This is part of a series on feminism and the decline of society. See this index.
Who should die today?
One of the fundamental problems with feminism is its incoherent notion of equality. There is no consistent definition of feminism that agrees on who or what must be equal vs unequal, nor whether equality must be of opportunity or outcome. This is shown plainly in the women’s suffrage movement.
Women have had the right to vote ever since the passage of the 19th amendment to the United States Constitution in 1920. Voting is not about the individual, but about the group: the group with the most votes carries the day. If the opinions of men and women as a group were equally valid, then there would be no need for women to vote. Suffrage implies that there must be at least some issues upon which women’s opinions are unequal and (implied to be) superior to men’s. Let’s see what their notion of equality looks like.
Lewis Petrinovich and his team performed psychological research on hypothetical moral dilemmas. Trolley problems are not new, but this research took a twist by asking men and women to decide whether to save their own dog or a person. The results show a stunning gender disparity.
The research shows that women are dramatically more likely to let a person die than to let their dog die. Moreover, they show strong intuition that this is the morally right choice. Your sister is approximately 5 times more likely to let you die than you would let her die. If your best friend is a woman, she’s 4 times more likely than you to let you die than let her precious dog die. A woman is approximately 2 times more likely than you are to let an extended family member die.
Other research on gender differences in morality has led to additional interesting conclusions. When justice is carried out against wrongdoers, the brains of men are stimulated in the pleasure centers. For women the pain centers are stimulated. Women do not like when justice is served. Women are sensitive to context, while men are sensitive to principles. This helps explain why women are so frequently given a pass for their misbehavior (e.g. lighter sentences).
The research shows that women are more empathetic than men, but they develop empathy over time in response to child development. This suggests that women who do not marry and raise a family fail to develop proper empathy to compensate for their lack of principles. Feminism produces hordes of voting women who shun families for career. Those who lack principles and empathy make natural incoherent feminist soldiers. They are the women who would leave you to die.
Those of us who are not feminists recognize that giving women the right to vote meant giving those with non-principled, context-based moral centers the right to shape our laws. The research shows that women are much more likely to value an animal over human life. For proof, look no farther than the abortion laws and statistics.
On August 18, 2020 we passed the 100 year anniversary of women’s suffrage. In light of that, remember that those women voting are significantly more likely to let you die. Men, the next time you have to chose between saving your woman or your dog, remember the feminist mantra of equality and save the dog.
 The best definition most consistent across all flavors of feminism is the promotion of gender inequality favoring women, that is, female supremacy.
 A women’s empathy is more context-based, not principled. Recipients of that empathy will depend on the target and situation. It need not be rational or consistent. For example, women may support empathetic legislation that actively harms people. Or she’ll save the dog and the kids and leave you to die. Don’t expect her to die with you.
 While I’m not serious, this is an excellent example of Dalrock’s Law of Feminism.