Feminism became in the beginning of the 20^th century a way and a tool for urban women to achieve political influence for themselves. Prior to this the common way for women to guard their interest was always through a man (e.g. father or husband).

Due to the industrial revolution and the mass migration from countryside into urban areas, women found themselves – for economical reasons – needing to seek an employment. This in many ways marked the end of a pastoral society, built around strict family values. In this context women contributing economically by bringing home a paycheck also started to vocalize opinions of women’s rights, in other words they demanded political influence. The feministic movement has since then changed a lot. Such as any movement it has taken on a self-promoting almost organic evolution.

When any movement reaches such status and when the enemy is no longer there, it starts to invent enemies, all for the ‘good cause’ and in order to survive. There are just too many people making a living on the idea of feminism, for ‘mission accomplished’ to be declared and the movement dismantled. The number of politicians, genus-experts, debaters, journalists etc. involved are growing for each year.

After women obtained the right to vote the aim changed to equal salary, then to equal ‘opportunities’, then to actively change socio-economical structures (tax system, contributions etc.) by political incentives and punishment, then by introducing female quotas wherever possible, then to practice ‘feministic policies’ within every sector and now even within such far-out sectors as defense and foreign policies. In short, the policies have been to elevate feminism as a hard-core political belief and into every corner of society. A state-religion. The country, which has taken this political belief farthest, is my own country, Sweden.

If feminism started as a way of gaining influence in a changing world, it has truly succeeded in changing society in a very profound way. With the majority of western women working outside their home, the ‘old fashioned’ family bond no longer exists.

So, what obvious negative impacts can we observe?

Today’s children are growing up with caretakers in kindergartens and the elderly are locked away in institutions. There are many examples where children and elderly have been abused or neglected in Swedish institutions. This brings alienation and frustration into every level of society. We are seeing an explosion in psychological disorder and un-health. Much of this might be connected with stressful societies where traditional family units have been destroyed. Feminism plays a big part in all this by promoting the sense that all women have to make job careers. Political decisions with feministic bias and often with economical incentives drive people to certain decisions. These decisions tend to be contrarian to traditional family values. This is also the wish by the political class; by destroying the family unit and introducing the ‘unified group-value unit’ in its place, the politicians can easier manipulate people, since these groups are not built on blood but on the ‘trend of the day’.

What we see today in modern western societies are that the number of divorces are on the rise, especially in urban areas. Women today are suffering from typical male lifestyle deceases such as ulcer, stress-related heart problems, alcoholism etc.

Children who are overactive – a grandparent might describe it as lack of parenting – are often diagnosed with ADHD. Many times it seems in order just to relive the parent from a bad conscience. Usually heavily medicated, in what probably will be considered by future medical professionals as a medical scandal.

Professor Annica Dahlström (histology and bio-neurology) has been outspoken with her critic against politically bias feministic ideas. When she dared to mention that children in Sweden as young as 1 year are placed in kindergarten and likely suffer PTSD with possible brain damages as a result, the feminists demanded her to be banned from her position and she literally became ‘persona non grata’.

Psychologist Eva Rusz has in many articles pointed to the danger of political ideas in Sweden. Often these ideas are based on a feministic agenda and are completely unscientific and contrarian to the needs of children.

There are numerous examples where an expert has been disqualified by Swedish media and not seldom is that person also declared ‘persona non grata’ and never to be heard of again, not in Sweden any way. This could only happen in what is best described as a totally brainwashed society.

The reason why feminism went so far in Sweden is probably due to ideas such as economical equality and the creation of the welfare state by the socialists in the 1960’s. This laid the foundation for a ‘big brother-society’ where the responsibility for children and elderly was moved away from the family and onto institutions.

If we establish that feminism once had a valid reason but nowadays as feminism 2.0 it is a movement creating a politically bias society, which is increasingly negative for its citizens, then what can we expect from the future and for how long will this movement continue?

We need to start with the differences between genders. Science, however politically incorrect, shows many biological differences. Cognitive capacity is connected to neurons and their activity levels in the brain. Science shows that men have more brain cells than women (due to larger brain size). This is not necessarily indicative of higher IQ but researches show that men do have a higher IQ than women (within their ethnical group). Actually it shows that women’s IQ are more clustered to the median level and lack really low (retarded) or really high (genius) scores, while men are more extreme, with higher number of retards and geniuses – to put it bluntly. Most people sense that more men than females are in prison and also that more men than females won the Nobel Prize. These are facts and not myths.

Are these facts at all significant for the future? Well, yes it is significant since history has shown us that the success of humanity mainly is due to a surprisingly few number of geniuses. The absolute majority of people live their lives in insignificancy. The people who really changed the world are men like Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, and Einstein etc. Also into our own days the people making the really astonishing discoveries are men. Nobel Prize winning females are less than 5% (science) while 95% are men. http://chartsbin.com/view/3069

Of course, on the other hand you might also say that people who changed the world in a negative way are men like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and G W Bush etc. Yes, this is true. With men we have bigger possibilities but also bigger risk for wars, as it looks like.

Since the feministic movement became a state-religion in Sweden, men have experienced a reversed discrimination. This starts already in kindergarten where boys are prohibited to play with toys that have an “aggressive” aura from a gender correct standpoint. Boys are also taught to sit and pee. Little by little the boys are brainwashed into believing that the female way is the better way. Due to that many boys live with the mother as a single parent, the female point of view is completely inserted into the young boys mind. Growing up he listens to that he should not take so much “space” since the girls “always and everywhere are discriminated”. The effect of all this brainwashing is that boys are losing their self-esteem and start doing much worse in school than girls. Boys in Sweden are presently not continuing to university in the same degree as before. In many Swedish university classes (law etc.) the gender ratio is 80/20 for the girls.

What this will bring for the future Swedish society is easy to guess. Since the society will be governed by a majority of females and seldom on positions well suited for them – necessary discoveries and inventions (like in the past) will not be made. We will have a society that is mellow, drab and highly politicalized. A lot of discourse but no solution or the survival of the un-fittest is another way to describe it.

These tendencies can already be found in today’s Swedish society. Since feministic values are the rule, nobody dares to take any ‘hard’ decisions. In Sweden the migration policy debate is a fine example of this with a complete systemic collapse, still nobody want to address the elephant in the room.

This situation will prevail until the feministic belief system fails enough times – and it will, trust me. When the general population start to feel the pain of idiotic politics in the form of unemployment, increased poverty, failing welfare, failing infrastructure and maybe even war. All due to an extreme experiment I call feminism 2.0, then the pendulum will strike back.