Sunday, February 20, 2022

The Woman Question



I’m not a supporter of sentimentality, as a general rule. I consider sentimentality a weakness. It is certainly in opposition to realism, which I’ve built as the core of my personal identity – and for that matter my professional identity (the dichotomy between personal and professional identity – the places where the two overlap and the places where they should not – is an important topic for another time). Sentimentalism is a fundamentally feminine trait.

Nostalgia can probably exist without sentimentalism, in theory, though this is some kind of emotional gymnastics. In general, we should be dealing with the present, and how we can use the present to shape the future. That is certainly something that should be true in personal and professional life equally. The past is relevant only insofar as you can learn from it, and nostalgia can, in theory, be a method for reflecting on the ways that the present is different from the past, and where things went wrong.

Whether you want to admit it or not, you are either an incel or you have serious emotional problems. You do not have the option of forming a permanent relationship, no matter how successful or attractive you might be.

If you are not attractive enough to actually convince a woman to marry you, which is most of you, but you do hit the occasional “hook-up,” you are still an incel, in the same way that a homeless man who is able to break into an abandoned building and sleep for a few nights before being evicted by the police is still homeless. You just got lucky and got to sleep in a building for a few nights. When you’re kicked out by the police, you’re back on the streets.

Any non-incel decision is an absurd waste of your time and resources, and is deeply personally humiliating. If you get married and have everything taken from you through a grueling process, you’ve played yourself. If you get lucky on an app and get a hook-up, you’ve wasted how much time and emotional resources that could have been spent on making money, learning skills, studying, and doing things that are actually enjoyable, in exchange for a few minutes of sexual release.

If you are one of the few who manage to find a woman and stay married, then you are serving as a slave, without any power at all, waiting for the woman to get a feeling she is “not happy” and it’s time to cash out. This can happen in your 40s or even your 50s. Any married man is simply rolling the dice, every single day, hoping that the woman doesn’t say “we need to talk” and tell you she is “not happy.” Or, as has happened to more than one person I know personally, doesn’t even say anything to you, changes the locks on your house, and has the divorce papers sent to you.

If you are a “live-in boyfriend” – now often goofily referred to as a “fiancĂ©,” then the situation is about the same, though it will cost you less money when she decides she is “not happy.”

Women are not logical. They can not be talked out of things. They make decisions purely based on emotions, and all of their emotions are based on the premise that they are personally the center of the universe and that everything that exists in the universe exists for the purpose of making them feel happy. 

That’s just what they are, that’s what they’ve always been. It’s the first story in the Bible. A woman’s desire for excitement is what destroyed paradise.

Where we are now, all of their worst instincts have been unleashed, and they are rewarded for embracing these worst instincts. They do not need you for sustenance anymore. Technological society, and the welfare system, feed, house, and clothe them. Therefore, you are obsolete, unless you are capable of being entertaining or otherwise feeding her ego.

This is the system we live in. We didn’t volunteer for it. But this is where we are, and we cannot change it as individuals. 

Just to round this off, the entire “women in the workplace” phenomenon needs to be mentioned, as it often gets the blame for a lot of this. However, women in the workplace is more of a side effect than a core cause of the problem. If women could not prevent pregnancy through all of these different means, they wouldn’t have the option of joining the workplace.

It’s likely that the social pressure for women to “have a career” is part of why they choose to have abortions. It is unlikely that if you polled most 13-year-old girls before this massive brainwashing campaign that many of them would say they dream of being a bank manager rather than a stay-at-home mother. But the birth control/abortion system enables this.

The system of welfare for single mothers and just women generally also enables this. But really, “women in the workplace” is a form of government welfare, via the affirmative action programs. The only real job that a woman can do and make money comparable to that of a man, without an affirmative action program, is prostitution. And the period in which a prostitute can work and make good money is relatively short. 

At the core of the disaster is the failure of Christian Churches – which, not too long ago, had a lot of influence – to push back against this agenda.

If churches in the 1950s and 1960s would have taken a hard line against feminism, none of this would be happening. Churches should have actively pushed not only for a ban on contraception and abortion, but on divorce, and on women being allowed to go to college and enter the workplace.

Imagine that churches were at least at the time teaching that sex before marriage was wrong. Yet they were supportive of women going to college and getting jobs before marriage, which would mean that they would be expected to lose their virginity at what age? 28? 32? This is plainly nonsensical.

It’s far from difficult to make the argument from the Bible that women’s place is in the home, having children. In fact, it is virtually impossible to make any other argument. Yet the churches didn’t do this, save for perhaps the Mormons (who are now backing off of that like every other church).

Saint Paul, who is for all intents and purposes the founder of the religion of Christianity (Jesus was more of the basis of it than the founder, although I don’t want to get into semantics), said explicitly that the only way a woman can be saved is through childbirth.

Whenever this conversation comes up, someone tries to bring up some kind of loophole. “Oh, I could become Amish” is probably the most extreme (and probably most likely to be successful, I guess, if the Amish let you join them, which I think is impossible). But there’s also “meet a girl at church,” which completely misses the entire point and shows a total lack of understanding of what is happening right now (according to statistics, Christians have a higher divorce rate than non-Christians, though that’s probably due to income gap rather than religiosity).

There are also dumb arguments about how “it’s not really that bad.” Someone will bring up the alleged divorce rate. Firstly, go look at how divorce statistics are measured. They use different methods, but none of them make any sense, because people don’t get married at the same time they get divorced. Furthermore, most people who are currently not yet in the divorce statistics who are under the age of 40 will be in the divorce statistics soon enough. That also doesn’t acknowledge the fact that “common law” marriages (i.e., “live-in boyfriend” situations) are extremely common, and virtually always end in “divorce.”

There is no loophole, there is no solution, it is as bad as it looks. You can go look around you, you can go look at the con artist gurus telling you they know how to make your marriage work. In fact, I encourage it. Go look at everything, and come to your own conclusions.

Of course, it is possible that you’ll find a woman, get married, have kids and grow old together, happily. It’s not impossible, it’s just statistically improbable. This is like saying “you could play the Powerball and win $200 million.” Intelligent people do not play the Powerball.

Bottom line: there is nothing you can do to make a divorce less likely. Literally, nothing. You can be kind to her, you can “neg” her and try to control her, you can be reasonable with her, you can be a raging abuser – none of that is going to affect the outcome.

Women are the greatest possible distraction for all of us, due to the biological reality of the drive to reproduce (that’s what the sex drive is, by the way – it’s not about pleasure). The fact that a healthy relationship with a woman is officially impossible is killing our ability to live meaningful lives.

Meaningful life as a slave is resisting slavery, fighting back against the slave masters. We can only do that with God.

Here’s my advice:

  • Don’t be fat
  • Forgive your mother
  • Stop pitying yourself (no one cares)
  • Respect yourself
  • Do things that give you self-esteem (work! Whatever it is, just work!)
  • Learn to pray
  • I don’t have a solution to how to make a relationship with a woman work, because there is no solution to that problem. Look around you. This is self-evident.

You are not special. You are not going to beat the house, you’re not going to pull some kind of trick and win the game that everyone else who plays is losing. 


I enjoy reading Andrew Anglin. He provokes thought, which is the purpose of reading.

He gets enough readers that I don't like to regurgitate his words. Plus he does a good job of explaining his positions to the point that I don't feel a need to add commentary. He does a good job of deconstructing his ideas before presenting them.

While it's rather obvious his writing is directed at a particular audience (disenfranchised young men), this particular article should be read by all men. 

There are always exceptions to rules. The article addresses that. Although I don't think having a successful marriage is the equivalent to hitting the Powerball, I do think that spending your life chasing women in the hopes of a few seconds of pleasure is silly. Even if you don't agree with his premise, how much more fulfilling would a man's life be if he didn't spend most of his time trying attract or impress women. 

I encourage you to read the article in full. It's not my job to think for you.

No comments:

Post a Comment