-income model and it long since has, and women are unhappy because they want to date a man who makes more money than they do even though their feminist brain conflictingly demands that they be able to have a job and make an equal amount for the same job too.

>a lot of the people in those countries have historically had less than people in the west, and so they are more willing to have children in worse economic conditions

And people don't have less here in the West?

>>82261258
You wont breed anyway so why are you itt?

>>82261238
"Deserves" is irrelevant. What matters is what is and who is left standing, and it won't be western feminist democracies if the current course does not change, no matter what is done.

>>82261238
that's not what's being said, and it's that kind of arrogant rage with zero constructive utility that guarantees the feminist religion will necessarily die out. There just aren't any useful feminists right now. Look at you anon, you're fucking useless, you don't even want to fix the problem, you're gaurenteeing that your ideas will fail and disappear generationally.

>>82261272
>communism feminism fascism
I don't know what you're on about schizo. Sounds like you're having a conversation with an idea inside your head and not with any of us here.

>>82261223
>why are the Nordic social democracies also have falling birthrates
my understanding is that most scandi welfare states have been significantly eroded over the last 30+ years. you can see here that most mainland nordic countries haven't risen above the point they reached in 2008-2010, around the time of the last major recession: https://pub.nordregio.org/r-2024-13-state-of-the-nordic-region-2024/chapter-2-fertility-decline-in-the-nordic-region.html
>the only real determination for things like fertility rates (at least with the presence of birth control) is female educational levels.
I'd say they mutually develop together. higher education levels come with economic development, which eventually leads to a rising cost of living which outstrips the raising of wages

>>82261275
talking about "who is left standing" while we have all-time-high global population is wild.

>>82261252
>>82261276
When you blame female education for the falling birthrate what do you think you're suggesting? Barring women from education and forcing them into a collective homemaking role.

>>82261295
if it prevents white genocide yes

>>82261222

>What do you gain from having complicated technical or mental ideas?

Antinatalism gives you a deeper understanding of morality than breeders.

>Absolutely nothing other than more suffering

Often more suffering, yes, but not absolutely nothing.

>>82261286
>I don't know
Exactly. You wouldn't understand any of those concepts. When was the last time you subjugated a woman, king?

>>82261276
You're retarded, ngl.

>>82261304
So... dumb sex slaves.

>>82261295
>When you blame female education for the falling birthrate what do you think you're suggesting?
It suggests that there is a flaw in the education that needs to be criticizes and innovated upon, but that it is being refused out of hubris.
>Barring women from education and forcing them into a collective homemaking role.
Your psuedo religious sexual fantasies are as histrionic as they are unproductive. There is clearly something wrong with feminism and feminists, just go fix it. Or accept that soon no one will believe in it. It sounds like you all have really made your choice.

>>82261295
Women throughout history have contributed to communities beyond le dumb moo farm animal sex slave scenario you are envisioning, but only recently has the education gone to such a level where they suddenly forgot how to breed. It's simply being silly if you think women had the pleasure of being 1950s homemakers throughout history. Middle managers with a 3 year degree simply dont breed though.

I wish tradniggers would just shut the fuck up and breed with each other like rabbits instead of playing pussy monitor with every woman under the age of 40.

All cope. Force women to have children or die out. There is no middle ground.

>>82261329
This is what happens in reality so dont worry, progressives dont breed. Go play funkopop or whatever.

>>82261324
>It suggests that there is a flaw in the education that needs to be criticizes and innovated upon, but that it is being refused out of hubris.
You should have mentioned that considering your argument is commonly used by hardcore traditionalists who are against women seeking education. Because it's fair to assume, on 4chan of all places, that it would be your position.

>>82261209
>nah, shit being expensive tanks the birthrate
Poor countries have significantly more kids. So this is clearly false.

>>82261342
>This is what happens in reality
Most conservative women I know pop out 3 women maximum before menopause so you're not even doing a good job of it.

>>82261342
>incels won't breed
This is a good thing.

>>82261287
>my understanding is that most scandi welfare states have been significantly eroded over the last 30+ years.

Sure because there is no more threat from the USSR with which people can purchase concessions from the ruling class. But I am pretty sure the standard of living, especially related to parenting, is far higher in the Nordic countries than it is elsewhere. So if giving women more money and stuff made them have more kids, why aren't Scandinavian women having more kids?

>>82261295
>Barring women from education and forcing them into a collective homemaking role.

Ultimately that's likely to happen either way, if women refuse to make any concessions. Either women keep doing what they are doing, and the populations that tend to support things like female education die off because they don't have kids, or women as a group have to grant some concessions and start having kids even if they don't necessarily want to.

Mind you I'm not making a moral judgement on this. I don't know nor care since I'll be dead by the time it happens, but I am simply interested in the practical choice at hand.

>>82261294
Humanity, yes. But there are subgroups within humanity known as "cultures" and "nationalities", and there are absolutely differences between them as well as competition, too.

>>82261354
3 babies, kek

>>82261360
>as well as competition
Moreso cooperation.

>>82261243

>what are you yapping about? most conservative muslim countries also have declining birthrates.

Why is Muhammad the most common name in the UK then? They're outbreeding the local white liberal population. Even if absolute birthrates are going down in Islamic countries, the rate relative to liberal Western societies still matters.

>>82261360
Kids being born to parents who don't want them is how you get abuse victims

>>82261354
3 vs 0.75 and a furbaby. Good stats
>>82261356
Progressives are incels. It's good indeed.

>>82261370
>local UK population
>white
Are you trolling? anglo brits are not white in the first place. The dumbass in the OP was talking about tanking birth rates, and falsely claimed Islamic societies have not tanked their birth rates. If you're asking about common sense, yes muslims have always had more kids than christians, but the christians just had a few hundred years where they slaughtered everyone else.

>>82261368
No it's just competition. The jungle exists on an individual level as well as a collective level. A group that is weak will be subsumed or destroyed just like a person who is weak will be subsumed or destroyed.

But the point is that the future is not feminist because feminist women don't have children while women in non-feminist cultures DO. If feminism is important to women, then you would think they would want to continue it.

>>82261257
>Many high birth rate countries live in extreme poverty
yes, I recognise this. in my first post I said that Islamic countries have been historically poorer, and so people are generally willing to put up with more economic hardship, at least when it comes to having kids.
There are two factors in determining the minimum wage. one is physical - the bare amount of food needed to survive, the minimum rent, etc. the other is mental - the lowest bearable standard people will accept before they start killing themselves or trying to overthrow the government.
>The real difference is entirely cultural
so yeah there is a cultural aspect, but that's not all of it
>You just don't want to own up to the fact that liberal feminism is the reason things are going wrong
I actually do disagree with liberal variants of feminism, but only because I don't think those forms are capable of achieving their stated goals
>>82261273
>Most people throughout history have been poor, yet they had kids
see above ^^^
>Having women in the workforce drives down the value of labor. It also takes away jobs from men
you're probably not gonna like what I have to say on this
what you say is true in isolation - it's a fact that when women joined the workforce, the number of hours men and women worked didn't halve, but stayed the same. at the same time, wages fell because businesses could get away with paying both men and women less, as they would rely on eachothers incomes.
you have a guy you work for, who gives you back in money only what you need to live, and takes whatever you make above that for himself.
your wife comes to work for the same guy, and working together you produce more than twice as much as before - but instead of getting twice as much back, the guy you both work for just takes more and expects the two of you to rely on eachother more to stay afloat.
in this scenario, is the answer that the woman should stop working, or that the guy you work for should be paying more?
(cont.)

>>82261360
Nigga, we have over 8 billion people. "Replacement" is pushed by oligarchs who want an endless supply of wageslaves. Every time I come into work I see like 10 new white babies/toddlers. Stop going on twitter and focus on something else.

>>82261413
>People I see have kids therefore large-scale population trends don't exist!

ok retard

>bans abortion
>birthrates get even lower

>>82261396
It's mostly cooperation. The collective has kept growing over time, especially in terms of lifespan.

>>82261413
We wouldnt have 8 billion people if the northern hemisphere western nations were somehow unable to pump out massive amounts of food and medicine and export it.

Can someone explain how it's my problem that white people don't want to fuck each other and make white babies? Why do y'all come on the internet and make it everyone else's problem when you're clearly only talking about yourselves, the fuck.

>>82261423
The trend is that 8 billion people is bigger than 7 billion people. This global warming cuckoldry would be a good thing to reduce long lines and traffic everywhere, but the objective scientific trend is that people have too many babies.

>>82261162 (OP)
I can't help but laugh at these kinds of posts given shit like Destiny's 11 year old child being a white supremacist incel.
Kids are falling down the far-right rabbit hole so fucking young these days. OP have you even gone through puberty yet?

>>82261439
You are in charge of your own internet experience.

>>82261411
>I actually do disagree with liberal variants of feminism,
Make your case fast and humble. Your homework is roughly 15-20 years late. I'm dead serious that if you can't make a solid case for an alternative form of feminism, and successfully throw a subsection of liberal institutional Clintonian style 2nd wavers under the bus and sell people on the idea that the excesses of the 2010's were a subsection of bad feminists and scapegoat them hard enough, the whole project is going to sink like the titanic. One day we invent an unsinkable ship, the world is changed forever, the next night we un-invent it. Hubris. If feminism wants to survive it has to adapt and shift blame. You can't make the case feminism had nothing to do with it, but could maybe sell a particular strand unhelpful of feminists be excommunicated. That's the only scenario i can picture feminism eeking out a win in this environment.

>>82261450

I have gone through puberty. I noticed you didn't provide a rebuttal. No one can without being dishonest. Liberalism and feminism are ideological failures. Period. At a minimum, an ideology needs to be able to produce the next generation of itself for perpetuity. If that's considered "le far-right" or "white supremacist", then I don't know what to tell you. Those are the facts.

>>82261411
>women are unhappy because they want to date a man who makes more money than they do
this is a problem, and a major cultural holdover from before women entered the workforce
>And people don't have less here in the West?
sure, but they're used to a higher standard of living. if you've been living around the poverty line your whole life, and so has your family, you're gonna put up with it. in any case, you'll take it a lot better than someone who's used to living somewhat comfortably
>>82261348
see above ^^^
>>82261370
A lot of muslim families name their kids the same name. Historically British names still make up the majority, it's just that no one of those is as popular by itself
>>82261389
>anglo brits are not white in the first place
*stares at hands in disbelief*

>>82261481
goin to bed lids

I'm black so I know OP isn't talking about me but I'm less inclined to have more than one child as the oldest of 6 who had to sacrifice my childhood to be a third parent.

The more kids my father had the less time we got to spend together, the less food I ate until I was old enough to get a job, etc. and I don't want to put another human through that.

>>82261237
What you actually need is a significant wealth & status imbalance in favour of men vs women. That's why the Baby Boom happened, and it ended right around when feminism managed to get women into the work force in large numbers.

>>82261501
>The more kids my father had the less time we got to spend together, the less food I ate until I was old enough to get a job, etc. and I don't want to put another human through that
This is funnily enough the thing that happens with immigrants too so when that gets presented as a solution it is a temporary bandaid at best.
Sure the first generation might bring 5 kids but the second generation hated sharing a room so they will go for only one or two kids.

>>82261510
Being a constantly pregnant housewife sounds genuinely terrible. I'd rather kill myself. May be related to my autism but I don't care.

>>82261536
Multiple siblings sharing a bedroom would be the reality for most families if the trad lifestyle was forced on everyone.

>>82261537
That is however not what was put forward or implied.

>>82261162 (OP)
>I can't get over the fact that the natural endpoint of liberal feminist ideology
True, feminism in the west lacks the diversity of beliefs to survive in the socialist American future. The irony today is recognition of the democratic party's capture by the rich, and the republican party's capture by the socialism, all these "conservative" voices like Tucker Carlson talking about the needs of the workers and the working class, the president considering taxing the wealthy and taking ownership of 10% of intel stock, a private corporation into a sovereign wealth fund imply a complete shift in economics that is unprecedented. 6/10 Americans think being a socialist would make someone a better candidate for political office that they would be more likely to vote for.

The liberal capture of western feminism and liberalism's subsequent bankruptcy will likely take the whole of feminism down with it. There are no other branches. Feminism today is basically all elitist and all institutional. There are no feminists today who challenge the system, and there are no feminists today who can make valid arguments in a debate anymore. They disappeared. Feminism in this environment will necessarily be scaled back, but by how much remains to be seen.

>>82261222
Your ability to make this post is the direct result of millenia of complex technical ideas. To avoid being a hypocrite you must immediately cease all posting at once

>>82261544
I know and it's been the norm for the entire human history up till at best 80 years ago but it's that when the second generation grows up they have to fit into the society their parents brought them to. They want to go on holiday to expensive places, drive nice cars and have an apartment that's not constantly filled with noise.
It doesnt help that a lot of apartments have only 3 bedrooms max.

radfeminism is unpopular because the oppressor class makes up 50% of the world population and most women cannot isolate from their oppressors, which is also why misogyny is also taken less seriously than racism

>>82261577
liberal feminism is much nicer to men (MTF worship, pandering to gay men and nonwhite men) but still funnily enough rejected by men

>>82261577
>and most women cannot isolate from their oppressors
Like that women only resort that has male plumbers/maintenance guys

>>82261594

>foidland still needs men

amazing

>>82261633

also agrarian vs urban birth incentives

>>82261622
No duh, men are biologically stronger. No one is denying that except trannies.

Sometimes we just want to be away from moids for a bit. You're a really annoying bunch you know.

>>82261640
>the trad endgame is for us to eternally do farmslop while poor for jewish serfs

>>82261645

are u sure u want to be surrounded by women, foid?

>>82261645
>Women plumbers dont exist because you need to be arnold schwarzenegger for it
Radfeminism/female separatism doesn't get taken seriously because it is ultimately a pipedream. Women do not want to separate from their servant class.

>>82261677
>file deleted
Yeah moid

>>82261218
Yes, actually. And being pegged. It is what it is.
>>82261258
I want to take care of children, but my children, not some rapist's or deadbeat's.
>>82261273
>Having women in the workforce drives down the value of labor. It also takes away jobs from men. This double whammy imposes hardship on everyone because men can't be the single-income breadwinner once the economy adjusts to a two-income model and it long since has, and women are unhappy because they want to date a man who makes more money than they do even though their feminist brain conflictingly demands that they be able to have a job and make an equal amount for the same job too.

This wouldn't be a problem if women would just date men who will stay at home and take care of the kids.
>>82261548
>True, feminism in the west lacks the diversity of beliefs to survive in the socialist American future.
Yes, and it will evolve to be less about just for women once institutions stop hatespeeching men. Feminism will either be replaced by MRA or be transformed by the coming generations into finally a movement that doesn't just hate men and cares about men's issues. Gender is fundamentally a socialist problem since EVERYONE has one.

>>82261537
The Baby Boom put the TFR at around 5, you wouldn't be constantly pregnant.

>>82261162 (OP)
India has the highest birthrate therefore by your own logic it seems that Hinduism is thus superior to Christianity which let's face it created this whole mess to begin with by allowing the worship of a jew and the infiltration of jews into Aryan society. Hinduism as a religion of the original Aryan people's is thus also more in line with the religion of our ancestors who ruled over thw brown hordes and enforced a racial hierarchy.

It is thw stain of Christianity itself as an anti-life death cult that preaches equality that opened thw door for feminism.

>>82261776
India's birth rate is plummeting, you dumb shitjeet.

>>82261744
>Feminism will either be replaced by MRA or be transformed by the coming generations
I have a guess that nationalist and classist lines are going to be the new topic of debate for a while. Gender is going to be taking a back seat. I'm a little curious if racial lines will inflame. My best guess is actually not surprisingly. I think the racism angle is being artificially overstated and encouraged by institutional actors, and isn't as popular as some fringe groups might wish it was. I could be wrong on that if they're really organized but the MAGA base especially in its top political picks aren't explicitly racist. Kesh Pattel isn't a white supremacist, JD Vance's wife and kids are Indian.

If i had to guess what was coming next it would be government capture of wallstreet and fractures in international relations spinning out into incidents. Nationalist socialist ideas are literally nazi but it doesn't sound like race is intended to be the defining aspect of being a member of the nation.

>>82261162 (OP)
Things make more sense when you realize that feminism and leftism in general is a result of a total inability to anticipate unintended consequences, or even rejection of the possibility of unintended consequences. Feminism only exists because women are usually isolated from any consequences thanks to being protected by men.

>>82261839
women selected for indians for millennia, no reason that they would slow down now.