Government, Taxes, and Sex....

[Dill]

(07-03-2017, 12:01 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I thought that'd grab your attention.


So, I thought this would be fun to get opinions on.

https://nkilsdonkgervais.wordpress.com/2017/05/04/when-men-pay-taxes-women-become-promiscuous/comment-page-1/

LOL an interesting read, Roto.

I think this Hollander has been reading about the Men's Rights Movement.

Some random thoughts:

1. Most of the points made here are driven by movement ideology and diverge quite a bit from the historical record. E.G., the US government stayed relatively the same size during the ten years after 1919. It did not expand appreciably until after the election of FDR, and the cause is pretty clear--the Great Depression. Countries with no women's suffrage, like Germany and Japan, also turned to Keynesian solutions during the Great Depression. Germany's government was already larger, proportionally than that of the US. 

2. Traditional conservatives often characterize the relation between the Democratic Party and minorities in the US as one of mutual dependency: Democrats need votes and so promise services and special considerations from blacks and illegals. That is why they "love" immigration--more Democratic voters. The long term tendency is then to expand government and drive up taxes as hard working whites pay for lazy minorities and people who shouldn't be in the US. These minorities in turn become dependent upon government for protection and services and so vote Democrat.  So the Democratic Party creates dependency or "modern day slavery."

Mr. Kilsdonk-Gervais has adapted this tactic for the Men's Rights Movement. Over the long term, women vote to make the government their protector/provider, and therefore "bigger," along the way usurping the "traditional" role of men as provider/protector. All manner of evil results, as women are able to leave their "protectors" and provide for themselves. If a guy steps in to "correct" his dependent woman, the government calls it "domestic assault" and intervenes in the privacy of the home. But it does this unequally--or where are all the battered shelters for men? WHAT ABOUT MEN'S EQUALITY!!! At the base of this viewpoint is a very patriarchal anxiety about women's equality and nostalgia for the days when men were "in charge" everywhere--government, business, school, and the home. I guess you could call this "malelash" against feminism. It's about threatened male identity. 

Alternative facts abound.