The problem is these moves are female driven but ultimately being made by men that own these entities & women as a group are the mascots for the change.
Which makes women the scapegoat for the failure & the infractions:
- ergo: "See ? See?! When you make it female, it fails."
Which is as much a red herring as the forced changes.
Thus the illusion is women are the face of the issue but women aren't driving this entirely, even less so the average woman, because all the men in charge need to do is say "No" & if women are in charge, it still wouldn't have gotten this far if men didn't cave and lower standards.
If women pushed for Girls to be in the Boy Scouts & the answer was "no, period". Women would complain, there would be articles and women would get over it, no choice but to. that's the energy that needs to be had here. This isn't about rights or inclusion, it's about conquest.
*But the gap is the average man can't control that, the men in charge of these IPs do.*
- If there's been one million men that did something more impressive for over 100 years and a women does the same thing but mediocre:
- She's celebrated because she's the first woman or girl that did it.
- Mediocrity is a woman's peak, all she has to do is participate & that's all it takes to be a pioneer now.
- Being useful is not required, & the women actually pioneering are swept under the rug. (Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna)
That's the level of stagnation girls are brainwashed to believe is their "modern" destiny, a figurehead.
But the useful women that earned their accolades are damn near myths. The illusion of being exceptional vs the exceptional are almost illusions after their 15 minutes run out.
The loudest ones doing the least, standards lowered, not held accountable as much if at all. Whatever women want, they eventually get, the world revolves around them meanwhile they're not building or producing parallel to what they inherit and are given. Despite how much they "contribute" they're not building much of anything, which is why the hard labor field gender ratio statistics are brutal.
Because there's no excuses now, we're not in the 1600s, zero excuse.
That is the threshold where women become a blatant weaklink--- when there's no accountability or boundaries, when women aren't ever told "No", that is the turning point when women become a liability. And when that's your norm from psychology, to broad academia, to pop culture, to the damn Boy Scouts? You're cooked.
Feminization by itself isn't a bad thing, your mother did it in everyday of your childhood, it's what made you feel safe since infancy, that maternal presence was feminizing you.
But the cultural exploitation of it or the lack of the masculine to balance it out, all of which without boundaries is why it's an antagonistic force.
Masculinization without parameters is equally smothering, but the masculine builds, the feminine exploits what's already there. One builds, the other mainly consumes and "repurposees".
It's just more acceptable to say men are behind based on selective statistics, than admit women are a blatant societal liability because they're allowed to be.
And girls are shielded from that reality: they genuinely think theft of boys spaces is inclusion but preservation of women's spaces while absorbing everything men have- isn't a double standard. Thus that's a liability, blatantly.
TL;DR A bratty little sister that always gets her way, everything she that goes wrong in her experience is your fault. But while the brother comes to resent the little sister, the actual source of the problem is the people allowing the entire situation & telling her she's an empowered "princess": The parents are the problem.*
*the problem, truly, are the people "allow-"ing it in the first place, & after 15 years+ of decline, profit and efficiency is clearly not the reason.
A female dominated field is progress, anything male dominated is something that needs to change*
It's pure warfare. Women are being set up to be the ultimate weaklink of civilization or at minimum: the face & mascot of decline, when that's not their cosmic design.
It's pure evil, not because of a change to a stupid fictional universe, I could care less. The good movies we like already exist, just go watch those, just go play those older games, read those comics, watch the good shows that we have already.
So more importantly, the predictable resentment these changes brew in men is as much a calculated outcome as the "mankeeping" term is for womens reactions, it's pure propaganda, it's science. It's machiavellian probing.
- People's reactions are the chemical outcome that these changes depend on, and people keep feeding into the formula.
Men's scorn is exactly what these agents want by taking something from men & boys or sharing it with girls & women aka repurposing it for women & girls; and men & boys just have to deal with it. And that's "equality".
But again: who's allowing them to do it, who's allowing women to think that's right? A group? A Political party? An ideology? It's definitely not just women allowing this because women aren't the vast majority of elites that control everything.
Why aren't the men in charge saying "No"? which is my point. Liberalism is not Leftism, Leftism is the radical feather of the liberal wing, it's important to know the difference.
There's a reason why this has been permitted, no boardroom fails their industry on purpose because "progress".
The warning, there are some women that advocate for cultural invasions, but they can't do anything they're not allowed to.
So demonizing "feminization/ Fem" eventually leads to resentment of the association of "fem" to Women. I already see it through what feminism did via "patriarchal/patri" / Father/ Men.
- Despite feminisms resources are plentiful because of the father system, feminism has the luxury to poke the bear & not get it's head bitten off.
But that luxury extends to women invading spaces they have no business touching, at least to this extent. (example: girls don't belong in boy scouts, boy scouts should be for boys. What women allegedly were after beit a badge or funding, they should've done the work vs taking a shortcut via invading Boys spaces. But a franchise wanting to shake up a formula by appealing to girls too is not a bad thing. the issue is how you're doing it.)
Speaking out, keeping your kids away from these hypocritical organizations, boycotts, replacement organizations are the best chances you have against this.
Cultural Distancing, put on your mask by not feeding into it with your energy every single time you feel the urge to speak.
You might even have a better response than what would've been your gut reaction if you just wait at least 2 hours to 24 hours before posting your reply.
Because speaking on it alone won't do anything, these organizations can afford & have afforded decades of this: or will collapse trying, because in the end: that's the gambit-
A normal business model takes a chance to change it's target audience if the previous one fails to fund product, to betray the previous audience that never left to actively replace them for a new audience is an ideological decision. And over a decade of failure without admission of mistake or changes to the approach shows it's not about money.
It's collapse for a statement for a gaslight for a red herring, all for no one.
No comments:
Post a Comment