Feminism is a Capitalist invention

if women decided to stop working and become stay at home mothers what would happen to wages and unemployment? I think wages would go up and employment would be full and a lot of inefficient and unnecessary government/private jobs would simply get filtered out.

Other urls found in this thread:

striking-women.org/module/women-and-work/19th-and-early-20th-century
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Females have always been in the workforce. For some reason reactionaries didn't care when it was only daughters and wives of the proletariat who were forced to sell their labor for a wage.

...

muh tradwife

Well looks like I am an ancap now.

But half your workforce just quit. What now?

Look, I hate feminism as much as the next guy, but you're a fucking retard. Women still have to work under capitalism. This is inevitable.

sure, raising kids, cooking, gardening and sewing etc were considered part of the workforce a long time ago.

full employment, higher wages, inefficient government/private jobs would disappear.

workers would have a lot more bargaining power with their employers when it comes to rights and wages, they'd have a lot more employment options to choose from. A lot of barriers to entry would disappear like having a "college indoctinration degree" which is just a formality for most jobs and not a functional requirement.

Population in the west would stabilize and reach replacement level or higher, women would be on less anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medication since they are naturally more inclined to housework and motherhood than doing construction work or looking at paper for 8hours a day. etc

Women began to work because they had to since falling wages made it so one person could no longer support a whole family. Obviously it they all "decided" to quit they wouldn't be able to raise a family at all

if women work besides men then how will i get that leftist pussy i am deserved

...

someone here has no idea about the history of feminism and its radical roots and gets all their information from youtube anti-feminists

Workers bargaining power usually comes down to population. You can see this in the difference of how smaller Scandinavian Nations treat their workers, vs. Japanese, South Korean, or American Workers.

Are you burger op? Can't have bargaining power if you got no unions

Half of your workers are unemployed, retard! That's not full employment.

You forgot working the fields and working in mills. The point was is that as long as capitalism has existed the majority of woman have had to sell their labour power in exchange for money, and in feudal society they worked the fields alongside men (and children for that matter). The idea that women traditionally only worked in the domestic sphere in a modern conceit.

they're not part of the workforce anymore, they aren't seeking work.

supply and demand also influences bargaining power, because businesses will be competing for a smaller pool of workers.

Women entering the work force (to the point that most of them now work, not just a few of them) was definitely more beneficial to corporations. It didn't help out the families at all as it just allowed wages to go down as businesses now had excess potential workers who were willing to undercut each other. Wives are still dependent on their husbands if they want a good chance of their children having decent futures, but now they have to spend their days working for a corporation as well as still having to find time to raise their children, which impedes the children's chances of being successful as well. Of course this doesn't affect the bourgeois nearly as much as they can afford having someone take care of their children while they are both working, or are making enough that they only need one parent working full-time.

I still wouldn't call feminism a capitalist invention though, and it isn't inherently bad. It's just that women entering the work force did absolutely nothing beneficial to anyone but business owners and women who want to live independently as single women, though many of them end up regretting that choice when they get older and have to turn to "medication".

Right and people that don't work magically stop needing things, correct? You're retarded.

assuming materialist feminism since all other kinds are idpol

Adding to this.

I don't think women leaving the workforce now would really achieve anything, as low wages have been completely normalized. The average worker would still undervalue their labor.

women have always worked. read a history book.

Yeah but bourgeois women only started working recently. Proles have been brainwashed into accepted the bourgeoisie's version of history as their own.

you're not telling me anything new.

almost forgot where i was for a second lmao

I'm just trying to be nice to OP by pointing out that it isn't uncommon for people not to know that women worked in farms and factories well before feminism was even a thing.

they become mothers/housewives, the father provides for the family, as was common historically.

...

...

Crisis. Labor would have (more) bargaining power.

So now women can't live if they don't get married and men are on the hook for being "providers" instead of being free to pursue their own goals. Congratulations, you've fucked over both sexes.

men today are still expected by women to be providers and financially successful. feminists never intended to do away with male gender roles, only female ones

This is especially true in Japan. Both men and women were pretty equal before westernization.

You are a fucking moron if you think feminism is a capitalist invention.

What you mean is, the material conditions of capitalism gave rise to feminism.

And yet the early feminists are almost universally leftist

What

Wages would go up even higher this way, because barely anyone would be able to do any job that requires significant skill/labor.

capitalism thrives on exploiting workers, half the population wasn't being totally exploited until feminism told women they should become wage-slaves like men. And not have one master at home but also a master out in the work-place.

Prior to the feminist revolution women's employment was very minimal and usually centered around the home or personal farm, like the amish women.

No, they're not. You aren't required in any way to do this, and you won't ruin the economy by failing to do it. Get over yourself.

Child support/alimony inequalities says otherwise.

There was no such thing as a "feminist revolution". Gender roles and expectations started to change following WWII for a number of reasons, but there is no specific point in history when the paradigm somehow shifted because feminists wished it hard enough.


This is pure, unadulterated bullshit. Women made up a significant portion of the workforce since the start of the industrial revolution, most notably in the textile industry.

striking-women.org/module/women-and-work/19th-and-early-20th-century

lol yeah, women love unemployed and low income men. those homeless guys have to beat them away with sticks

...

Go back to Holla Forums OP