Women and the State

Women, libido, and government; former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee started quite a controversy with his comments about these three things a while ago. Big surprise, it made feminists upset. And I’m talking about lowercase ‘f’ feminists to refer to feminists in the general sense, as in people who support the uppercase ‘F’ Feminist agenda, whether actively or not. We all know that feminists are a powerful group. We all know how much influence they have over social discourse, what you can and can’t say, what is bigotry and what isn’t. Predictably, Mr. Huckabee got a lot of heat for his comments. But the way that the controversy unfolded was just a textbook example of everything that men going their own way have been talking about for years, so I just wanted to take this opportunity to elaborate on it.

Now I’m paraphrasing here, but basically he was saying that the Democratic Party portrays women as incapable of controlling their libido and that they need big government (“Uncle Sugar”, as he called it) to provide birth control. Frankly I don’t really care about exactly what he said. That’s not the issue here.

First of all, the reaction to this was just textbook feminism: liquid butthurt trailing from every media outlet. That’s nothing new.

Second point, I want to talk about where Huckabee was wrong. Being a Republican, he is of course politically motivated. He wants to convince women to reject the Democratic Party. Despite the reaction in the media, though, he didn’t demean women at all. In fact, he praised them; he’s trying to represent the Republican Party as a pro-women party. I don’t begrudge him for being politically correct, that’s what politicians do. They recruit voters, and the female demographic represents half of the population.

But here’s where I think Huckabee is ignorant or just being politically correct: he puts the blame on the Democratic Party, not women themselves. Again, I don’t fault politicians for doing what their job entails, just as I don’t fault bears for aggressing into human territory in search of food. It’s simply in their nature. But all this political doublethink detracts from the real issue.

This is where the concept of “political religionism” comes in. To paraphrase Stardusk, the political religionist sees ideology as the primary drive of humans. That’s the basis of Huckabee’s argument: that women are voting Democrat because of the way that the Democrats portray them as needing these entitlements, not because women actually want those entitlements. I mean why would they want the government to give them free stuff, right? People should recognize that humans existed and evolved long before any concept of politics or civilization came to be. So the idea that the Democrats are manipulating women into voting Democrat simply by telling them that they need government-funded birth control is absurd in my assessment. Remember that women are asking for and legislating these policies on their own.

Consider this: modern humans developed their biological preferences over the course of approximately 200 thousand years, and our predecessors evolved over an even greater period. We know that since life was difficult and dangerous on the plains of Africa, in order to survive women were biologically motivated to seek a protector-provider, namely the alpha male, time and time again over many generations. In this symbiotic relationship, men had a better chance of propagating their DNA and women and children were offered resources and protection, and this was essential to the advancement of humanity as a species and the development of civilization, as we know it. The family unit is often touted as being all manner of religious, political and philosophical ideology, but the fact remains that the adoption of the tribal instinct dramatically improved human survivability. Similarly, female cooperation with the alpha male dramatically improved her survivability.

Then, as civilization and mechanization made life much more safe and secure, male protectors were inevitably outsourced by the ultimate alpha male, the State. This is a simplification of course, but as a whole, women want the protections and provisions, not the man. A lot of us, conditioned with altruism and romanticism want to deny this. But nobody can be intellectually honest and deny the divorce rate statistics of mechanized countries in comparison to non-mechanized countries. Women know that they can get everything they need from the State. In this case, women want birth control and big government is there to provide it. Nobody corrupted women, nobody socially engineered them, nobody manipulated them; women systematically voted for entitlements of their own accord when they were given the opportunity; government, seeking the women vote, followed suit.

In other words, the Democrats are not manipulating women into voting for big government; in fact, quite the opposite is true. Women are expanding government because it benefits them, and now Democrats know that they can guarantee a large portion of half of the population’s vote simply by pandering to their interests. But like bears and politicians, I do not fault women for acting according to their nature.

However, it is necessary to place limits on human nature when it makes society unsafe or insecure for the rest of us. We always frame birth control in the politically motivated binary of government-provided birth control or no birth control at all. This is where I take issue with female nature and their persistent need for benefits, benefits, and more benefits. When we discuss birth control, it’s always an all-or-nothing. They demand government-provided birth control. To them, it’s a matter of women’s rights. You can’t deprive a woman of her rights! But any rational person recognizes that just because it isn’t covered by your health care plan doesn’t mean it’s inaccessible. Again that’s how they frame it, but having no government-subsidized birth control simply means that the expenses of your sex life come out of your pocket. Is that unfair?

Yay! Free birth control!

Yay! Free birth control! Now imagine if the man and woman switched places.

I want to be clear, I do not fault women for wanting security of birth control, as having children is a serious matter, and in some cases it is a health issue. But to demand that taxpayers – male and female taxpayers – pay for your pills and every discretionary abortion just because you want to continue your unsustainable lifestyle is a despicable display of self-entitlement. The fact that women have the audacity to make these demands just shows that they are not even bothering to control their base human instincts. This is textbook hypergamy: women are predictably taking the bigger-better deal, divorcing the male protector-provider in favor of the State, which is compelled to provide these rights indefinitely in order to remain in power, and who can extract virtually unlimited amounts of money from working people in order to guarantee them. But at the end of the day, government only has as much money as it can tax, since government doesn’t produce anything. They can print all the money in the world, but it isn’t worth a thing unless there is product or service to back it up. If we keep on giving women everything they want just because they have a vagina, then we are looking at a society that spends more than it earns, and this is why female entitlement is unsustainable. It’s that simple.

The funny thing is that women liken government-funded birth control to fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, yet when men get involved in the debate, women complain that it’s none of men’s business and demand that they shut up. Well it’s none of their business; it’s only their hard-earned money, isn’t it? Time and time again, women have shown that the only rights they care about are the ones that pertain to them. I don’t suppose that an aborted child will have the opportunity to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness, now will he?

Can you imagine if men wanted the government to cover their birth control? Men will never be covered to the extent that women are because men don’t demand it. They don’t legislate it. There is no male birth control pill because men don’t demand it. Men don’t campaign to fight prostate cancer nearly as much as women campaign to fight breast cancer despite the fact that men are as likely to suffer from prostate cancer as women are to have breast cancer. So clearly birth control is not a matter of rights, this is a matter of privilege because it only applies to women. So get over yourselves. You want equality? Pay for your own birth control like men do. Stop demanding that men shut up and pay for it because men are not your providers. Men are not your slaves. Male ingenuity created civilization so that all men, women, and children can have safety and security. So maybe women should start showing the male sex a little respect – maybe even a little gratitude – and think about who it was that made it so that you don’t have to be a baby factory for a living in the first place.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Women and the State

    • While it would be naive to suggest that women’s suffrage has not been without vast political and social consequences, it’s much more complex than that. I know you’re probably just being blunt, but that’s my input. I could go on but I won’t. Maybe my next post could address my view on this topic.

      Like

  1. Actually it is an accurate observation/conclusion based upon the reality of the feminine gender’s penchant to abuse their right to vote on an individual/collective basis; while falsely claiming to be oppressed by the male gender on both an individual and collective basis.

    Like

    • Okay, I understand what you mean, and I agree. But given my politically correct conditioning, I had made all kinds of inferences about what you said, and I thought that you were suggesting that women shouldn’t be allowed to vote. And that’s a whole different topic in itself.

      Like

  2. The state is an artificial construct that is supposed to serve the interests of all the people and not just certain groups. Both the democrats and the republicans are ‘POLITICAL PERVERTS’ who pander to certain groups – liberals pander to women, homo’s, poor, ethic groups etc. while conservatives pander to the one percent while pretending to serve the middle and working classes. Both groups are responsible for their actions – leading their followers in the wrong direction and over the edge of a cliff – and will have to be removed from power in order for this country to survive.

    Like

    • Yeah, anything to get a vote. But the critical mind is the most difficult to win over. You know this, I know this, the politicians know this. The only way to guarantee votes is to target specific groups who can be won over by bribery (privilege, “rights”, etc.) or mere rhetoric. A natural consequence of democracy. Ideology prevents impartial thought, and the clash of ideology prevents impartial elections. So I have no hope that the US is capable of democratically electing a non-partisan leader on a national scale. Local, yes. State, maybe. But not national.

      Like

      • Those with dishonest minds tend to vote others just like them into political office – this is why our republic is failing and does not have much ;longer to survive.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s