T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Yep.
A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Are you sure?
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Absolutootly!
Without a doubt-ly?
Yakuda
Verified User
The inference is she cant decide if she has children. The quote isnt just about the economic impact of having children although thats all you dingbats see. The quote is about whether or not she can decide to have children. Oh course she can decide. It just more victimhood bullshit. I have kids so dont fucking preach to me about the economics of kids. Fucking pompous ass
I take it "murph" is Naked Hunter Biden?
I have it on ignore, so no matter what it changes its name to, I blessedly don't see it.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
it was invented in a lab in Wuhan.
watch Rand Paul interviewing fauci so you wont be so fucking dumb.
the old interview. not the new one with him taking the fifth.
the old one with him playing ridiculous word games about what "gain of function" means.
Generally a woman can decide, but you are arguing an inference that is not there.
Try again!
Isn't he a libertarian, Jerry?
ModernDiogenes
Well-known member
She did a lot to help get women elected to public office as well. Increasing their footprint as a political entity with their own gravitas as a special interest with gravitas.
Here are widely circulated Gloria Steinem quotes, each followed by a concise rational critique. Where a line is commonly misattributed, that is noted.
1. “A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.”
This is a definition so broad that it collapses a political movement into a moral truism. Almost everyone already accepts that women and men are fully human. The live questions are about which differences (average strength, reproductive role, crime rates, variance in traits, occupational preferences) are treated as evidence of injustice versus as facts that institutions should accommodate. Treating recognition of humanity as equivalent to a specific policy program (quotas, speech norms, family-structure changes) smuggles contested means into an uncontroversial end.
2. “Women have two choices: Either she’s a feminist or a masochist.”
This is a false dichotomy. Large numbers of women reject the label “feminist” while still supporting legal equality, property rights, education, and contraception. They may prefer complementary sex roles, religious frameworks, or market outcomes over activist reconstruction of institutions. Calling that preference masochism pathologizes disagreement instead of arguing the evidence. It also ignores women who have done well under arrangements Steinem opposed.
3. “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.”
This reduces liberation to two lifestyle choices that happened to match mid-century elite urban patterns. Many women experience more autonomy, stability, and well-being inside marriage and motherhood than outside them; others do not. Cross-national data show no simple mapping from premarital sex + career to higher life satisfaction or lower depression. Treating one script as the definition of freedom treats other scripts as unfree by fiat.
4. “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” (often also attributed to Florynce Kennedy)
The line is rhetoric, not argument. Pregnancy is not a symmetric hypothetical: only one sex gestates. Societies that treat abortion as a sacrament still have to confront the separate interests of the fetus, paternal investment, demographic decline, and the fact that most abortions are not the result of rape or life-threatening illness. Male legislators have also legalized abortion in many places; the claim that opposition is explained only by “not being pregnant” ignores religious, philosophical, and empirical reasons that apply regardless of sex.
5. “We’ve begun to raise daughters more like sons … but few have the courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.”
The first half happened because markets and schools reward traits that were already more common among high-achieving men (competitiveness, spatial focus, risk tolerance). The second half collides with sex differences that are large, cross-cultural, and appear early: boys have higher variance, more physical aggression, later verbal development, and different play preferences even in very young children and in other primates. “Raising boys like girls” often means suppressing traits that later predict male advantage in certain fields and male disadvantage in others (school discipline, suicide). Courage is not the scarce resource; trade-offs are.
6. “Women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
Household labor is not a zero-sum ledger that must be 50/50 for outside equality to exist. Specialization by comparative advantage—who earns more, who is more willing to interrupt a career, who has a stronger preference for child proximity—raises household output. Nordic countries that pushed hardest for equal domestic hours still show large occupational sex differences. Equality of opportunity outside the home is compatible with unequal average hours inside it.
7. “Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It’s about making life more fair for women everywhere. It’s not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It’s about baking a new pie.”
“New pie” language treats the existing economy as a fixed moral failure rather than a set of trade-offs. Expanding the pie (growth, technology, cheaper energy) has historically done more for women’s material welfare than redistributing a stagnant one. “Fairness everywhere” also papers over conflicts among women: high-earning professionals vs. working-class mothers, career women vs. women who want part-time or home-centered lives. One coalition’s pie recipe is another’s tax or cultural cost.
8. “Don’t think about making women fit the world — think about making the world fit women.”
Institutions already adapt when the gains are large (maternity leave, remote work, smaller tools, female-only spaces). Making “the world” fit average female preferences in every domain—combat standards, STEM pipelines, criminal sentencing, sports—requires ignoring average male advantages in strength, spatial rotation, and upper-tail variance, or treating those advantages as illegitimate. Adaptation has limits set by physics, biology, and other people’s rights.
9. “Most women are one man away from welfare.” (variant: “one man away from poverty”)
This was closer to true in an era of lower female labor-force participation and weaker property rights. It is less true where women have education, earnings, and no-fault divorce. The remaining risk is often children, not the absence of a paycheck: single motherhood is a stronger predictor of poverty than marriage per se. The quote also treats male earnings as a patriarchal trap rather than as a form of insurance many women still choose.
10. Associated slogan: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Steinem repeatedly credited Australian activist Irina Dunn, not herself. As a claim about need, it is overstated. Pair-bonding, paternal investment, and two-parent households remain statistically protective for children and for many adults’ health and wealth. Independence is real; interchangeability of the sexes in reproduction and child-rearing is not.
Steinem’s sharper lines work as slogans because they collapse contested empirical questions (how large are sex differences? what do women actually choose when constraints loosen? what are the costs of the proposed reconstruction?) into moral binaries. Rational pushback starts by reopening those questions instead of treating the slogan as the last word.
grok.com
1. “A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.”
This is a definition so broad that it collapses a political movement into a moral truism. Almost everyone already accepts that women and men are fully human. The live questions are about which differences (average strength, reproductive role, crime rates, variance in traits, occupational preferences) are treated as evidence of injustice versus as facts that institutions should accommodate. Treating recognition of humanity as equivalent to a specific policy program (quotas, speech norms, family-structure changes) smuggles contested means into an uncontroversial end.
2. “Women have two choices: Either she’s a feminist or a masochist.”
This is a false dichotomy. Large numbers of women reject the label “feminist” while still supporting legal equality, property rights, education, and contraception. They may prefer complementary sex roles, religious frameworks, or market outcomes over activist reconstruction of institutions. Calling that preference masochism pathologizes disagreement instead of arguing the evidence. It also ignores women who have done well under arrangements Steinem opposed.
3. “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.”
This reduces liberation to two lifestyle choices that happened to match mid-century elite urban patterns. Many women experience more autonomy, stability, and well-being inside marriage and motherhood than outside them; others do not. Cross-national data show no simple mapping from premarital sex + career to higher life satisfaction or lower depression. Treating one script as the definition of freedom treats other scripts as unfree by fiat.
4. “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” (often also attributed to Florynce Kennedy)
The line is rhetoric, not argument. Pregnancy is not a symmetric hypothetical: only one sex gestates. Societies that treat abortion as a sacrament still have to confront the separate interests of the fetus, paternal investment, demographic decline, and the fact that most abortions are not the result of rape or life-threatening illness. Male legislators have also legalized abortion in many places; the claim that opposition is explained only by “not being pregnant” ignores religious, philosophical, and empirical reasons that apply regardless of sex.
5. “We’ve begun to raise daughters more like sons … but few have the courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.”
The first half happened because markets and schools reward traits that were already more common among high-achieving men (competitiveness, spatial focus, risk tolerance). The second half collides with sex differences that are large, cross-cultural, and appear early: boys have higher variance, more physical aggression, later verbal development, and different play preferences even in very young children and in other primates. “Raising boys like girls” often means suppressing traits that later predict male advantage in certain fields and male disadvantage in others (school discipline, suicide). Courage is not the scarce resource; trade-offs are.
6. “Women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
Household labor is not a zero-sum ledger that must be 50/50 for outside equality to exist. Specialization by comparative advantage—who earns more, who is more willing to interrupt a career, who has a stronger preference for child proximity—raises household output. Nordic countries that pushed hardest for equal domestic hours still show large occupational sex differences. Equality of opportunity outside the home is compatible with unequal average hours inside it.
7. “Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It’s about making life more fair for women everywhere. It’s not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It’s about baking a new pie.”
“New pie” language treats the existing economy as a fixed moral failure rather than a set of trade-offs. Expanding the pie (growth, technology, cheaper energy) has historically done more for women’s material welfare than redistributing a stagnant one. “Fairness everywhere” also papers over conflicts among women: high-earning professionals vs. working-class mothers, career women vs. women who want part-time or home-centered lives. One coalition’s pie recipe is another’s tax or cultural cost.
8. “Don’t think about making women fit the world — think about making the world fit women.”
Institutions already adapt when the gains are large (maternity leave, remote work, smaller tools, female-only spaces). Making “the world” fit average female preferences in every domain—combat standards, STEM pipelines, criminal sentencing, sports—requires ignoring average male advantages in strength, spatial rotation, and upper-tail variance, or treating those advantages as illegitimate. Adaptation has limits set by physics, biology, and other people’s rights.
9. “Most women are one man away from welfare.” (variant: “one man away from poverty”)
This was closer to true in an era of lower female labor-force participation and weaker property rights. It is less true where women have education, earnings, and no-fault divorce. The remaining risk is often children, not the absence of a paycheck: single motherhood is a stronger predictor of poverty than marriage per se. The quote also treats male earnings as a patriarchal trap rather than as a form of insurance many women still choose.
10. Associated slogan: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Steinem repeatedly credited Australian activist Irina Dunn, not herself. As a claim about need, it is overstated. Pair-bonding, paternal investment, and two-parent households remain statistically protective for children and for many adults’ health and wealth. Independence is real; interchangeability of the sexes in reproduction and child-rearing is not.
Steinem’s sharper lines work as slogans because they collapse contested empirical questions (how large are sex differences? what do women actually choose when constraints loosen? what are the costs of the proposed reconstruction?) into moral binaries. Rational pushback starts by reopening those questions instead of treating the slogan as the last word.
Gloria Steinem Quotes and Counterarguments | Shared Grok Conversation
List Gloria Steinem quotes and rational arguments against them.
grok.com
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
not really.
real libertarians are for sound currency.
there are no real libertarians in government anymore.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
feminism was always political. part of jew created cultural Marxism. see frankfurt school.Here are widely circulated Gloria Steinem quotes, each followed by a concise rational critique. Where a line is commonly misattributed, that is noted.
1. “A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.”
This is a definition so broad that it collapses a political movement into a moral truism. Almost everyone already accepts that women and men are fully human. The live questions are about which differences (average strength, reproductive role, crime rates, variance in traits, occupational preferences) are treated as evidence of injustice versus as facts that institutions should accommodate. Treating recognition of humanity as equivalent to a specific policy program (quotas, speech norms, family-structure changes) smuggles contested means into an uncontroversial end.
2. “Women have two choices: Either she’s a feminist or a masochist.”
This is a false dichotomy. Large numbers of women reject the label “feminist” while still supporting legal equality, property rights, education, and contraception. They may prefer complementary sex roles, religious frameworks, or market outcomes over activist reconstruction of institutions. Calling that preference masochism pathologizes disagreement instead of arguing the evidence. It also ignores women who have done well under arrangements Steinem opposed.
3. “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.”
This reduces liberation to two lifestyle choices that happened to match mid-century elite urban patterns. Many women experience more autonomy, stability, and well-being inside marriage and motherhood than outside them; others do not. Cross-national data show no simple mapping from premarital sex + career to higher life satisfaction or lower depression. Treating one script as the definition of freedom treats other scripts as unfree by fiat.
4. “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” (often also attributed to Florynce Kennedy)
The line is rhetoric, not argument. Pregnancy is not a symmetric hypothetical: only one sex gestates. Societies that treat abortion as a sacrament still have to confront the separate interests of the fetus, paternal investment, demographic decline, and the fact that most abortions are not the result of rape or life-threatening illness. Male legislators have also legalized abortion in many places; the claim that opposition is explained only by “not being pregnant” ignores religious, philosophical, and empirical reasons that apply regardless of sex.
5. “We’ve begun to raise daughters more like sons … but few have the courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.”
The first half happened because markets and schools reward traits that were already more common among high-achieving men (competitiveness, spatial focus, risk tolerance). The second half collides with sex differences that are large, cross-cultural, and appear early: boys have higher variance, more physical aggression, later verbal development, and different play preferences even in very young children and in other primates. “Raising boys like girls” often means suppressing traits that later predict male advantage in certain fields and male disadvantage in others (school discipline, suicide). Courage is not the scarce resource; trade-offs are.
6. “Women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
Household labor is not a zero-sum ledger that must be 50/50 for outside equality to exist. Specialization by comparative advantage—who earns more, who is more willing to interrupt a career, who has a stronger preference for child proximity—raises household output. Nordic countries that pushed hardest for equal domestic hours still show large occupational sex differences. Equality of opportunity outside the home is compatible with unequal average hours inside it.
7. “Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It’s about making life more fair for women everywhere. It’s not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It’s about baking a new pie.”
“New pie” language treats the existing economy as a fixed moral failure rather than a set of trade-offs. Expanding the pie (growth, technology, cheaper energy) has historically done more for women’s material welfare than redistributing a stagnant one. “Fairness everywhere” also papers over conflicts among women: high-earning professionals vs. working-class mothers, career women vs. women who want part-time or home-centered lives. One coalition’s pie recipe is another’s tax or cultural cost.
8. “Don’t think about making women fit the world — think about making the world fit women.”
Institutions already adapt when the gains are large (maternity leave, remote work, smaller tools, female-only spaces). Making “the world” fit average female preferences in every domain—combat standards, STEM pipelines, criminal sentencing, sports—requires ignoring average male advantages in strength, spatial rotation, and upper-tail variance, or treating those advantages as illegitimate. Adaptation has limits set by physics, biology, and other people’s rights.
9. “Most women are one man away from welfare.” (variant: “one man away from poverty”)
This was closer to true in an era of lower female labor-force participation and weaker property rights. It is less true where women have education, earnings, and no-fault divorce. The remaining risk is often children, not the absence of a paycheck: single motherhood is a stronger predictor of poverty than marriage per se. The quote also treats male earnings as a patriarchal trap rather than as a form of insurance many women still choose.
10. Associated slogan: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Steinem repeatedly credited Australian activist Irina Dunn, not herself. As a claim about need, it is overstated. Pair-bonding, paternal investment, and two-parent households remain statistically protective for children and for many adults’ health and wealth. Independence is real; interchangeability of the sexes in reproduction and child-rearing is not.
Steinem’s sharper lines work as slogans because they collapse contested empirical questions (how large are sex differences? what do women actually choose when constraints loosen? what are the costs of the proposed reconstruction?) into moral binaries. Rational pushback starts by reopening those questions instead of treating the slogan as the last word.
Gloria Steinem Quotes and Counterarguments | Shared Grok Conversation
List Gloria Steinem quotes and rational arguments against them.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
cultural marxism and the frankfurt school scholars overview
“Cultural Marxism” and the Frankfurt School are related in some discussions, but they are not interchangeable terms.
The Frankfurt School was a group of mostly German-speaking social theorists associated with the Institute for Social Research, founded in Frankfurt in 1923. They developed “critical theory,” combining Marxist political economy with sociology, philosophy, psychology, and cultural analysis. Their central question was why capitalism had survived despite Marx’s predictions of revolutionary change, and how modern culture, institutions, and mass communication shaped social consciousness.
“Cultural Marxism” is a later and often polemical label. It is sometimes used neutrally to describe Marxist approaches that emphasize culture, ideology, language, and social institutions rather than economics alone. However, in contemporary political rhetoric—especially in conspiracy theories—it is often used to claim that Frankfurt School thinkers deliberately engineered feminism, multiculturalism, secularism, or the decline of traditional values. Historians generally regard that conspiratorial version as misleading and unsupported. The Frankfurt School was intellectually diverse, internally divided, and not a coordinated political project.
The key concepts associated with the tradition include:
There are also important limits to their work. Critics argue that some Frankfurt School writers were overly pessimistic about popular culture, underestimated audience creativity and resistance, and sometimes treated “mass culture” too uniformly. Feminist, postcolonial, and later critical theorists have also criticized the early school for insufficient attention to gender, race, empire, and colonialism.
In short: the Frankfurt School was a diverse intellectual tradition focused on capitalism, culture, domination, and emancipation. “Cultural Marxism” can refer loosely to some of those cultural analyses, but its conspiratorial political use is a distortion of the school’s history and ideas.
“Cultural Marxism” and the Frankfurt School are related in some discussions, but they are not interchangeable terms.
The Frankfurt School was a group of mostly German-speaking social theorists associated with the Institute for Social Research, founded in Frankfurt in 1923. They developed “critical theory,” combining Marxist political economy with sociology, philosophy, psychology, and cultural analysis. Their central question was why capitalism had survived despite Marx’s predictions of revolutionary change, and how modern culture, institutions, and mass communication shaped social consciousness.
“Cultural Marxism” is a later and often polemical label. It is sometimes used neutrally to describe Marxist approaches that emphasize culture, ideology, language, and social institutions rather than economics alone. However, in contemporary political rhetoric—especially in conspiracy theories—it is often used to claim that Frankfurt School thinkers deliberately engineered feminism, multiculturalism, secularism, or the decline of traditional values. Historians generally regard that conspiratorial version as misleading and unsupported. The Frankfurt School was intellectually diverse, internally divided, and not a coordinated political project.
| Scholar | Main ideas | Major works |
|---|---|---|
| Max Horkheimer | Developed critical theory; criticized both capitalism and authoritarian forms of state socialism; emphasized the relationship between reason, domination, and society | Eclipse of Reason; Dialectic of Enlightenment with Adorno |
| Theodor W. Adorno | Analyzed mass culture, authoritarianism, antisemitism, and how standardized entertainment can encourage conformity | Dialectic of Enlightenment; The Culture Industry; The Authoritarian Personality |
| Herbert Marcuse | Argued that advanced industrial societies could absorb opposition by producing consumer desires and ideological conformity | One-Dimensional Man; Eros and Civilization |
| Walter Benjamin | Studied art, technology, historical memory, and how mechanical reproduction changes the political role of culture | “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”; “Theses on the Philosophy of History” |
| Erich Fromm | Combined Marxism with psychoanalysis; examined how social conditions shape personality, fear, obedience, and the desire for freedom | Escape from Freedom; Marx’s Concept of Man |
| Friedrich Pollock | Analyzed capitalism, economic planning, and the changing role of the state in modern economies | Writings on state capitalism |
| Leo Löwenthal | Studied popular literature, mass culture, and the relationship between entertainment and social control | Literature and the Image of Man |
| Jürgen Habermas | Second-generation theorist; focused on communication, democratic deliberation, the public sphere, and the conditions for rational agreement | The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; The Theory of Communicative Action |
| Nancy Fraser | Later critical theorist who examines capitalism, gender, social reproduction, recognition, and political representation | Fortunes of Feminism; Cannibal Capitalism |
| Axel Honneth | Developed a theory of social recognition, arguing that struggles for dignity and respect are central to social change | The Struggle for Recognition |
- Critical theory: Social theory intended not merely to describe society but to expose domination and help expand human freedom.
- Ideology: Ideas and institutions that can make historically specific forms of inequality appear natural or inevitable.
- The culture industry: Adorno and Horkheimer’s term for the commercial production of standardized entertainment that can encourage passive consumption and conformity.
- Instrumental reason: The tendency to treat reason mainly as a tool for efficiency, calculation, prediction, and control, rather than asking what ends are morally worthwhile.
- Authoritarian personality: A psychological pattern associated with rigid conformity, submission to authority, hostility toward outsiders, and susceptibility to authoritarian politics.
- Reification: Treating social relationships or human beings as if they were objects or commodities.
- Public sphere: Habermas’s concept of a social space where citizens can debate matters of common concern, though access to that sphere is shaped by class, gender, and power.
There are also important limits to their work. Critics argue that some Frankfurt School writers were overly pessimistic about popular culture, underestimated audience creativity and resistance, and sometimes treated “mass culture” too uniformly. Feminist, postcolonial, and later critical theorists have also criticized the early school for insufficient attention to gender, race, empire, and colonialism.
In short: the Frankfurt School was a diverse intellectual tradition focused on capitalism, culture, domination, and emancipation. “Cultural Marxism” can refer loosely to some of those cultural analyses, but its conspiratorial political use is a distortion of the school’s history and ideas.
