Thursday, May 10, 2012

Government Husband Vs. Actual Husband & The Female Vote


I was reading some Gallup Poll data. I find it interesting that the largest differentiating factor in how much women support the current democratic President is defined by whether women are married or single. The majority of single or divorced women support the president where as the majority of married women do not support him. This tells us much about women. There are many possible things that can be inferred from this.


As we know, he is of course women's white knight, the great provider of women. In line with the lobbying of the women's union, he has increasingly advocated for devoting ever more resources to women. The single \ divorced \feminist women's union even managed to successfully lobby for the president to devote the Stimulus Package away from men and toward women. The president and the democratic party in general are the feminist party, they are the supporters of the Marxist class struggle for "equality".
  Important to note is that the same separation of support was also found by women's varying support between Republican \ Independent and Democratic parties based on the same variable, single or married. Suffice as to say that one can conclude the single largest difference in women's voting disposition is directly related to who shows more promise in providing to them at the moment, an actual husband or government husband and furthermore which party provides to them the most.

  Suffice as to say that I believe the difference relates directly to whomever is providing them protections, provisions and resources. Divorced women are in the middle. They are single again but feel more reliant on the government i.e. the more socialist \ matriarchal \ feminist Democratic party. I believe they are represented in the middle rather than realigning with single never married women because divorced women still obtain resources from the man they removed from the family and the lives of his children. It is true however that age also affects the vote across gender lines. The young are typically more in support of the idealism of the socialist Democratic party. So I surmise that this is also a reason that divorced women, typically being in the older bracket as measured by the voting demographic as a whole, are represented in the middle rather than realigning with single never married women.

  Women have a very different and in my opinion dangerous relationship to the alpha status of State. It is this relationship that increases, consolidates and centralizes power to the State. This of course is an element of what creates a matriarchal feminist State and society. As strange as it might seem, in observing the photo above I am compelled to believe these women most likely are in some stage of sexual arousal. I believe a Photoplethysmography probe would most certainly show increased engorgement of the vaginal tissues and an associated increase in lubrication. These women look like they are at a rock concert looking on in adoration and attraction to the alpha male on stage. Groupies are a female phenomenon. I've heard female musicians speak about the fact that no female musician has male groupies. This is because males have different requisites that are something other than a high status female.

  These women would most certainly copulate with the President. Women's relationship to State is a dangerous one and one that we are paying the price for now through the implementation of female agency through feminism. Women's relationship with State is directly relative to their relationship with men. One can say that as the State becomes more female focused with government husbandry as advocated by feminism, as the state increasingly supports matriarchy, the less likely women are to form or maintain married relationships with men. They will increasingly gravitate to the State to meet these requisites.

I see feminism and feminist advocacy as not something separate from women themselves but the name given to what is the collective action of female political and social agency. All women are feminists in this respect. Women have a propensity and predisposition for the implementation of it and it is relative directly to their personal relationships with males. For the first time in American history there are more single never married and divorced women than married couples in this country and the demographic is increasing as marriage is on the decline. The growing amount of single and divorced women are literally a separate socio-political and socio-economic class, and as the data implies, this class will increasingly be of a feminist gynocentric disposition.

I believe due to the divide between men and women as separate classes with separate class interests or rather, a divide between the family and single\divorced women, we may have reached an event horizon  at which the female majority vote which is ALSO the majority vote overall, will lead the nation to the continued centralization of power and to the increased size and scope of the State. This is to say that it will increasingly become a feminist, female favoring, female focused, matriarchal, socialist State. As they already have done, women will increasingly direct resources and policy toward the benefit of females at the expense of men and boys in education, healthcare, the judicial system, family law etc. This is already the case. I believe they will continue this. I believe this will further exacerbate the breakdown of relationships of the male \ female pair bond. We will increasingly pay the price for this....we already are.

This new sociopolitical landscape is literally a contest and divide between the will of the family vs. the will of single women \ divorced women \feminist. Again, women being the majority vote and the most powerful voting demographic in the country I postulate that single \ divorced women will sway the vote away from the family vote. In time, as government husbandry \ chivalry as advocated by the feminists \ single woman vote grows, the numbers you see in the below photo will grow wider in disparity as a result.We will become an increasingly divided nation in regard to gender class between the interests of single women vs. single men but also in regard to family women vs. feminist women.

At this point, at the event horizon, the female feminist vote will hold sway over the course of the nation.

In fact, looking at the below numerical disparity and going by what we know by the data presented above, along with the current entrenchment of the feminist women's union within the political machine, the female feminist vote already has established marginal if not entire domination. Our future as a nation is now clenched in feminist hands.


To learn more about matriarchy please see Anatomy of Matriarchy to understand what women wish to build. Feel free to read the comment section of this current article as well to understand how women actually see men and the position fatherhood holds to them within the "family" and the lives of children. I'd like to thank the feminist for rearing her vile head here. Thank you for elucidating the goal of women and your feminist union for my countrymen. It is important that they know their enemy well. Men need to know our enemy better than the enemy knows themselves.  

23 comments:

Zorro said...

"Our future as a nation is now clenched in feminist hands."

We are so fucked.

MRA said...

I think the feminists are the ones who WILL be fucked in the future. They forced the pendulum to swing too far over to the benefit of women and it isn't sustainable. When the USA falls apart men will be required to protect and provide for women and the pendulum will swing back to favoring men.

Bwec said...

Men would be wise to never forget what happened and make changes to the system accordingly so that it doesn't happen again. Otherwise there is no point or incentive to rebuild from the rubble.

Many do agree, this is unsustainable. Historically speaking matriarchies do not last long either on their own or when coming in conflict with a patriarchy. There are in fact matriarchies that exist today. They have no technological advancements, the men are loutish and disenfranchised. They don't even know who they are the father of. There is not fatherhood and there is no family. Men remain close to the mother and the matriline. As we would say here they become peter pans, child-men or living in their mother's basement.

Under matriarchy men drift to the margins of society and are unproductive. Without male enfranchisement the system consumes itself of its own means of production. The good thing is that as gathered from the blog post the growth of matriarchy is inline to accelerate. This will speed up the process. However, I fear we will become a police state and fascist dictatorship in order to stem the fallout.

Anonymous said...

"There are in fact matriarchies that exist today. They have no technological advancements, the men are loutish and disenfranchised."

Patriarchy was imposed on cultures that already had technological advances that patriarchy later tried to claim credit for. The minoans were the first high tech society in western civilization. They had running water and indoor toilets centuries before anyone. They also had advances in math and architecture way before a lot of other cultures. You look at minoan art, and there isn't any representations of a king or the glorification of warfare common among patriarchies. In fact, most of the art at the palace of Knossos and other minoans sites is ABOUT WOMEN. The Minoans were goddess centered, and the high priest was most likely a priestess. Unlike our society, religion and state were one and the same. In other words, those priestesses most certainly had a lot of political clout. Archaeology has discovered that minoan houses were most likely built in the long house form-characteristic of matrilineal societies where males left their homes of origin and lived with their wives and in-laws. All that talk of a King Minos was probably based on myths of the mycenaeans who were a more patriarchal people that took over what was left of minoan societies after they were destroyed by a volcanic eruption. Even if there were kings, they probably were more like the phaeacians of Homer's The Odyssey. In fact, scholars have noticed the amazing similarities between Homer's description of the phaeacians and the minoan civilization (there's actually a Minoan city called Phaestos go figure. Queen Arete of the Phaeacians was worshipped as a goddess by her people, and her husband was described as a "mortal who lived like a god". That said, Queen Arete also seemed to have more political clout than her husband because Odysseus had to speak to her before her husband. That said, if the minoans had a king, the queen/priestess probably functioned as the power broker much like the Iroquois nation did. The male chiefs couldn't make a decision unless the Clan mothers looked at the issue first and determined the census of the clan. If the chiefs didn't make a decision based on the consensus of the whole group, the clan mothers could over rule them. Btw, these clans were not just extended families of the mother, they could literally be thousands of people. OTOH, another early civilization with a lot of technology was the Indus Valley civilization. Not much is known about what these people worshipped because most of their art is centered on animals. That said, dna tests on ancient graves show that these people were buried with related females and children with unrelated male adults. In other words, they were most likely matrilineal.

Anonymous said...

"They don't even know who they are the father of. There is not fatherhood and there is no family. Men remain close to the mother and the matriline. As we would say here they become peter pans, child-men or living in their mother's basement."

You don't know what your talking about. Michael Lamb, a researcher usually toted by the father's rights crowd, described cross cultural studies where children in different modern day preindustrial socities had more father involvement in their lives than children in western society (including the good 'old USA). Most of these societies were described as matrilineal, mother centered, and women had a high social status. While most of these societies had high father involvement, there were a few like the Musuo (who I'm sure your thinking of) who had little or no father involvement. Guess what? Children in the pre-industrial societies with little or no father involvement were as well adjusted as the children from the societies with high father involvement. In other words, there was no difference. OTOH, the children in pre-industrial societies (no matter what their father status) were found to be MORE WELL-ADJUSTED than children of comparable ages in the USA and other Western Cultures (two-parents or not). In other words, father involvement or absence in itself really doesn't matter how much in how well adjusted a child is. However, GOOD male role models do make a difference, and they don't have to be the child's biological father. In the case of the Musuo, it could be an uncle. What it all boils down to is that these societies are doing something right that western culture is lacking. For one thing; our culture is fixated on father exaltation. Unfortunately, this leads to stupid shit like joint custody and custody battles. The cultures in Lamb's analysis are mother focal and women have a high status. Father involvement is higher because mothers have ultimate authority and a higher status as women to use as leverage to get fathers more involved (or other male role models in some societies). There are no custody battles and sharing joint custody with an abusive ex husband or a father who never even changed a diaper. These lead to conflicts that are far more detrimental than father absence. No wonder US chidren are less well adjusted than a child in the cultures in Lamb's analysis. We need to become a more matri-focal culture like the Scandinavian cultures, and we need to dump joint custody and bring back the maternal presumption as a RIGHT instead of something only to be used at the judge's discretion. In the meantime, so-called modern matrilineal matriarchies are judged as inferior to western culture because of a lack of technology. Yet, it was these cultures that developed high technology, democracy, and art to begin with. It was patriarchal conquerors who spun these cultures into the dark ages with the loss of technology. After a period of chaos (like the greek dark ages after the fall of Minoan civilization), they absorbed or tried to take credit for the matriarchies technologies, or they just reinvented the wheel again and tried to make it sound like it was never invented before (like that so-called greek golden age which supposedly "invented" democracy-the minoans most likely had a rule by consensus way before Homer's greece). OTOH, these modern day matrilineal societies have preserved the mother-child bond without making the father's rights as a rival. The result is better well adjusted children and more father involvement than the USA. Happy Mother's Day!

Bwec said...

"Guess what? Children in the pre-industrial societies with little or no father involvement were as well adjusted as the children from the societies with high father involvement."

These civilizations are dead. All known matriarchies are either dead or subsistence communal groups. As long as they stay out of the way of modern civilization I don't expect any problem with their continued existence.

Let's talk about now. How will you liberate men from having any obligation to women and women's children along with women's families? Men want liberation, how will you feminists provide that to us?

You don't plan on that do you. How will you liberate men from involvement? If fathers are not necessary to the family or lives of children how do you plan to make men independent of being forced into labor to support the matriarchal family as we are now?

Fuck you and your matriarchy...feminist cunt. Fuck the single mother whore family. Men don't owe your fucking matriarchy a damn thing bitch.

Bwec said...

"Guess what? Children in the pre-industrial societies with little or no father involvement were as well adjusted as the children from the societies with high father involvement."

These civilizations are dead. All known matriarchies are either dead or subsistence communal groups. As long as they stay out of the way of modern civilization I don't expect any problem with their continued existence.

Let's talk about now. How will you liberate men from having any obligation to women and women's children along with women's families? Men want liberation, how will you feminists provide that to us?

You don't plan on that do you. How will you liberate men from involvement? If fathers are not necessary to the family or lives of children how do you plan to make men independent of being forced into labor to support the matriarchal family as we are now?

Fuck you and your matriarchy...feminist cunt. Fuck the single mother whore family. Men don't owe your fucking matriarchy a damn thing bitch.

Bwec said...

"That said, dna tests on ancient graves show that these people were buried with related females and children with unrelated male adults. In other words, they were most likely matrilineal."

Yes...obviously...men don't owe anything to you fatherless bastard family bitch. Promote your matriarchy elsewhere cunt. This blog is for men who are going their own way and want nothing to do with your feminist cunt utopia or your fucking matriarchy. Support yourselves and your fucking bastards on you own. Men owe you nothing.

Bwec said...

"Children in the pre-industrial societies with little or no father involvement were as well adjusted as the children from the societies with high father involvement. In other words, there was no difference. OTOH, the children in pre-industrial societies (no matter what their father status) were found to be MORE WELL-ADJUSTED than children of comparable ages in the USA and other Western Cultures (two-parents or not)."

Again, take your matriarchy elsewhere cunt. What I want to know is how you plan to cut the last cords so men aren't forced to support your cunt family after being tricked into feminist marriage. If you don't have a solution to liberate men then fuck off.

Bwec said...

"However, GOOD male role models do make a difference, and they don't have to be the child's biological father."

Again, how the fuck do you plan to liberate men from contributing to your families and your fatherless bastard kids?

Bwec said...

"OTOH, these modern day matrilineal societies have preserved the mother-child bond without making the father's rights as a rival. The result is better well adjusted children and more father involvement than the USA. Happy Mother's Day!"

Fuck off you vile feminist cunt. I'd like to see you say fathers should not be a member of the family in person..I'd like you to say it to my face bitch. Fuck you and your families, fuck your bastards. Feminist cunt.

Bwec said...

Your matriarchal family needs to be supported by the state. Hurry up...it's taking to long for you cunts to be independent. Men must be liberated from the family and fatherhood in your matriarchy. The government is your husband cunt bitch...not men.

Men should have one thing, one use for women in your order, to use and fuck you..that is our only involvement with you you piece of meat you whore cunt. Hurry up..Men are tired of carrying you dependent parasites and your bastards on our backs. Dependent parasite cunts.

Anonymous said...

Bwec, holding your breath until you turn blue doesn't work with me. Calling me a cunt and a whore does nothing but show your real mentality. Obviously, I hit a nerve-big time! I'm speaking the truth, and you damn well know it. Your temper tantrum just proved that! The only thing men like you need liberation from is to look past your thumb sucking and grow up! That said, it's time to put on your big boy pull-ups and realize it's not all about you guys anymore. 5,000 years of patriarchy, and we're all at the brink of extinction to show for it! You guys aren't qualified to run the world anymore! It's going to be a better world with matriarchal values, or let patriarchy continue to kill us all! That little boy, is the reality! Patriarchy is nothing but suicide for the human race.

Bwec said...

LOL you are one sick cunt. Again, fuck you and your families bitch.

You are one real man hating radical cunt. You thrive on violence against men and rape.

"I'm speaking the truth, and you damn well know it."

Speaking the truth about what, that you believe matriarchy makes a functional society??? All known matriarchies in history are dead. Those that exist today live in squalor...like savages. It should tell you much that not many people have even heard of these matriarchies you talk about. They are dead for a reason. You live in a fantasy land lady.

If you want to systematically debate why matriarchies are this way I'd be more than happy to help you with that. You hit a cord with me because I know your lack of humanity and the vile hatred that comes from your kind. You are a violent savage.

I have no tolerance for your kind and consider your violence and savagery so revolting you can't imagine. My anger is a rightful response. I'm angry because I know how violent you are. I consider you vile and evil. You are my enemy. The sick part is that you gain validation by this reaction from me. Inside you feel powerless and seek power through violence. There is nothing more savage. You represent the worst of humanity.

Bwec said...

You never answered my questions. What are you afraid of? Go ahead, answer the questions. Show yourself for what you are.

Bwec said...

Again, how the fuck do you plan to liberate men from contributing to your families and your fatherless bastard kids?

Go on savage...answer the question you dependent parasite. What are you afraid of conceding? State your true intentions proud matriarch whore. Reveal the weakness of your kind and your gender and admit you are incapable of humanity and hopelessly dependent on men to survive.

Admit you are so dependent and weak that the only way your kind can survive is by savagery. Go on matriarch, speak.... how will you free men from supporting you and your bastards?

Bwec said...

http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2012/05/how-feminism-is-merely-tool.html

Take a look. Understand just how your weak and dependent gender survives. Let me see you legitimize this. Your gender has to literally buy out seats of men with money in order to achieve a place in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. How inferior your kind must feel in order to resort to such things other than achieve by ability or merit. Let me guess, men owe you because we are so powerful that unless we show mercy and give up our seats to the weak you would not achieve on your own right?

Let me ask you...are you embarrassed or ashamed by this weakness and dependency upon men or simply entitled to be provided to by men's benevolent nature and his sympathy for your weak nature?

Bwec said...

I will end with this for now which is somewhat a continuation of my initial question, are you or are you not capable of being independent without men showing mercy upon your weakness by providing chivalry towards your dependency upon us?

Is your kind capable of surviving on your own without the sheer benevolence of male nobility and his mercy upon your weak nature? You see, it is important for you to understand your status as parasite if you are unwilling to concede to this truth. I have you backed into the corner with truth and the only way to get out of it is to admit your pathetic position or not reply at all. Truth tends to do that....parasite

Bwec said...

One more thing. Oh yes it is true. I am angry with righteous indignation for your pious pathetic parasitic nature. You have rightly angered the very hand of the noble gender which feeds you your sustenance. You eat from male hands woman. What you lack you indignant savage is respect for your keeper.

You would be wise to understand that upsetting the gender you are hopelessly reliant upon for your very survival will lead to your own demise and suffering. With outstretched arms your weak gender clamors for male benevolence and chivalry. Suck to much blood from the stronger host you rely upon will kill your kind parasite. You would be wise to acknowledge your foolishness. Entitled child like dependent female with your child like face and your child like voice. All designed to elicit your male keepers to feed you. Child-woman you have become spoiled. I pity your savagery and dependency. I pity your weak nature. You have shown your nature when it has graciously been given agency. Men overestimated your capacity to be our equal woman-child, child of man.

Anonymous said...

Women do most of the unpaid and underpaid work that is the infrastructure of the entire patriarchy. Because of this, men are largely unencumbered to pursue wage work without meeting the demands of home and family while, in most cases, reaping the benefits of a wife's second income. It's actually men who are dependent on women in order to get more resources. The ultimate male privilege is to sit in a male blindspot and call women parasites. Men are the real parasites. Men aren't showing mercy by giving us the resources WE RIGHTFULLY EARNED. We're tired of carrying you dependent bastards on our backs.

Bwec said...

Love your last comment. It makes an example out of you. You lose..thanks for playing.

Sociopathic Revelation said...

"Men aren't showing mercy by giving us the resources WE RIGHTFULLY EARNED. We're tired of carrying you dependent bastards on our backs." ---Anon

Its typically the other way around. Most women in this culture have fallen underneath the rubic of Ameriskank attitudes and entitlement, and you are no different. Even a multiplicity of women-oriented government programs are funded by an enormous amount of men's taxes (via legal extortion), as well as engaging in cuckolding, false allegations while demanding CS and what should be unearned and unworthy alimony, and expecting men to generally to take care of you despite the illusion of being a strong and independent woman.

Let's face it. There's growing number of people seeing that the game is up, although your burgeoning lifestyle and demands have weighted so heavily on the economy in will probably only recover with a drastic re-boot. It's all about you and your feminist whims. And we you know what you think of men when you say this:

"We're tired of carrying you dependent bastards on our backs."

Then stop expecting handouts and take out the garbage yourself for once if you don't need men.

Anonymous said...

Fascinating...

"You would be wise to understand that upsetting the gender you are hopelessly reliant upon for your very survival will lead to your own demise and suffering. With outstretched arms your weak gender clamors for male benevolence and chivalry."

Dude, I can almost picture you with a luminous ring of light surrounding you as you deliver your judgment before an awed male crowd, then reading from the Malleus Maleficarum and setting fire to the witch/cunt/whore/whoever makes you feel inadequate ( apparently that's the entire human and canine female sex-woof). And from your impassioned speeches, whoever wants YOUR SPLENDID MALE BENEVOLENCE must be an extreme masochist what with your talk of demise and suffering. I shudder to think that a few decades ago women were tied for life to such men and unable to sever these ties without suffering social stigma and other consequences, if able to divorce at all. Aren't you glad those days are over?! At least in most parts of the world? Nah?

Now before you start calling me a cunt and whore and attack my family and froth at the mouth, take into consideration the following facts:

Wealth: Women represent 40% of the world’s labor force but hold just 1% of the world’s wealth.

Wages: Salaried women workers earn 62 cents for every $1 that men earn in Germany, 64 cents in India and about 80 cents in Mexico and Egypt. Women entrepreneurs fare far worse, earning 34 cents for every $1 men earn in Ethiopia and just 12 cents in Bangladesh relative to every $1 for men.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/19/women-make-only-1-percent-wealth_n_969439.html

Now a rational being would look at these facts and analyze them, and would reach the conclusion that women are STILL BEING GROSSLY abused financially, mentally and physically. However, a not so rational person would scream that the numbers are fake and there's a conspiracy out there(lead by women)that want to enslave the noble male specimen. Oh how i wish I were included in it! Or you might say that women are weak and have what they justly deserve, but just a proven random scientific fact women's threshold for pain is considerably greater than men's- it might be a survival trait acquired in the past 3000 years of male dominion over beast and woman. Now, I know you don't love your mama very much, but she probably went through some serious pain to at least bring you in this world.

Phew, I'm rambling almost as much as you. I'm not expecting my words to change your attitude, hopefully they will at least annoy you. Such bitterness cannot be healthy for your blood pressure. :D

In the end, women are indeed dependent on men to survive just as men are dependent on women to survive, you know it takes 2 to tango and reproduce. I believe that it's all about balance and man should not have control over woman and animal or woman over man and animal. Human nature is predisposed to abuse -male and female-... perhaps the animal kingdom should take over...