The females in the WNBA earn most of their revenues on the backs of the males in the NBA. It’s interesting to see how much society can influence social behavior.
If you are located outside of the U.S., then you are forgiven for never having heard of the WNBA. Most people here have never watched a single game, ever.
a high percentage of women who complain about the salary disparity in professional sports wouldn't be caught dead watching a single game or financially support a women's league through becoming a fan. if they ever do go to a game, it becomes a politicized event instead of a mere entertainment choice.
Classically, men produce or acquire resources, then give them to favoured women who use and distribute those resources to care for children, family & community.
We’ve broken the pipeline at both ends.
At the destination, women in the upper classes are no longer being raised to see care work as a primary calling, so resources directed to these women just get consumed on the self.
Meanwhile, the economic shift is to give the state the primary role in resource distribution. But the state is mostly not a producer, just a redistributer - or it creates synthetic wealth to make up the difference. This insulates women from the male role of actually generating wealth and provides socio-economic advantage to those who are best at convincing the state to give them stuff.
This whole process starves wealth production among the lower classes, so the dam is running dry. It also inserts the state into the historical connection between lower classes labour and lower class provision. Lower class women are less able to get state money, especially on terms that don’t feel like begging, but lower class men are struggling to provide for themselves, let alone anyone else.
Prioritising the service economy doesn’t help either. Service economy is great, but it plays in the realm of existing resources. Offshoring so many of our production pipelines is hollowing out the lower classes, which will eventually destabilise our economic foundations.
Great points, but to be honest a fit 14 year old boy (playing say football, soccer, lacrosse, track, basketball, even baseball) would likely wreck fit 21 year old women playing the same sport in a strength contest. My son was a baseball player and benched around 155 max when he was 14 which was strong for his age but not super notable — meanwhile I’m guessing less than 1% of 21 year old fit softball playing women could bench 155 across the entire sport.
“brain-rot pseudo-history.” A very useful phrase! This seems to me (admittedly from way outside academia) to preciselycharacterize what is being and has been taught in schools for decades in what passes for objective American History. I can see it in some of my own schooling from back in the 60s, but a lot more in that of my children and now, my grandchildren.
It seems that a good place to start is to make very clear that the myth of women and men being interchangeable is just that: a myth.
I have been mulling over the effect of this matriarchy we're in for a while now. The so-called "loneliness epidemic" seems so counterintuitive for women, but it does seem to be driven by women prioritizing career over creating communities where women of childbearing age (not starting in their forties because a few women were able to) formed lifelong friendships and created real, living places where people actually felt "safe."
Ironically, in the female-dominated society, no one feels "safe" in the institutions if their beliefs deviate even a bit from the imposed narrative.
Depressing, but in a good way. It is important for preservation of these truths that they be laid out in their tragic awful comprehensive reality. The take away summary and brilliant meme is the clip from X which concludes: "This is the banality of feminism winning"
The females in the WNBA earn most of their revenues on the backs of the males in the NBA. It’s interesting to see how much society can influence social behavior.
If you are located outside of the U.S., then you are forgiven for never having heard of the WNBA. Most people here have never watched a single game, ever.
a high percentage of women who complain about the salary disparity in professional sports wouldn't be caught dead watching a single game or financially support a women's league through becoming a fan. if they ever do go to a game, it becomes a politicized event instead of a mere entertainment choice.
Classically, men produce or acquire resources, then give them to favoured women who use and distribute those resources to care for children, family & community.
We’ve broken the pipeline at both ends.
At the destination, women in the upper classes are no longer being raised to see care work as a primary calling, so resources directed to these women just get consumed on the self.
Meanwhile, the economic shift is to give the state the primary role in resource distribution. But the state is mostly not a producer, just a redistributer - or it creates synthetic wealth to make up the difference. This insulates women from the male role of actually generating wealth and provides socio-economic advantage to those who are best at convincing the state to give them stuff.
This whole process starves wealth production among the lower classes, so the dam is running dry. It also inserts the state into the historical connection between lower classes labour and lower class provision. Lower class women are less able to get state money, especially on terms that don’t feel like begging, but lower class men are struggling to provide for themselves, let alone anyone else.
Prioritising the service economy doesn’t help either. Service economy is great, but it plays in the realm of existing resources. Offshoring so many of our production pipelines is hollowing out the lower classes, which will eventually destabilise our economic foundations.
Congratulations on setting the Substack record for footnotes.
Great points, but to be honest a fit 14 year old boy (playing say football, soccer, lacrosse, track, basketball, even baseball) would likely wreck fit 21 year old women playing the same sport in a strength contest. My son was a baseball player and benched around 155 max when he was 14 which was strong for his age but not super notable — meanwhile I’m guessing less than 1% of 21 year old fit softball playing women could bench 155 across the entire sport.
“brain-rot pseudo-history.” A very useful phrase! This seems to me (admittedly from way outside academia) to preciselycharacterize what is being and has been taught in schools for decades in what passes for objective American History. I can see it in some of my own schooling from back in the 60s, but a lot more in that of my children and now, my grandchildren.
It seems that a good place to start is to make very clear that the myth of women and men being interchangeable is just that: a myth.
I have been mulling over the effect of this matriarchy we're in for a while now. The so-called "loneliness epidemic" seems so counterintuitive for women, but it does seem to be driven by women prioritizing career over creating communities where women of childbearing age (not starting in their forties because a few women were able to) formed lifelong friendships and created real, living places where people actually felt "safe."
Ironically, in the female-dominated society, no one feels "safe" in the institutions if their beliefs deviate even a bit from the imposed narrative.
Depressing, but in a good way. It is important for preservation of these truths that they be laid out in their tragic awful comprehensive reality. The take away summary and brilliant meme is the clip from X which concludes: "This is the banality of feminism winning"