Women didn’t just abandon the home.
They were drafted out.
What was offered looked easier than duty, shinier than sacrifice.
This is how the world convinced mothers to leave their children behind,
and how women helped make it happen.🧵
The home wasn’t just where women were.
It was where society was built.
Economies, cultures, and values all flowed from stable households.
Women weren’t “confined” there.
They were the center of it all.
But when industrialization and war demanded more labor, something had to give.
And the most underutilized labor pool?
Mothers.
Wives.
Homemakers.
It wasn’t about “equality.”
It was about production.
Machines needed workers.
Governments needed taxes.
Corporations needed consumers.
The home was in the way.
But no woman naturally wants to hand her baby to a stranger and sit under fluorescent lights all day.
So the propaganda machine was born.
Motherhood was rebranded as oppression.
Homemaking as drudgery.
Feminine duty as weakness.
And “freedom” was recast as careerism, sexual liberation, and total independence.
They sold it through media.
Hollywood gave us the bored housewife.
Ads gave us the career woman in heels.
Magazines gave us the sexual “liberation.”
The message was loud:
You’re wasting your life at home.
And they had to be loud, because the instinct to nurture, protect, and remain with one’s children is so deeply embedded in a woman’s soul,
it takes years of noise to silence it.
So they raised girls on a steady diet of ambition, individualism, and fear of missing out.
By the time they became mothers, the guilt of wanting to stay home felt like regression.
Now we have an entire generation of women
who’ve been made available to the workforce, but unavailable to their children, husbands, and communities.
And we call this progress.
The truth is:
Women weren’t “freed” from the home.
They were extracted from it.
Because powerful systems knew:
If you remove the woman from the hearth, the whole house collapses.
And that’s exactly what they wanted.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The greatest lie of the modern world? That men and women are the same, that they are interchangeable.
Here’s a thread on why they never were, and never will be.
Women carry life. Men don’t.
Women are born with every egg they’ll ever have. Men produce sperm daily.
Women bleed, birth, and breastfeed. Men do not.
Not “social constructs” but simple biology.
Women are estrogen-dominant, emotional, relational, cyclical.
Men are testosterone-driven, aggressive, linear, stable.
That affects everything: energy, behavior, libido, attachment, and even brain function.
One of the most spiritually corrosive lies of modern culture.
A thread on obligation, duty, and why real freedom isn’t found in detachment, but in devotion. 🧵
Modern life is built on the idol of autonomy.
“Set boundaries.”
“Cut off anyone who doesn’t serve you.”
“You don’t owe anyone your time, your energy, your body.”
It sounds progressive, it sounds good, but it’s actually just the blueprint for total isolation.
We are born into debt.
You owe your mother for carrying you.
You owe your father for protecting you.
You owe your children your presence.
You owe your spouse your faithfulness.
You owe your neighbor your decency.
You owe your God your life.
The modern world tells women:
“Have children, just make sure nothing changes.”
Not your work output.
Not your body.
Not your identity.
Not your ambition.
This is not progressive.
This is painfully delusional nonsense.
🧵
There is no greater cognitive dissonance in modern society than its attitude toward motherhood.
We treat childbirth (the most transformative event in human experience) as something that should be squeezed between meetings and bounced back from by Monday.
Philosophically, it’s incoherent.
To bring forth a new human being, a soul with an eternal destiny, and expect your ontology, your being to remain intact is anti-reality.
Motherhood isn’t a task. It is an ontological shift.
In nearly every civilization, the possession of power was historically accompanied by a code of conduct. Kings had laws. Warriors had honor.
Power without restraint isn’t liberation it’s simply just corruption.
🧵
Feminism restructured the moral and social architecture of the West by transferring vast cultural, legal, and sexual power to women. But unlike previous power structures, it imposed no corresponding code - no duties, no hierarchy, no internal governance.
This is unprecedented. Every previous transfer of power, from monarchs to parliament, from nobility to citizen, was accompanied by debates on responsibility, on the burden of wielding power justly.
Darwin’s theory didn’t just challenge Genesis.
It challenged the very meaning of womanhood.
By reducing the human person to a cosmic accident, evolution turned motherhood into biology, femininity into utility, and the soul into myth.
This was the first blow to the sacred.
In the Christian vision, woman is not a byproduct of randomness.
She is the last act of God before He rested.
Made not from dust, but from man, a relational creature by nature, not merely by function (Genesis 2:22–23).
Darwin strips this entirely.
If evolution is true, then woman is not created with purpose.
She is simply what survived.
Not “helper,” not “beloved,” not “mother of all the living.”
But a vessel of reproduction, selected by a blind and brutal process that favors aggression, not love.
Promiscuity promised women power. But it functioned like a pyramid scheme: a few winners at the top, millions of losers at the bottom.
🧵
Like any pyramid scheme, the early adopters appear to thrive.
But this model is not sustainable.
It commodifies sex, flattens intimacy, and turns bonding into transactional leverage.
The system depends on mass buy-in.
Women give sexual access in hopes of securing long-term intimacy.
Men are told to “level up” endlessly to deserve basic loyalty.