That's because your primary contention is a nonsense statement. It's too broad and unclear. What does that even mean? In your back and forth with Stephen, you contradict yourself on this. You don't seem to u derstand what you mean here yourself, or your unable to step outside your own assumptions about it.
I can't read your mind.
Still, I kind of did contest it.
Re: resource repayment: the state. If civilization depends upon infrastructure and police to exist and those things must be supplied by taxpayer revenue, and civilization also depends upon the creation of new people in order to exist, then the development of those people should also be supplied by taxpayer revenue, don't you think?
You seem to want dree labor from women so civilization could exist for you men, the right to take resources (tax money) from women to upkeep society again primarily to thr benefit or to address problems of men but not be obligated to extend the same help or support to women for their contributions to the continuation of society.
Who's really trying to dodge obligations to the other sex here? Because it's not women. We more than pay and provide our share.
Re: police exist b/c of men: there are so few, they could be better handled outside an entire militarized police force that acts more as bullies to the marginalized. Don't even try to pretend that the vast majority of violence in this world does not happen at the hands of men. Further, when women do turn violent and murder, it is most often after years of being abused. It's reactive violence, not violence "just cause". That argument has been put to bed too. Numerous times.
Re: infrastructure oriented toward families: I mean infrastructure will be woman and child rearing centered, rather than like right now, where it is business and car culture centered. Again, civilization needs people to continue, otherwise you have a collection of empty buildings. The development od those people should be a priority for any healthy civilization, and bot an afterthought or a burden most would prefer to ignore. Wouldn't you agree?
Re Evidence: yes and no. I don't think it will look like what we have today but yes, women will keep it up once men are out of the way. There have been woman only communities in the past. There are attempts today. Women are building them and maintaining them. It's a male belief that women are against hard work or incapable. But belief is not fact.
The biggest obstacles these communities seem to face is still men. Even living alone, men still assault them. One village has had to hire security because men from a nearby village still infiltrate to rape and abuse. Even though these women live separately. Even though these women built their village. Even though these women do not rely on men for anything and do not want them around. Now they're having to buy guns to defend themselves and are shooting and gibbering these men on sight, apparently. Proving once again that the reason police are a necessity is because of men.
