Inequality is encouraged by divided decision making outcomes.
If Group A of women have no children, Group B have one and Group C have two, will their finances magically align at some point despite the pressure of expenditures caused by childrearing?
This is why societies need to actively encourage the family unit, you leftoid idiots. Children are an investment with a future taxable benefit to society. Your benefits and pensions are paid for by the investment of parents if you have no (productive) children of your own.
To take a non-sexed unbiased egalitarian (even Communist) example.
Give everyone in the world £2,000.
Check in a year later.
How can anyone deny that some people will be doing well, and others will be doing poorly?
Inequality is driven by fundamental differences between people. In other words, human biodiversity. Where’s the celebration of ideological and intellectual diversity? Why should idiots be supported by the intelligent for freely made choices?
In an ideal feminist utopia, everyone is a feminist.
Where are all the productive people? When you take away the motivation, the carrot e.g. quality men from offering the commitment of marriage, the system falls apart. Productive people will not work when the fruits of that labour, their natural right, is stolen from them by broken societal decree. They strike from action because they are not stupid, that is why they are productive.
Feminism isn’t a war on women per se. It’s a war on productivity, a la Cultural Marxism. On good men and good women, who might’ve found each other. It might’ve worked before globalization, pushed by the same stupid groups who expected widespread financial ruin would turn people to their anti-capitalist alternative. Now, a single SWPL princess’ faux journalism can be outsourced to a very grateful girl in India supporting her children. Hallelujah, karma is sweet.