[Kingsley Davis]

The fucking irony. Besides, that's good pay back in IRT land.

"A top diplomat at India’s consulate in Manhattan who lobbies for women’s rights has been busted by the feds — after allegedly mistreating her female nanny.
Devyani , India’s 39-year-old deputy consul general for political, economic, commercial and women’s affairs, was busted Thursday for allegedly helping to submit fake documents to the US State Department saying she was paying the woman $4,500 per month — when, in reality, the caregiver received only $573 monthly, or a measly $3.31 an hour."

   

http://nypost.com/2013/12/13/top-indian-...hour-feds/

[Aliblahba]

I would love to see this turned into an ROK article and rubbed in the face of Nitasha Tiku.

[007]

If there is one thing worse than a hypocritical feminist, it's an Indian hypocritical feminist. I hope she gets crucified by the media, she probably won't though.

[Combored]

[soup]

[Parlay44]

Hypocracy makes the world go round.

[HeyPete]

"5 reasons to date a girl with an eating disorder." = Millions of Wow, just wow's. And a ferocity the manosphere had yet to witness from the entitled, pedestal-ized, life is easy bitches.

A young female (Who could actually be one them) being paid slave wages. = crickets.

[randomForest]

This should come as a shock...to absolutely no one.

This rank hypocrisy is par for the course for feminism, after all if feminists were to represent all women equally the movement would collapse within a day. The fact of the matter is that high SES women need poor and minority women to shut up about their problems and continue to show up to nanny their children and make dinner for their husbands while they spend 12 hour days leaning-in at the cubicle farm. Meanwhile, the poor and minority children abandoned so high SES kids can have needed maternal influence grow up maladjusted and anti-social and are eventually shipped off to prisons. These imprisoned men exert little influence over their communities and contribute no income to their families forcing their women to work outside the home, and the cycle repeats itself.

This inherent tension between privileged women and their poorer sisters is one of the biggest fault-lines within feminism. Feminists are some of the biggest exploiters of women in existence---especially poor and minority women. Like all social movements, the gains of feminism have largely accrued to those of high socioeconomic status and every effort is made to keep it that way.

This woman paying her maid 3 bucks an hour is really just the true face of feminism---it is plutocratic and exploitative through and fucking through.

[Slim Shady]

WYB?

[xpatplayer]

(12-14-2013 10:48 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  

WYB?

Yes, without hesitating.

Funny how she finds time to be an advocate for women's rights when Indian foreign missions are severely understaffed.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes....er-service

Also liked how "underprivileged" is in quotation marks in the article.

What she did is a common scam. Lots of Indians pay for maids to come over and take care of their kids for better pay than in India but less than American minimum wage.

[Kid Strangelove]

I want to post this on my FB but I am torn between the two possible headlines.

1) This is what a feminist looks like.

2) Leaning in

[aphelion]

If it had been a man, she'd have paid him at LEAST $4.29 an hour.

[Kingsley Davis]

(12-15-2013 02:21 PM)aphelion Wrote:  

If it had been a man, she'd have paid him at LEAST $4.29 an hour.

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-31152-...#pid604152

[SheriffBart]

Maybe she shouldn't claim she's paying her nanny 54000 dollars a year and they won't investigate her. Even in Manhattan that's crazy money for a nanny. Always remember that, on top of it all, feminists are also not very intelligent.

She's also lobbying for immigration rights while exploiting an immigrant. Double dose of lefty hypocrisy.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(12-15-2013 01:58 PM)Kid Strangelove Wrote:  

I want to post this on my FB but I am torn between the two possible headlines.

1) This is what a feminist looks like.

2) Leaning in

Leaning in is better, but more specialized.

If your FB crowd is full of Sheryl Sandberg types, go with #2. Otherwise, #1 would be better.

Either way, expect mass outrage.

[Excelsior]

This is just more evidence of what we all know: modern western feminism is very expensive.

It requires an advanced, wealthy western economy and infrastructure just to sustain most of the demands and obligations it makes. It requires a large, expensive state to enforce those obligations and demands. And its most dedicated, vocal practitioners (and largest beneficiaries) require a vast amount of labor (for child care, domestic labor, etc) in order to sustain themselves and continue to push their ideology.

This is a big reason why I am often very dismissive of sensationalist claims on the forum fromgyus who fear that modern western feminism will soon be "everywhere", covering the globe in 20/30 years in some sort of unstoppable march. This won't happen because there simply isn't enough fuel to sustain that kind of spread.

1. The unique northwestern European cultural imperatives that under gird feminism (ex: emphasis on small age gaps, later marriage, fewer children, gender egalitarianism, etc; Germanics and other northwestern euros have been backing all of these thing since pre-historic times) simply aren't present to a large degree in other parts of the world. There is a reason that the most pro-feminist societies (the Anglosphere, Scandinavia, and the rest of Northwestern Europe) are run and populated by these same people, and not by Italians, Slavs, Africans or Eastern Asians. Feminism of the kind we're used to requires extensive, long term cultural investment in its ideology by a society. Northwestern (particularly Germanic) euros have that investment (thousands of years worth). Others do not, and for that reason are never going to be all that good at sustaining it, even if they do get rich. They (the men AND the women) simply have different views on what "gender equality" means and they're not all willing or able to toe the western line in that regard.

2. Brain drain. Those who most ardently support feminist initiatives even in non western nations (where, as I just mentioned, they simply aren't prone to grow) and do the most to promote their growth there are generally highly educated and socio-economically elite. In poor nations where up to a quarter of the population lives in poverty and the average joe earns maybe $4000 annually, these are the people whose families are earning $30k or more and live about as well (if not better than) your typical middle class American.

They are also by far the most likely to migrate. The majority of the world's brightest and most gender progressive Pakistanis, Nigerians and Jamaicans are in Canada, the UK, the United States or Australia, not Pakistan, Nigeria or Jamaica. Since most of those most capable of bringing these societies closer to western style feminism end up leaving the country, the chances of those nations getting anywhere near the level of feminism western nations enjoy are low and remain low.

3. Money. Feminism is expensive and the money simply isn't there outside of the western world to make it feasible on a western scale elsewhere. The previous factor I just mentioned (brain drain) just keeps this in place by removing those most essential to economic progress in these nations from those nations and ensuring that they never quite catch up to their western peers. Without the money to afford western style education, government, welfare and broader employment, these nations can never hope to sustain western style feminism. Gender equality, in a feminist sense, will always be a step (or many steps) behind in these nations, and there is very little western feminists will be able to do about it.

It is for all of these reasons that feminists, unable to work around harsh economic realities despite their continued calls to "lean in" and "check" all manner of assorted privileges (save their own), are going to continue falling into the trap that this woman fell into. It is inevitable.

[The Lizard of Oz]

Excellent points, Athlone. But:

1. The iphone and facebook are the great equalizers. Once the hamster is exposed to an iphone for 10 minutes or more it is infected and for the time being there is no cure. It's not just the best and the brightest anymore even in non-western societies.

2. You are completely right to say that idealized feminism is unsustainable as an economic model, but that doesn't mean some aspects of it (typically the worst ones) cannot be implemented in some more or less bastardized form. Communism is not sustainable either, yet monstrous versions of it were implemented, and not in the advanced societies where it was developed (England and Germany) but in backward semi-feudal societies like Russia and China.

Look at what is happening right now in places like Brazil and India. Seemingly out of nowhere they are passing some of the most deranged misandrist laws that have been passed anywhere.

Is feminism ever going to take over the world in some pure form that would make Andrea Dworkin proud? No, and there are inherent contradictions in it that make such a pure form impossible to even define. But don't underestimate the momentum it has and its ability to substantially affect life in all sorts of places around the world in surprisingly nasty ways.

[Excelsior]

(12-15-2013 04:17 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Excellent points, Athlone. But:

1. The iphone and facebook are the great equalizers. Once the hamster is exposed to an iphone for 10 minutes or more it is infected and for the time being there is no cure. It's not just the best and the brightest anymore even in non-western societies.

That's just not the case. Social media is not enough to make western feminism workable on any significant scale. All it does is spread awareness and curiosity; without the cultural imperative, the money and the desire (which is generally only present in the best and brightest in developing nations), you can't get anything going. It doesn't matter how many IPhones you sell: if you cannot pay for western feminism and get broad support within a society for it, nothing works.

Quote:

2. You are completely right to say that idealized feminism is unsustainable as an economic model, but that doesn't mean some aspects of it (typically the worst ones) cannot be implemented in some more or less bastardized form.

Such implementation will be limited without the factors I mentioned above.

Quote:

Look at what is happening right now in places like Brazil and India. Seemingly out of nowhere they are passing some of the most deranged misandrist laws that have been passed anywhere.

And their cultures are nowhere near the deliriously pro-feminist level seen in the west and never will be.

Some guys on this forum give western feminism entirely too much credit. Its pervasiveness shouldn't be overestimated.

[The Lizard of Oz]

Athlone, a few things:

1. What the iphone does first and foremost is introduce itself as the object of supreme necessity in the life of a hamster. Once the hamster handles an iphone and learns how to use it, it understands one main thing, which is that there is nothing more important in its life going forward than to attend to the iphone at all times and at any cost. This by itself causes significant changes in females which have been too extensively documented to need rehearsing.

2. What social media does is that it exposes everyone with said iphone -- which is increasingly everyone -- to the dominant culture of the time, and this culture is certainly western feminism. Women in particular are conformist in the extreme and are always ready to get with the program, once they find out what it is. And once they have an efficient delivery system in the form of a smartphone, they can't help but find out, from every possible source.

3. The point about Communism is precisely that in backward societies you don't need to have particularly wide penetration of an ideology in the population to get things done -- all you need is a determined cadre ready to assume power and impose the ideology by fiat. As you well know, Russia and China as societies were not "deliriously" or even particularly pro-communist at all and most people in those countries would not even know the meaning of the term.

While there are differences, the presence of a western-educated elite that is absolutely persuaded of the truth of an ideology in combination with a political system that allows for radical laws to be imposed with relatively little resistance creates important similarities. Thus, it will not surprise me to see some of the most deranged feminist experiments conducted precisely in societies which seem least ideologically disposed towards them.

Again, while you are completely right that western feminism can't work as an economic model, that has never stopped similarly unworkable ideologies from being implemented in one way or another with disastrous consequences for all. I don't believe that feminism is likely to be implemented as state ideology in the same way as Communism was, for example, but I do think that its ideas will have increasingly far-reaching effects on societies all over the world. Its momentum and growing pervasiveness should not be underestimated.

[Feisbook Control]

Interesting conversation. Please continue.

[Excelsior]

(12-16-2013 12:51 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Athlone, a few things:

1. What the iphone does first and foremost is introduce itself as the object of supreme necessity in the life of a hamster. Once the hamster handles an iphone and learns how to use it, it understands one main thing, which is that there is nothing more important in its life going forward than to attend to the iphone at all times and at any cost. This by itself causes significant changes in females which have been too extensively documented to need rehearsing.

I'm not denying any of that.

I'm saying that this is not enough to guarantee the spread of modern western feminism to any substantial degree. It is not wise to point out the spread of the modern smartphone as a sign of modern western feminism's inevitable march to global dominance in our lifetime.

Smartphones will continue to spread globally in the coming years, but the women using them are going to continue to be a far cry from your typical western feminist.

Quote:

2. What social media does is that it exposes everyone with said iphone -- which is increasingly everyone -- to the dominant culture of the time, and this culture is certainly western feminism. Women in particular are conformist in the extreme and are always ready to get with the program, once they find out what it is. And once they have an efficient delivery system in the form of a smartphone, they can't help but find out, from every possible source.

The program (western feminism) requires:

1. Money
2. Cultural imperative
3. Acquiescent men
4. The lack of a brain drain
5. Stable, transparent, working government (with the aforementioned money).

It doesn't matter how many smartphones you've got logged into facebook if you lack all of the above. You're not going to get widespread western feminism without them.

Quote:

3. The point about Communism is precisely that in backward societies you don't need to have particularly wide penetration of an ideology in the population to get things done -- all you need is a determined cadre ready to assume power and impose the ideology by fiat.

Which you are extremely unlikely to find outside of a western European context.

Men within the western European elite essentially "white knighted" on a grand scale, pushing modern feminism into the legal and social mainstream (the access to which they totally controlled) and allowing its more extreme elements to gain hold. Most of the negative elements of modern western feminism today are the product of male acquiescence: men not only allowed for major changes to occur, but then proceeded to encourage and enforce those changes. All of the seemingly ridiculous feminist liberties we complain about today are the product of western European males (starting with their elite) essentially rolling over and allowing their women to have their way with them.

In short, western European men are the biggest white knights the world has ever seen. No group of men allows its women the kind of unrestricted license for extended fuckery that western European men do. The rise of western feminism as we know it is a direct product of this acquiescence (along with the other financial and historical factors I mentioned above).

Good luck getting elite African, South/Central American, and South Asian men to roll over for their women the way elite western European men have. Good luck getting the elite in a place like Nigeria or Jamaica to tolerate a "slutwalk" in their nation's capital (even the elite women in these societies wouldn't put up with that). Good luck getting Filipino, Russian and Pakistani elites to tolerate the notion that gender is entirely a social construct with no strong correlation to biological sex, and that men and women are really the same and all major differences observable between them are social constructs that need to be eliminated.

You'll need a substantial number of them to do so in nations like these for this "determined cadre" theory to come to pass on a global scale.

Is it possible? I'm not going to bet on it.

Quote:

While there are differences, the presence of a western-educated elite that is absolutely persuaded of the truth of an ideology in combination with a political system that allows for radical laws to be imposed with relatively little resistance creates important similarities. Thus, it will not surprise me to see some of the most deranged feminist experiments conducted precisely in societies which seem least ideologically disposed towards them.

Again, while you are completely right that western feminism can't work as an economic model, that has never stopped similarly unworkable ideologies from being implemented in one way or another with disastrous consequences for all. I don't believe that feminism is likely to be implemented as state ideology in the same way as Communism was, for example, but I do think that its ideas will have increasingly far-reaching effects on societies all over the world. Its momentum and growing pervasiveness should not be underestimated.

Don't overestimate it either.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Quote:

Again, while you are completely right that western feminism can't work as an economic model, that has never stopped similarly unworkable ideologies from being implemented in one way or another with disastrous consequences for all.

Agree with this completely. While everything Athlone says is correct, I would still choose to err on the side of caution.

[The Lizard of Oz]

Athlone, while it is true that feminism has flourished so far thanks to the white man's acquiescence and encouragement, there is no reason to believe that men of other races possess some sort of native immunity.

White-knighting as such is a tendency of men across all cultures and generations, proceeding from their endemic misunderstanding of the nature of women. It far predates feminism as an ideology.

What was missing before feminism was an ideological framework that would systematically exploit this natural white-knighting tendency of the male in order to reshape society as a whole; and a female population that has internalized this framework and on whose behalf men will act to realize the requisite changes.

This framework is now fully in place and is the dominant and unquestioned ideology of the time -- seriously challenged only on the periphery by perhaps even more pernicious ideologies like Islamism. And the ever-growing army of phone hamsters world-wide is absorbing this ideology with every byte. As you realize, they don't need to be reading Jezebel for this to happen -- every news or entertainment article from every source is equally saturared with the dominant ideology, simply because it could not be otherwise.

What happens next is clear: the phones command and the simps -- of all races -- comply. This is already happening in some seemingly unexpected places. Brazil, a supposed paragon of machismo, has elected arguably the world's first radical feminist leader of a major country. Israel, in many ways a macho Mediterranean society with a strong military culture, is adopting an extreme version of the misandrist Swedish model in prosecuting and shaming "johns". India has passed demented "rape laws". The list could go on -- and it will.

Finally, it is worth noting the pervasive presence all over the world of western feminist NGOs, which are fundamentally engaged in fostering precisely the kind of determined cadre that will oversee the legislative and judicial implementation of the ideological imperatives.

I don't know about you, but when I look at the expanses of China or India, I see nothing so much as a vast standing reserve of thirsty SIMPS ready to rise to the phones' command.

[Slim Shady]

Actually, looking more at this issue, there is more to this than just feminist hypocrisy. It is a power move by the American government against India. No matter the fact that she might have done a crime, she can not be publicly arrested, strip searched, and put in prison with hardened criminals like she was. The Indian government is right to call for an apology and a dropping of all charges. The american media has also not shown this correctly. The 4500 they wanted to pay the nanny is in fact more than the salary of the diplomat itself. It is a show of utter hypocrisy by the American government, because they wouldnt dare do this to a chinese official, and if India had done this to an American, they would be up in arms. India shouldnt take this lying down, like America probably expected. I mean they arrested her on her way to pick her kid up from fucking school.

I am guilty of this too, but we really should look deeper, and past the fucking american media, to see the truth. Strip search of a top diplomat? Give me a fucking break, this is beyond feminism.

[Kingsley Davis]

Let the White Knighting begin.

"NEW DELHI (AP) — The arrest and alleged strip search of an Indian diplomat in New York City escalated into a major diplomatic furor Tuesday as India's national security adviser called the woman's treatment "despicable and barbaric."

http://news.yahoo.com/indian-official-di...40734.html