Miscellany:Elimination of all state funding for young women to attend high school and college

From Nathania, Nathan Larson's bliki
Jump to: navigation, search

State funding for women to attend high school and college should be eliminated, as it tends to have a low and in some cases negative return on investment. Young college women typically have trouble focusing on their studies because they are addicted to their smartphones and more interested in men than in their classwork, now that they are away from parents and no longer subject to their rules. Women, lacking the same ability at abstract reasoning as men, are more likely to choose relatively worthless degrees in easy majors like psychology, communication, liberal arts, etc. rather than more rigorous curricula such as math, science, engineering, law, accounting, or medicine.

Many of these educated women will, at any rate, eventually quit or put on hold their careers in order to raise kids. Those women who do stay in the workforce tend to eventually become miserable with shouldering a burden that is more than they can comfortably handle, day in and day out, for decades. Women's involvement in the workplace is also correlated with a higher risk of extramarital affairs, relative to those women who stay home with the kids. That the vast majority of Nobel Prize winners in the hard sciences are men is unsurprising, given the different purposes and motivations of men and women in life. As Illimitable Men notes:

Where testosterone coalesces with creativity, the engine of civilization hums on the fuel of male ambition. Civilization is man’s grand project, an expression of his thought form and aspiration, and although from time to time atypical women will make spontaneous contributions, its distinctly masculine texture remains dominant.

Man has a mission beyond the scope of the home, it is merely the scale of vision and ability to actualise that differs among men. Indeed, we owe modern civilization to men who kept firm to their life’s work and executed their vision, for it is women who bring us into this existence, but men who make said existence glorious. All men have missions, but it is within the provision for humanity through the development of civilization that the greats illuminate the depth and scale of said ambition.

Women are concerned with matters of people, people are women’s business, reproduction with a powerful man is their life goal – they are simple. Where woman’s ambitions are concrete, some may even say mundane, man’s potential is infinite. This is not to say that men do not seek to reproduce, but rather that babies and hearth do not constitute success for a man in the way they do for a woman. A woman who achieves these goals actualises her femininity, her mission is complete, and so rarely will she aspire for greater.

Men on the other hand do not find completion in family life, it is important to them, but it does not encompass the sum of their being. Men do not live for relationships, family and people in quite the way that women do. Whilst the social fabric is the beating heart of all that matters to women, it is but a puzzle piece in a grander picture for men. Being the architects and providers of humanity, man’s focus is expectedly different; the scope of his existence is wider, and thus the extent he must be willing to go more extreme.

To play it safe as a woman brings success, but for a man it elicits nought but failure. A woman married with children is the apotheosis of feminine success, but a married man with children is not. Even should a man not marry nor reproduce the need for a mission persists, for whilst a woman defines herself by her relationships, a man defines himself by his achievements.

When a woman postpones marriage and children to attend college, her years of peak fertility are wasted, and chances of birth defects or infertility are increased. Some of these women will wait so long to have children that they will become unable to do so without expensive fertility treatments (which may or may not be successful), and their children will suffer from an elevated risk of birth defects, such as Down's syndrome, due to the higher chance of chromosomal abnormalities in older women.

A woman does not need more than a junior high school education (if that much) in order to properly fulfill her most important role in society, which is to be a good wife and mother. By the end of 8th grade, a woman has learned algebra, she has had some exposure to foreign language, and she has studied civics. The point of diminishing returns has already been reached, and the knowledge that is being gained as the years go on is of less and less practical use in a typical woman's life.

If a woman wants to read the great works of Shakespeare or learn how to take the cosine of an angle, there is plenty of time to do that through online courses while she is sitting at home with a baby. But if a woman is going to truly "have it all," and have the best chance of success at both intellectual interests and childbearing, she needs to put family first while there is still time. Studies have shown that the biological clock ticks faster, and the window of healthy fertility closes sooner, than most women realize.

College is increasingly pitched not only as an education but an experience to broaden women's horizons. The implication is that there aren't other, perhaps more cost-effective, ways a young woman could spend those years that would be just as important, if not more so, than watching a professor's PowerPoint presentation or chugging from a beer bong at 3 AM and throwing up on themselves. Many women, being introverted or conservative, have little interest in partying or joining leftist campus organizations, and therefore don't even enjoy college, but suffer through it anyway because it's expected of them. (High school is the same way; many young women don't enjoy the experience, but rather find that the way they're treated by their peers is like something out of Mean Girls or Carrie.)

Besides social pressure to get a degree, a large part of why many women want to attend a college far away from their hometowns is the same reason why many women like to travel — so that they can drink and use drugs as much as they want, and sleep with whomever they want, without being told "no" by their parents or having word of what they're doing come back to damage their reputations. But, like travel, having a university education doesn't tend to make a woman more interesting to talk to. More commonly, her newfound credentials will overinflate her ego to the point of making her insufferable to be around.

Educated women tend to feel that less-educated men are beneath them. Yet men, including educated men, are usually attracted to women's youth and beauty more than their education. (Although people with similar levels of intelligence tend to be attracted to each other, one does not need to be educated in order to manifest intelligence.) Educated women therefore have a higher likelihood of remaining single.

Teenage women should be encouraged to leave school; marry men who have the means to support them; and start having babies while they are still in their years of peak health, fertility, and beauty. It is not necessary for married women to have their own incomes, if they live in a thrifty way; care for their children at home rather than putting them in daycare; don't have student loans to repay; and have a husband who is mature enough, and far enough along in his career, to handle his responsibility as breadwinner and head of the household.

A typical American woman loses her virginity at age 17. There is a high correlation between a woman's number of sexual partners before marriage, and her likelihood of divorce. To help protect children from the tragedy of broken homes, therefore, it is important that women get married at a young age, while they are still virginal. If women are encouraged to complete a high school or college education before getting married, there is a high likelihood that they will give in to the temptation to have premarital sex, which will later have a negative impact on their marriages. This also brings with it a greater likelihood of sexually transmitted diseases spreading and children being born out of wedlock.

Fewer women traveling to school and work will also relieve some of the burden from our transportation system and help the environment, as there will be fewer cars and buses on the road during rush hour.

One might argue that keeping intelligent women out of the universities and the workforce is a waste of their potential. But it is arguably a worse waste of their potential when their years of peak beauty and fertility, which could have been used to attract a good man and produce intelligent children, are instead devoted to school and work.

Public school is no place for a smart young person. The smarter they are, the less they tend to fit in with their peers. The students who get straight A's are regarded as nerds, or hated on for making the rest of the class look bad. Those who can't excel so much at getting good grades find a way to put down the academically superior by pointing out their weaknesses (whether in social skills, or style of clothes, or physical attractiveness, or whatever), in an attempt to lift themselves up in comparison.

Some smart students, though, simply disengage, because they are bored with their schoolwork and with their peers. They have their heads in the clouds, pondering the deep mysteries of the universe, while their fellow students mock them for having their nose in a book all the time, or for being uninterested in the topics their peers like to talk about. Being forced to be around a crowd of people one doesn't fit in with just intensifies the feelings of loneliness.

Teachers try to intervene by telling the bullies, "Leave her alone." Then classmates just ignore, ostracize, and give the silent treatment to the kid who doesn't fit in, rather than bullying her in any overt way that they could be disciplined for. But young people want more than to be ignored; they want to be accepted and appreciated. Public school can't offer that to the smart kids; they will always be "uncool" in the eyes of their peers. They can't even hang out with other smart kids, without being subjected to jeers of "Nerds!" by passers-by for the company they keep.

One of the reasons why a lot of older women want to keep younger women in school, is that they want to encourage those younger women to put off marriage till later and spend their youth having sexual flings with men their own age, rather than competing with them for the older men who are capable of providing for a family and who would prefer to have a younger and more beautiful wife, if they had the opportunity. In this way, feminism operates much like a trade union in which the skilled workers sell out their unskilled comrades by advocating a minimum wage increase that will put the unskilled workers out of a job. Older feminists are selling out the younger generation of women by doing whatever they can to make them postpone looking for a husband.

Actually, as a libertarian, I advocate eliminating compulsory education altogether, for both boys and girls (since kids who don't want to be in school are more likely to be troublemakers who disrupt others' efforts to learn), and I also support privatizing education, since I think a competitive market would provide education more efficiently than our bureaucratic system of state schools. In the manosphere, it is acknowledged that even for men, going to college is often a waste of time, because little of use will be learned. It is often noted that one can get a good education without going to college. But I focus on eliminating state funding for women's education in order to annoy the feminists.

External links[edit]

Template:Navbox issues