Here is something that made me laugh.

Why womenomics is the force of the future

This article doesn’t really go anywhere or say anything most don’t already know. But of course, they need to keep rehashing the same old crap to cater to the narcissists.

It starts off with the usual girl-power spin.

Once women simply spent the housekeeping money doled out to them. These days they are more likely to hold the purse strings.

This was one of the findings of a report entitled Living Britain, which examines the trends affecting the country at the beginning of the 21st century.

It looked at the increasing purchasing and physical power of women on the economic and cultural front, which has been labelled ‘womenomics’.

A phrase initially coined by the Economist, womenomics refers to the increasing purchasing and physical power of women on the economic and cultural front.

This isn’t new though. Men usually had the last say in the family budget because;

1. He earns it.

2. He is more likely to budget intelligently and think about preparing for the future.

Women are earning more, good for them!

The number of women scientists has soared, there are more female graduates than male, girls outstrip boys at A-Level and even traditionally male markets are succumbing to female touch.

We all know why this is happening. Conveniently forgetting the reasons for these changes because it involves boys’ needs being ignored. But why let that stand in the way of womenomics?

A recent Ofcom report found that women aged 25-35 now spend more time using the internet than men.


That has to be up there for the ‘Most Irrelevant Statistic’ Award 2007.

The womenomics phenomenon was described by the Economist last year which argued that the future of the world economy lies increasingly in female hands.

It found that over the past decade or so increased female participation in the paid labour force has contributed more to the growth of the world economy than either booming China or new technology.

“Women are becoming more important in the global marketplace not just as workers, but also as consumers, entrepreneurs, managers and investors,” the report said.

“Women have traditionally done most of the household shopping, but now they have more money of their own to spend.”

We also know about pro-woman legislation designed to push women up the career at a rate disproportionate to their work volume, in the name of ‘equality (of outcome)’, and yes, it is good for the economy that more and more women are choosing careers. Bad for families and relationships of course, also bad for wages.

The biggest winners in this girl-power ‘revolution?’

Why, corporations and government of course. More profits and more tax income.

For the Living Britain report, researchers were keen to establish whether the womenomics phenomenon was equally alive in Britain as in the US. And Mr Raymond said it was a phenomenon driving Britain today.

He said instead of focusing on women and gender, focus was instead switching to women and economic factors.

He said this was partly driven by the fact that more than half of graduates are women. Graduates aged 25-30 earn on average 25 per cent more than non-graduates. More women on higher salaries mean they are a driving force in the workplace.

“Womenomics is about the purchasing and physical power of women and there economic influence, not just thinking about how many women are in the workforce,” said Mr Raymond.

No, womenomics is actually about promoting the idea that women are best having careers.

Flexible working times and work-from home options have given women in the workplace more options, said the Living Britain survey.

Today more than 80 per cent of employees in the UK, both male and female, rate flexible working as the most attractive benefit that an employer can offer.

Jane Cunningham, founder of female marketing consultancy Pretty Little Head – who was interviewed for the comprehensive trends survey, said: “There’s an increasingly interesting commercial opportunity in marketing to women.

“Not only do they dominate household spending decisions, they are now significant in categories that have been traditionally viewed as male such as technology, cars and financial services.”

The report said: “Women are becoming more important in the global marketplace not just as workers, but also as consumers, entrepreneurs, managers and investors.

“Women have traditionally done most of the household shopping, but now they have more money of their own to spend.”

That’s nice.

So what we have (since feminism) is women flooding into the workplace, dropping the wages so everyone has to work three times as much for the same quality of life, then complaining it’s too hard, getting laws passed to push them through the ranks, trying to laugh at men because women have high-powered jobs, then trying to shame men because they don’t find hyper-competitive i-can-have-everything females attractive, then they find themselves alone with all that money! On the other hand, if they do find a man silly enough to get hitched too, she then wants to do what? Keep her career AND stay at home and be a mum. If she can’t do both those things she will become unhappy and blame the man (obviously).

By the way, in case you were wondering, doing both things is IMPOSSIBLE.

And that is why men don’t fancy high-flying women.

So these women will find themselves with a career and no family. So who actually wins and loses?

Remember one of main goals of feminism was gaining control of women’s reproductive capability. Encouraging them into the workplace not only gave the corporations more power to pay less in wages, but also for the government to make more by taxes other half of the population. Plus birthrates will plummet because of these ‘careers’. Having the birthrate below replacement levels will encourage governments to have mass immigration to compensate.

This then becomes a great tool for attacking the culture of this ‘girl-power’ country, and erodes the country’s cultural identity. This then reduces the desire of the population of rise up to defend their country from being destroyed by having its sovereignty sold to a centralised power.

So feminism doesn’t just destroy families, its effects spread to be able to undermine entire countries when it is allowed to grow unimpeded.

Womenomics is the term used to describe the progress of the corporations in taking away personal independence and sovereignty.


4 thoughts on “Womenomics?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s