It would seem to me Feminism is a con job foremost, for purposes of robbing the public as well as providing a pressure against overpopulation (and demographic imbalance) to resources. The fact that it causes so many people to not only live unhappy lives but to force their unhappiness upon others is a further argument for its eradication.
The economic impacts of Feminism are multi-fold, and rely on the propensity of Western Women to be ill-equipped for mathematics and computations. This failure is pretty well limited to Western Women and is probably an outgrowth of privilege because poor men and women do not have the luxury of being so blind to mathematics or to dare delegate such pursuits to others, like men, for instance.
The notion of “equal opportunity” for women, I’m afraid has more negative consequences than positive ones when the notion is so easily translated into “equal outcome” as the perpetually non-achievable metric.
I suspect that both computational dysfunction and selective blindness on the part of Feminists is a function of generations of institutional brainwashing, that generally speaking, men and more intellectually fit women are more but not necessarily completely immune from. However, when “intelligence” is defined for political or “democratic” purposes, such as to apply to the greatest possible number of individuals, then it ceases to have meaning.
I wonder sometimes whether cradle-to-grave ostensible social engineering such as a caste system is ultimately less cruel than the promotion of the myth of social and economic advancement due to “luck,” “hard work,” or “privilege”. It would seem to me that these illusions are largely designed to set family members, neighbors, and peers against each other, as well as to set men and women against each other.
However, those families with strong patriarchs who are capable of bringing together the family in an hierarchical or authoritarian structure are more likely to lift themselves out of poverty than those who look toward the state or employer to fulfill “equal opportunity” and “fairness”. Therefore, any brainwashing that diminishes the ability of such patriarchs to effectively pursue their responsibilities and manage their risks serves to redistribute whatever economic advantage may have been previously obtained by such families.
Of course, it is possible that a woman can head such a clan however such women capable of the dispassionate professionalism required while meanwhile being above catfighting are rare. Those who are, chances are, learned those character traits from a man, rather than a woman.
The tragedy of the result of generations of propaganda aimed toward women that a) superior professional and social status is fun and men are mean to keep it to themselves; b) men and women are more natural rivals with each other than same-sex rivals are, has resulted in worsened economic outcomes for the middle class, not better.
Humans with low intellectual capacity assume a whole lot of untruths about the world and obsess over contrived and imagined dramas. Propaganda and brainwashing contribute to that inability to see the world as it really is.
Personally however I have my doubts that the effective countermeasure to Feminism is excessive baby-making. It would seem to me that excessive baby-making is more of a cause of Feminism than a cure. While it is true that baby-making provides women a meaningful vocation that perhaps will deter them from professions that require more dispassionate and rational thinking, too many babies means too much pressure on wages and resources, and leads to excessive conflict. It would seem to me that one way to at least take some pressure off of resources would be to put more women into rewarding but menial work such as to displace machines. Such work that could replace useless vocations such as “going to the gym,” would not only provide something meaningful, but contribute to physical fitness and attractiveness.
I think it is a shame that so many Western Women prefer to purchase consumer goods made elsewhere rather than to make their own items. I suspect that it is a form of learned helplessness that so few women have the courage to buck the consumerist trends promoted by media and instead create their own style of dress, home decor, etc. Misguided ambitions to acquire men’s professions rather than tend to one’s own home further export femininity to other nations.