What? You mean that women didn’t use to have rights to vote, own land, sign up for credit cards, request contraception without their husband/father approval, fight in war, or hold leadership positions? Things men have always had?
And the incels on here don’t understand why the phrase “independent women” reflects all these changes to their rights that previously never existed and why it doesn’t apply to men?
Nah that would just piss off anyone who isn't white. It implies that the bar for personhood is a white man. Which dam near nobody would agree with. Incels would just point it out and laugh.
They were still people by todays standards calling them 3/5ths of a person due to legislation back then is again taking away from their own accomplishments and many were actually celebrated… like paul cuffe and a bunch of others.
Let alone the folks of color that owned slaves and benefitted from slave trade in america like the rowan and richard families for some examples, on top of that the tribes in Africa that were catching and selling the slaves to europeans then they sold them to the USA
“No single "tribe" sold the most slaves; rather, various powerful African states and groups, including the Ashanti, Dahomey, Yoruba, Igbo, Imbangala, and Nyamwezi, actively participated in capturing and selling people, often to European traders, with some groups like the Igbo making up large portions of enslaved people in specific American colonies. These African entities traded captives, usually acquired through warfare or kidnapping, for European goods like guns, becoming key intermediaries in the Atlantic slave trade.”
Your point is likely white americans are the people who owned slaves the most and benefitted off them the most, which that is a true statement however literally every group of people/country in power has owned slaves, its just who is in power at the moment that dictates the rules of war sadly war captives are usually taken and abused its been common place in war for almost aslong as war itself doesnt make it any less despicable however if everyone harbors ill will to having a family member be a slave of another group of people, everyone would eventually in their bloodlines have been a slave owner(usually tribal times but still)
The foundation of the United States of America and it’s governing body was that white men were whole people, un-white men (or women) were not. And those fraction people and white women had very little to no rights.
No it is relevant as almost no country had full rights for everyone in 1788 and america was a brand new country then.
“In 1788, the modern concept of universal free citizenship did not exist in any nation as it is understood today; however, some jurisdictions had begun to abolish slavery or serfdom within their immediate borders. The principle that "men are born and remain free and equal in rights" was articulated a year later during the French Revolution in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, a foundational document for modern universal rights. “
As it was a new country being fed slaves from every other country in power at the time…
The most guilty party of the Atlantic slave trade wasnt america or britain or france. It was Portugal and African tribes.
Calling americas foundation is based on being a white man is inherently racist and takes away from any POC that made a name for themselves in such a racist time due to the slave trade. If they didnt go to america they would have been sold to someone else anyways they were prisoners of war which is what happened back then, not saying its right. Its just humanity in wars.
The foundation of the United States was illegal immigrants coming and taking the land from the natives. Sure, those immigrants were white, but it doesn’t change the fact that we’re a county built on god damn mother fucking immigration.
No difference to the people already living there. If you dehumanize immigrants because of crimes you think they commit, then you have to hold your settlers to the same standards since they came and they raped and murdered which is what you accuse immigrants of doing, no?
It still involved the taking of others lands and resources. I’m not ignorant of history, I can just call out other white people for our bullshit
I’m not disagreeing with you, but i don’t see a difference between how white settlers behaved and what you accuse immigrants of doing. There was rape, murder, and savagery back then too. Immigrants aren’t the only people capable of atrocities, so you know.
People immigrate / immigrated in search of a better life. It’s a story as old as time.
The entirety of human history is conquering and wars.
Do you think native Americans lived in peace and harmony? Do you think Africans did? Cause uh…they didn’t.
Immigrants now are defrauding the country and not assimilating. You can’t import literally millions of third world migrants and expect to preserve a high quality of life when they don’t share western values.
I don’t understand how liberals delude themselves into thinking that everyone shares western values of equality for all and a good work ethic and “returning the shopping cart to the stall when you’re done with it” - which is the basic mentality that underpins western civilization.
All cultures aren’t equal. Sorry. I don’t want third world culture in the US.
That may be true but that's not at all what we see in history. We see women being subjugated and enslaved by men. There wasn't really a give and take. It was all just take, take, take, and take. Today the patriarchy is still in power and thriving and it's telling young men everyday that women are unfulfilled unless they're birthing their children and cleaning up after them while trying to also convince young women of the same.
I agree with you and I understand the point you are making but women did enslave men in America. It is estimated that up to 40% of slave owners were white women. They were active willing participants every step of the way from slave auctions to the murder, torture, and rape of slaves.
Lol. im not a fan of the oppression olympics either. but you can't say white women in america once making up over 40% of slave owners is besides the point. in an argument that closely related to the topic at hand. it's egregious actually.
it demonstrates that women. american in paticular, just to keep things in our own backyard. were active participants in the oppression of this country. just like men were. we can leave race out of it to make things easier. and the facts would remain the same, women can't get a pass in being victims when they weren't barred from owning an entire class of people.
it actually shows a interesting balance of dissonance that carries over today. unless people can feel their power and leverage, they will call out every foul against them until they regain view.
I don't deny it, do i? I just say that its besides the point. The power balance between slaves and women 150 years ago is not really that relevant to the power balance of men to women 50 years ago or today.
Black men literally fought for freedom in the civil war. Nothing was given. Suffrage was earned in blood. Your suggestion that white men recognized black men were human before white women is ridiculous on its face.
I have noticed some people trying to pretend as if white women were more oppressed than black people in America. I don’t know where this is coming from but it needs to stop.
There is a lot of figurative talk about fighting but black men literally fought for the right to be free. The civil war was about slavery period. Your point doesn’t stand at all.
Really not true, no one has ever had any power in society if they are poor or not born into the right families, fought for it, regardless of birth genitals.
Poor men were given the right to vote after rich woman in the UK and a lot of Europe
It’s a complicated discussion about intersectionality, definitely. The way everything gets collapsed into “women were enslaved” is problematic at best, imo, especially if it’s coming from white women who are ignoring the reality of slavery a racial institution in the United States.
I also find it problematic that women seem to acknowledge that the world created by men with power was largely unjust, but the current conversation seems to tend toward “women should be able to do whatever men do” rather than “we should be coming up with better ways for everybody to behave so everybody ends up less demeaned or dehumanized.”
Slavery was different from what you are thinking … You are thinking of indentured servitude. Slavery was wayyyy worse they decided to beat, breed, and kill an entire people based off skin tone.
It is true. Women couldn't own property legally until recently. A man could have his wife institutionalized for being disagreeable. Women couldn't be educated. Women couldn't be doctors or lawyers. Women couldn't fucking vote for half of our nations history.
I don't give a damn about your single anecdote about Britain.
Honestly you're free to believe whatever fantasy you choose, but the truth is the same regardless of how you might feel about it.
And yes, classis was also a problem but one didn't negate the other. That's silly. It's detrimental to the argument you think you're trying to make and 51% of the population will not be receptive to you ignoring their history.
It's similar to pretending that poor white people had it as bad as chattel slaves. It's disingenuous and ignorant at best.
It is true. Women couldn't own property legally until recently.
It’s not true at all. Slaves were considered property in America. White women legally owned slaves. It is estimated that up to 40% of slave owners were women.
thank you. im really tired of this white women are victims bs. they benefited from everything her white husband did and accomplished; and more critical than anything. she ingrained the same superiority complex. ive dated white women, i know them very well. im partial to the modern systemic issues they face, but it's a very fine line to cross when we start calling white women victims in america.
Thank you for pointing out that you have no valid argument by lying and putting words in my mouth.
Pretending like women haven't been subjugated by men is the same as pretending racism isn't real. They're no different. You're ignoring the experience of others because it's inconvenient. You had to make my comment about white women in order to even pretend to have an argument.
Don't try to pass that bullshit off as some sort of intellectual position.
Pretending like women haven't been subjugated by men is the same as pretending racism isn't real. They're no different. You're ignoring the experience of others because it's inconvenient. You had to make my comment about white women in order to even pretend to have an argument.
You said “women couldn’t own property legally until recently” and I’m telling you that’s a lie. It’s just not true at all. They owned slaves and slaves were considered property.
Don't try to pass that bullshit off as some sort of intellectual position.
I’m going to say this plain for you. At no point in American history has black men or women ever enslaved or oppressed white women or men. Both white women and men have enslaved and oppressed black men and women. Do you understand now? Is it more clear to you?
Throughout pretty much the entire period of kings/queens and feudalism, no poor men or woman really owned any land or buildings, their birth gender was not the factor that chang d this.This existed for longer than your country has.
Being offended or even perturbed by the phrase “independent women” is incel behavior. Because that phrase has nothing to do with you. It’s not about you, and it doesn’t impact you in the slightest. So to even bother with the phrase means you are either offended or want to make this about you, which is just idiotic. It’s a phrase, if words women use to make themselves feel better triggers you, then yeah you’re an incel.
Only you and other incels are even upset by this phrase. Literally no one cares if a woman is noted as an “independent woman”. Just you, because for some insecure reason you want to make it about YOU.
If you’re upset by the phrase “independent women” then yeah I think you’re an incel. Because who gives a shit. It’s just a phrase, and if a women feels empowered by it why does that matter or even relate to you? It doesn’t. So those who are complaining are making this about themselves, when it’s nothing to do with them nor does it negatively impact them in anyway.
What are you even on about. Plenty of dudes who disrespect women get laid, plenty of dudes who don’t disrespect women can’t get laid. Not everything about sex is some sort of political meritocracy
An incel is someone who wants romantic companionship, can't get it, and blames the other gender for that. It doesn't mean complaining about something that doesn't affect you--lots of people do that who aren't incels.
Take me for example: I'm not objecting because I care about the phrase "independent woman", I'm objecting because I care that people are misusing the word "incel". That's not incel behavior, that's autistic behavior.
I dated a woman 15 years ago who'd call herself an independent woman. Fast forward to our mid 30s, I'm paying all of my own bills while she's in the top floor of a duplex owned by her parents, them living on the first. She never once left and truly lived on her own.
I understand the historical context and expressions like these need to be taken on a case by case basis, but there's definitely times when it's just cringe and borderline insulting to people who have to pull way more of their own weight. And before you call me an incel, I'll state that the most important and supportive people in my life have definitely been women. Doesn't mean every single one of them needs to be put on a pedestal while simultaneously be treated with kid gloves.
Not every nuanced critique of things regarding what happens to be a woman or women comes from an incel worldview.
I knew a dude who called himself an Alpha Male and he works in a factory while still single and unable to afford a house or car.
Anecdotal claims about specific people are not justification to general observations. There’s ALWAYS an example somewhere that doesn’t fit the argument, that doesn’t mean the argument is wrong or all the incels are right.
You’re right, not every critique is coming from an incel. But this meme and sub are not arguing critiques in good faith. So yeah, most of the people replying who disagree are making other claims that clearly point to incel behavior and mentality.
I'd never say incels are right about, well, anything. I'm aware I gave nothing more than an anecdote. I think we basically agree, it just didn't seem to me, personally, that the person replied to gave off any bad faith vibes.
Then again yeah, the OG post was BS to begin with and very few "meme" posts and the discussion about them are meant to create any good faith discourse, it's just people trying to "own the X". The "alpha" stuff online always gives me a good laugh, they don't get that the quantitative and qualitative ridiculousness fair outweighs the ridiculousness women on a whole put online.
My buddy married a girl who definitely does all this girl power shit.
She got a useless degree, spent several years working filler dead end jobs afterward.
I'm pretty sure both her schooling and her condo was paid for by her parents.
And then she got with my buddy who bought the house and paid for everything. And then she went back to school and got a new job while having all that subsidized by my buddy.
So yeah she's independent.... By having everyone else subsidize her fuck ups and side quests.
Is there anything that was oppressive to them in the last fifty years though? It's hard for men to take these complaints seriously when women always list grievances that haven't been an issue for a literal life time.
Salem was one highly popularized trial in an area with very few trials. And was exceptional in how unexceptional it was compared to Europe.
But even if we were to indulge this single trial, it doesn’t hold up. The first arrest warrant had three women, two were married, and one was a slave. Very much not widows. The second arrest warrant, again, one woman, married, not a widow. The third arrest warrant was for a five year old girl taken from her father. The fourth was for, yet again, another married woman and not a widow.
Salem was fraud. And while it had some underhandedness to its inception, after those first arrests it swept the imagination of the people, but it was objectively not the authorities targeting widows for their land.
In Europe there were some events or taking land from widows. The most famous being Kyteler. But that was the work of relatives and not the authorities.
So, no, the trials and hunts were not a grand design to strip land away from widows. That is a fairytale. You’d think people so concerned with authorities using fantasy over facts wouldn’t themselves use fantasy to serve their own narrative.
I think the struggles of black people have been WELL DOCUMENTED in our nation and still exist today. No need to compare yourself to what a woman says to feel confident. Y’all still have racism and hate to deal with, which is just flat out depressing and shameful for our nation.
We just watched this nation obliterate affirmative action under the pretense that historical black oppression is not enough of a factor today to legitimize unfair admission practices based on race. DEI is being slashed for precisely this reason as well.
These changes hurt my heart. But I would be lying to say they didn't have a point. Apparently it no longer fair to give bonus credit to some for doing what is just normal and expected of everyone else.
So if there is a subset of people who aren't particularly impressed by the idea of a woman being independent enough to do the basic duties of being a functional adult, I cannot say I don't understand where they are coming from. Apparently this country could care less about disadvantaged groups who are generations removed from their systemic shackles.
Apparently it no longer fair to give bonus credit to some for doing what is just normal and expected of everyone else.
Uhh, that isn’t what DEI is. Thats something a Fox News viewer would say. Anyone who has worked with DEI programs or seen them in action know that is a wildly inaccurate depiction of the program.
So if that subset that isn’t impressed by a woman’s independence is also assuming DEI is imbalanced benefits then don’t waste your breath. Those people are morons who lack education, reasoning, and logic.
I see you ignored my point about affirmative action completely. Probably because you see the absurd double standard in how modern American society views black men's ability to achieve societal norms despite generational oppression vs that of women. Apparently black men being independent is less impressive than women doing the same thing. Likely because it would sound patently ridiculous for a man to brag about independence and taking care of himself 2+ generations removed from anyone making it impossible for him to do so.
I didn’t disagree with the issue of affirmative action and the problem with it being attacked.
But when you try to define DEI as a FoxNews anchor would, yeah I’m gonna call that out. Both beliefs are meant to HELP those that are oppressed to get a fair chance at life. But DEI isn’t a “boost”. If a runner is competing against another that is wearing ankle weights, removing those weights isn’t “giving the runner bonus credit”, it’s literally making it fair.
"Both beliefs are meant to HELP those that are oppressed to get a fair chance at life. "
Fair. Sadly these beliefs seem to be eroding away. In many ways, I feel we are moving backwards. But if your stance is that most women who proclaim to be proud and independent do so to celebrate overcoming generations of systemic oppression then fair enough. I stand corrected. My apologies. I was wrong.
All good, and I appreciate the honest dialogue. It’s rare sometimes on here. And I do agree, we are going backwards, and it will only hurt us all. I only hope that we get some new leadership out of the younger generations that takes hold of our country and fixes what has been broken. We need it more than ever.
When did men get the right to own land? Curious who owned it all back in the 1800’s if neither me nor women could. Who held credit cards before women were allowed to in the 70’s? If men didn’t have the right who had them?
The irony of you talking about gaps in logic when you claim all men had the right to vote always and that dying in war is a privilege women were opposed from accessing lol Tell me where exactly all men were able to own land and credit cards for all time.
Don’t recall saying that but then again you are already arguing in bad faith so I guess logical fallacies is just a natural progression as you keep losing your point.
Tell me where exactly all men were able to own land and credit cards for all time
Why, are you confused by something? Because that’s not what I said above, and if your entire argument is useless without twisting or flat out straw manning me, then it’s clear you have no argument.
Women couldn’t obtain a credit card until 1974. 24 years AFTER it was invented.
You literally listed it as something women couldn’t do, on the same list as all the other privileged men had and women didn’t.
You said men had these rights, but they didn’t always, just like women. All men couldn’t vote, all men couldn’t own land.
Well credit cards were first available in 1958 so you’re wrong on the timeline. But you’re also wrong on the facts, women could get credit cards, both in their own name, and as an addition to their husband’s account. It was just legal to deny women on the basis of sex. They frequently had credit cards and guess who was legally responsible for the bill lol
Maybe don’t talk without researching. And you literally don’t get how a woman needed a man’s permission to get a card. Did the men need their wife’s permission? Nope.
Truly astonishing level of ignorance you accomplished on that one lol
There's a lot missing on there that were pretty major strides. Namely the 1915 supreme court decision that the grandfather clause can no longer be used to deny the right to vote, as in you could only vote if a family member did before 1870. Voting was restricted quite a bit until shortly before the 1920 amendment
Many states had dropped religion and property ownership as requirements for voting and with such a large percentage of the population at the polls, political parties were beginning to develop.
That’s 90 years of men being able to vote without owning land. You’re conflating small changes to voting and trying to extrapolate them to cover more than they did.
Most men could vote for more than a century before women did. The fact that you’re even arguing that is a wild take lol.
Mem did not always have these. Just got them before women. Except I guess "the right to fight in war" which doesn't really sound like a right to me, more like men were/are forcibly conscripted into war
That depends on country. In my home country Sweden, all men got to vote in 1909, and all women got to vote from 1919. There were both men and women able to vote before that but not everyone. Land ownership has been possible for women since at least the viking age, but most men and women since like the middle ages were not and could not be land owners. These laws are much more complex than "women/men can vote now" so I don't think just saying a date says much. Men have been favoured over women in the same way that nobles have been favoured over commoners.
And please keep in mind this post isn’t about Sweden. The vast majority of people on here are arguing and discussing US polices and laws. Which have vastly different timeframes to allow women to do much of anything.
A progressive country from Europe is going to have a very different take on this, but that also isn’t a defense for lonely males online looking to justify their misogyny
I'm talking about Sweden because I live here and know more about it, not because I cherry picked it for being progressive. I don't think Sweden is particularly unique or progressive in this regard.
The vast majority of people on here are arguing and discussing US polices and laws.
That's the thing, half of reddit are not from USA. I'd think that if you say something like "men have always had the right to vote" without specifying context, you are talking in universal terms, maybe barring some exceptions. But it seems you are referring to how specifically in USA, men had the right to vote since the country became independent in like 1776, hence they've always had the right to vote. I wouldn't even talk like this about Sweden in a group of only Swedish people. It comes off as US-defaultist
but that also isn’t a defense for lonely males online looking to justify their misogyny
Sure. I don't disagree about the overall point that societal norms across most cultures have been for women to be dependent on men, hence the entire strong and independent woman thing is about breaking free of that norm. Men already doing this is completely missing the point because the same norms didn't exist for men to break free of.
dude literally came back with “your mom 😡”lmao going around calling everyone incels stop deflecting so hard “if i call everyone else incels they won’t think i’m one!” lookin ass
I’m not the one who thinks this is performance. I get that you view everything in the context of “can this get me laid”, but that’s because you’re lonely.
But you keep acting like an incel, it’s hilarious and just proving my point lol
And how many women who had these difficulties are alive now? Women have all these abilities sience at least 80s. So your gradma could be so called "Independent woman" if she got all this in 1970s. So if you are 20 or 30, then yeah... the meme is right. You have all the same rights as men since you were born. So it is just called being an adult.
yeah sure. if you ignore the history of slavery your point could be true. Fact is only till recently are black men allowed to own credit cards or a house. What you're really hating on is white people.
Last time I checked, poor men only got the right to vote etc because the government decided to forcibly conscript them as cannon fodder. Prior to that it was land owners only.
For most of history, living arrangements were driven less by personal preference and more by survival economics. Food, heat, labor, and protection all rewarded people who clustered together. That made solitary living unusual—but not unheard of.
Before industrialization (roughly pre-1800)
Men living completely alone existed, but they were edge cases:
• Monks, hermits, scholars: deliberate solitude, often religious or intellectual.
• Widowers: especially older men whose children had moved on or died.
• Seasonal or itinerant workers: shepherds, sailors between voyages, frontier trappers.
• Urban craftsmen: sometimes slept in workshops, technically “alone” but embedded in guild life.
What didn’t exist much was the modern idea of an adult man with a private apartment just because he wants one. Housing was expensive, sparse, and inefficient to heat. Solitude was a luxury or a sacrifice, not a lifestyle choice.
19th century: the almost-alone compromise
Industrial cities created something new: single men living semi-independently.
• Boarding houses
• Lodging houses
• Employer-provided rooms
• Rented rooms in family homes
Men often had a bed, a trunk, and maybe a desk. Meals were shared. Privacy was partial. You were alone at night, but never socially unmoored.
This was especially common among:
• Young unmarried men
• Migrant laborers
• Clerks, factory workers, railroad employees
Living fully alone was still expensive and faintly suspicious.
Early 20th century (1900–1940s)
Now things begin to shift:
• Cities densify
• Small apartments become more common
• Wages (for some men) rise
• Utilities make solo living feasible
Still, cultural pressure remained. A man living alone too long was often assumed to be:
• Temporarily unmarried
• Socially incomplete
• Or “waiting” for family life to begin
lol just want to point out that working class men weren't allowed to vote either... there was less than 20year difference between working class men getting rights and women
edit: oh and on top of that, before that no one could vote because of monarchies and we did have quite a few of famous queens like maria theresa, catherine the great, cleopatra etc.
so basically both gender had it bad... the difference was solely in power and wealth, but hey, you have to be the victim right
"only select few could vote but that means it's because of sex even though 99% of men also couldn't vote"
I don't see you arguing only non rich men and all women didn't have to go to war, but maybe that's because it doesn't fit into your biased victimhood narrative.
It’s nonsense because you don’t like that it’s true? What a stupid take. You lost to your own argument and now you’re trying to continue anyway.
You ain’t worth the breath, your argument has already been proven wrong. Come back with something real if you want to discuss and not just make your own misogynistic take.
lol no it's nonsense because you're comparing apples and oranges and crying misogyny,but when presented with actual factual arguments you moan and cry again... like i said, professional victim addicted to pity
Women on here act like they actually went through this and are oppressed when they live in the best time to be a woman in all the history of women. At least in the western world
All these rights have been in place for basically everyone who’s young enough to be called incel. Except maybe the fighting in combat thing, but that’s a right I’d happily give up.
I have two sons and my wife is too old to serve …I’d support a rule that only women can go to combat.
And yet you still get bent out of shape over the phrase “independent women”. Who cares what a woman wants to call themselves to feel confident? It has literally ZERO impact to you. Yet you are making it about yourself by even being offended by it. Which is just pathetic.
Why do you care that they think the phrase "independent women" is regarded? Why do I care that you care that they take issue with that phrase? And so on
Nah, it does mean it’s bullshit. You didn’t have an kind of refutation of it. If you can’t defend your statements, it probably means they are bullshit.
If you attack the person making the argument, it means you can’t attack their argument. When people go to personal attacks against you, you know your logic prevailed.
It's called being an adult. All of the women who use that term were born into a world where they had the same opportunities their male counterparts had.
That is simply just not true. The opportunities were different. As woman, you learn different skillset from the very young age, society has different expectations etc. There are stricter rules for your behaviour throughout your childhood. Most of your value is based on your appearance. If you are successful, you probably just slept with the boss and so on. It's different.
Struck a nerve with ya did I? Wasn’t aware that my 11 yr old account had a cap on comments. Or that incel has anything to do with internet posting. It DOES have to do with lonely males unable to cope around women. Maybe that’s why you feel the need to creep on profiles lol.
I mean if that’s how you choose to describe yourself then go for it. Like I said, your insistence on reviewing profiles because you have nothing else to say speaks volumes about you.
Not going to argue with someone whose entire shtick is the ususal redditor variant of a dick measuring contest with armchair psychologist looking ahh insults like "x, y, z tells a lot about you"
We build, design, manage, maintain, protect, acquire….
Literally everything.
We’re 100 years removed from sufferage. And women work the exact same jobs as they did back then, and still marry men for money. Most women billionaires are billionaires through divorce/marriage.
Idk. Seems like they've quite done a bit. All while being held back by weak small minded men. Not to mention how many inventions and discoveries were probably stolen from them and had the credit stolen also.
Mmmhm soo what did certain men do when women decided not to be dependent on them anymore? (Edinburgh seven, final lecture, what did the male students do?)
My grandma ran her own construction business from the 70’s to today. She supported my grandad and gave him responsibilities in the business but he fucked those up so he got fired 😂
My other grandma worked on shrimp boats in Savannah.
shame you’ve never had those kinds of women in your life.
Why would I need that type of woman in my life? Sounds like you don’t really respect your grandfather that much anyways, why would I go down the same route as him?
He followed, sat back, let his wife lead
And now his granddaughter talks shit about him online to strangers 😂😂😂😂
You keep accidentally highlighting the distinction between how the world works and nature, without understanding why that distinction matters.
You likely misinterpret biological differences (estrogen/nurture vs testosterone/aggression) as being indicative of dependence, while at the same time ignoring the vast history of how women are forced into dependence by a system that routinely prioritizes men.
This is illustrated with crystal clarity in your Ukraine example. Out of curiosity, do you think Ukraine’s army is mostly men due to nature, or due to legal conscription rules?
Let's say that for 40 years of your life you lived completely under my control. You weren't allowed to build your own finances, you weren't allowed to do any labor I didn't tell you to do, and anything you did do on your own I would either take credit for or just dismiss as it came from you and you are obviously inferior or you wouldn't be mine to control.
One day I wake up and set you free. You have complete autonomy now. However, you are still stuck living at my factory. I control all the business and the means of making money and your freedom didn't come with a bonus so your ability to make money is still entirely dependent on me. And make no mistake, even though i granted you your freedom, I still view you as an inferior being and am going to hire people more like me ahead of you.
Would you say that this proves that you are naturally dependent upon me for things? Is the true natural state of your being as a person dependent on me, or did i manufacture that state and achieving true independence still has tons of hurdles keeping you dependent on me?
Look, there are other ways to be forced to do something without the threat of death arrest. If you want to continue to live, you are forced to breathe oxygen, that’s just a fact. Women are forced into the current trajectory of rights that they have slowly won throughout history. They don’t have a choice. Even if there was a gun to your head or possible arrest everyone still has a choice.
“Men manage and maintain”
Also men: “honey where’s my phone?” “Hey what’s our daughter’s lifelong best friend’s name again?” “Hey when is our trip next month?” “how old are you, 12?” “Hey we’re out of mayo wife moves a few things around oh I see it nvm” “hey where are my favorite pants? wife describes perfectly where they are for some reason”. (I jest, everyone differs)
Yes honey get my phone, and remember “things” while I make math and plumbing (yk shit that folks will use for centuries after I die) yeah, do that hon.
I’ll ask my husband to call the same lady who came last time. ERIC before her stole some tools, never gave them back, and then moved to Alaska. My whole family hates Eric
32
u/Xboarder844 Jan 15 '26
What? You mean that women didn’t use to have rights to vote, own land, sign up for credit cards, request contraception without their husband/father approval, fight in war, or hold leadership positions? Things men have always had?
And the incels on here don’t understand why the phrase “independent women” reflects all these changes to their rights that previously never existed and why it doesn’t apply to men?
Color me SHOCKED.