The term feminism, blankets social and political movements under the guise of an ideology that claims to raise women to the same threshold as men in all fields of society. However, this dogma deserves contention as its true intentions remain shrouded by the elitists of the past. The complementary relationship between oligarchy and feminism is indisputable.
To believe that women deserve to work is not inherently bad. However, the usurpers who enable feminism may not always want to alleviate the plight of the average woman. The continual promotion of women in the workplace is done with the goal of using them as additional supplements. This provides surplus manpower in the workforce to generate larger profit with respect to demand.
An oligarchy is a tightly knit group of people who work together to exploit the bulk of the working class. It originated with aristocracies, in which select castes or nobility ruled over the masses. However, it has since evolved further under the guise of capitalism and communism. In the ages past, it was considered chivalry not to allow women to work. Women would commonly only work if they were from impoverished backgrounds or during times of war. Working women became more common following the second world war and from there on started their exploitation by oligarchies.
The top 1% of the population, mainly the politicians and wealthy elites, exploiting the proletariat would like to have access to as much labour as possible. As a result, corporations despise the family unit. The family which requires the poor worker to deviate his attention to the mouths he has to feed and care for. Incorporating women into the workforce boosts manpower and, as a result, corporate production. This is also why corporations are often seen backing female marches and protests.
An intriguing aspect of businesses is that, while they enable women to work under the guise of equality, they do not provide paid maternal leave or the shortest feasible duration and compensation. This is because the corporation’s sole purpose was to profit from a statistic that suggests people are less valuable if they do not work. Working women who work in an atmosphere that is less supportive of expectant mothers are less likely to have many children because they will be unable to sustain them. It’s a tyrant’s fantasy come true.
Communists, too, are not shy of the oligarchy. The soviet union would be a prime example of the oligarchy. Although communism claims to be for the workers, it gravely exploits them. Both men and women labour to provide for the country under a communist dictatorship. As a result, women disregard their children’s psychosocial needs, creating the ideal atmosphere for a totalitarian government to thrive. Children are less supervised while their parents are busy working.
Consquences of feminism and oligarchy
Feminists having fewer or no children results in lower birth rates leading to low or negative natural population growth which would then create a labour gap in the market. This requirement would then be filled by having more immigrants. This would in turn mean that corporations would have to pay even less for labour in the future. Thus further benefiting them by cutting the cost spent on employees.
A research article in the American Economic Journal, based in Sweden, the country leading for gender equality in Europe at the time the article was written, found that that married women had twice the probability of being divorced three years after their promotion to CEO rank compared to their males. In politics, female mayors and parliamentarians promoted after an election had twice the chances of divorce. In women who were not promoted, the chances were 15%. Woman doctors, priests and police officers who progressed in their careers showed similar statistics.
According to Pew Research Center, the number of single father households has increased about ninefold from 1960 till 2011 and the number of single-mother households increased more than fourfold in the same time frame. These numbers only increase with more children being brought up in broken households which are a byproduct of feminism being juiced by oligarchies.
You may wonder what the response to these statistics would be? The answer: an increased normalization of divorce within the generation. With the normalization and tearing of a family in one generation comes the normalization of divorce in the next generations. Marriage loses its meaning, becoming nothing more than a good economic contract for couples. Divorce rates are higher in children witnessing a parental divorce. Adults who experienced divorce as children also have a tendency towards lower education and greater employment and financial issues.
Adverse effects feminism has on children
Divorce results in children facing anxiety, resentment towards parents, anger management issues, depression and impulsive behaviour. Parental divorce has also been linked with higher rates of dropouts. It also leads to conduct disorders and delinquency. Parental divorce in younger children has been associated with higher numbers of sexual partners during adolescence. Teenagers are more likely to engage in early sexual activity and substance abuse.
A parent may have disagreements with a particular dogma, but owing to the fact that they are less involved in their children’s lives, they may be unable to protect them from governmental brainwashing. This would lead to greater state stability at the expense of traditional values, beliefs and freedom of expression since there would be fewer transgressors with opposing beliefs. A totalitarian regime teaches its youngsters about the ‘greatness’ of its presence when the children first start attending school. An absence of a parent who teaches a child otherwise would create great ease for the governing oppressor.
Stress levels among women are 50% higher in women as per the American Psychological Association 2010 evaluation. This is not healthy for both women and for families as children will be more likely to have the stress taken out on them or neglected as a side effect of a fatigued maternal figure.