Summary

Following Donald Trump’s recent election victory, Google searches for “4B,” a South Korean feminist movement advocating a “no sex, no dating, no marriage, no children” stance, surged in the U.S.

The 4B movement, popular among young women on social media, promotes individual resistance against conservative politics and the erosion of reproductive rights.

The trend reflects a broader ideological divide between young men and women in the U.S., where women under 30 are significantly more liberal than men.

  • Isthisreddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    I call bullshit. Any politicaly aware liberal/progressive woman can sniff out a conservative dude 5 miles away. They ain’t fucking these kinda dudes unless they actually wanna be fucking them. I just don’t see it

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Yep, it also doesn’t consider the 46% of women that voted for Trump or the near 50 million women that couldn’t be bothered to vote at all.

      This is a minority movement that is probably not much more than ineffective virtue signalling.

      If you’re wife doesn’t want sex then that’s usually a big problem for the relationship and could even end it. How many guys are going in to the ballot box in four years time and voting differently because they decided to get a divorce? It could possibly even entrench their views.

      I’m probably going to get bored of saying this, but people that disagree with you need to be engaged not derided.

  • ATDA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    Magats on the one way road to demographic suicide unless they learn to like gay sex and hope hard for some crazy evolution…

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 days ago

      Are you saying women who support 4B used to date MAGAts? Seems like the women talking about 4B were already selective enough to only date liberals/leftists/etc.

      • ATDA@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Don’t mind me I’m pissy. But no I was saying Trump supporters will likely be the recipients of this treatment and other than changing course or learning to procreate in the absence of women will decline, in my dream anyway.

        • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          45% of women voters were for Trump. More young women voted for Trump in 2024 than in 2020. I don’t think this movement is going to affect Republicans at all.

              • ATDA@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 days ago

                Nonono no antagonizing felt. I don’t know why I thought that my last response had a jocular sarcastic self deprecating tone. People can’t read my mind, and I have a bad habit of being vague in my word choices at times.

                We Good!

                Edit also I need to chill myself rough day.

                • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  No, your tone came across, I just started worrying about my own tone. And I think we all need to chill out. Stop looking at what’s happened in the past 10-20 years and start appreciating the progress we’ve made in the last 100, and thinking about how we’ll make the next step.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    Good for them for asserting their autonomy but basically the end affect is the opening plot of Idiocracy

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 days ago

      I get your point, but I wouldn’t worry about what might happen in 20 years when what is currently happening is bad.

      • noisefree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I get your point, but I wouldn’t worry about what might happen in 20 years when what is currently happening is bad.

        Ahh, the ol’ false bifurcation ostrich effect as a thought-terminating-looparoo.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I don’t think dismissing eugenics based arguments based on movie plots is a thought terminator lmao.

          • noisefree@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            Downvoting to save words in your reply - nice. Have another upvote.

            Your most recent reply actually conveys meaning/makes a specific versus broad point. To that point, I don’t necessarily think they were making a eugenics based argument (though I would agree with you in dismissing an argument based on that) since they didn’t explicitly state the reason for mentioning the movie was because they believe in some idea of politics being genetic versus simply being most effectively passed down via social means from one’s parents while living with them through adolescence. Call me crazy, but I think most of the folks posting here should be given the benefit of not assuming they’re talking about eugenics until they are explicitly promoting it versus something more widely accepted, such as the aforementioned idea that it’s highly likely that parents pass down their politics through social means to their children. I could, of course, be wrong and maybe they were intending to make a eugenics based argument, but they weren’t specific enough to divine that. All of that said, I should edit the phrasing in a sarcastic comment I made elsewhere about removing oneself from the gene pool being a bad strategy since I probably wasn’t clear enough to get across that I was using the very real right-wing perspective where they favor their “good genes” over others’ “genes” for added effect.

            Your initial (decidedly vague) comment, as quoted, presents a false choice as if the person you were replying to was worrying about a future problem that is totally disconnected from the current topic of discussion, but they’re not and I don’t think the person you were replying to gave any reason for one to infer that they were ignoring the current issue in favor of some future issue. If they were talking about disconnected topics/problems then what you were saying would make more sense (or if you had been more specific, like in your followup, that would help too). It’s as if the person noticed a ceiling was leaking and exclaimed to someone suggesting to just put a bucket under it “Ignoring a leak is exactly how my neighbor ended up needing to replace their roof, I don’t think the bucket plan is a good plan in the long term!” and you were there to reply “Don’t tell them to worry about the roof, they need to fix the leak!” It’s not wrong, it just doesn’t really say anything or lead to further thought beyond the loop and comes across as a “calm down!”

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Yes, women should rape themselves by having sex with men they are furious with to avoid the ending of a random documentary

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          I think you misunderstood me. Assuming this is sarcasm, which I think is fair, I was also saying people shouldn’t oppose 4B because of Idiocracy.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    228
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 days ago

    “Young men expect sex, but they also want us to not be able to have access to abortion,” Thomas told The Post. “They can’t have both. Young women don’t want to be intimate with men who don’t fight for women’s rights; it’s showing they don’t respect us.”

    Sounds reasonable and fair to me.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      In over 50% of America’s land area Rapists get to pick the mother of their child.

      Flee red states.

      The only why they’ll learn is if the rational people leave. The whole fill strategy will never work because red states need you more than you need them.

      Flee red states!

      Project 2025 advocates for tracking of child barring age women and girls. They will turn you into brood sows the moment they get a chance and justify it as the moral good.

      Flee red states!

      Blue states aren’t perfect but we at least know what freedom is and don’t need a 2000 yeast old book to decide what we should do next.

      • ChexMax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        Fleeing my state isn’t an option. Besides, my state didn’t used to be red. A lot of states flipped or at least went from purple to red. So it’s not even a guarantee if you uproot your entire family and life that you get to stay blue.

        I feel so demoralized when this comes up, as if it’s my own fault I’m living somewhere with terrible laws. I voted. I got other people to vote. I changed a few minds on abortion (not easy to do!). I don’t have the money or resources to start somewhere else, and we’re all about to have less money.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Are you willing to risk your mother’s, sisters, and daughters bodily autonomy on a under performing political party?

          I’m not saying leaving will be easy. And I’m not saying it paradise and blue States. But I am saying red states don’t deserve you. Start making a plan at least because they won’t stop.

          • ChexMax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            It’s my bodily autonomy. I’m a woman of child-bearing age. I even want to make a child sometime in the next four years. I’m risking my health. I can’t move. I will end up broke with zero resources in another state, with no job, and my husband will need to start his career from scratch if we move. We just can’t afford it. Plus wherever we move, we’ll be separated from both our families who are local here. And again, even if we move, wherever we start over could just be red in two election cycles anyway. Moving isn’t the answer.

            • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              One in five women in the United States experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime.

              The chances of having a miscarriage is 1 in 4 pregnancies.

              Multiply those statistics for every girl and women in your family.

              Add in the fact that red states have disproportionately more sexual violence than blue states.

              Are those odds you are willing to take?

              No one is say moving well be easy. But you can start saving, planning, and applying for positions in safer areas. (politically, economically, and socially.) You don’t have to just move your core family. Everyone that cares about women’s rights can move too. If migrant women with no job, no prospects, no money, and no path to citizenship to receive services can do it, so can you.

              Red states don’t deserve you. Every day you play the odds

      • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 days ago

        It doesn’t seem generalized at all to me.

        • A series of laws are passed that make this thing riskier.
        • Do less of the risky thing.
        • Make it clear why.

        What’s the problem?

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 days ago

          Hmm so this movement excludes men that want abortion to be available then? Missed that.

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 days ago

            I think the subtext implies that you can have sex with people that don’t suck. This is the female counterpart to, “don’t stick your dick in crazy”.

              • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                10 days ago

                Taking into context that it’s to protest people against reproductive rights, I take it that it’s to punish and withhold specifically from those people.

                • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 days ago

                  That is mentioned nowhere in this argument. But the credo of the movement is:

                  No sex. No dating. No marrying men. No children.

                  This sounds pretty intentionally absolute in nature

            • MrFootball@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              Did really some of the American women need for Trump to be elected twice before learning this? Isn’t this supposed to be common sense, not just only for women?

                • MrFootball@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t understand why a movement is necessary to understand that you shouldn’t have sex with people that, in your opinion, suck

          • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 days ago

            Would you mind saying what you mean here? I’d like for you to explain your thought a little more.

            • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 days ago

              I’m responding to “it doesn’t seem generalized at all”. If that were the case it would not be a movement based on absolutes that apply to all men

              • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                It most certainly doesn’t exclude anyone unless you think someone refusing to have sex with you is an act of exclusion.

                Most of all of us are refusing to have sex with you at this very moment.

                • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  This seems to assume that I’m concerned this will impact me. I’m not, at all. Not slightly. It wouldn’t even impact me if I were even single, which I’m not.

                  I could probably put out an ad on Craigslist offering to pay someone like this for an interview and still never meet such a person or even get an email back about it.

          • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            10 days ago

            It’s about risk management, first and foremost.

            I suppose you might get a second look from a 4B-practitioner if you had a vasectomy (i.e. to remove the risk of pregnancy), but I’m a man so I can only speculate on this. And of course this isn’t such a great option if you do plan to have kids some day. Then again, despite the anti-abortion rhetoric of “don’t have sex if you aren’t ready to reproduce”, planned pregnancies are much more dangerous under abortion bans.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        109
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        11 days ago

        I don’t think anyone involved thinks she’s talking about every single young man. Well, except you, of course

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          53
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          11 days ago

          Now he’s just worried that they’re talking about him. Which they probably are considering his immediate defensive reaction.

          • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            57
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            10 days ago

            Jesus Fucking Christ, do we literally have to have women say things like:

            “Young men – not all, just some, well in some areas most, but a lot of young men – expect…”

            This tiptoeing bullshit to not anger some fragile men is insane. I lived as a straight man for over 40 years and this new idea that men are somehow put upon whenever a woman brings up being objectified, or has an issues with interactions with /takes a breath some, but not all, just a large amount, enough to be traumatizing, particularly as it’s systemic to the patriarchy, men.

            This is ridiculous semantic bullshit in response to women feeling like objects and pushing back.

            We’re better than this, and I’m tired of watching us act absolutely horrible whenever women point out systemic, extremely frequent issues they have with men, and have to inch around it so as to not break our fragile egos.

            • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 days ago

              I agree. It’s like the whole “Not all men” deal: nitpicking the details of the phrasing instead of tackling the root issue. You’re only fighting those symptoms that affect you directly, not the root cause.

              The day I have someone yelling in my face that I’m to blame for some other man’s rape is the day I’ll argue about that issue. Until then, let’s focus on the actual problem: In this case (some) young men being pieces of garbage.

            • shiftymccool@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              10 days ago

              Just the word “most” or “some” would avoid this whole conversation. Why does it have to come to this every time?

              • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                Why does it have to come to this every time?

                I don’t know, why do men require people to use extra words not to hurt their feelings?

                “Young men expect sex, but they also want us to not be able to have access to abortion,” Thomas told The Post. “They can’t have both. Young women don’t want to be intimate with men who don’t fight for women’s rights; it’s showing they don’t respect us.”

                See, they even included parts like that, and still people are here whining about it.

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  My feelings aren’t hurt by the presence of people who hate me.

                  But I will call a spade a spade. A person too lazy to add the word “some” to their statement does hate all men. Can’t be bothered with a syllable to honor them, and that’s hate.

              • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                10 days ago

                Just the ones who conform to my incredibly contemptuous description of them (a majority of white women apparently).

                Going to need an attribution there, champ.

                • JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  What kind of attribution do I need? I’m only talking about the ones who fit the description. Seems to me like trump voters fit that description but hey, if I’m wrong no biggy. After all I am only talking about the ones that do. Can’t you just infer that?

            • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              Women need to say, “Well, not every man is a rapist, but every person who raped me was a man, amd when I tried to speak up, almost every man told me he needed more evidence, that was an extreme claim that could ruin that man’s life, and when I tried to call police, they were made also of men who also rape and commit domestic violence at high rates, and when I went to court the judge was a Trump appointeee… So I guess really no men are rapists because the system doesn’t allow us to label them. Or maybe that makes all of you dangerous.”

              • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 days ago

                I teared up a bit reading your comment, I’m so sorry you all go through this, and continue to go through this.

                The worst part is a lot of the men saying this shit, even here in this thread, consider themselves ‘Leftist’. They know it’s the wealthy causing fighting amongst the poors to distract, and yet still these men fall for it. They think there’s some ‘women’s agenda’ coming for them and never once look back and think to themselves ‘wow, thank god they want equality and not revenge.’

      • GetOffMyLan@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        11 days ago

        It’s talking about people who support trump. But you can’t only target them as people will just hide their political views to get laid.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    11 days ago

    Sounds like a great way to ensure that conservatives are the only ones having kids. This is just liberal women organizing their own extinction.

      • deus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 days ago

        Only if you assume a person can’t possibly have different political views from their parents’. It’s certainly more difficult, I’ll give you that, but it does happen.

      • seejur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        Wouldn’t this make it even worse? This is basically ensure that an ever greater % of people grow up right wing, so that Republicans can stay in power longer with more extreme ideas

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        11 days ago

        Yup. I want kids, but I’m leaning towards not having kids due to, well… gestures broadly

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        I didn’t say they were. I certainly believe that a woman can do whatever she wants with her body, and if some women choose not to have children, that’s their right, as far as I’m concerned. But, the fact of the matter is, if women aren’t having children, before too long there won’t be any more people. It’s really as simple as that.

        • Chloé 🥕@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          I certainly believe that a woman can do whatever she wants with her body

          sorry but I find that a bit hard to believe when your previous comment is basically saying that women should breed to ensure the survival of their ideology

          • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 days ago

            I find that a bit hard to believe

            Why? Two things can be true at once. I can believe that a woman can do whatever she wants with her body, while also acknowledging that if liberal women stop having kids, before too long there aren’t going to be very many liberals.

            Unless you think my saying that is some form of coercion. But that would be silly because my words can’t force a woman to do anything. My words aren’t taking away any woman’s agency, especially since I’m not necessarily advocating for anything. You assumed I was, not that’s not my problem.

    • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      While parents certainly have an influence on their children’s ideologies and political leanings, it isn’t deterministic. Those children do still have agency, and external factors such as education (which yes, I know is under attack) and urbanization matter. Or even just simple youthful rebelliousness.

      Regardless, I wouldn’t advocate left-leaning people to have more kids in some ill-advised attempt at a reproductive arms race. Among other issues, we are still staring in the face of environmental collapse.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        I wouldn’t count on spontaneous liberal epiphanies and teenage rebellion to preserve the liberal hegemony.

        I’m not necessarily advocating for anything. If you don’t want to have kids, don’t have kids. I’m certainly not going to mourn the death of liberalism, but I’m not thrilled about Conservativism taking its place as the dominant ideology.

    • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 days ago

      Have you not been paying attention to practically every progressive issue in the last decade? Pretty sure the people actually making decisions about what gets promoted on social media aren’t your friends.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’m not being facetious, but how many countries that were part of the Arab spring are now not effectively Islamic dictatorships?

      It was a great thing at the time but it seems to me to have not paid off.

      • tempest@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 days ago

        I mean it’s a tale as old as time. Surviving and opposing strongmen dictatorship selects for the most adherent and extreme. Thus when the dictatorship falls for whatever reason the crazy extremists are usually in the best position.

  • Ekybio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    11 days ago

    Understandable.

    But sweaering of ALL men is neither healthy nor realistic and the 4B movement is not really helping the issue. Plua the movement is extremely transphobic and essentialist. Its just TERFs doing a thing again…

    A more practical solution: Dont date MAGA and leave them if need be. Take the children from them as well. They deserve scorn for voting in a dictator, just because they cant get laid. And they deserve to be reminded on how parhetic they are for all of it every single das until they change.

    • lettruthout@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 days ago

      Agreed. I also can understand the feelings behind this, but it seems to ignore that quite a number of women voted for Trump.

      • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        11 days ago

        Bingo. My wife won’t vote for a woman president because she, not me, thinks that they’re too emotional. I know a decent amount of women in the workplace that feel the same way. I voted for Kamala because Trump is a paranoid narcissist that is a thief, liar, and can’t be trusted and she was a darn sight better to keep the boat moving predictably forward.

        • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          That’s rich. How could one ever think in this election that Kamala was the emotional one. She made one joke about his crowd size and he went completely off the rails.

        • root_beer@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          41
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 days ago

          Women are too emotional to be president? Shit man, maga and their current figurehead are fueled by extremely volatile emotion, no matter how much they crow about facts vs feelings. Rage is an emotion, and it’s what’s driven the movement for years before it even had a name. Citing emotionality as a reason not to elect a woman is just an excuse—a very poor one, at that—and everyone knows it.

              • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                10 days ago

                Never said she voted for Trump. In fact, we don’t tell each other who we vote for. So yeah, try again. She’s typically strongly independent and really hates the two party system. RCV FTW.

                • PunnyName@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  My wife won’t vote for a woman president because she, not me, thinks that they’re too emotional.

                  This is directly from the Right’s playbook. She’s a moronic fascist.

                  Talk to her, and teach her the error of her ways. If you continue to be an apologist for a fascist, you might as well give up and join their ranks.

    • BossDj@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      The problem is that some men will literally tell a woman anything they want to hear until they’re in bed. They will lie their ass off and avoid political discussion until after the proposal, then they’ll suggest maybe she could cook a little more

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    Man here, I fully agree with this.

    I have been hoping for something to bring down the birthrate of the states that restrict abortion since the restrictions started.

    I had been hoping for mass migration of 50% or so of all women from the relevant states, but I see how that can be difficult.

    I truly hope that they are successful in gaining their rights back.

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    11 days ago

    OR…you could just have sex and start families with men who support women’s rights?

    I have a feeling this extremist “solution” is just disguised misandry from a bunch of extremist feminists.

    Ah well, thanks for selecting yourselves out of the gene pool, I guess?

    • seejur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      This ironically helps the right wing cause lol. Right wing men have sex anyway with right wing women, who are not interested in the 4b movement (and there are quite a lot of those, judging by how many voted for trump), so basically this ensure that the majority of future children’s will grow up in a right wing family/environment

    • whithom@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      It has been idiocracy for a long time now. I doubt this will make a dent in the diluted gene pool.

  • ShadowRam@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    But the large swatch of incel’s that voted for Trump aren’t going to be affect by this.