My note here: nostr:note1m3xnwmnf39v7ygq2vspev8lfm8c7dau3wgj27jvcfsysqujjuqmszcq3kd which OP replied to is no doubt a seed for this post

She stated that we fundamentally disagree on many points which is possibly true but neither of us elaborated.

So let me tackle this point:

>”Many reasons are given, but I never seem to hear mine — that no one at all, man or woman, should be able to vote / hold political power.”

In utopia, I agree.

No-one should be voting on shit to do with other people. We should all be left alone to live however we want and that goes equally for those with whom I vehemently disagree (ie Commies - see my proposal for dealing with them here: nostr:note1cfch9rjpnzv6pt72dkrzn40ytm6k8etv547t6q9qsttm5r4rsthqcw2qtz)

We don’t live in Utopia though. We never will.

There will always be some hierarchy in society no matter what. It could be informal in an Ancap society which would be preferable, but it would exist nonetheless.

That’s the nature of humans. Particularly mid-curve normies who don’t have the mental horsepower to conceptualise anything other than outsourcing certain functions to an overarching entity.

So it’s not that I **want** certain people to hold power. I’d rather no-one did. But I’m somewhere between ancap and neo-reactionary where I don’t ever see a world of a power vacuum playing out.

Before we ever get to Ancapistan the best we can hope for is a world of 100,000 Lichtensteins. I’d have no issue with Queens running their jurisdictions. There are many extremely impressive and capable women who can operate at a high-level in otherwise male-dominant arenas.

However I don’t think you can be Queen and a great mother simultaneously. Like every other human being that woman has 24 hours in her day, she has X energy; she cannot possibly be as present with children and guide them into being good adult humans as Queen as a mother whose focus for their productive time is solely on their children.

This is no different than saying you can’t become a Lionel Messi-footballer when you have a day job as a consultant for PWC - no-one will argue with that point because it’s obvious, the only difference is we’ve taken out the gendered nature of the discussion.

My point was never that women are on the whole incapable of governing. It was two-fold:

1. Liberal democracy with everyone having equal rights at the ballot box despite divergent skin in the game has been and will remain a disaster; in particular women who lean collectivist and will never be sent to fight for the society’s security whilst benefitting most from it

2. That for a properly functioning society we need women to be focussed, good mothers, raising the next generation of leaders; not for them trying to be equal in how society functions

I’m not bothered if that is controversial; I think I’m just ahead of the curve on this like I was with nuclear power and Bitcoin, and that others will come round to my point of view once we bottom out this supercycle and the disfunction of this system is laid bare for all to see with the women all on one side and the men on the other saying “fuck that, you bitches caused all this and its over”.