Gender and slavery

Chapter Title : Gender and Slavery

 I will use the term males and females instead of men and women so as to be unambiguous because men has two meanings one including only males and the other including both males and females.

How many genders are there?

Male Definition 1

A biological human male is someone who possesses, will possess or has possessed the quality to be able to make a biological human female pregnant and who is unable to become pregnant by natural means

Male Defintion 2

A biological human male is someone who possesses the ability to produce sperm, possessed the ability to produce sperm or will possess the ability to produce sperm but does not possess eggs, has not possessed eggs and will not possess eggs.

Female Definition 1

A biological human female is someone who possesses, will possess or has possessed the quality to be able to become pregnant by a biological male and who is unable to make another biological female pregnant by natural means

Female Definition 2

A biological human female is someone who possesses eggs, has possessed eggs or will possess eggs but does not produce sperm, has not produced sperm and will not produce sperm

Perfect Hermaphrodite Definition 1

A biological human perfect hermaphrodite theoretically is someone who would possess the quality to be able to make a biological female pregnant by natural means and who also would possess the quality of being able to become pregnant by a biological male by natural means.  

Perfect Hermaphrodite Definition 2

A biological human perfect hermaphropdite theoritically is someone who possesses eggs, has possessed eggs or will possess eggs and who also possesses the ability to produce sperm, possessed the ability to produce sperm or will possess the ability to produce sperm

Perfect Hermaphrodites are theoritical

I say theoretically because many people claim human perfect hermaphrodite's do not exist.

Possibility of biological Neuter from the moment of conception as a fouth human gender

Biological Neuter from the moment of conception Definition 1

There are humans for whom it was, is and will also be impossible to reproduce by natural means who are biological neuters from the moment of conception

Biological Neuter from the moment of conception Definition 2

There are humans who never possessed eggs, do not currently possess eggs and who never will possess eggs, who also never produced sperm, do not currently produce sperm and never will produce sperm who are biological neuters from the moment of conception

Definition of Biological Neuter through an event

There are humans who were originally conceived as male, female or theoritically as true hermathrodites who later became unable to reproduce by natural means.  These are biological neuters.

Possibility of classifying someone as a neuter of a specfic biological gender.

I am not denying that a biological male or biological female or biological perfect hermaphrodite could be rendered unable to reproduce by an event but such a individual is not intended to be classified as being originally conceived as a bioloical neuter if they were made unable to reproduce as long as they would have had the potential to reproduce if that event did not occur.  Such individuals could be referred to as having an original biological gender of male or female or biological perfect hermaphrodite at conception and as having become neuters after a event.

Definition of Intersex

Some intersex individuals have some qualities about them that would cause people to guess they would be biological males and other qualities about them which would cause people to guess they are females by looking at them.  Other intersex individuals might look like they are hermaphrodites.  

There are four kinds of human intersex individuals

1 A biological male who could be mistaken for a biological female by looking at them

2 A biological female who could be mistaken for a biological male by looking at them

3 Theoritically a perfect hermaphrodite

4 A biological neuter who could be mistaken for a biological male by looking at them and who also could be mistaken for a biological female by looking at them

There are only three or four human biological genders even with the existence of intersex individuals.  Intersex is not a fifth gender or a license to assign a unlimitted number of biological genders.

Intersex individuals are either biological male, biological female, biological neuters or theoritically could be biological perfect hermaphrodites.  Intersex is not an additional biological gender but a term to describe someone's physical appearance.

It is possible for a biological female to look like a neuter.  A biological female who looks like a neuter and does not look like a male is not intersex nor neuter.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230201062342/https://www.childrenshospital.org/conditions/vaginal-agenesis

Limitations of defintions

These definitions are imperfect and could be improved on but are good enough for the purpose of this book

Although I have classified humans into a maximum of four genders someone might "split hairs" about whether or not neuters exist and whether or not human perfect hermaphrodites exist.

Someone might "split hairs" and try to argue that there are only two human genders because all neuters are either male or female.  Or "split hairs" and insist a neuter is a third gender.

"Splitting hairs" can reduce the number of biological genders human have to two genders or to three genders but can not legitimately increase it into more than four genders.

People did not lack knowledge of the difference between Males and Females for thousands of years or more than one day in the 20th century discover DNA and one day in the 19th century discover chromosomes while still lacking such knowledge.  And only after discovering DNA and or chromosomes arbitrarily label some chromsome combinations as male and other chromosome combinations as female.  And then look for what phenotypes or physical expression the chromosomes have and label some physical expressions as a male phenotype to match the predetermined arbitrarily named or labeled male chromosome arrangement and other physical expressions as a female phenotype to match the predetermined arbitrarily named or labeled female chromosome arrangement.

People knew what biological gender was as a phenotype based on the physical trait of differences in reproductive capabilites between the biological genders before they allegedly found a genotype which was correlated with gender.  The phenotype or physical trait of reproductive capacity is the proper way or "gold standard" to measure gender by which the genetic method can be evaluated as a measure of gender determination.  The genetic trait is not the proper way or "gold standard" to measure gender by which the phenotype of physical trait can be evaluated as a method of gender determination.

There are very disengenous people who want to use genetics as an excuse to say there are more than four biological genders because of intersex individuals.  But intersex individuals either can or can not reproduce in the same manner as a male and either can or can not reproduce in the same manner as a female.  This attempt to split hairs about intersex individuals based on genetics is for political purposes to claim there are an unlimitted number of biological genders and biological gender can be anything you want it to be or whatever you feel it is.

A naturally genetically intersex person is someone who was not made to look like they are intersex through medicine or surgery when they would have not looked like they are intersex without the medicine or surgery

Naturally Genetically Intersex Females have some genetic difference from females that are not intersex that causes a phenotype that can have some features that potentially result in mistaken and incorrect identification as males but are still biological females and not a addtional bioligical gender or set of biological genders.

If Naturally Genetically Intersex Females are not classified as Females genetically then the genetic criteria needs to change to include both intersex and non intersex females as genetically female.  Female DNA arrangementts can then be classified as either genetically female and intersex or genetically female but not intersex.

Naturally Genetically Intersex Males have some genetic difference from males that are not intersex that causes a phenotype that can have some features that potentially result in mistaken and incorrect identification as females but are still biological females and not a addtional bioligical gender or set of biological genders.

If Naturally Genetically Intersex Males are not classified as Males genetically then the genetic criteria needs to change to include both intersex and non intersex Males as genetically Male.  Male DNA arrangementts can then be classified as either genetically Male and intersex or genetically female but not intersex.

Perfect Hermaphrodites real or theoritical?

Allegedly real

"

Documented cases of fertility

There are extremely rare cases of fertility in "truly hermaphroditic" humans.[15][17]

In 1994 a study on 283 cases found 21 pregnancies from 10 true hermaphrodites, while one allegedly fathered a child.[15]

As of 2010, there have been at least 11 reported cases of fertility in true hermaphrodite humans in the scientific literature,[4] with one case of a person with XY-predominant (96%) mosaic giving birth.[18] All known offspring have been male.[19] There has been at least one case of an individual being fertile as a male.[16]

There is a hypothetical scenario, in which it could be possible for a human to self-fertilize. If a human chimera is formed from a male and female zygote fusing into a single embryo, giving an individual functional gonadal tissue of both types, such self-fertilization is feasible. Indeed, it is known to occur in non-human species where hermaphroditic animals are common.[20] However, no such case of functional self-fertilization or true bisexuality has been documented in humans.[14][10]

"

https://web.archive.org/web/20221221183348/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_hermaphroditism

Should intersex individuals get special legal or cultural treatment?

I am not opposed to intersex individuals getting special legal or cultural treatment because of people confusing their biological gender for another gender.  But I am opposed to using the existence of intersex individuals as an excuse to lie about biological gender being anything someone feels like they are or want to be at the moment, from a biological or medical perspective.  I am opposed to surgically altering intersex individuals to try to make them look like they are not intersex or like they are a gender of the parent, the physician or the government or sorrounding culture's choice without the childs permission as has been supposedly done to babies without their consent.  I am not opposed to doing surgery on a baby who is intersex that might accidentally create the appearance of a certain gender as a side effect if it is necessary to save the babies life or protect their physical health and not done for cosmetic cultural reasons involving social acceptance and not some political nonsense about psychological health which is a code word for society deeming their natural body as unacceptable. 

Gender transition surgery is really surgery to turn people into either neuters or cosmetically intersex looking people of the same biological gender

Known surgical technology or medicines such as hormone supplements available to the general public currently can not change a human's biological gender from biological male to biological female nor to perfect hermaphrodite

Known surgical technology or medicines such as hormone supplements available to the general public currently can not change a human's biological gender from biological female to biological male nor to perfect hermaphrodite.

Known surgical technology or medicines such as hormone supplements available to the general public currently can not change a human's biological gender from biological neuter to biological female nor to biological male nor to perfect hermaphrodite

Known surgical technology or medicines available to the general public can change a biological male who is not intersex to a biological male who is intersex in appearance by doing many cosmetic alterations without removing the reproductive organs.  This can include for example sugically adding fake breasts  or surgically reducing the visible size of the adam's apple, surgically changing the voice and surgically changing other features to change a biological male into someone who can more easily be mistaken for a female.  This can also include prescribing certain hormones to change the physical appearance.

Known surgical technology or medicines available to the general public can change a biological female who is not intersex to a biological female who is intersex in appearance by doing cosmetic alterations without removing the reproductive organs.  This can include for example surgically reducing the size of breasts.  This can also include dosing with anabolic steroids which were illegal without a prescription and were banned in the olympics.

Known surgical technology or and possibly also hormone supplements or other medicines or poisons available to the general public currently can change a human's biological gender from biological female or biological male or perfect hermaphrodite to a biological neuter.

Known surgical technology or and possibly also hormone supplements or other medicines or poisons available to the general public currently can change a human's biological gender from biological female to biological neuter while simultaneously doing cosmetic alterations to make the person more easy to incorrectly mistake as being a biological male.  This can be done by removing the ovaries in addition to the use of cosmetic medicines and surgeries.

Known surgical technology or and possibly also hormone supplements or other medicines or poisons available to the general public currently can change a human's biological gender from biological male to biological neuter while simultaneously doing cosmetic alterations to make the person more easy to incorrectly mistake as being a biological female.  This can be done by removing the testes in addition to the use of cosmetic medicines and surgeries.

Theoritically surgical technology could change a human biological perfect hermaphrodite to a biological male or biological female.

Do Gender changing animals prove gender transition surgery is legitimate?

Someone might also argue other animals can change biological gender so humans can.  

If a male who is not a perfect hermaprodite can get a woman pregnant then get the gender transition surgery and become pregnant by another male with it's new female body then I will consider the possibility that male to female gender transition surgery and drugs are legitimate.

If a female who is not a perfect hermaphrodite can get pregnant than get the gender transition surgey and impregnate another female with it's new male body then I will consider the possibility that female to male gender transition surgery and drugs are legitimate.

https://web.archive.org/web/20221003221259/https://www.treehugger.com/animals-can-change-their-sex-4869361

Belief or behavior based on socially constructed gender roles can not change someone's biological gender

Behaving based on a different socially constructed gender role than the one traditionally associated with your biological gender in a certain society can not change someone to a different biological biological gender

What other people believe about someone can not change that person's biological gender

What someone believes about themself can not change that person's biological gender

What is a transgender person?

A male wearing a dress or skirt or any other type of clothing items does not make him transgender 

The right for a male to wear what type of clothing he wants is a separate issue than transgender rights

A female wearing any type of clothing items does not make him transgender 

The right for a female to wear what type of clothing she wants is a separate issue than transgender rights

A male engaging in certain hobbies like baking, cooking or ballet does not make him transgender

The right for a male to engage in whatever hobbies he wants is a separate issue than transgender rights

A female engaging in certain hobbies does not make her transgender

The right for a female to engage in whatever hobbies she wants is a separate issue than transgender rights

A person wishing they were born a different biological gender then they are does not make that person transgender

The right to wish you were born a different biological gender is a separate issue than the right to tell people you are a different biological gender than you are

A male telling people he or she is a female does make him or her transgender 

A female telling people she or he is a male does make her or him transgender

A male requesting to legally be treated like a female does make him or her transgender

A female requesting to legally be treated like a male does make her or him transgender

Women's special rights vs gender equality and trans rights

Only one of the following options can occur in any one society at one time

There is no scenario in which trans rights can occur without gender equality or in which gender equality can occur without trans rights.  There is no scenario is which trans rights can be removed without gender inequality or in which gender inequality can occur without removing trans rights.

All times and places - Only refer to all times and places controlled by a society 

Option 1 : Gender Equality, Compulsive Gender Integration in some times and places with compulsive gender segregation forbidden in all times and places, addition of Trans Rights, and elimination of different rights for biological males and females

Option 2 : Gender Inequality, Compulsive Gender Segregation in some times and places with compulsive gender integation prohibited in all times and places, elimination of Trans Rights and different rights for biological males and biological females

Option 3 : Gender Inequality, Compulsive Gender Integration in some times and places and Compulsive Gender Segregation in other times and other places, elimination of Trans Rights and different rights for biological males and biological females  - This was the standard in United States of America's late twentieth century public schools where male and female children were forced to integrate for most classes but forced to segregate to different bathrooms.

Option 4 : Gender Inequality, Compulsive Gender Integration in some times and places with compuslive gender segregation prohibited in all times and places, elimination of Trans Rights and different rights for biological males and biological females. - Theoretically possible but not likely to happen

Which one of the two options do I think is best?  I think it is best to let each community make their own choice and to let people choose their communities

I think it is best to have different communities where each community chooses a different option.  People can then choose which option they want based on which community they choose to join.  Each community should be very clear about which option they are choosing.  

If California wants one option and Texas wants another option then they should both get what they want through the process of secession.  The United States of America should be split into a minimum of three separate countries, the section that votes majority Democrat should get one country, the section that votes majority Republican should get another country and the rest of the United States that is neither consistently Republican nor Democrat should get a third country.  In the pro Democrat party country people would get option 1 and in the pro Republican party country people would get option 2 or option 3.  I do not see option 4 occuring if the whole point to females agreeing to different treatment under the law than males in Republican Party country was to have segregated sports and segregated bathrooms.

Womens special rights and extra priveleges they are currently getting in the name of equality are incompatible with trans rights which inevitably result from the same claim of equality.

Under the current society ( in all countries with more than 50% white gentile population that are not Muslim nor Jewish theocracies )  females get all the priveleges males get plus free special corporate and government priveleges just for being female but get less responsibility or accountability than males.  

Whenever they want something they demand males to man up and do it for them because they are weak and helpless or unequal, but whenever they want privelege to demand the right to do something they suddenly claim to be equal to males and just as capable and certainly not weak and helpless.  Females demand inclusion into otherwise male only spaces because they are equal to males but demand the right to keep males out of female only spaces because they are different than males.

In any society in which females are claimed to be equal to males and males equal to females, but females get better treatment than males by governmets and corporations, males can respond to females getting better treatment than males by legally identifying as females.  Such a society will eventually result in all sufficiently wise or shrewd males legally identifying as females and legal gender equality being achieved resulting in the loss of any extra legal government or corporate rights that biological females have because biological males can achieve the same extra rights by legally identifying as females. 

The Transgender Rights that come with Gender Integration and Gender Equality means elimination of Special Rights for Biological Females in practical application of corporate and government policy.  What about elimination of Special Rights for Biological Males in religious organizations?

There are not any Speical Rights for Biological Males ( who are not royalty ) in any country that is not a Jewish or Muslim Theocracy and for which more than 50% of the population consists of White Gentiles.  There might be exceptions in some religious communities with Special Rights for Biological Males but such religious policies are not enforced by the United States of America's Government nor the European Union Government, nor the Canadian Government, nor the New Zealand Government, nor the Australian Government, nor the British or English United Kingdom Government.  In fact any religious policies of adding Special Rights for Biological Males are often cracked down on by those governments.  

Some Roman Catholic, Mormon, Amish, Orthodox Jewish, Free Masonic, Baha'i and Muslim organizations are allowed to have special rights for biological males but religions that those governments considers to be new are not.  

Ultramontane Roman Catholics do not yet officially allow a woman pope as of the time of writing this.  Some denominations of Baha'i do not allow woman on the Universal House of Justice as of the time of writing this to the best of my knowledge from previous conversations with Baha'i.  Some Free Mason lodges have male only meetings for now but there is a seperate female only meeting group with a different name called the Order of the Eastern Star as well as female Free Mason Lodges.

A new Muslim Sect or Denomination or a new Jewish Sect or Denomination would certainly be permitted to give males special rights as part of their religious organizations policy in order to not be racist and to prevent another holocaust.  A new Christian denomination with a certain percentage or higher of their clergy being White Gentiles who also has their highest ranking Clergy member being a White Gentile would not be permitted to give males special rights as a policy.

Let's say someone starts a New Christian Denomination and quotes restrictions about women's behavior in the Bible.   This denomination allows male Pastors to do ministry to a gender mixed group or a male only group.  But this denomination only allows women pastors to do ministry to adult females and children and forbids women pastors from doing ministry to adult males.  They quote 1 Timothy 2:12 to justify their policy which they say is a ancient Bible based tradition that existed before the founder of their denomination was born.  Such a new denomination would be cracked down on by the government for having such a policy in official writing even if the policy predated the denomination.

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet.

Footnotes

a. 1 Timothy 2:12 Or over her husband

https://web.archive.org/web/20230116161310/https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+2%3A12&version=NIV

I am not saying whether or not the denominations understanding of 1 Timothy 2:12 is exactly correct but I am simply saying they might use that verse to justify such a policy.  There are many other different ways they could try to use 1 Timothy 2:12 to restrict the behavior of women as a written policy and I am not saying whether or not any of those understandings of the meaning of that verse are correct or not in this chapter of this book.

Why can old denominations and old religions get away with this but not new ones?  A naive viewpoint is that old denominations or old religions have already established politicial power and already have more members at the time the new religion or new denomination starts.  This means that the old religiions or old denominations have more political power then the new ones at the time the government would attempt such a crackdown.  The naive viewpoint is that the government fears cracking down on the old denomination or old religion but does not fear retaliation from the new one.  There might be an exception if a group like the CIA decides to start a new religion in which that religion is allowed to give Males Special Rights as a policy without being prosecuted.

Remember in reality all sufficiently large denominations and all governments recognized as legitimate by the United Nations are both controlled by the same "story tellers."  A new denomination giving Males Special Rights that was not created by a group like the CIA in reality would get cracked down on because it was not yet sufficiently infiltrated by the "story tellers" and therefore must get cracked down in order to get censored and or subverted.

Fictitious Dialogue between a Feminist and a Trans Employment Equality Activist

Person A

Men and Woman are equal

Person B

If genders are equal then a biological male who says they are a biological female is equal to a biological women.  If a biological male who says they are a biological female is not equal to a biological female then the genders are not equal.  

Person A

But I said equal rights not equal biology!  

Person B

Fine, then the biological male should have equal rights to a biological female to write woman or female on a job application in order to receive equal treatment to women or females.  A biological male should also have the equal right to use woman only spaces in order to get equal treatment to woman.  

End of dialogue

The practice of trans employment equality legal activism in job applications

If a biological male lives in a society that promotes equal legal rights for males and females but such a society acknowledges that males and females are biologically different then in such a society biological males have the right to legally identify as a female without being required to biologically identify as a male because males and females are viewed as legally equal but not biologically equal in such a society.  Judges, Police and Military in such a society would be legally obligated to call males the same as females and to call females the same as males when making legal decisions but doctors, anatomists and biologists could still medically treat and biological classify males and females as physically different.  If a judge in such a society ruled that a male who put down female on a job application committed fraud then that judge would be claiming that males are legally different than females and denying equal legal right to males and females.  A male in such a society is not required to use the women's restroom nor to wear a dress nor wear a skirt nor get a sex change operation nor medicate themselves with certain hormones in order to legally identify as a female on employment applications because a female is not required to do any of those things in order to legally identify as a female on employment applications.

Do not get a sex change operation nor take hormones in order to apply for job applications.

You can get the hormones if you want for other reasons such as if it will improve your health.  In most cases taking sex hormones would make someone's health worse not better, however it might make it better in some cases if prescribed by a doctor for a specific health problem.

Why would some females want to stay in a community with so called unequal gender treatment?  

Some females prefer to be able to choose whether or not they are employed over being forced to be employed.  

To work less hours

Some females prefer a "patriarchal" culture believing males living in a patriarchal community are better caretakers of females.  Males with "patriarchal" ideologies  encouraging the subjugation, domination, suppression and oppression of females and who additionally do not care for the well being of females who live in the geographic borders of non patriarchal communities are worse caretakers of women.  But males who respect the well being of females and live inside of the geographical boundaries of some communities labeled as "patriarchal" can be argued to be better caretakers of females from some points of view.

Some people would argue that in a "patriarchal" culture with a reduced proportion of employed women, a husband can earn enough money to support his wife on a single income enabling his wife to have the option to choose to be married and unemployed but in a culture with high female employment rates it is more common in monogamous marriages for both spouses to need to be employed to support a family due to the decreased wages for males.  Some of these people might argue that decreased wage for males comes from more people competing to be employed or a gender tax gap with taxpayer supported welfare directed toward females or taxpayer supported corporate welfare money to subsidize corporations to hire more female employees at better wages.  Of course if some females want to be both unemployed and unmarried in a involuntary government then they can sometimes simply vote to tax males only, such a situation may work great for them until the involuntary government economically collapses.  If some people want to be employed at jobs that cost more resources than they provide but provide status these jobs can be maintained through corporate welfare in which taxpayers foot the bill to hire corporations to hire people to do such jobs until such a involuntary government system economically collapses.  

Some women prefer gender segregation

Because some females do not want biologically male individuals who self identify as females to access female only spaces, or sports because they fear sexual assault or for other reasons involving a biological difference.  Adult women who do not take testosterone steroid supplements competing in sports against men is equivalent to men who do not take testosterone steroid supplements competing against men who do take testosterone steroid supplements.   

Some males may prefer gender segregated sports to avoid prosecution for unwanted touching that can happen by accident or that someone can be accused of without even doing at all  Some males prefer gender segregated competitive martial sports to avoid the social stigma of beating up a female.  Other males might prefer gender segregated sports to avoid the social stigma of losing too a female.  I personally endorse the co existence of both gender segregated and co ed sports as long as sport participation is voluntary and oppose the enforcement of only co ed sports or only gender segregated sports on a worldwide scale.  

Some people might argue that gender segregated workplaces, schools, swimming pools, bathrooms or restrooms or other types of places to numerous to list would reduce real sexual assaults and or false sexual assault allegations.  After immigrating to some locations with a previously low percent of Muslim population some Muslim communities have persuaded swimming pool managers to have special gender segregated swimming pool hours during some times at some days of the week.

Turd Flinging Monkey

I will try to explain Turd Flinging Monkey's views on economics, voting and gender.  I am not trying to misrepresent Turd Flinging Monkey but beware that some explanations of his viewpoints presented here might not be perfectly correct.  I have listened to a lot of his material but do not have this material I listened to in written form to quote his exact words to try to ensure I am representing him accurately.  Also some things I say are logical conclusions that I believe would result if some of the  claims he made were true even though he might not have directly said such conclusions.  Some of the terminology or methods of expressing my understanding of his viewpoints in his own words might also not meet his approval.

Turd Flinging Monkey's theory of political trichotomy

Value - Economic Political System

Economic Freedom - Free market capitalism

Freedom - Capitalism

Economic Equality - Communism

Equality - Communism

Economic Stability - Fascism

Stability - Fascism 

Fascist Capitalism vs Free Market Capitalism

Sometimes Fascism is called some other type of capitalism but this is not the same as Free Market Capitalism.  Fascism could for example be called State Capitalism, Stakeholder Capitalism or Capitalism with Chinese Elements.  

What Turd Flinging Monkey calls Fascism is the same as what some politicians call Public Private partnerships, "vocational rehabilitation" , "stimulating the economy" , or government "job creation" programs in my opinion.  This type of Fascism also includes subsidies that are called "corporate welfare" but does not include corporate tax deductions mislabeled as "corporate welfare" in my opinion.

What Turd Flinging Monkey calls Fascism I personally like to call reverse communism.  That is stealing from the poorer working class to give to the richer parasite class.  That is rich parasitic corporations use the government politicians to maintain and increase ( or Stabilize ) their power and rich parasitic government politicians use corporations to maintain and increase ( or Stabilize ) their power.  Rich old people who have Stabilized and accumulated wealth will support social security as a Stable form of income even though it means parasiticly stealing from poorer young working class people who are economicly unstable and decreasing economic equality.  What Turd Flinging Monkey calls Fascism is in opposition to what he calls Free Market Capitalism in which there is real competition between corporations without the government choosing winners and losers.

From now on Capitalism will mean Free Market Capitalism when refering to Turd Flinging Monkey

When using the phrase Capitalism from now on when refering to my understanding of Turd Flinging Monkey's economic and politicial worldview I will mean "Free Market Capitalism" and not Fascist Capitalism.

You can not have 100% of all three systems or values at the same time.  Evidential Information will not change which economic system someone supports if they do not change their values.

Turd Flinging Monkey has a political trichotomy model in which he believes people value either Freedom, Equality or Stability or partially value some combination of those three values but people can not logically value 100% of all three at the same time.  

Evidential Information will not change which economic system someone supports if they do not change their values.

Any evidence presented to someone which does not change their value system can not change their political goals.  Trying to persuade people to change political parties based on evidence usually does not work because they often value the same things after being presented with the evidence.

The person who values equality will always support hostile actions to take wealth away from the person who values freedom and to give it to themself no matter how much the person who values freedom tries to use evidence to persuade them to change political behavior or political alliances as long as that person continues to value equality more than freedom.

For example if you show reason and evidence to someone that there proposal to tax people in order to give them free stuff results in other people being enslaved, it will not persuade them to stop trying to tax people so they can get free stuff if they value economic equality more than economic freedom.  No matter how many people are enslaved so that someone who 100% values economic equality can get a free lunch they simply do not care.  However if you show them that complete economic equality will not cause them to get anymore free lunches in the long run but to starve to death you might be able to persuade them to still value economic equality but to value it less and to support just enough economic freedom to prevent them from starving to death.  Unfortunately most people who value equality 100% would rather have a free lunch today and risk starvation ten years later then have to work for a lunch today in order to avoid starving ten years later, so even reason and evidence of future starvation based on a track record of what happened to countries with communism will not persuade them.  

The person who values stability more than equality and stability more than freedom will not care how much evidence you show them that social security is a ponzi scheme.

"A Ponzi scheme (/ˈpɒnzi/, Italian: [ˈpontsi]) is a form of fraud that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors."

https://web.archive.org/web/20230203035418/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

Even if they find out and agree that it is a ponzi scheme they will still support it as long as they get their money because they do not care if the next generation is ripped off.  However they could know it is a Ponzi scheme but refuse to verbally acknlowedge that it is a Ponzi scheme.  Unless you can persuade them to value economic freedom, or economic equality more than their economic stability they do not care that other people are being enslaved or that other people who have less wealth than them are being made poorer to pay for their social security.  Showing an unlimited amount of evidence and reason of the economic harm they do to other people by supporting social security does not persuade them to stop supporting it because it does not conflict with their value system to harm other people economicly for their own economic stability.  So no matter how much evidence and reason you show them they will not change their mind if they have not changed their value system.

People who 100% support economic freedom do not care if a unemployed single mom who got pregnant sleeping with random guys of her own free will instead of getting a job or marrying a provider with a job before choosing to get pregnant goes hungry if she will not get a job or marry a provider if her government benefits for becoming a single mom are completely eliminated.  They do not want people to be enslaved to pay for her free will choices.  An unlimitted amount of evidence and reason to support the short term increase in the number of hungry single moms will not persuade people who 100% value economic freedom that people should be enslaved to give free lunches to single moms.  And they probably believe that in the long run less single moms would go hungry if such programs would be eliminated because less people would choose to be single moms and those that remained would be so small in number that they could be supported entirely by charity.  However if people who support 100% economic freedom were shown evidence and reason that communist rioters would outnumber and over power them resulting in massive starvation if they did not give up a little bit on economic freedom and support a little bit of economic equality they might change their mind and support just the minimum amount of economic equality to prevent that from happening while maintaining as much economic freedom as possible.

Turd Flinging Monkey Bio Shock and TFM's rejection of Anarcho Capitalism

Turd Flinging Monkey believes Anarcho-Capitalism can not work because someone will always be at the bottom on society and whoever is at the bottom will be tempted to value Equality instead of Freedom, he uses the plot of the video game bio shock to explain this.  Turd Flinging Monkey also believes Anarcho-Capitalism is not really anarchy or at least not really the absence of government because the corporations or companies that judge people could be called governments.  

https://whichiscorrect.com/absence-vs-absense/

Changing value systems and political economic cycles in societies

Turd Flinging Monkey believes in a Free society with Capitalism there will be a economic underclass who values Equality that tries to overthrow the society and make it Communist.  If Communism is achieved then once enough people starve under communism the masses will go for either Freedom and Capitalism or Fascism and Stability instead of Equality and Communism.  Any politicians that over threw society in the name of Equality and Communism will suddenly start valuing Fascism and Stability to try to maintain or increase their power after achieving power.  Starvation through Communism can be avoided and either Freedom and Capitalism or Fascism and Stability maintained by shooting rioters.  Turd Flinging Monkey admires Economic Freedom oriented Capitalist countries that outlaw pro communist propaganda believing you can not have absolute free speech because allowing pro communist propaganda can result in communism which results in a loss of free speech.  There is no free speech for people who starved to death in communism plus the fascist governments that come after communism tend to oppose free speech and communist governments tend to oppose free speech of those who oppose communism.

My understanding of the implications of Turd Flinging Monkey's political trichotomy when it comes to gender

If I understand his viewpoint correctly he believes that a higher percent of women than men support economic equality more than economic freedom.  And a higher percent of unmarried women than married women support economic equality more than economic freedom.

According to my understanding of his viewpoint, continuing to allow women to enslave men through voting to a greater degree with every year will eventually result in mass starvation as the value of Equality is used as a reason to remove Freedom.  Turd Flinging Monkey believes a higher percent of women than men supporting Equality instead of Freedom is biological to a great enough degree that allowing women who are not net tax payers to vote always results in mass starvation given enough time.  Turd Flinging Monkey would prefer to abolish non net tax payers from voting but allow women who are net tax payers to vote.  However Turd Fliinging Monkey believes it would be easier to forbid women from voting and thus reduce the percentage of non net tax payers who vote then it would be to forbid all non net tax payers to vote because there is a higher percentage of voting non net tax payers of both genders than the percent of women voters who are either net tax payers or non net tax payers.  Thus Turd Flinging Monkey believes the only solution to prevent mass starvation in the future is to forbid women from voting.

Is turd flinging monkey correct about the necessity of taking away women's right to vote being necessary to prevent mass starvation?

In a society where women valued equality more than freedom to a greater degree than men allowing women's vote to be imposed on men through violence would result in a less free society.  

If women could be educated to value Freedom more than Equality to a great enough degree then taking away women's right to vote would not be necessary to prevent mass starvation.

Turd Flinging Monkey is wrong about only allowing males to vote solving anything because voting can be rigged by the "story tellers"

Although Turd Flinging Monkey might potentially be theoritically correct in some other time period for some other society, we have reached a stage in society where voting does not work anymore because the news media outlets owned by the story tellers can determine the outcome of the vote instead of the voters.  Turd Flinging Monket is wrong because even if society abolished women's "right to vote" the news media outlets owned by the "story tellers" could still be used to rig the vote.  Whether or not Turd Flinging Monkey might have been right about that in the distant past we are beyond this point in society.  Although it is reasonable to question if there ever has been a time period where government voting systems existed in which such systems have not been rigged by the "story tellers" 

Do I personally believe in a women's right to vote?

I do not believe anybody of any gender Male, Female or whatever has the moral right to vote for certain things in a Involuntary Government.  Voting is often the same as saying that violence should be used to promote your political preferences.  There are exceptions such as voting for a violent policy not to be enforced.

That being said there are some exceptions if people choose to live in a Voluntary Anarchist Community or Voluntary Government in which there is voting then I do not have a problem with voting as long as people voluntarily submit to being controlled by other peoples votes.

I think some commmunities should allow no one to vote, other communities should allow only females to vote, others to allow only males to vote and others to allow both males and females to vote.  If someone does not like that some group of people may or may not vote then they should be allowed to choose not to live in the community for which they do not like the voting policy.

Why would a female choose to live in a gender integrated community where females are not allowed to vote but males are allowed to vote?

Let's say there are three communitites

Community 1

This is a gender integrated community where females are allowed to vote and males are not allowed to vote.

The males in this community are the poorest.  This is a direct result of females repeatedly voting to take away resources from males and give them to females by taxation.  The males in this community have less motivation to work for resources than the males in community 3.

A woman who likes being able to vote while forbiding males from voting more than valuing marrying a wealthy male would like Community 1 better than Community 3.

Community 2

This is a gender integrated community.  Both males and females are allowed to vote.  

The males in this commnuity have more wealth on mean average than community 1 but less than the males in community 3.

Community 3

This is a gender integrated community where males are allowed to vote and females are not allowed to vote. 

The males in this community are the richest.  This is a direct result of females being unable to vote to take away resources of males and give them to females by taxation.  The males in this community have more motivation to work for resources than males in community 1.

A woman who likes being able to marry a rich man to such a great degree that she is willing to sacrifice her right to vote would value community 3 more than community 1. 

Gender segregated communities

Sexual Orientation integated communities and sexual orientation segregated communities

Copyright Carl Janssen 2022, 2023