![121212.JPG](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmbmC5g1n4UgqGR9ikE6KZntLeYPLEQpdyuB6vkMQE2roe/121212.JPG)
Feminist movements have alienated themselves from the male sex.

From a 40 year, culturally negative perspective of all things male, to an imbalanced legal system that enables the sucking of all the male  resources for a lifetime..
A resource sucking mechanism, that has gone _way past_  supporting the life of a child borne from a relationship.

Equal rights movements a hundred years ago, have morphed into something quite different, and as intended by the marxist evil.


### Females  have shot themselves in the foot – big time!

Why? AI, and the misunderstanding of market forces. 
Well, they would misunderstand them wouldn't they?  They  accept cultural marxist brainwashing  as a valid philosophical standpoint.(_Not_ the sharpest tools in the shed, lets just say...)

Sexual market value currency  _is_  the currency of the sexes.
And it  has been willfully devalued through feminism.

![121212.JPG](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmZ4TEUvQqvkhK6gPfQ1zg1jSJcz8isVEgQdfjXUeG8N8A/121212.JPG)

Women are simply _not worth_ as much as they think they are- or as much as they  have been led to believe, anyway...


 MGTOW (men going their own way) is real.  And there is a logical reason for it.

The demand  for females, from males -has been perfectly balanced throughout history  - until the arrival of feminism. 
The sexual currency has had a self balancing mechanism, where purchase of sexual access in return for offspring, and a stable safe environment has been the trade.
####  And it has worked!

The one thing the feminists of the world didn't contemplate, was technology.
The one thing the feminists of the world didn't _understand_, was the male sex drive.

What they thought only they possessed, – a vagina – has now been circumvented by technology and the sex robot.
While still in it's infancy, it is not beyond the scope of reality to see the 'silicon stand ins' providing all  male sexual needs. (as well as cleaning and cooking in all probability).

The  value of the 'lady parts' that women possess,  was their power. Always. It was always   _assumed_ to be  finite - and hence, holding it's value.
This is the thing that  gave them a power that has enabled the feminist movement, paradoxically.
When you posses the most valuable asset there is,  you can always negotiate from a position of strength.

This has been the case for centuries, and result of that has been villages, towns and cities... A physical representation of just _how_ successful this relationship has worked .... before any political intervention.

This relationship only works if there is no competition.

![121212.JPG](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmQccFsVyuH2aZGvbtnXfPVHkgXQYJiFTUpUwCBCutNJyP/121212.JPG)


Feminism has twisted that  free market mechanism, by trying to  control the price through market manipulation. 
This is expressed by  a central authority (government and legislation), deciding on the allocation of an individual and their resources.
“We want your resources, _because we are women_ ”, has changed the discussion in men's minds from 
' Am I prepared to risk my resources for this woman', to 'What other options  are there?'

#### 'What other options  are there?'...the spark plug, in the engine  of free markets...
And hello to AI, and sex bots. 


The  market value of the female has not only decreased through new technology, (sexual access being their number one valuable asset),  it is the _reduction in value_ of the female sexual asset, (through feminism), that has been _the engine_ to provide alternatives..

And while the argument of 'emotional needs' is valid, that is predominantly a female perspective. That is the glue holding a couple together. _It is not the motivation for becoming a couple_. 
The _driving force_  - from male perspective- is sexual satisfaction, not emotion.
Emotional attachment and stability is a _bi product_ of that sex drive.

And if there is no  emotional attachment in the relationship with a piece of silicone? ...well, you don't miss what you've never had...
Not only that, but through feminism- and the society it has produced - the 'emotionally stunted', modern male, is  now in higher proportions in society, than ever before!

Not only has feminism produced emotionally stunted males, it has also enabled the transition of 'real female' interaction to 'sex doll' interaction _an even easier_ one.
Talk about a double whammy.
The very emotional arguments the feminist women have been using to gain an inordinate amount of power, is now shooting themselves, well and truly in the head, (or between their legs, if you like)

I'm not making any judgement on the validity of  a 'sex doll' course of action, for a relationship – I'm pointing out _the reality_ that 'new males' are still the logical, critical thinking organisms that males have always been, and the 'non emotional sex bot' argument is a very powerful, logical one.


Traditionally, the dance was played out, and generally  came to conclusion with  lots of sex, lots of babies, and a stable life.
With post female power grabbing, this dynamic just doesn't fit.  The two sexes are still dancing, but they are not listening to the same tune...

![daily patriot.jpg](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmNMSsiwMnQifbt4w4rMXBgq5bc4gTYHUBiMCWzM6sK1Nk/daily%20patriot.jpg)

#### The risk is just not worth the reward for the male,  anymore. 

From the male point of view- in terms of relationship- sex is a _very_ risky business, and one that could cost you _the rest of your life_, in terms of further resource acquisition.
Paid, impersonal sex, is becoming the _least expensive_ sex, a male will ever get..
Sexual access in a stable (emotionally rewarding) relationship was a price worth paying, from the male perspective.
Sexual access in a non stable relationship, where the price of any previous sexual access may then be _a lifetime_  of depression, poverty and loneliness?
 ...Not so much...

The market value of  lady parts has  gone down, through feminism.....(and not 'gone down' in a nice way!).

#### So what does the free market have to say about this?

....If the price of 'X' is too high for the  value it offers the buyer, then the buyer will find  product 'Y'. One that meets the basic requirement  looked at in product  'X'.  
It may be not as good a product asc'X',  but the offset of value over cost is one that is acceptable to the buyer.

Hello to AI, hello to sex robots.

#### But it gets worse...
... (for the girls.  

Imagine when the technology develops to such a degree, so as to make  ' organic' female sexual value, _negligible_?
Where does that leave the female half of the worlds population?
 
Baby making units,  _without any of the material and emotional benefits_  that were previously offered with the traditional male/female relationships. Wow.
Female sexual market value has hit the floor...

### The Marxist feminist movement are the epitome of the definition  'useful idiots'.

....And when you're sellin',  but no one is buying' – you have to lower your price...or go out of business.

Going out of business (dying) for the female gene is not an option.
Lowering your price to whatever is market value, offers no moral (or ego) barrier for genes _demanding_ to reproduce...
...._none_  whatsoever...

![daily patriot.jpg](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmXXFn5wzGfkLMQW197Mbrvuj2wg6y2ASb5oDCwFjRzrTW/daily%20patriot.jpg)

A dystopian female existence... all borne from feminism....


The free market will out.  Always. 
Supply, demand, and price. A perfect balance.

Government market intervention and price fixing will _always_ screw things up - _for everybody_.