Tuesday 5 May 2015

What You Can Destroy

Uncle Bob has an interesting article up about how a century of feminism has failed women, written by Belinda Brown of The Conservative Woman. I'm going to cherrypick a few bits from the article, though I think the entire post he's put up is worth reading and thinking upon - this is simply my take on it:
Firstly, feminists may be a minority, but they are powerful. Women have real power in the family, rooted in their reproductive capability. This may, entirely through women’s individual decisions, lead to a secondary role in the public realm. Feminists have used this lower public status as a bargaining chip to pursue their own self-interest in every possible avenue of public life. Today feminists control the traffic lights and the road rules, men are only chauffeurs, even when they appear to be in the driver’s seat.
Secondly feminists are not amenable to rational argument. There are none so blind as those whose view has been eclipsed by ideology; ideology built on distortion, piled on top of stupidity and upon lie after lie until the truth lies buried deep beneath. Feminists are not going to turn traitor to an ideology which has not only nurtured their careers but determined crucial, life changing, and possibly life destroying, decisions in their private lives. The courage required to recognize their error would not be outweighed by the gain.
Feminism works well for women who want visible power and influence. But it has no strategy for social reproduction. Boys on Ritalin, internet addiction, obesity, oversexualised children, men in prison, fractured families – feminism has no long term survival strategy. These are just some examples of its scorched earth spawn.
You are right, Neil, that ultimately it is women, women who destroyed so much through their pursuit of self-interest, but who, because of their reproductive potential hold the key. This time round it is going to be very much harder. Men trusted us, they served us, they built our houses, fought our battles and they received our respect embodied in patriarchal structures in return. But now they have nothing. What is more they have found out that if they do give us what power they had, we deprive them of their children, we take their resources and we give them nothing, nothing in return. This time round we can’t expect them to do our bidding, as they did for so long. If we want to win back their trust and if we want them to co-operate with us, and I do, we will have to concede some of our independence and be prepared to place some dependence on them. In this, for their own security, we will have, I am afraid, to allow them to take the lead.
This is what the feminist century has done. By almost destroying the family it has shown us that it is the cornerstone of society. If we want self-fulfilled, happy, creative individuals, a functional, well networked society and a civilization worthy of emulation, we need strong healthy, resourceful families built on the commitment and selflessness of adults, persistence and a lot of hard work.
As I have quoted before: "If you can destroy something, you control it." - Muad'Dib, Dune

However that doesn't mean that you should destroy it. Especially for your own selfish gain. Which the author admits that feminism has done. (Note: While a lot of Men would like to destroy the feminist-centric grip on society, I am beginning to doubt that there will ever be a strong or lasting effect. There are too many white-knight manginas and assholes willing to throw all men under the bus for an opportunity to empty their nuts into a woman.)

It's interesting that the author also refers to feminism and MGTOW as Scylla and Charybdis. Two poles, steering between them safely. Unfortunately she makes one very large mistake in her thinking (given that this is a female writing the article, I cannot say that I'm surprised):
Only the steadfast women who are happy to prioritise the interests of their husbands and their children can set this process in motion. The feminists can’t, nor can the MGTOW. Women can do it, but only with the help of men. Together we can undo the damage which feminism created and rebuild a world of which can feel a little more proud.
"...only with the help of men..." - indeed.

Picture a couple together, standing shoulder-to-shoulder against the world, marching boldly and proudly into the future. A pretty and noble image.

Rah fucking rah.

The author's female entitlement mindset is such that she seems to automatically and unthinkingly expect Men as a whole to step up to the plate and help the process along. The final sentence reeks of a sub-rosa "man up" message. Fail!

A woman can shout to the world that she is happy to prioritize the interests of her husband and children. Yet we Men no longer have reason to cooperate and do our part in the process - let alone believe anything that women say.

Belief? Trust? In a woman?

Our harsh experiences have proven otherwise.

Feminism hasn't "almost" destroyed the family. Feminism has destroyed the trust between the sexes - at least, for the current generations.

With no trust, with no enforceable worthwhile marriage, there is no family.

Brought to you by Crap Colored Glasses™, only $1k the pair and cheap at 10x the price.


  1. There is a thing called betrayal fatigue, and it's epidemic in men.

    Patient Zero is women.

    Great post again.

  2. At least this woman realizes that woman have to start asking themselves "what do I bring to the table?". That is more than most modern women do, even ostensibly "conservative Christian" women. Ask most young women what they bring to the table to deserve commitment from the guy of their dreams and you will likely get a blank stare. Probably the first thought would be "isn't my vagina enough"?

    1. True enough, Robert.

      I truly wonder though, if she has realized one thing. It requires utterly irrevocable commitment on women's part as well.

      Are they willing to bring that to the table? In a non-revocable way? One which cannot, ever, be overturned in the future - for whatever reason, no matter how ostensibly-good?

      Until that is a part of the package placed upon the table, in a matter utterly believable to all (including the badly-burned) men - then it is nothing more than an empty mouthing of pretty-sounding platitudes.

    2. Women have not changed. Young women have always had the instinct to be disloyal. It is in their DNA. However, for most of civilized history, society and law put a check on those instincts. Divorce and affairs had great social stigmas attached to them. (Affairs by men less so, because even a "straying" man usually supports and protects his wife and family. Abandoning them was also met with enormous social stigma.) However, divorce and affairs initiated by women now have little or no stigma attached to them and are often celebrated. So if you are waiting for women to "see the light", you'll be waiting forever. It is society that has to change, and I don't see it changing for the better anytime before the collapse. And that might not come for a hundred years.

    3. Excellent point about female behavior. Women can deny it all they want, but they are hardwired to betray.

    4. Females have spent decades if not centuries deconstructing the social and legal limits upon their sex. As you say Robert, they will not be interested in "seeing the light". Which makes the entire post of hers an empty moo-ing of platitudes, designed to soothe certain sectors of men and keep them quiet.

      Society will not change. Society is composed of women and those besotted with women. These vastly outnumber those who (like us) consider themselves to be capable of seeing the crap coming down the line. We can shout truth to the skies and nobody will listen, because they have a vested interest in not listening and not changing.

      In her gut, every woman knows that she will survive. Even if men starve to death, she will eat. Even if men fight and kill each other, she will still be around and her genes will continue - mixed with the victor's. Since society is comprised to overwhelmingly favor women and most men have a similar mindset of favoring women, then women will continue to be coddled and protected at Men's expense. She doesn't care if the man she "bonds with" (aka marries) dies. She will still survive.

      In the end there is always someone willing to fuck her even if she's butthole ugly. Even if it's just to get his rocks off when he's blind-drunk. Even if he's already got a wife and a couple of mistresses on the side (just look at Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bill Clinton).

      We are in a slow decline and collapse, it will not be sudden and earthshaking. Barring some absolutely revolutionary method of education or breaking down willful barriers in the mind, I can see nothing happening in a hurry. I cannot imagine such a technology coming into existence. So things will simply continue as-is, getting worse and worse.

      A while back I posted up a video by Sandman, about the collapse. He stated that he saw women in Belgrade, upping their competition for men with money. This type of thing is what will happen as the West collapses.

      Only after the collapse is basically complete will the survivors force and enforce a moral system upon their women. Will this be out of a desire for civilization? Hell no! It will be because they're jealous and brutal bastards who no-fucking-way are going to share "their" women with anyone else.

    5. Hell, that deserves to be a post.

  3. A scene in the not to distant future. A young boy walks with what appears to be his grandfather through a ruined city. They are both in rags. "Is there food in there pappap?" - "No Tommy - we checked there last week". "Pappa why did the building fall down?" "We let the women vote Tommy - we let the women vote."