The future is female? Not if birthrates mean anything.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Is the future female? Is the future feminist?

Not if birthrates mean anything. Nations with more feminists have less babies. Socioeconomic classes with more feminists have less babies. The maternity wards of the world are filled with non-feminists. The cradles of the world are filled with toxic masculinity, squalling to suck internalized-oppression teats. Is there a special place in hell for women who aren't feminists? I don't know, but I do know there's a special place on earth for women who aren't feminists, that place is the future.

Why?

Feminism is the radical notion that having babies should be left to men.

Instead, the result has been that having babies has been left to the people most immune to feminism:



Oh sorry, I thought feminists said that women are good at math. Well, here's something a little easier:


Every nation with a birthrate under 2 is on an extinction trajectory. That's the pretty yellow and pink ones, ladies.

I wish I could help ladies' lib. I would have babies if I could. But I don't have a womb, so I have to leave this job to the people who DO have wombs. I know, such a hate crime, like blind people expecting people with eyes to see stuff for them.

Humanity has a social contract with women, you enjoy privileges like "don't hit women" and in return you do can do us a nice favor by, you know, not making us go extinct.

But it turns out we can't so much as teach you a multiplication table without it leading to a fullscale dereliction of duty, we can't write a few words on a chalkboard without women deserting their posts, switching sides, and siding with the Dodo Birds and the Dinosaurs and those little horses the size of a cat. (Okay, I'll admit the tiny horses are pretty cute, but extinction didn't make them turn cute. When feminists are found only in natural history museums, they'll still be the same fat, purple-headed armpit-hair-depositories they always were).

The future is female? No the future is this kind of people:

I was going to use a picture of a huge family in burkas, until I realized that white babies horrify feminists far more

If this offends you, if this triggers you, if you think the priceless creation of human life is beneath your dignity, if you think the miraculous, literally physics-defying creation of consciousness is beneath your dignity, well, the future doesn't care what's beneath your dignity. The future doesn't care what you think.

The future is nonfeminist.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: The future is female? Not if birthrates mean anything.

if you think the priceless creation of human life is beneath your dignity, if you think the miraculous, literally physics-defying creation of consciousness is beneath your dignity

I'm going to belabor (pun intended?) this point.

Every physicist has to admit that the creation of consciousness is a miracle. Women literally - I mean literally-literally - have the ability to perform miracles.

But oh no, performing miracles is beneath you. Instead you chose to join the rat race, live your life stuck in traffic, doing degrading jobs for people you don't like. Look at the most common jobs women work, it's all either in the fake-smiles industry (sales, cashier, waitress), or stuff that stay-at-home-moms were already doing anyway (maids, cooks, teachers, nurses, personal aides), such as general housekeeping (secretaries, clerks). Lots of office busywork of dubious usefulness where you can't help but suspect you were only hired so powerful men have a pretty status symbol.

Young women are hired to look pretty, older women are hired to do the exact same work they would have done pre-feminism.

In short, "female empowerment" is just women spending hours in traffic so they can wipe the butt of someone else's baby.

The only thing that feminism has changed is your commuting time. Oh yeah, and also that whole extinction thing.

Pic is related:

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: The future is female? Not if birthrates mean anything.

Excellent and thought-provoking work, Brother Jeb. But I'm afraid the truth may be even worse. The future isn't female, it's shemale.

The number of people identifying as the opposite sex has risen explosively in recent years, especially among children. In the filthy, unsaved UK, where the name of Christ is considered less holy than the four-letter C word, this increase has been tallied at four THOUSAND percent over the last decade. At this rate, it won't be long before every last Briton has hacked off whatever feeble remnant of (wo)manhood he or she had left. And then what? Do they start to transition back the other way, but with even less functional Frankengenitals, or do they go on to identify as different ages, races, even species?

Who on Earth knows — or cares — what becomes of that God-forsaken hole. The fact is: if you think it's not happening here, you're nuts! "Trans kids" are all the rage in public schools now. Websites like Tumblr and Twitter have become transmission vectors for a highly contagious mental illness with a 40% mortality rate, and that number comes straight from the people pushing it! One has to assume the reality is worse.

My guess? I would say 80 or 90% of trannies end up seeking rope therapy. And that's before you factor in AIDS, overdose, neogenital necrosis, and other horrors closely linked to transanity.

When will the madness stop?

And to bring us back on topic — is there any doubt that feminists have brought this on by ceaselessly chipping away at our innate, commonsense, God-given understanding of gender?

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: The future is female? Not if birthrates mean anything.

The future...transmission vectors for a highly contagious...AIDS

Clearly God sent you a prophesy, as you predicted the outbreak of AIDS 2: Gayer and Blacker just a month or two before God unleashed it.