Female quotas in migration to increase nationalism

Not one reasonable response. Thread nearly slided. Bunch of joke threads are bumped with shitposts.
Wtf has Jow Forums become.

If you push this narrative onto a roastie she'll get absolutely assblasted. I know because I've done it. Usually they're in such shock and horror at the thought they'll laugh and try to shame you for it. "user this isn't serious, you just want to fuck all the foreign pussy that'd be pouring in!" Of course she's not wrong and it'd be dishonest to try and disprove her. Simply agree and point out the facts:
>Women make up a slight majority of the population making them, by pure economic forces capable of being picky (if you bring up sex differences they'll get too assblasted to listen, they will listen to economics even if it they still get butthurt)
>This will simply even out the gender gap and fill the need in the market. Current women will complain but ultimately they'll be better off for it by being forced into competition with their newly arrived sisters.
>Female dominated jobs like nursing are currently experiencing a shortage. If we add ten million bodies into that labor market wages for everyone will increase. Just like they did for men in trades and manufacturing.
>Millions of women exist in dangerous and oppressive societies. By bringing them in not only do we bring them out of that but we can draw upon their culture and assimilate what works into our own.
It makes them pissed every single time. They'll try to shame you for it but to anyone with half a brain it makes the game they want to play plain as fucking day. It's kind of like this girl I used to work with who's husband was a literal cuck. She'd brag about fucking black guys like it was something hard for a decently attractive white woman to do. Then every once in a while this chad would show up with his asian wife. Every time they left she had a fucking meltdown. She'd actually scream and throw a fit like a child about how she didn't deserve him, it was hilarious and I found out many of my coworkers were also racists by laughing at her together.

I've also had more than one person tell me I've changed their mind on immigration with this argument. If you point out that increased migration leads to more competition for men you just seem bitter and insecure. If you flip it around and argue for migration that would straight up hurt women, and do it in a somewhat jokey way it short circuits peoples brains. "You know, user, you were making those jokes about how women are gonna have to work extra hard to get dates and get jobs once we start letting more women in... Don't you think that's true? But for us guys?" It works. Try it.

Here's an idea migrants predominantly male come from foreign countries with foreign societal standards on sexual violence and abuse torwads predominantly women. Women wake the fuck up you're the one's who will end up being raped and pillaged...

Good points.
What are the counter arguments, besides "you just want pussy", you get, when you talked about it?
Or do they just dismiss such a policy out of hand?

Good goy, bring in more brown people

It's mainly European countries which are taking huge amounts of single men of fighting age . I really wonder why quotas on women hasemt come up yet it would honestly solve a lot of problems in the west.

Bump for effortposting

I literally said:
>To make sure: The proposal does not aim to increase migration in general

Of course the west is doomed, when people like you can't properly read, while bitching on a political discussion board.

Pretty much the only people that dismiss it are women. Men that see the argument either see what you're doing and smile or they're totally baseded out and also agree that we need to increase female migration, albeit because they actually want more migrants.

Since it's mostly young women that disagree with the policy the "counteraguments" are pretty much all some variant of male shaming. Besides pussy the other common one is "Hah! That's the only way you're getting a wife!" which I've found turns around best by doing something like talking about how much you appreciate some foreign culture and find their women cute. Then they either have to explicitly disavow interracial relationships or back off and appear weak.

Start bringing in thousands of female refugees from Ukraine, and watch feminist support for migration dry up overnight.

Attached: 1512059160542.jpg (760x1024, 204K)

wtf? no. migration = white genocide. sink their boats, shoot them at the border, deport illegal immigrants, imprison their enablers. no more immigration, period.

>Thoughts?

Holy fucking sauerkraut, are you serious? You reason like a commie without thinking about the consequences.

Then what will happen if we import millions of Shaniquas and Fatimas?

1) More welfare for these poor cunts, not only redistribution of the existing gibbs.

2) Millions of out of wedlock mongrels with an IQ lower than a fucking Sardinian.

3) We are already doomed when our electorate is +54% female, guess what will happen when we are at 60%?

UNLESS you are proposing your idea as an ACCELERATIONIST one, like Tarrant would say, then you are 100% Korrekt.

FUCK THE GERMANS, WE NEED ANOTHER AUSTRIAN!

>1) More welfare for these poor cunts, not only redistribution of the existing gibbs.
Depends on the time frame.
Might increase welfare cost in the short term, but lower the significantly in the long term, if women are swayed to oppose migration.
Might even reduce gibbs even further, because anti-migration parties typically are against welfare in general.
If women voted for them because of migration, the small government policies might still get implemented.

>2) Millions of out of wedlock mongrels with an IQ lower than a fucking Sardinian.
Not sure what you mean. If you believe that all female migrants will arrive pregnant, you are wrong.
The desired effect on native female voters is the risk of an increase level of marriage, which, I believe, will be achieved:
Migrants are less used to welfare, thus valuing loyalty and marriage to improve their economic situation.
>3) We are already doomed when our electorate is +54% female, guess what will happen when we are at 60%?
You are opposed to this, because currently women are voting rather progressive.
I think the proposed solution (increase competition on women) would make them move away from the extreme left.
I'd rather take 60% more reasonable voters than 54% rather radical voters.

> if women are swayed to oppose migration.

fucking brainlet, no wonder germany is fucked with retards you like running around.

Also watch male support skyrocket.

Female are females, it is not that you can change their nature, this is blank slate reasoning, liberal hogshit that we are all equal and only education makes a difference.

When Shaniquas and Fatimas comes to Europe many of them will breed with local men and produce half-nigger half-sand-nigger mongrell, hence the lower IQ.

>I'd rather take 60% more reasonable voters than 54% rather radical voters.

Again, you talk like human nature, and particularly female nature could be easily modified and manipulated, it isn't like that!

I understand the desperation of living in a doomed society, looking for any kind of possible solution no matter how ridiculous it is, but.. seriously this isn't realistic at all.

So how do you change the course except removing the female vote or Democracy entirely?
But I'd find that even more unrealistic.

>So how do you change the course except removing the female vote or Democracy entirely?

Democracy does and has always exclude certain classes of people. Convicted criminals, mentally handicapped, young adolescents. You have made the common mistake of assuming "democracy = everybody votes". No. Not everybody.

For USA in previous generations women weren't allowed to vote. Before that you had to be white. Before that you had to be a land-owner. Go back 200 years and you had to be a white male land owner of fighting age and of good character. Now a retarded black lesbian immigrant drug-dealer can vote. Notice the exact correlation between the decline in voting requirements and the decline of society.

The solution is to go back to a proper democracy; only people who *contribute* *positively* can vote. Leeches, parasites, immigrants, degenerates, all should be excluded from voting, because they will not vote in the country's best interests.

And that naturally excludes women because they are low-IQ emotionally swayed children.

Brainfart.

If u bring their femslrs here, they sll suddelny find partners with no more problems and will start instabreeding, ALL!
Plus all of those females know no contraception, believe in having most possible amount of children, being submissive zo islamic men, dont fivorce, etc.

Your idea unfortunately is one huge brainfarz.
Sorry bro.
Literally troyan horse jew tier brainfart .

>The solution is to go back to a proper democracy; only people who *contribute* *positively* can vote. Leeches, parasites, immigrants, degenerates, all should be excluded from voting, because they will not vote in the country's best interests.
This

>Notice the exact correlation between the decline in voting requirements and the decline of society.
imho it's "happiness through consumerism, fueled by mass media" as well as: feminism and similar ideologies, that break every social fabric, which turns every citizen into an atomized individual, who lacks a real social net and seeks to increase the welfare state to protect himself.

>only people who *contribute* *positively* can vote.
I agree.

>degenerates should be excluded from voting
Too subjective and not even 10% of Jow Forums could agree on the details.
High risk of misjudgment, failure and extreme backlash.
It would even be hard to paraphrase it as a valid philosophical principle and many would regard you as a moralistic despot.

>women because they are low-IQ emotionally swayed children
Not all.
Compare some woman in her 50s running her own business with some liberal student in his 20s. I'd rather want her to vote.
Besides: Why do you even consider this feasible in this day and age?
C'mon. Don't try to solve real world problems with dream world solutions.

This is stupid.
Much better deal: make people in your country marrying a foreigner getting the nationality of the foreigner, instead of letting the foreigner becoming a national.
Marriage scam to get the nationality stopped dead in their tracks.
Women race traitors BTFO out of society = no gibs for you.

It's amusing how the objections to OP's proposal hinge on lack of realism, when the objectors are even more unrealistic

The answer to white genocide is more female migrants. So, let's say you do impose a 50/50 rule. Now you are basically saying "married couples only".

Juan and Juanita come becuase 50/50 rule... thats all you need.. 1 couple to move here to make 4 kids.

Yeah BTFO feminist...

It's mostly young men who immigrate into Europe because they have nothing to lose. Even the poorest women on the planet have lives and a community they belong to. So if we tried to have an immigration process based on gender quotas we would have millions of men who want to enter Europe and few women willing to do the same.

>Besides: Why do you even consider this feasible in this day and age?

You want feasible? Because limiting democracy is the only feasible solution that doesn't involve war.

History has shown time and again what happens when you force immigration onto a population. Civil unrest, riots, ethnic cleansing, civil war, this is the *actual* outcome of immigration. It has happened repeatedly in history and only brainlets think this time will be any different.

Immigration = war. There is no other outcome. If you don't stop and reverse the tide *now* there will be a much more violent and bloody outcome.

If you want a feasible solution to democracy it starts with basic testings - means, intelligence, character, these are all practical tests. And not "dream world" because it's how it used to be.

>Much better deal: make people in your country marrying a foreigner getting the nationality of the foreigner, instead of letting the foreigner becoming a national

This

What's the historical precedent for mass female migration?

The idea is good, OP.

I meant it like this: "this policy can be realistically implemented in our current system"
Even if it was a good solution, you'd have most of media, politicians, ngos and companies instantly against you. The vast majority of normal people would oppose it right now.

Then prepare for war.

((zeitgeist))

What's that old fashioned phrase again? Women and children first?

Why would you want to start a war, when the odds are so overwhelmingly against you?
Even if it was just 40/60 against you on a local level, it will be 5/95 against you, when powers like China and Saudi Arabia arm and puppeteer their desired factions.
The west is a sweet cake and when it fights itself, everybody else will want to have a bite.
A civil war in the US will turn the US into a puppet of China.

amazing how this thread went from "quotas in migration"
to
we need more women migrants

and I thought you were gonna say we need fewer male migrants.... but I suppose I shouldn't be surprised based on your flag.

We already saw this play out in South Africa. White people will give up their power, all their military assets, and pay reparations to the "minorities" who will run them over in a now lawless nation. Any white person who does not accept this bullshit will be labeled racist and ridiculed by their own people. We will forever have to atone for some evil thing we were all perceived to have done until every single last one of us is gone.

I think I see what you're getting at, a more nuanced version of pic related.

Attached: 1525756559589.png (1216x1356, 1.06M)

we could make them think that they will actually have more competition from all the young single females. if they think were replacing them theyll lose their minds and demand we stop

Love it!
Topic is now about: "How do we trigger a war between China and Japan?"

The title starts with "Female quotas"
and I even wrote this part for people like you:
>To make sure: The proposal does not aim to increase migration in general, but reduce male migration, while increasing female migration to get the 50/50 split feminists like so much.

KEK

Attached: JANM-hapa.me-Harper.jpg (1800x828, 286K)

Good effort post. I was also thinking about how to feminism is a weapon that could be directed at people, but you seem to have formulated your ideas better than I have. Have a bump.

>Why would you want to start a war

Goddamn you're stupid, war is inevitable whether you want it or not. Those immigrants taking over your country, they aren't there because they want to be German. They want to be Muslim living on your land. They're a minority now but once they've reached a critical mass, they will murder the last Germans and establish a new Goatfuckistan. Like they've done dozens of times before.

They are displacing you. They keep their religion, they keep their customs, they marry between themselves and produce more of themselves. So your race is being replaced, one household at a time. The final result is identical to an invasion the only difference is how it happens.

They are not German. They will never be German. You are simply inviting the invasion forces in and housing/feeding them while they establish ghettos. Inevitably there will be war between you and them. However you're still living in denial so you won't be prepared and they will *massacre* you.

Your naive "fix" is to modify the invasion forces, not realizing that won't solve a damn thing. The only solution is to *stop* the invasion forces. And you're not going to do that with emotional women voting for more refugees, with immigrants voting for their interests not yours, with degenerates destroying society by enabling homos and trannies. So war is inevitable.

You don't have to *want* to start a war. It will start without you. Be prepared. Or end up like every other unprepared citizenry in history and be killed, innocents massacred, genetic lines wiped out, culture torn down and burnt or desecrated. Do you think it won't happen in Germany? Don't be naive.

Shut the borders. Don't allow in any non whites

my dudes, this place is a shithole, if youre interested in upgrading and leaving the autism at the door, riot.im/app

Honestly I don't see a solution for the West.

Europe or better the white race survived two world wars the cold war and even the complete collapse of the state in the ex Soviet Republics, but we will not survive miscegenation with millions of unevolved hominids from Africa.

Repealing female suffrage is a pie in the sky, the modern western male is brainwashed to absurd levels, say what you want about the ancients, they invented many crazy gods and insane rules but nobody was so crazy to advance the idea that men are equal to women and children, or even negroes, that is just insanity and we accept it because that's the way we have been brought up, many of us FEELS something is wrong but the majority rules and cunts shame us into submission.

Maybe if we lost a war with China we might accept limiting democracy to compete with them.

We are ruled by Jews and Women that HATE our guts, and clearly show their monstrous hate for anything white and male without any repercussion, instead we can't even make a fucking joke without losing our job.

We need to start burning them at the stake again, seriously.

yea the gender side of the mass immigration is ignored too much. I reckon if migration to europe was 90% young women then we'd definitely see a lot of roastie opposition to it.

In the old days, my kraut fren, pol would have been glad of such a solution and attempted to advocate it, causing a media frenzy and showing the left as hypocritical (i e we would meme this and buzzfeed would write an article about "FEMALE IMMIGRATION IS SEXIST AND PROBLEMATIC" ) and we would all have a laugh. Pol is now too Shilled.com to do things like this. Actual concepts like this are less easy than

x d d d d d kill niggers x d d d d d

Attached: 6b134582984f30b8429bd8455a10773c273da6149c021ce6a16a4aaf419a44df.jpg (960x443, 128K)

crazy thing is that the current feminist dictatorship is likely just a temporary blip in history. We are just unlucky enough to have to endure it.

women are kept under lock and key outside the west. almost no unaccompanied women ever immigrate to the west (unless they're bringing their husband in later)

We can only hope so. Maybe in 20 years this will all be over. My youth will have been wasted though.

>riot.im/app
What then? Any rooms you would recommend? In the room directory all I see is open-source, crypto and similar computer topics.

>In the old days
Yeah. Too many dudes today want to talk on Jow Forums to show off how edgy they are instead of trying to reach an actual goal.

Do you know any other sites for such a discussion besides other chans?

this

This only makes the case for the proposal

It would be preposterous to suggest women are equal to men in athletics because both male and female athletics are separated. Anyone with eyeballs can see that men are bigger, faster, and stronger than women. It's not so obvious in a gender-mixed workforce where government is used to create equal outcome. If the male and female workforce was separated we might find strong evidence that would suggest it's a waste of time and money to educate your average woman. That's not to say female outliers do not exist, only that most women are not nearly as productive in their lifetime as your average man.

We accept that women make better caretakers, so why can't we accept that men are better providers?