The moral of the story here is too much freedom is even worse than too little for a woman.
There is very little glamorous about the average western woman. No grace. No subtlety. No shyness, cuteness or warmth. Not sophisticated nor classy.
Coarse, obnoxious, aggressive, and openly, shamelessly promiscuous.
This is what "women's freedom" looks like.
Take a good look.
The ruse is up pic.twitter.com/Wq68n9QIwE
— CCide (@chimericide) January 19, 2021
The moral of the story here is too much freedom is even worse than too little for a woman.
Free women are feral women.
An unmarriageable husk, an abomination that has all the negative qualities of the feminine, and all of the negative qualities of the masculine, with none of the positives of either
Neglect is abuse.
But libertariarians abuse their women in an altogether different way - they abdicate their duty to protect and guide her. They neglect her entirely.
"We are doing what is best for our women"
One, allowing her little room to even breathe incorrectly or make any sort of meaningful decision for herself without extreme social pressure and harsh punishment, the other, tossing her to the dogs.
"Why did you let me win" you can hear her soul cry.
And it ends with frivolous divorce, broken homes, widespread misandry, feminine sons, masculine daughters and the complete demonisation of any & all things masculine.
You cannot out of kindness, fairness and modern thinking grant them a few liberties, preserve society and be done with it.
Oh no.
Once the foot's in the door, it never ends. They will push for more until the universe itself explodes.
More from Society
Krugman is, of course, right about this. BUT, note that universities can do a lot to revitalize declining and rural regions.
See this thing that @lymanstoneky wrote:
And see this thing that I wrote:
And see this book that @JamesFallows wrote:
And see this other thing that I wrote:
One thing I've been noticing about responses to today's column is that many people still don't get how strong the forces behind regional divergence are, and how hard to reverse 1/ https://t.co/Ft2aH1NcQt
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) November 20, 2018
See this thing that @lymanstoneky wrote:
And see this thing that I wrote:
And see this book that @JamesFallows wrote:
And see this other thing that I wrote:
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.