@georgia @s8n @D00B @LukeAlmighty @MaceDindu @mushroom_soup no it's not. It's call providing value to society so you can get resources back. Exploitive removes the second part.
You can go save a bunch and live in the woods like so many people have done; learn to hunt and all that.
There are cases like "company stores" and other situations that put people in continual debt, but in general, you have the choice to work somewhere else or ask people to pay you more. You can define your own value under capitalism, but it's balanced with what people will pay you, or the risk you're willing to put into try to make a desirable product.
Calling all work to all employers as exploitation is overly reductionist. If you convince everyone they shouldn't work and throw their wrenches into the gears, the sooner they'll have no choice but to do whatever work is given to them in order to keep from starving.
You can go save a bunch and live in the woods like so many people have done; learn to hunt and all that.
There are cases like "company stores" and other situations that put people in continual debt, but in general, you have the choice to work somewhere else or ask people to pay you more. You can define your own value under capitalism, but it's balanced with what people will pay you, or the risk you're willing to put into try to make a desirable product.
Calling all work to all employers as exploitation is overly reductionist. If you convince everyone they shouldn't work and throw their wrenches into the gears, the sooner they'll have no choice but to do whatever work is given to them in order to keep from starving.
@djsumdog @D00B @LukeAlmighty @MaceDindu @mushroom_soup @s8n i don't believe all work for employers is exploitative lol
the difference is when a woman wants to change employers (ie get a different man to do chores for) that's divorce which is naturally forbidden without some proven trespass under his system. the difference is the power of money applies to the whole of society while doing chores for someone begets nothing concrete. and the answer to this is always "they do it out of love" but if that's the case why wouldn't they also cook meals? are they really so loveless they need their contribution to be wholly fungible?
the difference is when a woman wants to change employers (ie get a different man to do chores for) that's divorce which is naturally forbidden without some proven trespass under his system. the difference is the power of money applies to the whole of society while doing chores for someone begets nothing concrete. and the answer to this is always "they do it out of love" but if that's the case why wouldn't they also cook meals? are they really so loveless they need their contribution to be wholly fungible?
@georgia @djsumdog @MaceDindu @LukeAlmighty @mushroom_soup @s8n
>nothing concrete.
Yup woman brain is verified. Anyone this ungrateful is a jew or a woman
>nothing concrete.
Yup woman brain is verified. Anyone this ungrateful is a jew or a woman
@D00B @LukeAlmighty @MaceDindu @djsumdog @mushroom_soup @s8n considering love a form of currency is the real hysteria i'd wish women to have power that isn't batting their eyes and saying pretty please
@georgia @djsumdog @MaceDindu @D00B @mushroom_soup @s8n
How is legal right to leave with half of his shit, all kids and a literal slave NOT a "power"
@LukeAlmighty @djsumdog @MaceDindu @D00B @mushroom_soup @s8n this stuff exists because of feminism. you wish it to not exist. you're telling me a counterfactual world is better and pointing to this one as proof your world isn't unjust.
Follow
@georgia @djsumdog @MaceDindu @D00B @mushroom_soup @s8n
> this stuff exists because of feminism. you wish it to not exist.
Yes! That single line should make you stop AND RE-THINK everything you claimed above about just how exploited WOMEN are.
