Yes, it’s an example of socio economic eugenics albeited by feminism.
Would you, please, post the link to the thread(s) of that example.
There obviously is no discussion going on in the world about this which is why we’re theorizing and speculating the subject within this thread. 
I really wish this discussion was more mainstream but it isn’t.
What is your exact statement of your last post?
Which “discussion” do you mean?
The thing I dislike about Eugenics, is that most of the people who do them don’t have the power to make superior inferior judgements.
I mean, the 13 families are inbred. Do we want to make a bunch of George bush and rockefeller clones? I mean, according to them, if you have money, you are superior, if you don’t have money, you are inferior. This is very ghetto logic, like something you would hear from a rap song. Do you want people who have such minds deciding on our eugenics?
Putting toxins and chemicals in our environment is ignoble and such minds are unequipped to have the authority to carry out superior/inferior eugenics. Second of all, its not even a reliable method, people who drink Koolaid everyday often have lots of kids. Clearly the people behind the eugenics are unfit inbred lunatics.
My DNA machine will fix all that though. Simply step into the machine, put in the body you like and viola. Has different parameters you can adjust such as strength intelligence and body types. Also has a function to input defects and disabilities, to remind us of the old ways and still have a connection between past and nature. I figure most people will opt for the most beautiful bodies though.
I mean, do you really want the Patrick Bateman’s, Dandy Mott’s, J.D Rockefeller’s of the world behind your eugenics?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=992HpviuhX0[/youtube]
Who has an interest in making that clones?
What about the projections people make and actually show that there are others who do what those who are projecting like to do?
The reasons for the non-sex-segregation, feminism, genderism, … (and so on and so forth) are not only the sexes themselves but also and especially the interest in the human resources.
If the societies of the west do not stop using the human resources like a common property, then the Tragedy of the Commons will go on and lead to the death of that societies.
Society is already dead. We are living in the ashes.
I am Arcturus’s villain.
she is one of the remaining survivors…a final fantasy girl living in a hut, no objective, just foraging for food.
Would you say that heterosexual females who are attracted exclusively to homosexual males and males who don’t want them…what would you say in terms of that…would you say the modern female’s filtering system is functioning appropriately, or malfunctioning inappropriately?
The society as I understand it is not dead. Maybe it is dying but not already dead. If it was dead, then there would be no Tragedy of the Commons anymore. But there is a Tragedy of the Commons - the biggest ever.
The meaning of feminism has not to do with females as such but with cheap wages, which means the replacement of expensive male work by cheap female work. If you compare feminism and immigration with the machine revolution we have been experiencing since the last third of the 18th century, then you will see that both feminism and Immigration have the same economical and demographical function as the machines have: replacing the espensive occidental male workers by cheap workers, destroying the occidental patriarchalism, thus destroying the occidental families and reducing the occidental birthrates.