A father wants to protect & take care of his little girl

A husband wants to protect & take care his young wife

A son wants to protect & take care of his old mother

These 3 are the most emotionally invested to genuinely protect the woman

Their absence leaves her vulnerable

Yet look at how women are being conditioned to look at them

They started with the Father - He is a tyrant

He wants to discipline, restrict

He wants to decide who a woman should marry -

Only a tyrant -a patriach would do that - There can be no other valid reason

For example-

Is his life experience dealing with men irrelevant?

Can't he be a better long term judge of a man's character and future?

Isn't he most emotionally invested to want his daughter's best interest?

No - She is conditioned to look at his concern as tyranny

So she chooses the husband but he isn't spared either

- He wants her to take care of her home & family

- He sees her as "baby producing machine"

- He wants her to cook

- He restricts her freedom

He of course must be an oppressor

Ergo She must be incentivized to divorce him

With father & husband out of the way - Only the son remains

However She is supposed to be a concerned global citizen - so she shouldn't be having many kids anyways

She has to be "prouder" if the kid is a daughter

If it's a son - He is a future tyrant - a future oppressor

All his natural masculine expression should be suppressed

In fact he shouldn't be a man at all - He should be a daughter or at least behave less masculine

Once this happens all the 3 men who have the most to gain emotionally from a woman's well-being are effectively sidelined

She has been potentially isolated at one or all stages of her life

Ready to be used as a tool by the government & elites who are the least emotionally invested in her well-being

Too stupid to see without love there can be no real protection or concern for her well-being