614 words
It is superficial thought that causes some to call themselves feminist or anti-feminist. The usual definitions of feminism, from womyn’s empowerment to sexual egalitarianism, serve to curtail thought – therefore we shall not define feminism here. Instead, we will look at synchronicities, to help us better understand our time and place.
When we examine feminist actions, we see continual petitions for “equality” long after women were given the right to vote, were legally assured of equal treatment in the workplace, and even privileged with rights of reproductive choice above and beyond what have been granted men. A feminist revels in her immodesty, her naggishness (which she mistakes for authority), and her aping of what she views as masculine behavior. The unfortunate male who calls himself a feminist, on the other hand, takes pride in his emasculation, his eager deference to the opposite sex, and his “reasonable” outlook on life.
At first, this may seem like a moral inversion – an attack on the natural order. But this behavior can be understood biologically, and not just culturally. At conception, fetuses begin in an undifferentiated state. A feminist will say that everyone starts off as a girl, in a show of her fixation on the superficial male member. But it is an undifferentiated state, and when development proceeds as normal, the sexual organs differentiate. The same blobs of cells become either testes or ovaries, and other blobs become either a penis or clitoris, depending on the natural signals propagated through the fetus.
Skipping ahead, toward the end of life, women are released from the menstrual cycle by menopause, and men’s testosterone levels drop. This is often believed to be the stage of a woman becoming matronly, and men’s retiring and becoming relatively inward-directed. Rather than an inversion, this is a return towards the “second cradle” and the undifferentiated state. This return does not – indeed, cannot – undo the history that shaped the body in the first place, but is instead like a sword returning to its sheath.
Western Civilization is also entering its old age. The City of Oxford was established in the eighth century, long before the Aztec or the Inca civilizations of the Americas, and even the University of Oxford predates them. If the youthful energy of our civilization, which we harnessed to conquer the globe, seems to have been spent, let this not be cause for despair. A civilization that has undergone menopause makes way for new generations.
And if it seems as though white women have turned against the natural order – preferring to ravenously consume all that has been built up, and like a bulimic, vomiting it out instead of accepting its sustenance – it is only a signal, much like the ones that differentiate fetuses in the womb. With nothing left to conquer, white men have grown complacent; even weak. What self-respecting woman wants a man who is unwilling to fight for himself and his own? What self-respecting woman is willing to be taken for granted, rather than considering herself a prize to be won?
There is no hypocrisy within a feminism that declares all manner of minor acts to be rape whilst encouraging the mass migration of foreign men into our nations. Rather, it is a consistent signal sent to the manchildren, that they should once again become men. With the world conquered, our science and institutions having spread across the globe, and with no frontiers left to civilize, we have become boring, bourgeois, and banal. We ought to cherish the fiery spirit of the white woman that manifests itself in this age as feminism; it wills to tear everything down and start again, just to get back the white man she once knew.
49 comments
“Just embrace your disposability, bro!”
I’ll embrace it if the payoff makes sense. Some men will die if they think 40 virgins await them in the afterlife.
There’s no reason for men to take risks to recover some earlier iteration of feminism. Most of these “become men again” guys just want to return to pre-SJW, pre-no fault divorce feminism and somehow hold it in place.
Hah, a MGTOW? Since you’re worried about the tiger disposing if you, why not hop on instead of slinking away and hiding?
Feminists are not the problem. Organized feminism is sustained by Jewish funding and media control. White women are more conservative on abortion and affirmative action than men are.
The scapegoating of women is going to intensify as a result of the YouTube purges, as content creators struggle to develop content that the system will tolerate.
“White women are more conservative on abortion and affirmative action than men are.”
Is there any evidence for that statement? White females have been the (unintended) prime beneficiaries of affirmative action, white men the main victims.
As much as traditionalists may dislike “diversity” and “globohomo”, of the post-60s culture wars ideologies which have collectively ruined the West, feminism has probably played the most negative role in the actual daily lives of ordinary men. The only comfort we can take about feminism is the knowledge that eventually it will die out (or at least have a much smaller following), as feminists have lower fertility than traditionalist women.
What’s happening to the white race is that all its inherently non-traditionalist genomes – those whose bearers in the past had no option but to go along with {racism, nationalism, female subordinationism, sexual normalism, etc} – are gradually weeding themselves out of the collective white gene pool via miscegenation and sterility. As long as enough whites ingather into sovereign polities in which they can be the electoral majorities, the white race that remains a century or two from now will be numerically smaller than today, but racially sounder and hardier.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/affirmative-action-white-women_n_56a0ef6ae4b0d8cc1098d3a5
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/white-women-and-support-restrictive-abortion-laws/590101/
“As much as traditionalists may dislike “diversity” and “globohomo”, of the post-60s culture wars ideologies which have collectively ruined the West, feminism has probably played the most negative role in the actual daily lives of ordinary men.”
I see. The hope is that by “tying” anti-feminism and White identity politics, the movement can appeal to otherwise racially indifferent Whites. All by itself, that is a rather sad commentary on White men’s priorities.
In any event, how do you believe feminism has negatively impacted men’s lives? It seems to me it’s had numerous benefits for them, especially the convenience of abortion. The only specific grievance I’ve ever heard is that it’s harder to get a wife when women aren’t forced to marry for economic reasons, being free to earn our own living. Women are obviously going to strenuously object to any attempt to force us into such transactional pseudomarriages in the future.
“It seems to me it’s had numerous benefits for them, especially the convenience of abortion.” Now I know you’re either a troll, or you’re just so blue pilled that you don’t know which way is up. That, or your career as a diversity hire has led you to think you’re smarter than you actually are.
If you want a list of grievances, just check out some MGTOW YouTube channels. Misandry Today is probably a good place to start. The parallel legal system called Civil Courts is run by feminists, and it regularly destroys men’s lives with false accusations of abuse to get “a better deal” for women in divorce cases.
Feminism is a problem, it is unnatural and dangerous, it generates a defect/defect equilibrium and yes, it is one of the causes of the incel movement ( most men don’t get women and a handful men get many women, so the equilibrium is destroyed and these men don’t produce offspring and become antisocial).
Feminism destroys the nature of women, it makes women despise motherhood and the life of a wife, because it is what nature tells us: men and women have inherent roles and differences.
With the awakening of feminism, there are more and more broken families, the man is emasculates and women are making themselves highly repulsive to men ( surely an aftercome of women being more educated and masculinized than men), also highly intelligent women don’t have offspring and the lowest intelligent women have a lot of children wich is dysgenic/harmful.
Politics, industries and sciences have become weaker and the advancements are lower and lower, these places that were highly competitive and manly, are in these days egalitarian and femenine, men are castrated and they don’t compete and fight with each other anymore and the society has lost its vigour and wisdom.
There are a lot of reasons to exclude women from politics, industry and at some degree from sciences, women’s place is in their home and nurturing children.
It seems that letting women vote and empower themselves was one (if not the biggest) of the errors of the white christian men.
That girl in the photo is not all that big of a deal. She’s OK, but not hot. Off topic but, many in this sphere seem absolutely enamored of scrawny women- what gives? Nobody’s into breast, curves, etc., just skinny girls? Hey, it takes all types and they are ‘of us’ of course, but why is the alternative sphere into women like the one pictured above? (and spare all the “fat” foolishness, many of you think anything over 110LB is a “land whale”).
And yeah, good article.
I haven’t noticed any fixation on beanpole women in our sphere. I’ll keep an eye out for it.
Bear in mind that breasts grow at puberty and when a woman is pregnant, so there’s still hope for the scrawny woman. Tempt her with cake now and then and watch the phrase “straight to the thighs” in action.
@Vernon
Nice, lol!
Simple, the physique of ‘scrawny’ women -as you describe them- are indicators of K-selection.
Are they really though? I’ve heard all the theorizing about this (yes, yes; Dutton et al) but really, I’ve met plenty of scrawny girls that were slutty as all get-out and voluptuous ones that were highly K selected. I think the alternative sphere is just afraid of being called out by scrawny girl worshipping PUAs as liking “fat chicks,” (any girl with tits really) so they signal accordingly to at least end that noise. Plenty of white girls who are not scrawny are out there and should not be left in the cold while the people who “get it” are fighting over lasses as the one pictured above. It takes all types.
The enduring popularity of dangerous sports puts lie to the insults in white men in this. Feminists are horrible and this article is romanticising spiteful women chucking white babies literally into the trash.
“Dangerous sports” are diversions, decoys, meaningless drivel if they don’t prepare us to do what is necessary to restore sanity to this world. I don’t care how much UFC a man watches, it’s popular because it’s pornographic. You know what’s unpopular? Shutting down abortion clinics, punishing the infanticide industrialists, enforcing sexual morality, and ensuring that those who have a stake in the future aren’t sabotaged by those who don’t.
Feminists will stop when we stop them. If they are ugly, it is because we don’t make them keep good manners. You can call that romanticism if you want, but don’t mistake a call for my fellow men to get their hands dirty for anything else.
I guess you never read Evola about mountaineering. Challenging physical pursuits can be worthy in and of themselves, I make time to fall off my skateboard just as much as I make time to write.
If you are against abortion clinics and infanticide, then you need to write much more clearly. Just glancing over the comments it seems you’re waging a flamewar to justify your article, which indicates that your message was either misinterpreted or poorly received. my personal takeaway from “We ought to cherish the fiery spirit of the white woman that manifests itself in this age” you outright supported baby killing nutcases who adopt feral refugees. Chill out, take the time to write more even handedly, and only deploy hyperbole when you really need to.
Challenging physical pursuits are good. I wouldn’t call falling off your skateboard a dangerous sport, but it’s definitely better than a lot of people do.
Admittedly, most people misunderstood my essay. You think I’m glorifying feminism, OMC thinks he’s talking to Achilles, Achilles thinks he’s talking to OMC. I have a suspicion Lexi is trolling, but she also sounds like she’s talking to OMC.
You misread my words, I’m not glorifying feminists nor their misdeeds. Feminism is what happens when the “fiery spirit” is put to inappropriate purposes. I like the spirit, whilst the physical manifestation is something I see as the swan song of our civilization. In that light, it’s a natural process that will also result in a new life springing up.
This ambiguity, between seeing a forest fire as destruction, but looking ahead and seeing the results, is exactly what I was trying to convey. Unfortunately, like an egg set upon the apex of a roof, gravity pulled it down to one side or the other for most people. Perhaps this style could work for something people have less of an emotional attachment to, or I don’t know, maybe the style itself is doomed to fail.
The flame war is regrettable, it’s not even about the essay. I think Achilles is making a mistake by trying to reason with feminists, and I held onto trying to change his mind longer than I should have. That’s his mistake to make, or on the odd chance that he gets somewhere more power to him.
History may (seem to) have come to the end for White people but it sure as h*ll is not yet over for the Chosen People: they are working at maximum capacity to bring about THEIR end of history: global domination (“One World Government”) and their “justice” court in Tel Aviv. And boy do they have stuff to do: wreck the USA… infiltrate China, play all big players against one another, manipulate, lie, brainwash via maximum media control, perform false flags…
Interesting how in light of the above, it yet seems for White people that history has ended and there is nothing useful anymore to do. What does that tell us about White people? No sure… but I guess what it certainly tells is something about incredible naiveté… bordering on the stupid? Induced stupidity? I don´t know… (maybe we have here another one of fundamental White weaknesses… the first one being pathological altruism…).
There’s plenty to do, but where’s the spirit to do it? In only a few, sparks that will either be extinguished or start a blaze that will reach the heavens.
“History may (seem to) have come to the end for White people but it sure as h*ll is not yet over for the Chosen People: they are working at maximum capacity to bring about THEIR end of history: global domination (“One World Government”) and their “justice” court in Tel Aviv. And boy do they have stuff to do: wreck the USA… infiltrate China, play all big players against one another, manipulate, lie, brainwash via maximum media control, perform false flags…”
And rich White men who have the resources to influence politics do so to the detriment of their own people. The Koch brothers are apparently working with the ADL to censor the internet. Feminism is nothing but a tempest in a teapot by comparison.
This is a boomer tier analysis of feminism. The author apparently wants the reader to fill in the blanks when he says that men need to become men again. What does this mean and why is it the antidote to feminism?
Even if every Western man joined the marines, fought in battles, did physical labor 60+ hours a week and so forth it wouldn’t put a dent in feminism. As long as woman can vote, live independently of their families and wield power in the schools and media there will be limits on how masculine the culture is. Men cannot truly become men in this context because their actions are not evaluated by other men. Men shoot stragglers, but if women share power with men then stragglers and degenerates can play on feminine sympathies. Men have to prove their usefulness to other men but in a feminized society everyone gets a gold star for trying.
And no, women are not prizes to be won. That’s a distinctly modern perspective on family formation. The traditional way of winning a girl’s hand was to win the trust of her father, who was the girl’s legal guardian until marriage. The girl’s father doesn’t care how cool a prospective suitor’s tattoos are, or how big his bicepts are, or if he knows all the cool people in town. He wants his daughter married off to men of good character and of sound financial means. Arranged marriages encourage men to develop qualities that appeal to fathers. This is how you get men out of their basements.
The answer to feminism is to bring back coverture which means a 100% rollback of women’s rights. It is not for men to shorten their lifespans and pretend like women’s rights don’t exist.
Excellent observations. All this “manospheric” and “alt-masculinist” stuff is pathetic. REAL traditionalism is just as you say (though you need to throw in traditional religion as its metaphysical support). And having big biceps or even being tough with one’s fists is no guarantee of a sound or even strong character. We need white men who are masculine, not macho or “trash talkers”.
I don’t particularly agree with you on marriage but I do agree on the need for a male driven society. You made very good points on the differences in leadership between men and women.
Have you met any boomers? Their “analysis” of feminism is usually one of either a) feminism is women’s liberation and that’s a good thing, or b) feminists are the real sexists.
As for your “analysis” of my piece, perhaps subtlety isn’t your strong suit. You say women aren’t prizes to be won but then describe a situation in which women are prizes to be conferred by a father. You say men can’t become men again if women still have rights, but what do you think will happen when society is torn down? Come on, it’s the last sentence in the essay.
I’ll give you some writing advice. You can only write as smart as your reader can read. How about you take a break, have a cup of tea, and read it again. Does anything you’ve said actually contradict anything that I’ve said, when you’re not triggered by filling in the blanks?
Yeah, i agree.
Though it is impossible to crush this degenerate and maladaptative feminism that fast, we must do it even if it is a very slow process.
Btw it is impossible to generate a 100% rollback on feminism, maybe a 90% rollback in feminism is ok. 🤣🤣
Good piece.
All that is happening in our nations is a signal of fight or flight. In a time when nuclear powers prevent invasion we have subverted that (or been subverted) into the fight reaching our shores again unconventionally. We wanted this, we have inspiration again beyond cubicles and spiritless materialism. We have a fight again.
We are no longer given peace so we must take it. We will return to what was ours by ripping out and dragging the present back to the past. We will find the future we are owed.
Feminism is no more than a shit test. And ‘we’ failed.
Someone failed, that’s for sure. But there’s hope for remedial education.
Yes. In theory this could end today, if all men simply stood up and rejected feminism.
But that though experiment also shows why it will never happen and what is _really_ wrong: our genome.
We need selection pressure. Without selection pressure our lineage will stop. No social security without sterilisation…
Feminism is a form of selection pressure. Women who fall for it either murder their own progeny via abortion, or don’t have them in favor of careers, or sterilize them with trans-sexuality, or have the babies of their boyfriends rather than their cuck husbands.
As for other forms of selection pressure, those who are too anti-social to join together, the atomized, the bugmen, aren’t in much danger of reproducing. Our genome will be fine, most of those unfit sterilize themselves.
I have been moving to the Right in the last few years as I have finally recognized the Big Lie – the Jewish driven denial of race realism – and where it is taking American whites . But when I read these attacks on feminism, I feel as if I am joining a bunch of Luddites. Give it up guys. The happy days of white Protestant Anglo rich men running the world is OVER We Americans have to band together as male and female Gentiles of European origin – WHITE PEOPLE – and forget about overturning feminism. Of course women do have a bio identity that is somewhat different from men’s and this is of great importance though denied by radical feminism. But accommodations MIGHT be reached with the more reasonable sort of feminist – the kind who is in touch with her true nature – if we just give up this very dated idea about somehow bringing the chicks back to their supposedly natural roles as simply wives and mothers. The Jews haven’t made it ALL up: nature and history are in dialogue.. Women to varying degrees really want freedom from the old ways and the technologies exist to give it to them. They aren’t going back to some happy, “natural” subordination to men in the work and political sphere. Insisting that they do so will drive the more reasonable ones to the extreme left which we all know wants our EXTINCTION as a race and as men in any sort of natural sense of our sex. But the struggle is primarily about RACE guys, not gender. We need women unequivocally on our side NOW Realize it or we are finished.
Doesn’t Sam Dickson says something like that? Everybody says Sam is a great speaker and then ignores what he says.
You say, “Of course women do have a bio identity that is somewhat different from men’s and this is of great importance though denied by radical feminism.“ This is true, and I for one will never compromise on it. I don’t care what accommodations “MIGHT” be had with “reasonable” feminists, because one of the many lies of feminism is that our women were ever “simply wives and mothers.” Women have a vital role, and you don’t have to take many red pills to see that women who fulfill that role are happier than those who seek “freedom from the old ways.”
Another commenter here, OMC, is the sort of superficial mind that I mentioned in the beginning of the essay. He hears feminists say women were chattel slaves, and he says, “that sounds good, I’ll have some of that.” I’ve met women who are into that sort of thing, so I’m not here to judge. But still, it’s not true. You use the word “subordination” which is another blue pill you’ve taken, because a woman’s role is no less important than her man’s, but it is different.
We do need our women on our side, but we aren’t going to get it by kowtowing to feminism. One of the reasons I wrote the essay is that flinching to feminism is another form of kowtowing to it. Seen for what it is, “a shit test” as Rhodok puts it, we know exactly how to treat it. You are being reasonable, a trait of men feminism exploits to disenfranchise us in our own countries. Demand what is right, disengage any woman who doesn’t want what is right, and you will find out how many actual “feminists” are out there.
“We do need our women on our side, but we aren’t going to get it by kowtowing to feminism.”
I notice that you specifically avoided defining “feminism” in your piece, and that is something that will ultimately have to be sorted out. You obviously can’t evaluate the merits of a thing without first defining it. The fact is, demands for a reversal of all of feminist history are very threatening and alienating to women. It is also pointless, because our forefathers themselves rejected the old ways. The Married Women’s Property Acts enjoyed widespread support among fathers and male judges who saw firsthand the injustices women suffered under common law coverture.
I very much agree with you that women’s traditional roles are the most satisfying for the vast majority of us. Nonetheless, it remains a fact that women remain vigorous, healthy, and sharp for decades after the heavy lifting of childrearing is over. One of my great regrets in life is that I didn’t have my children before getting my career started. (Now, I don’t actually regret it, because from where I stand now, I wouldn’t change a thing.)
I advise women to do things differently than I did. Distance learning actually allows some women to train for a career on a part-time basis while she is raising her kids. I have seen this work for some younger women.
The fact is, demands for a reversal of all of feminist history are very threatening and alienating to women.
Yeah, that is EXACTLY the problem. Our movement need a kinder, gentler, more progressive masculinity at the same time that we do not punk out to these racist misandrist, nature hating feminists
Unlike the Scotsman, we can truthfully say there is no true feminism. Any definition I offer will be “well actually”ed by some Loki with nothing better to do. Everybody knows what feminism is, so it’s a waste of time trying to define it or evaluate its “merits.”
I like this phrase, “the old ways,” it’s a red flag for the blue pill. Don’t you think it’s interesting that you see women as being still vigorous, healthy, and sharp, whilst I see a bunch of marginalized, sick, and frayed creatures, yet we both attribute that to feminism?
Can you make up your mind, please, do you think it would have been better to start your family first, or don’t you? I respect your stoic outlook, but you seem to have cognitive dissonance, like your conscious and subconscious are at odds.
And why are you selling your sisters into the slavery known as careerism? This is a blue pill, that childrearing and family life are somehow a burden, whilst being a cog in someone else’s machine is somehow liberating. The mind is it’s own place, and can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven. You got lucky, your subconscious made you do the right thing, even when your conscious was singing the praises of feminism. Not everyone is as centered, and it behooves those of us who know better to not spread mischief merely to get social praise.
“Everybody knows what feminism is, so it’s a waste of time trying to define it or evaluate its “merits.””
Cop out. I’ve been called a “feminist” for all sorts of reasons, from defending women’s rights to vote and hold property to claiming that women should be able to go to the grocery store without a male chaperone. If that is a “feminist,” then I am a feminist.
On the other hand, I oppose all efforts to achieve gender balance in every walk of life as unrealistic and unnecessary for justice. Now you tell me. Am I a feminist or not? I don’t care which way or the other.
” I like this phrase, “the old ways,” it’s a red flag for the blue pill.:”
Semantics.
“Don’t you think it’s interesting that you see women as being still vigorous, healthy, and sharp, whilst I see a bunch of marginalized, sick, and frayed creatures, yet we both attribute that to feminism?:”
I don’t know what you’re talking about here. The reason women remain vigorous, healthy, and sharp after menopause has nothing whatever to do with feminism. It is a biological fact.
“Can you make up your mind, please, do you think it would have been better to start your family first, or don’t you? I respect your stoic outlook, but you seem to have cognitive dissonance, like your conscious and subconscious are at odds.”
I think I made myself perfectly clear, but in case I didn’t: A career is a fulfilling endeavor for a woman, but not until after she has kids. Otherwise, she’s going to be distracted, resentful, and sad about being separated from her child for most of the day.
Okay, I’ll bite. How about this, you give me your definition of feminism, then we can discuss the merits of that definition. I also think women should be able to go out without a chaperone, which they could do before all this diversity, does that make me a feminist? If you don’t care either way, then why desire a definition from me?
I see, I misread the vigorous, healthy, and sharp comment. My bad. As a practical matter, yes, I wouldn’t want a woman who has fulfilled her motherly role to just be stuck in boredom. And perhaps in a polity where the major institutions are edifying rather than caustic to the people, even a career is a good choice. But in this crass, materialistic society, a “career” usually means selling out to an entity where loyalty is extracted but not returned. In this environment, I’d prefer women (and men, if they can still provide for their families) not debase themselves with loyalty to institutions that are ultimately bent on their destruction. Just to give an example, I think a “career” as an agriculturalist setting up and running community gardens could be highly worthwhile, if not likely to make any money.
As for asking Incels anything, I don’t know any Incels. There’s nothing wrong with a nerdy girl, per se, so long as she doesn’t fall afoul of the standards of hygiene. I think Incels are probably self-defeating, if your implication was that they reject available nerdy girls.
MGTOW does have a lot to sift through, a lot of it is not worthwhile so perhaps a ~15 minute video on the origin of the Duluth model is a good place to start. Feminism is not something that is merely good for women and neutral-at-worst for men. And I still don’t understand how you can say easy abortions are a benefit feminism has for men. That’s some 4D chess, if not a troll.
I’m not talking abut kowtowing or flinching. You are conflating compromise with some sort of abject and un masculine submission . Compromise is how movements happen or at least how they grow. I have not noticed that we are filling any stadiums as of yet with males much less females and we better start making crowds soon or we are going to be calling our capital Jerusalem I am not punking out. I am talking about trying to make a reasonable compromise with the reasonable elements in the feminist community I think a lot of the white male – tradition hating whack job females probably actually disturb certain other kinds of white feminist women – WHITE GENTILE females who really are OUR women genetically, historically culturally. But these same women aren’t buying the 19th century female roles even if we do assure them of how much we are going to respect them for doing it On the other hand if we flex and are willing to talk about a more androgynous kind of society, my hunch is that white gentile women will be more willing to return to some of the traditional roles -at least some of the time, at least to a certain degree. After all, they know that they are better at it than we are and that they like it more than we do. It’s natural for them since these quasi traditional or neo traditional roles would be rooted to some degree in the female nature independent of history which ideological feminism denies.
But still there is history and it has moved on It is time for WE WHITE GENTILE MEN stop looking like something out of the Bronze Age. Our enemies love that shit. It gives them the opportunity to steal our women.
Compromise with whom? Women who are so self-centered that they think a career is more important than a family? Who buy into the lies that they can compete on equal footing with men? Who don’t understand their own hypergamy, and feel entitled to the top 0.001% of male achievers?
No, the compromised state we are in is due to compromise. “Why doesn’t America have a DACA plan, that would be nice, wouldn’t it?” “Why doesn’t Germany take in more ‘refugees’ even though to get refugee status one is supposed to stop at the first port of entry?” “Why not allow everyone to vote, even prisoners and foreign nationals?” There can be no compromise, anything worth compromising on doesn’t matter anyway.
Unmarried women vote for what makes them look good in our liberal society. Married women vote more in line with their interests, those of their husbands, and those of their families (although they vote for gatekeepers, which is something we need to change). People who have no stake in the future of our society should have no say in that future.
Take this to the feminists, if I’d my druthers both women and men would be disenfranchised. Instead we would have a “one household, one vote” rule. If they want rights, they will have to take on responsibilities. Watch them laugh in your face at the notion of responsibility.
“Who don’t understand their own hypergamy, and feel entitled to the top 0.001% of male achievers?”
Utter nonsense. Mike Enoch asked a very good question the other day (as he so often does):
What was wrong with the nerd girl?
Ask any incel this, and you won’t get a satisfactory answer.
Yes well I suppose we should just agree to disagree. But I will say again that this movement of ours is gong to lose if we continue with this patriarchal stuff. However, I think if a lot more men like me are coming in, the movement will change toward a more exclusive emphasis on race and a moderation of attitudes toward women. And if men like me aren’t coming in, well its over anyway. The tribe and its race traitor allies will have no trouble isolating, sidelining and extinguishing us, We will be begging for it.
“And I still don’t understand how you can say easy abortions are a benefit feminism has for men. That’s some 4D chess, if not a troll.”
Neither. Before abortion-on-demand, men were expected to marry girls if/when they knocked them up. Now, they can just say, “Get rid of it.” Much of the increase in out-of wedlock births is actually the result of a decrease in shotgun marriages, we know from parish birth and marriage records that it was very common for young brides to be pregnant when they walked down the aisle.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/
“Un this environment, I’d prefer women (and men, if they can still provide for their families) not debase themselves with loyalty to institutions that are ultimately bent on their destruction.”
Very understandable.
Alright, Achilles, I’ve been more than patient with you. You may wannabe Achilles, but you strike me more as an Agamemnon. Tell me, was it worth it for Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter so that he could go fight just so Helen could get her rocks off? Even leaving out the fact that Agamemnon was murdered by his wife’s boyfriend, do you really think it was worth it?
I let it be, but now it’s time to address your anti-Semitic comments. They were disgusting, even to me, and you should keep shit like that to yourself. The Jewish influence in feminism is well known, and it will not be forgotten, but you can’t just blame the Jew and expect a free pass for bad behavior. They are not a scapegoat, and comments like yours will only hurt our case against them.
You are immature, your judgement is poor, and you don’t know how the world works. Lexi’s comments here have convinced me that my essay is 100% correct, feminists really are Helens. Though some saw my essay as glorifying feminism, nothing could be farther from the truth. Feminism is proof of what happens when Men stop wearing the pants. We can either put the pants back on, or like Agamemnon we will sacrifice our daughters for nothing.
My apologies, Achilles, I take back my accusation of inappropriate anti-semitism. In the heat of the moment I projected meanings onto your words that were not there. You were very reasonable, and that is to your credit when you are dealing with reasonable people.
I accept your apology.
But If I had had to name a site where I would not expect to have been accused of “antisemitism” or hating Jews – one does not necessarily include the other – I might have named CounterCurrents. Life is what happens to you when you are busy making other plans,
huh?
But I should say that I AM an antisemite. That does not mean I hate Jews It means I am engaged in a fight with organized Jewry over resources – one of which is OUR women.
Oh, by resources I don’t mean women are objects. But why don’t we all just give each other the benefit of the doubt?
As for the Iliad, we have different interpretations. So it goes with literature
I’ll be plain with you, the accusation was a rhetorical strategy, “show don’t tell,” one which in my experience only works half the time. You accused me of crossing a boundary I had not crossed, so I accused you of the same but not on the same subject. It was foolish, I should have just been plain from the start.
All I have to say now is good luck, if you can reason with feminists then more power to you. You don’t have to worry that I will misunderstand the word “resources,” men and women should be mutually resources for the other, but with feminists you will have to use their politically correct parlance; parlance that is designed to weed out wrongthinkers, so again, good luck.
“If you want a list of grievances, just check out some MGTOW YouTube channels.”
I’ve heard it all, already. I don’t buy the anecdotal claims of bias against men in family court. It always sounds like SJW radical feminists failing about bias in STEM hiring or other such hysterical nonsense.
I would like to make a statement of apology. It is obvious I was not clear in my essay.
It is my belief that feminism is not something to be feared nor hated. Our women have always been extremely capable, and this capability is something to be cherished. Many of them have fallen for the lies propagated by feminism, such as women in the West were ever property, or that white men only want them for their looks, or that they themselves have something to apologize for by way of privilege. The damage this has caused, along with numerous other acts of sabotage, might be fatal to Western civilization as we have known it. But there is hope, for after a forest fire new growth springs up.
My conduct in the comments has not been entirely respectable, and for that I am sorry. To those who have accused me of peddling patriarchy, please know you’ve got me wrong. To those who have accused me of glorifying feminism, please also know the same. I will work to be clearer in the future, although the above clarification is 108 words, compared to the original 614, which points to the idea that the ultimate clarity is not had with what we say, but with how we live our lives.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.