One thought on “The Feminist Heist: Rachel Reeves’ 2025 Budget – A Misandrist Mugging of the British Taxpayer”

1. Note that it is only another woman who can call out Reeves on her quite ridiculous assertions of ‘my soggy knee’. Kemi Badenoch and Deputy Speaker Nus Ghani stepped right up to the plate on this occasion.

   Had it been a man, the optics would have been bad. Real bad.

   The truth of the matter is that when women make incursion into the workplace, they subtly run the show, and men become almost irrelevant, other than getting their dirty work done for them.

   Sir Keir, a man who has always nailed his colours to the feminist mast for the sake of his career, will now experience their backlash to his cost. Under the guise of being ‘progressive’, weak managers often like to surround themselves with women. But, God help them if they do not keep those ladies onside. Not always easy, as ladies like to bend and break workplace rules, with expected impunity.

   This time last year, Sir Keir told us that the 2-child benefit cap was here to stay, as we couldn’t afford otherwise. Sensible decision. But, in the interim, he had to deal with a few transgressions from the girls….Louise Haigh, Sue Gray, Lucy Powell, Angela Rayner.

   The ladies don’t forgive, and they don’t forget. Any Starmer-induced hiatus in the career they envisaged for themselves must be punished.

   So, they get together, to show who’s really in charge of the show. Starmer knows that if he hadn’t scrapped the 2-child benefit cap, those ladies would have marshalled their not inconsiderable backbench resources to have him gone.

   He has, therefore, capitulated to their demands… forcing the taxpayer to subsidise female reproductive preference for polyandry with government support.

   In those ‘households’ and ‘blended families’ with 2+ kids, how many will correlate with 2+ fathers?

   This appears to be what ladies want, as it minimises the chances of offspring genetic defects arising from a single father.

   https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347200917056

   Whether they consciously realise this or not is a moot point. But Esther Perel’s ‘Breeding in Captivity’ indicates that women seek the security of marriage to have a child. Then, they get bored…

   At that point, they can weaponise a marriage contract which has no benefit from a male perspective (fidelity until death do us part), but all too beneficial to a female in terms of asset-stripping that male.

   This stuff doesn’t happen by accident. As soon as women enter politics and jurisprudence, they are working tirelessly towards facilitating female reproductive preference.

   All too soon, men are mere observers to the real power in society.

   You can almost see the bewilderment on Starmer’s face.

   LikeLike

   Reply