Take a look at the political debates raging today, and compare them to those of just ten years ago. In America, women can now be infantry, and homosexual marriage is gaining legal sanction, state by state. A man who was a Democrat by the standards of 2000 or even 2008, might well be a Republican now. Put two and two together, and it becomes clear that our political discourse is utterly hostile to anyone but morons and children – who else would reverse their views so quickly? It’s impossible to be principled when your beliefs are just a rehash of the latest propaganda blasts from Hollywood or talk radio. To be educated, one must read broadly, across time and place, and that means reading principally the works of dead men.
Recently, I came upon the writings of a man who lived more than fifty years ago, and yet his writings on the sexes are more apt than ever.
Julius Evola
Julius Evola was a philosopher in the early to mid-20th century. Born a noble, he was an intermittent admirer and ally of fascism in Italy, and even of Nazism in Germany. Evola sought to trace the threads of the great civilizations, and identify what they had in common. He draws on sources as disparate as Aztec mythology and ancient Indian rites, and writes on many topics. And his work is not without controversy. Thankfully, there is no rule that one must agree with all of a man’s work before accepting any of it. Evola is not very well known, but with the internet and translations of his works spreading, discussion of his ideas is rapidly increasing.
Here, I’d like to highlight some of Evola’s thought on the sexes. Instead of reviewing or criticizing his work, I have posted some interesting excerpts and comments, and I encourage others to explore his works on their own. Quotations are taken from Revolt Against The Modern World, unless otherwise noted.
The Essence of Femininity: Selfless Dedication To Another
This occurs when the feminine principle, whose force is centrifugal, does not turn to fleeting objects but rather to a “virile” stability in which she finds a limit to her “restlessness.” Stability is then transmitted to the feminine principle to the point of intimately transfiguring all of its possibilities… What is needed therefore is a radical “conversion” of the feminine principle to the opposite principle; moreover, it is absolutely necessary for the masculine principle to remain wholly itself.
…there are also two types available to the feminine nature. A woman realizes herself as such and even rises to the same level reached by a man as warrior and ascetic only as lover and mother… [the feminine is] totally giving of herself and being entirely for another being, whether he is the loved one or the son, finding in this dedication the meaning of her own life, her own joy, and her own justification.
In Evola’s philosophy, to be feminine is to dedicate yourself selflessly to an external cause; masculinity is pure virility – as in the action of the warrior or the pure detachment of the ascetic. “To realize oneself,” he writes, is “to reduce in a woman all that is masculine and in a man everything that is feminine.” Within every person is a mix of the masculine and the feminine, but excellence lies in being a paragon of one’s sex. While a man’s success comes from achieving self-sufficiency and independent action, a woman achieves order by cleaving to a masculine force. Even in the absence of a man, she will seek to submit herself to some greater force.
As the blogger Roissy once wrote, without a strong man in her life, the Western woman simply seeks alternative masters to which she submits, typically idols with the seal of society’s approval like careerism and progressiveness. For instance, you will find that support for multiculturalism among Westerners is very high among single white women; as these women marry and have children, and yoke themselves to a man, their support for liberalism fades.
Evola goes on to mention women who have achieved this feminine ideal. There is the Aztec mother who dies in childbirth, a death as valiant as the warrior’s on the battlefield, in his estimation. Another is the Hindu woman, who ends her life on the flames of the funerary pyre of her husband, to join him in eternal afterlife.
Likewise, there is a profound meaning in the legend about the Kalki-avatara, which talks about a woman who could not be possessed by anybody because the men who desired her and fell in love with her turned into women as the result of their passion.
As far as the woman is concerned, there is true greatness in her when she is capable of giving without asking for anything in return; when she is like a flame feeding itself; when she loves even more as the object of her love does not commit himself, does not open himself up and even creates some distance; and finally, when the man is not perceived by her as a mere husband or lover, but as her lord. [emphasis added]
This Hindu legend is prescient – it accords with my observations — that the more a man gives to his woman, the less she will love him. The more he veers from his own pursuits to accommodate hers, the surer feminine betrayal is to follow. Nearly every time I hear of some man moving to another city to join his lover, she dumps him within the year. I recall reading the blog of woman complaining, how she had disliked her man’s playing in a band. She had finally got him to stop playing with them, and shortly after she laments that she now sees him as less of a man. This is fairly typical – when a man gives in to his woman’s demands and sacrifices for her, her respect and desire for him diminishes and deteriorates.
The Modern Woman, Long Before the iPhone and OKCupid
Evola tells of how men have abdicated their power, how they made women their equals and pushed them into formerly male spheres.
…the results have been the degeneration of the feminine type even in her somatic characteristics, the atrophy of her natural possibilities, the suppression of her unique inner life. Hence the types of the woman-garconne [flapper or tomboy] and the shallow and vain woman, incapable of any elan beyond herself, utterly inadequate as far as sensuality and sinfulness are concerned because to the modern woman the possibilities of physical love are often not as interesting as the narcissistic cult of her body, or as being seen with as many or as few clothes as possible, or as engaging in physical training, dancing, practicing sports, pursuing wealth, and so on…
Because of the woman’s increased egocentrism, men will no longer be of interest to her; she will only care about what they will be able to offer to satisfy her pleasure or her vanity. In the end, she will even incur forms of corruption that usually accompany superficiality, namely, a practical and superficial lifestyle of a masculine type that has perverted her nature…
The same holds true for the results of the Western “emancipation” of women, which is on its way to infecting the rest of the world faster than a plague…Modern woman in wanting to be for herself has destroyed herself. The “personality” she so much yearned for is killing all semblance of female personality in her. [p.164-165]
The men critical of modern women are quick to blame recent inventions, like the smartphone, or online dating, or even ‘the pill’ and antibiotics, as the cause for the disappearance of femininity. And their criticism of modern Western women mirrors Evola’s, yet Revolt was published in 1934, easily predating any of those technologies by decades. While things like texting may have an impact, the fact that Evola could anticipate these criticisms some eighty years ago suggests that these recent technologies are mere sidenotes to the change that modernity has wrought.
Evola makes a similar criticism of American women, back in 1945:
The much-vaunted sex appeal of American women is drawn from films, reviews and pin-ups, and is in large print fictitious. A recent medical survey in the United States showed that 75 per cent of young American women are without strong sexual feeling and instead of satisfying their libido they seek pleasure narcissistically in exhibitionism, vanity and the cult of fitness and health in a sterile sense. American girls have no hang-ups about sex; they are easy going for the man who sees the whole sexual process as something in isolation thereby making it uninteresting and matter-of-fact, which, at such a level, it is meant to be. Thus, after she has been taken to the cinema or a dance, it is something like American good manners for the girl to let herself be kissed — this doesn’t mean anything. American women are characteristically frigid and materialistic. The man who has his way with an American girl is under a material obligation to her. The woman has granted a material favor. In cases of divorce American law overwhelmingly favors the woman. American women will divorce readily enough when they see a better bargain. It is frequently the case in America that a woman will be married to one man but already engaged to a future husband, the man she plans to marry after a profitable divorce. [emphasis added, from Civilta Americana]
Here we have a man, some seventy years ago, saying how American women are uniquely constituted to be pumped and dumped by players – “they are easy going for the man who sees the whole sexual process as something in isolation.” Long before the advent of the pill and safe sex, before no-fault divorce and the surge in the divorce rate, before middle class women went to college en masse, before the supposed ‘golden age’ of the 1950’s, you have a man penning ideas that are now conventional in the manosphere.
A Misogynist, He Is Not
As you begin to peel back the curtains on what modern Western women are like, it’s easy to become a misogynist – to simply write women off as inferior, even contemptible. There are two problems with this; for one, you are seeing woman at her worst, in a tiny slice of her time on Earth. It would be like taking an athlete and branding him a failure because he lost a game once. For another, you’d be practicing the same nonsense feminists do – judging men and women by the same standard. If one believes that men and women occupy different roles, comparing them on the same measure makes about as much sense as… judging a quarterback by how fast he can run a marathon. It’s not a point unique to Evola, but he states it well:
We cannot ask ourselves whether “woman” is superior or inferior to “man” any more than we can ask ourselves whether water is superior or inferior to fire…
There can be no doubt that a woman who is perfectly woman is superior to a man who is imperfectly man, just as a farmer who is faithful to his land and performs his work perfectly is superior to a king who cannot do his own work.[Eros, p.33-34]
Western-Style Romance Makes Men Of Women
True to form, Evola does not spare European romantic traditions, which he accuses of making women into men.
The love Europe has celebrated is the love that does not tolerate the other person’s lack of commitment. Now when a woman, before consecrating herself to a man, pretends that he belongs to her body and soul, not only has she already “humanized” and impoverished her offering, but worse yet, she has begun to betray the pure essence of femininity in order to borrow characteristics typical of the male nature – and possibly the lowest of these: the yearning to possess and lay claims over another person, and the pride of the ego… [p.165]
The blogger Roissy is very much in agreement with Evola here, when he advises men to give less than they get, though perhaps not for the same reasons. According to Evola, true femininity means devotion with, or without reciprocation. The female egocentrism that Evola profiles comes to form a repulsive fusion with Western-style romance; men are told to make pathetic, emasculating displays of affection. American women have the gall to say that such men are ‘proving their manhood.’ Considering that this is what Valentine’s Day has become, it is easily the most wicked holiday on the calendar.
In case there is any doubt as to what Evola is referring to, consider these Rihanna lyrics:
So boy forget about the world cuz it’s gon’ be me and you tonight
I wanna make your bed for ya, then imma make you swallow your pride
Want you to make me feel like I’m the only girl in the world
Like I’m the only one that you’ll ever love
Like I’m the only one who knows your heart
Only girl in the world…
Like I’m the only one that’s in command
Cuz I’m the only one who understands how to make you feel like a man [Rihanna – Only Girl]
As Evola says, this possessiveness is a quintessentially masculine pose, and yet in modern America, only women have the license to do it. A man who takes a woman his as his own, who publicly and proudly, tells her she must show her love for him through regular cooking, cleaning and sex, is ‘domineering’ and ‘controlling.’
By Evola’s philosophy, for a woman to elect a priority above that of her lover or son is to suppress her femininity; devotion to her career over all is betrayal, an infidelity of which all polite people now approve. The masculine man who would be master often faces a dilemma – the woman refuses to dedicate herself to him. Alternatively, to accommodate her is to suppress his masculinity and endanger the relationship. Beset by this problem, there is no solution – only ignoble compromises.
Modern women will hardly make their men a priority at all, as evidenced by their steadfast refusal to try and please their man, except with deviant sexual acts. Many a man will do as I do, and simply resort to promiscuity. Since few women in the West will agree to submit or aim to please in any meaningful way that would make a lengthy relationship attractive, he compensates for the absence of quality with an increase in volume. He sleeps around, constantly seeking new charges to mask the emptiness evident in each. Evola contends, that with such incomplete men and women, with such adulterated gender roles, sex has been reduced to nothing but its mechanical, physical elements.
The Appeal of Traditionalism
Nowadays, we like to think we are urbane and cosmopolitan; we’ve seen all the world has to offer, and chosen only the best of it. In reality, we are some of the most provincial, narrow-minded humans to have ever lived. Societies across thousands of miles and years have lived by similar timeless principles, yet we think we’re better and ignore all that. Which is plausible, except that the more change and ‘progress’ we experience, the more dysfunctional society gets.
When I listen to most people argue, I get this nagging feeling that the terms of the debate are all bullshit; before the debate has even started, both sides have agreed not to even consider whether certain beliefs are true. If you wonder whether these beliefs are valid, say about whether women working hurts their families, it doesn’t matter how much truth you can marshal to prove your point. So if you ever dare to question beliefs that are common but false, you may be told that you’re ‘arguing for the sake of arguing,’ or that your views ‘belong in the 1950’s’, the 1800’s, or even the Medieval Age. Invariably, these people think they’re being cute, but all I can think is how foolish they are. Why are the people of a hundred or a thousand years ago automatically wrong, while people today are automatically right?
Turns out, they aren’t. As men ignore convention and rediscover the truth, by dint of personal experience and sage advice, they will find themselves increasingly drawn to traditionalism.
Read Next: Are You A Traditional Conservative But Don’t Realize It?
This was a really interesting read. I think you can summarize most of this with the simple statement: “Women hypergamy needs to be controlled by masculine men or shit goes bad.” It’s why that even back then he could say all this, because this statement has always been true and anyone with insight into the male-female dynamic knows it.
She’s just being honest. Usually the docile ones get treated like door mats
It was for the Springer Fiona thread sorry
That was meant for the Springer Fiona thread my phone is kinda slow
I’d say this article was exceptionally well articulated and presented. Good work sir.
if we are yearning for the days of widows flinging themselves on funeral pyres then thats just sad
Beats having widows flogging themselves at thugs who promise to rob third parties to “care” fro them, now that their husband is gone. And it definitely beats not getting to be a widow in the first place, since noone but limp dicked trash would ever consider marrying a prostitute.
Fantastic article, one of the best I’ve read on RoK. I liked the mention of misogyny being the equal to feminism, it should be understood that pointing the finger at westernized “tom-boy” women can only do so much good before they initiate a retaliation. However, in the direction society is going, tugging the rope for the misogyny side would surely help even things out a little. The beauty of this read is that it is beneficial for both sexes. The sooner this is realized , the sooner these ideals will act as a buffer for this feminist epidemic, and hopefully slow down the infection to other countries/cultures. Traditionalism is not an option, it is biology. You can’t argue with science.
Excellent. Radical Traditionalism and Evola. I wasn’t expecting this!
The problem is bitches get to have their cake and eat it too. They get to dress like sluts, but they also get to accuse men of rape and play little miss innocent snowflake. They get to say “never hit a woman” but also demand that women be allowed in the military. They get to abort a fetus, abandon a newborn or even kill an infant while also lecturing men about being a man/ father.
I hold nothing but CONTEMPT for these cunts, if that makes me a misogynist then I’m the dominant authoritative boyfriend who gets his expectations met and keeps his females in check. All those non-misogynists are completely at the mercy of their bitch while I’m getting my cock sucked 3 ways to Friday by a bevy of attractive teenage girls. I’d rather be a controlling misogynist than a limp-dick doormat faggot begging his 40-year old warpig wife to love him.
Misogyny is just a meaningless word like creep. Either you control your bitch(es) or these cowardly control you. Your choice, I’ve made mine.
Ouch.
Eh, misogyny is gay. You care way too much about women folk, enough to bring out so many negative waves. Just enjoy their flawed beauty and do your own thing. I don’t care how many BJs you get, all that stress is going to send you to an early grave.
very smart, Zoidberg. The smart man adapts and is opportunistic, instead of engaging in bloody wars. Also, while I generally agree about how stupid feminism is, this kind of posts go to the other extreme: constantly bitching about how women should be. Who gives a shit, don’t try to change the world, it’s useless.
well fucking put. …a “bevy’ of bitches, he says. I like yer style, dude.
Well, I like your style too man. Ya got the whole cowboy thing going…
yep have fun with herpes
Yo, like, wow, man!
A bevy of attractive teenage girls? You mean, the ones in the video you’ve got open in the next tab?
I seriously doubt you have any females to control, keep in check, OR make suck your dick.
YEAAAAHHHHH>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.I’d rather be a controlling misogynist than a limp-dick doormat faggot begging his 40-year old warpig wife to love him.
no woman with half a brain cell will ever care for you so don’t worry!!
like you know how his life will turn out, stupid silly bitch? Don’t worry before long your ass is going to get out of shape, if it hasn’t already, and not even dogs will want it
Only in shitty ass north america. In most of the rest of the world hot women trip over themselves to suck the dick of strong, wealthy, alpha male.
Men age too, and take it from someone who’s been a good looking teenager and is nice looking woman, nothing is nastier than a man who hits on you that’s old enough to be your father. YUCK!
Please go to those women, please. Because then we don’t have to tolerate you. It’s a win win situation. We’re not being pestered by men like you , and you get what you want. Take several of the American men with you.
How about you feminists leave? Men aren’t obligated to get out of your way just because you’re wrong.
wow so they let you out for the day then
like someone said, you are taking all this shit too seriously. Also, it is ALWAYS very dangerous to generalize and say things like ‘all women’, ‘all men’, ‘they do this’, etc. Don’t let your mind get poisoned. Not all women are complete cunts, although all of them are women.
but I agree in general about not letting any woman control you. That’s the only rule. It’s useless to hate them so much that your mind becomes a sponge for poison. In reality, I too hate women, but I don’t let this control me too much. DON’T TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY, if a bitch tries to control you, make fun of her, don’t beat her up or any of that shit. But if she tries to abuse you physically, yeah beat her up.
See, ’40 years old” Why should a woman trust a man with her life when he is going to use her to have his children, and use her to support him while he builds his business and then as soon as it pays off, desert her for ‘the bevy of teenagers’ ? How can you have the nerve to demand so much from women while bringing nothing yourself? How can you dare to say that a woman’s own person is not her own? It is her own, to clothe as she wishes. It is not yours to lay hands on as you choose. Men have always owned themselves, been able to develop their talents, travel as they wished, unraped, unattacked. Throughout history, women had one choice only: find a man and stay home. Never mind if you are a great painter. Great painters need to live in Paris alone: woman, you may not! That makes you a whore. You may not go it alone and travel to Italy and train as a lawyer at the Medici court and do a world of exciting things. You may only stay in the house and from the 19th century onwards, even that was taken away by the rise of household staff who ran the place and raised the kids and left the women with literally nothing to do. Forced women to be purely decorative, infantalized, made weak and silly and even turned into invalids…
All women are asking is to have what men have always had: the right to say who touches our bodies, the right to develop our talents, the right to look a man in the eye and not giggle at the floor, the right to keep the money we earn and to be paid as men are paid, the right to have the children we want and can support, the right to fight back against being physically harmed, the right to love and be loved, to admire and be admired…the right NOT TO BE A SLAVE.
This is what true feminism means. Not the stuff you see on Jezebel. Not the uneducated mouthings of very young girls who know nothing. Not the endless silly complaints and extension of rape into everything. Jezebel has been hijacked by 20 somethings wlth no more brains and experience than Miss South Carolina. They are one silly girl herd.
Four out of Five women have had abortions. That’s fucking deranged! So from the numbers, what your stating really doesn’t add up.
This Muktar wacko is the equivalent of the twenty-somethings on Jezebel. His speech is naught but a reflection of his personal insecurities.
I think that a lot of your arguments are misguided and misjudged. perhaps you could put yourself in someone else’s shoes for a second, imagine it is a sunny day and you choose to wear shorts, does that justify you becoming the victim of rape? ‘never hit a woman’, don’t hit any one! I am a pacifist though so i don’t believe in any kind of violence, however the army is a time of combat, here I feel that you have raised an irrelevant comparison. It takes two people to get a lady pregnant, and if a woman does have to let her baby go then that will probably be the most traumatising decision of her life, and I doubt she would be handing out parenting advice if this was part of her life. Imagine if some one were to be-little your mother or daughter? I am sorry if you have not had pleasant experiences with women, but if you treat people badly then they will act badly, and finally, it would do you good to stop thinking that men are superior to women, this is the 21st century where every one should have equal rights. Every one begins life in the womb as a female, remember where your nipples came from, and judgement like this is just as bad as racism or homophobia. I am also not sure what relevance female dogs have with this topic, but you could always go to puppy training centres.
“Everyone begins life in the womb as a female” –more feminist pseudoscience bullshit. Sperm cells are male and female and whichever one penetrates and fertilizes the egg determines the sex immediately.
The you had me until the teenage girl thing. That’s disturbing dude.
An 18 or 19 year old is still a teenager, “dude”.
So many children…
Yes. I’m not down with abortion, and no real Alpha should be. If all men are “potential rapists”, then women are potential murderers. I won’t trust any bitch who would KILL my child to save herself stretch marks.
Misogyny is just a meaningless word like creep. Either you control your
bitch(es) or these cowardly words control you. Your choice, I’ve made mine.
control your ‘bitches’ lol lol lol
you sound absurd! lay off the Eminem albums luv it’s making u deluded
shut your trap, silly bitch, and get your used up ass elsewhere if you don’t like it here. No one will give a shit
Unrelated to the main contents of this article, but Evola’s Metaphysics of War is a great read. It’s a recent translation of some of his works dealing with masculine ideals.
“Likewise, there is a profound meaning in the legend about the Kalki-avatara, which talks about a woman who could not be possessed by anybody because the men who desired her and fell in love with her turned into women as the result of their passion.”
This explains oneitis, whiteknights and manginas.
Oldschool PUA theory talked about ‘Betaization’, the process by which over time a woman’s shit tests would eventually turn alphas into betas, at which point she would seek out a new alpha. The theory goes that the process can be slowed, but never halted. Attempts to reverse it result in ‘American Beauty’ style relationship breakdown.
Search for ‘Betaization’ and ‘Franco’ to read further about this.
my buddy suggested a cure for this, when i was wrestling with my relationship….”just jerk off two three times in a row,” he said…”suddenly women will be much less important to you, and you’ll have all the power back.”
Relevant…..http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=201855
This is one of RoK’s best-ever articles. Very well-balanced in the portrayal of men and women, without resorting to bullying the fairer sex, it actually highlights their strengths. The perfect woman is better than the imperfect man, very good, very true. Also a very worthwhile reminder that just because we are a more modern society does not mean our views are correct.
Very well done emmanuel. Very very well done.
Feminist issues call for white knights to rescue her from real life then loses her job.
http://mashable.com/2013/03/21/sendgrid-fires-adria-richards/
Looks like Anonymous made her employer honest: pastebin.com/ubmznGhn
“Kingsley Davis earl • 3 days ago
−
“That’s the crux of problems we’re dealing with today. The ancients knew what’s what, passed on the knowledge but now we’re so far removed from our roots that even eating properly (Paleo) is up for scrutiny. We have a lot of explaining to do when we see them.”
I posted this comment on The Harem, The Tribe, And The Pride post but think it’s relevant to this brilliant piece.
Besides fucking hot wenches and making total war, THIS is what it means to be a man – developing and building upon a deep body of knowledge in the various esoteric and exoteric European and Eurasian philosophies.
Many thanks, Emmanuel, for turning us on to this philosopher Evola. I had never heard of him before your article, but I like your presentation of his ideas. Meaty food for thought.
I definitely agree that traditionalism holds a special allure for the mature, seasoned mind. As one gets older and the fires of youth begin to cool, one realizes that the collective wisdom of the ages was formed for a reason. Male-female biology developed over hundreds of thousands of years of experiment and evolution. We should be wary of anyone who presumes to set his or her own limited experience on this earth against thousands of years of evolution. The older I get, the more I realize that the old-school, hard-core views on social relations have a solid basis in truth. We have deviated from them at our own peril. And look what we got: modern America, in all its warped glory.
“I definitely agree that traditionalism holds a special allure for the mature, seasoned mind. ”
Conversely, belief in libertarianism is a marker of an infantile nature. Libertarianism has its wise moments in narrow matters of policy; much of my favored policies are libertarian, because that may be all that’s needed to return people to an orderly, traditionalist life. But libertarianism ultimately redounds to men being unwilling to say what is good, right and true, and it refuses to recognize any higher value than freedom; not truth, not beauty, not order. It makes freedom so paramount over everything else that it quickly becomes a defense of every pariah and outcast in society, without regard to their value or virtue, because those things don’t exist in their estimation.
In fact, Evola wrote “In a superior civilization, as, for example, that of the Indo-Aryans, the being who is without a characteristic form or caste… would emerge as a pariah. In this respect America is a society of pariahs. There is a role for pariahs. It is to be subjected to beings whose form and internal laws are precisely defined. Instead the modern pariahs seek to become dominant themselves and to exercise their dominion over all the world.” Civilta Americana
PS, Russell Kirk annihilated libertarians with his classic “chirping sectaries” essay, http://www.mmisi.org/ma/25_04/kirk.pdf
“But libertarianism ultimately redounds to men being unwilling to say what is good, right and true, and it refuses to recognize any higher value than freedom; not truth, not beauty, not order. ”
Quite the contrary, with freedom in place and respected as the highest value, natural order arises. Without having freedom you have government which cannot create order, but only use force to hammer society into line with the vision of those wielding power. At best that vision will be the views of a red-pill traditionalist, however in reality the vision will be that of the worlds elite wealthy and their useful idiots (environmentalists, feminists, manginas, social democrats aka socialists etc).
If you think libertarianism means anarchy or disorder, and that obedience to power represents order you are wrong. The rejection of libertarianism and the embracing or worship of power is a feminine trait my friend.
As for libertarianism not recognising truth as a value, I think you’d find that the further away from liberty a country gets the more truth is buried, take the inability to discuss anything non-PC in a western democracy as part of the way down the scale, and a propagandised society like North Korea or the former DDR the full way down the scale.
The last thing I’d like to say, would be to ask you to read the articles, books and many opeds of a man called Murray Rothbard, who is known to many as “Mr Libertarian”. More then anyone he formulated a complete picture of freedom, with complete absence of government, and instead voluntary, private institutions that create order, not only was he brilliant as an economist and libertarian, but combining his views in these areas to his study of history he wrote a number of articles challenging mainstream views of history and I’d say he unearthed more truth then any other writer last century. Some of what he wrote about women’s-lib was so prescient and red pill too.
Also, libertarianism is merely a political value. It’s possible to be either a staunch Christian or an atheist and be a libertarian.
Libertarians don’t believe in the absence of “the good, right, and true”, they simply believe that the government is not a legitimate means by which to transmit those values.
To equate right/wrong with should be legal/illegal is fallacious. Government is the legitimate use of force of one man over another. Libertarianism merely wants to restrict the use of that force to those times in which that force is necessary to preserve the rights of the individual.
Switzerland was a good example of a Libertarian Society……was….but still has the highest standard of living in the world.
I just read Kirk’s essay. He refutes libertarianism by conflating it with the philosophy of its miniscule libertine faction. In doing so, he contradicts the Declaration of Independece.
Ideologically, I’m a conservative libertarian, and I’m far from alone. To Kirk my very existence is impossible. It’s not
don’t get too carried away with Evola, he inspired some of the worst people in history.
I don’t see how this could even be remotely true. Evola’s contribution was limited almost entirely to his spiritual theory of race which was adopted by Mussolini’s Italy, and was one of the prime reasons why Italy didn’t go down the path of eugenics like Germany did.
If you’re talking about the ‘Years of Lead’, those men were heroes.
Good pick Goldstein, Evola is one of the true great intellectuals of the 20th century, but because of his beliefs he’s not considered that by the mainstream society.
I would recommend everyone to read “Ride the tiger – A survival manual for the Aristocrats of the soul”. I think it would help a lot of people who have swallowed the red pill and doesn’t seem to know how to handle the crappy “modern” society that we live in.
great recommendation : “Α little group seems willing to fight on, even ίη lost positions. So long as it does not yield, does not compromise itself by giving ίη to the seductions that would condition any success it might have,its testimony is valid.”
http://www.cakravartin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/Julius-Evola-Ride-the-Tiger-Survival-Manual-for-the-Aristocrats-of-the-Soul.pdf
Great piece. I had never heard of Evola. His observations are excellent and I enjoyed the commentary as well. “we are some of the most provincial, narrow-minded humans to have ever lived. ” This is absolutely true. The idea that anything about modern culture could be off-kilter is completely inconceivable for most people.
In addition to acknowledging the excellent writing in this piece, I’d like to commend whoever is responsible for the picture at the top of the article. “Mona Lisa Duck Face” is a fitting (and lamentable) emblem for our times. Well chosen, sir.
Excellent job. I found the article well presented and thought provoking.
Very good piece, lots to chew on, highly informative and resonant. Great work
Not really on a point but a New York Times article that points out how single parent homes fail boys. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/study-men-falling-income-cites-133858056.html
“there is no rule that one must agree with all of a man’s work before accepting any of it.”
this. i wish that more people reserved judgement until after looking at all the facts.
pre filtering all your incoming information keeps people in a thought bubble of their own preconcieved notions rather than looking at reality. And being red pill is all about looking at reality.
you can learn just as much if not more from your enemy as you can your ally.
of course over time and experience we learn what sources become useful and useless and discard the latter and retain the former
1. This article is fantastic.
2. I’ve known two women that embody the feminine ideals represented in this piece, one is my mother, and the other is the girl I should have married.
I just want to say to the guys that read this that think all is lost that that’s simply not the case. There are still women out there that embody these ideals, they’re just hard to find, but make no mistake, a good woman has always been as hard to find as a good man. I would recommend focusing your efforts on:
1. Women who grew up with both parents, in which the father was the breadwinner and the mother was primarily a housewife. Women who grew up in this environment will respect your breadwinning prowess and treat you accordingly. Women who grew up in an environment without a father or with a weak father will not have as great a respect for themselves or for men.
2. Young women (18 to 21), if they still live with their parents, this is good, the transition from the young woman being under her father’s benevolent rule to your benevolent rule can be seamless. Why have her waste her youth in meaningless flings when she can invest it in you and the future you two can create together? Save her from lesser men, if she’s worth saving, that is.
3. First generation immigrants from a country where masculinity still holds sway. Hispanic, Persian, Asian, it doesn’t matter. These cultures teach women to be feminine and men to be masculine, whereas the west tones down masculinity in men and encourages it in women, the goal being some kind of gender-neutral middle ground that leaves both sexes with a gaping hole in their psychological makeup.
That’s all I’ve got for now, anything more would require an article, and this is just a comment.
“There can be no doubt that a woman who is perfectly woman is superior to a man who is imperfectly man, just as a farmer who is faithful to his land and performs his work perfectly is superior to a king who cannot do his own work.”
And this quote is AWESOME. He may be wrong about everything else for all I know, but this was sheer brilliance.
Ironically, man-hating feminists who judge other women based on careers/hookups/etc, actually uphold masculine standards while denigrating feminine ones.
But in another sense, it’s perfectly according to plan. Make women “imperfectly woman”, make men “imperfectly man”. Turn the naturally sweet girl into a manjaw, make the guys into manboobs. Turn up into down and Hall into Oats.
They build nothing. They only tear down.
“They build nothing. They only tear down.”
Exact-a-mundo.
Like how the legal system is fixed toward transferring wealth from the man to the woman. And they (as a group) don’t generate any wealth from this transaction. They simply spend it away. So in the end everyone is broke. Among all of the terms I can apply to feminism, the inherent class ism not often spoken about has the laws set up to destroy every class except their own. Middle-Upper class white women.
#1. I’ve grown up around these girls. They’re better than the alternatives, but still nothing special.
#2. Agreed. I’ve often thought this, that in earlier times, women spent much less time as independents – they’d often go right from being under their father’s rule to their husband’s. Now they spend a decade or more independently, so they’re bound to chafe at the man who asserts himself over her, when she finally commits to one.
#3 – it depends on the ethnicity; I’ve met sweet first generation Asian and Continental girls. Hispanics, only if their parents were middle or upper class. Americanized Persians, usually a definite no-go.
In other words, do not try to meet a woman on equal terms, do not try to find a woman with a personality you can click with. Find somebody totally unformed and mould her. This says openly that you are a creature of fear, a man who cannot measure up. And so you do what the fox did, declare that all the grapes are sour. Just because you meet many silly and vain girls simply means you are not making any effort to meet anybody better. You make insane claims about ‘hypergamy’, ridiculous notion and all the rest. There are plenty of women who are judgemental, arrogant and spoiled. There are also plenty who are intelligent, kind and successful and who want a world to share. If you feel you need to dominate then by definition, you are a bully. I once was that young supportive sweet girl who cooked and all the rest and what it got me was my ‘vulnerability’ abused, my kindness taken for granted and I learned that if you are a doormat, you’ll get walked on. Your young girl is going to grow up and she is going to find her own personality and her own voice, and this is when the real bully resorts to violence either physical or mental. You dont have happiness in your future, dear.
Fiona, you’re a bitch. Aren’t you banned from posting? Where’s a mod when you need one.
LOL you’re using arguments from a man who inspired Hitler to justify ‘proper gender behavior’.
I pretty much laughed at the things you had to say because of how invalid and naive it is. It’s like you don’t even have an argument regardless of what you say because you don’t even know how to properly think well enough to say it. Insult what you want, say what you want, but you’re nothing, you have nothing, because you are nothing.
Why western men gave up their power? The real reason is something nobody wants to talk about… the reason is that they have LESS and LESS natural power and energy within themselves by living a lifestyle away from direct sunshine. Cars, corporate jobs, parties till 6am… the lifestyle is NOT what it used to be. Why southern guys are more macho? tell my WHY THE HELL? they have MUCH more sunshine for Christ sakes!!!!!
Sun energy is YANG. Extremely YANG, masculine. Without it a man turns literally towards less masculine, often towards gay or a pussy slave. Hey western comrades! You neeed more YANG! more sun, more red meat, more root vegetables, less thinking more SEA SALT, less candies, sugar or alcohol. Are guys from Sweden hot? LOL, yeah and who drinks the most vodka? Do horny Muslims drink alcohol? Do they work under corporate glass walls? Thank you!
Well said, well said.
Superior article, indeed!
The “F” in Female stands for
Feeding
Fucking
Folding
^^This is what real women do
Good writing and great points on a guy that spoke openly in support of the tenets of the SS and viewed the Italian Fascist Party as not being effective enough….and then you have a pic of a White woman on her knees washing a Black man’s feet.
…Evola himself might stomp you for that.
Fantastic post, it’s a shame that not enough people are reading these great write ups!
Ok I love traditional women as much as anybody, but…
Honestly Evola’s writing is just a bunch of sloppily argued, pseudo-intellectual masturbatory crap. So much of that crap was spewed in the early 20th century. Total waste of print.
Yawn. I can get better in the Rooshv forum.
Great read. I would pay good coin to subscribe to this site. Love every article, including this one.
Bravo!
You pretty much nailed it… and wow so nice to see real philosophy and discussion that needs a 3 digit IQ.
The answer to the problem is in there ….. you missed it. It’s not as tragic as it appears. Discussing a problem is not the same thing as finding it’s solution and what you wrote can easily be construed as …”that’s the end of that.”
I tried an experiment, with my family and my wife and I believe that all is not lost if men begin to stand up for themselves.
I did and thus far it worked. Difficult, hard and incredibly taxing it was yes. No particular immediate benefit, about as pleasurable as climbing Mt. Everest in an ice storm…. but my wife has settled down and my family is intact.
Men have to learn to lead.
I accomplished victory in my first battle, by picking up the entire family, angry wife and two kids under 5 and moving countries. No family court, no settlements, no messing about. I’m leaving bitch, come or never see me again and I’m not giving you a penny.
Women are great at playing brinkmanship with the family unit, but turns out what I thought was a tiger with a vicious bite, was a kitten with no teeth. She came, she slowly shut up all her materialistic nagging and so forth and she’s settled down.
Now, our visa is 5 years on my ticket, if i decide to leave, it’s game over once again. I found a crack in the system, and damn am I going to use it.
YEAH BECAUSE NOTHING IS MORE MANLY THAN TAKING YOUR WHOLE FAMILY HOSTAGE.
WIFE DOESN’T WANT TO DO WHATEVER YOU TELL HER? THREATEN TO KICK HER OUT OF THE COUNTRY. THAT’S RIGHT, REAL MEN LIKE MAKING PEOPLE FEEL LIKE SHIT BY BLACKMAILING AND RUINING SELF ESTEEM INSTEAD OF TALKING LIKE MATURE ADULTS.
PS. YOU’RE A WINNING FATHER. THREATEN TO CUT THEM OFF FROM THEIR MOTHER IF SHE’S NOT SURE ABOUT MOVING TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY TO MAKE YOU HAPPY. HELL YEAH. FUCK THE FAMILY DYNAMIC, IT’S ALL ABOUT YOU AND THE STABILITY OF YOUR TEMPER TANTRUMS.
Yes! This is what I was talking about the other day. Men have got to reclaim what is rightfully theirs.
Recent article on Julius Evola: http://www.amren.com/features/2013/03/can-fascism-be-critiqued-from-the-right/
It’s so surprising that men would prefer to return to traditionalism but women wouldn’t isn’t it? Oh wait…that’s because traditionalism inherently advantages men and disadvantages women! Ahhh, my poor feminine mind might just be able to understand this revolutionary concept, people on this site clearly DON’T CARE about women but just want to return to a world where their interests are prioritized and they don’t have to compete against women/evolved men for anything.
Oh and there is no evidence (except for the OPINIONS of men) in this article to support any of these claims or to substantiate the idea that it is any more beneficial for women to devote themselves to their families than it hypothetically would be for men to do so….
Women have no biological need to serve men. Absolutely no need whatsoever. Throughout evolution, most women have always been single mothers. Surprising, eh? This often comes as a surprise to people who failed their biology lessons simply because they had poor self-control and couldn’t stop staring at the boobs of the girl sitting in front.
A woman’s sole purpose in life (in terms of evolution) is to get pregnant, have a child and raise it into adulthood. A woman can achieve his evolutionary purpose by simply having sex with ONE man, ONCE during her fertile years. When she becomes pregnant (this happened very easily because condoms did not exist in stone-age world) the only thing she needs to do is give birth to a child and raise that child. Once the child is old enough to have children of her/his own, the mother has fulfilled her evolutionary purpose. She won’t be looking for a husband, or “someone to serve”. She has already found her true purpose: taking care of children and taking care of herself so that she can CONTINUE to be a mother to those children for the next 20 years. And to continue to be a grandmother for the grandchildren that will eventually be born to her own children. A woman can also help other women to fulfill their purpose in life. If a woman should die during child-briths, another woman can adopt the baby and raise it into adulthood, thus preserving the dead mother’s genetic line.
In this day and age, humans no longer live in a stone-age society (with rampant wars and total lack of social order) so women have lost their need for a “protector”. Men are not needed as cannon fodders or bread-winners. In fact, the only thing men are absolutely necessary is: giving sperm. Thanks to modern science, two women can now have a child together, without sperm. The “mother” gives her egg cells and her female companion gives her own DNA. With the cells and DNA mixed, a new life is born.
The truth is painful, isn’t it? Throughout the evolution, men have always been The Expendables (bread-winners, cannon fodder, breeding stallions) and women continue to give birth to new generations. With modern science (in vitro babies) and modern society (welfare state) human MEN have made themselves obsolete in evolution. This is a blunder most rare and extraordinary. Humans are the only creatures on Earth who posses the intelligence to tamper with their own DNA and yet they chose to do so. As a result, human females are now capable of surviving on this planet (and giving birth to future genarations) without human males.
Yes it is sad, so shouldn’t society have more programs to increase male happiness? It seems that when women want a leg up, society feels pity for them and gives them everything they want. When men are miserable, society just laughs at them and mocks them. Why are men hated by default? Men have always had it worse, but it’s painfully obvious in the modern day.
This is precisely why we have the tool of violence at our disposal. It is being used to great effect (mass shootings, bombings)
Good luck using all the advanced equipment when men are gone. Without men, there is no civilization and you will all return to the feral animals that you have always been.
How unfortunate it is that no mention is ever made of the masculine duties. You will find countless examples of how women are to serve their man in Hindi texts (which Evola probably read like instruction manuals), but not once is the man’s duty to protect his wife ever mentioned. You will never find a philosopher in any age who is willing to instruct men on THEIR duties, other than living for themselves. I refuse to truly love a man who is not willing to be a steward and protector. Women who perform their duties are ten times more worthy of life compared to men who think their duty is to be independent from responsibility or obligation towards family.
When women stop having 10 times more previous partners at the time of marriage than the man they marry, maybe he will feel some loyalty to the woman in return, instead of seeing her for the slut and prostitute she is. Give the guy a reason to believe you love him.
Actually you do. Read the bible, It says husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church. Jesus spent his time, serving the church. The church is a woman. He loved her so much that he layed down his life for it (her).
That’s right!
🙂
Hey folks this is actually already put in practice in many a sect. It is hardly news to use women. Most people don’t need an excuse to denigrate others. It is precisely this lack of respect that creates the prostitutes you so desire and despise. When you fantasize about promiscuity, whom do you figure will be your sex slaves but someone’s beloved daughter or sister?. It’s too bad this nonsense is passed as heritage and tradition. The real tradition is much more subtle. If there were truly great men worthy of followers, I doubt they would be so shallow and so incapable of relating to a woman in a meaningful way. How is this inner directed? You need adulation to feel normal! It’s outward, outward directed!! Your metaphysics don’t stand up to any amount of scrutiny.
Um, most men who respect women are disrespected by women. When you say “incapable of relating to a woman”, you’re really just imagining a “hot guy” who does everything right. Which doesn’t necessarily include respecting you, because for some reason women require an “animal/bad boy streak” along with the niceness, in just the perfect ratio or it’s over. Plenty of men want to respect and even adore women, but they are ignored because they’re not “hoooooot” or “attraaaaactive”. The article is perfectly right, nice guys get disrespected by women.
So this traditionalist point of view is based on recorded history which is how old exactly? And the writings of a man from the 20th century are presented as some sort of “evidence” to substantiate these prejudiced beliefs? How are these beliefs those of anyone but the weakest of character and the least outstanding examples of human existence? The world is FULL of men that wish to denigrate women. It’s inculturation and worthless as a spiritual tool. It seeks to nourish the ego with outer approval in the form of submission. Why do you need someone to wash you if you are not incapacitated? Why do male mammals have nipples? (Because all mammals start life as females in utero and only hormones dictate the masculanization of female form into male form. The ovaries become testes for example) Did you get here in a space ship, or did you come out of your mother’s womb?
what the hell are doing here? lecturing us with your lame junk? I don’t like Evola, but the guy wasn’t some braindead like you who asked stupid junk questions like ‘why do men have nipples?’ GTFO, silly bitch
you could also do better than ask ‘so who is this man and how long ago did he say that?’ It was Julius Evola, stupid bitch, get your lazy ass on google and type it in, instead of bitching about it
This is a great article.
It is a shame that there are men (ironically who call themselves Men’s Rights Activists) who outright reject Evola’s thinking. Even stranger is the notion that they reject it on the same grounds that feminists do; namely that there should be absolute equality between a man and a woman. It’s ironic that while feminism essentially tells women it is okay to take up the function of a man, the response thus far in our modern world has been to say that it is fine for men to reciprocate that by furthering the degeneration and un-differentiation between the sexes.
One of the the true rights of a man is that of the leader of a family or clan, and that is a function that cannot be fulfilled by a woman.
If that’s how you want to live, dominating over all those who would be close to you so that no-one will ever truly understand you, fine.
I’m choosing the path where my closest ally is my best friend is my sexual fantasy is the person who can pick me up when I’m down. We’ll see who has the richer, happier and more fulfilling life in the end.
This is powerful. I’m thankful that men like you are alive and do what you do. Keep up the amazing work, you are a great influence.
As a proud alpha black man, I say thank you for this self-validating article.
I am a metaphysical monkey.
Men from Sweden is not that bad as a comment said. Remember the vikings. But you don´t have to manifestate your mascunility all the time. Be yourself, without so much rubbish talk, then you have a real man.
Ah Evola. One of my favorite philosophers of all time. His political treatise trilogy is extremely inspiring, perhaps mostly his “Ride the tiger” because of it’s emphasis on spiritual transcendence in a world degenerating. Evola was a rare man, one of the highest breeds of the exalted class. Like Nietzsche before him his aim was Eternity. A truly inspiring writer and a true radical. Excellent article sir!
As I visit my 92 year old mother and look at her life and the life of my grandmothers, great grandmothers, Aunts and Great Aunts, I am struck by the disparity of contentment and happiness of my mother and the generations of faithful and respectable women before her that I knew versus the feminists of my age. My mother is in a nursing home that also addresses hospice care for the disabled and the number of women of my generation was a shock.
At 65, I grew up in the ‘feminist generation’ and have watched the pampered baby boom women from childhood chase the will-o-the-wisp of ‘having it all’ as they grew more lonely and bitter with more and more men as sexual partners. They chased these demeaning and dangerous liaisons as the elite feminist leaders said they deserved.
These young duped women chased after exploits they were told would liberate them but instead demeaned and enslaved them as masturbation toys for the men these women selected. It is exactly what they were offering the men as directed by the feminist elites.. These women were chasing ‘having it all’ and rejected that very thing, ‘having it all, when they rejected their own biological imperatives which was devoting themselves to the boy that loved them and the children they could have had together.
The young duped feminist adherents blind following of these elites directions has bred more discontentment among these dupes than the dupes have sown with the devastated ‘ no fault’ divorced husbands and destroyed single mother raised feral or dysfunctional children, if they even had children.
In the nursing home as I visit my mother regularly, taking her coffee, treats, recent photos of distant grandchildren, great grandchildren, etc… and generally dote on her I see women of my generation who are without health or dying. They are very candid with me about their regrets and mistakes, probably the first time in their lives. They openly talk of their regrets; of the decent boy who wanted a wife and kids when pop culture told her she was a loser if she went that direction.
As I regularly hear from these crippled or dying women my age, they tell me of how much of a mistake they made. They sometimes tell me of the guys success, or his large number of children and grandchildren.
They tell me they wish they had sons who looked after them as I look after my mother who was faithful to my dad till the day he died. It is decades too late for these old women looking at their own mortality right down the gullet
These women are extremely regretful of following the lead of current feminist philosophy. They have paid a great price, and for those who had children as single mothers, these women’s price wasn’t nearly as great as their children and the men who gave them their children.
There is a certain justice here and they are the first ones to say it. Dying brings out the truth.
It is only my humanity that keeps me from excoriating these ill and dying women for the generational destruction their hubris has caused their own children. Besides, they beat themselves up enough. No one could add to that sadness of regret.
These women’s greatest regrets weren’t that they only made VP of some national or international firm, not CEO, but that they did not stay faithful to the loving men in their lives and to their own children, but to the ‘career’, the feminist image, etc….. everything but the things that made them women.
The ones who express the greatest regret are the ones who state they chose to not have children. I suspect they chose abortion and those murders haunts them to their dying days. It should, and beyond. But that is a God thing, not mine.
Their stories and their end days tell it all. But where is the media that showed them burning bras in the 1960’s. That has abandoned them too. They are left alone with death and regrets. While the media and the pop culture elite feminists delude another generation of young women into throwing away their lives for the edification of another gender studies prof.
most of the women today are so very pathetic, and that is not saying much.
My only complaint is that, why are men and women necessarily psychologically different? Why would things that feel pleasurable and empowering to a man – possessiveness, for example – not also produce feelings of pleasure in a woman and empowerment in a woman? You understand that power feels good, clearly, and that power is possibly the foremost human goal. Why, then, are women exempt from having this instinctual urge? How can society “train” women in modern times to desire these things, but sex roles of the past are seen as “natural”? Let’s try a metaphor. Are all black men “meant” to be one way, and acting in any other way for them will then be unnatural? RedPillers seem to both dislike career women and vapid women. What, then, exactly, can a woman do to be accepted by a man?
The politicians and 1%ers have colluded in destroying the world’s economy for the lower and middle class…How can one be a “man” if he can’t find a breadwinning job or be allowed to participate in a free market if banks deny him loans and regulations stifle the small businesses?
Especially when most of the good jobs are being given to upper-middle class women under the form of affrimativate action and meeting quotas?
The women of today are being taught to purse careers and despise men. Absurd feminism is spreading from the Western world to all nations who are under the World Bank’s grasp.
Even in the Middle East where civilians are starving and dying in the wars, the feminists are busy promoting their feminism like a used car salesperson ( 1984 doublespeech language).
Women don’t need to be taught to despise men. They despise all men, except the ones whom they are sexually attracted to, even if this means they will despise moral men and love psychopaths. There is indeed a racket though. Alpha males are at the top, and career women are their harem. These two groups are in an orgy together. They get to have dozens or hundreds of sex partners before marriage. Beta, or average, males are at the bottom and get the scraps of women and the scraps of good jobs. They usually get married to a woman with about 5-10 times more partners than themselves. So it’s all about sex. Society is oversexualised and this is the price.
This is why I’m going to mass murder. I worked hard, treated everyone very well, had great morals, and all I’ve ever gotten was shit on. I’ve had to settle for only fat ugly girls or girls with dozens of previous partners, all because I don’t treat people poorly. It means there isn’t something wrong with me, it means there’s something deeply wrong with them. It completely interferes with my ability to pursue happiness. Therefore I refuse to ever work again, and when my reserves run dry, watch the news for another massacre.
For this author and all those who agree with him, check out this definition from the Merriam-Webster dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism)
Full Definition of SEXISM
1
: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2
: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
Probably a reason why the bitterness in many of your posts is oh-so-obvious to the female eye. I respect men very much, and I respect women equally as much. When I’m in a relationship, I give my all and expect him to do the same. And if he doesn’t, well the relationship is over. Love is a two-way street, people.
I’m Indian and have heard all of this nonsense from people in India forever, telling wives to be more like “Sita” in the Ramayana, who treated her husband as her lord. You know my response to that? I’ll become Sita when you become Ram, buddy. Become an incarnation of the Lord and I’ll treat you as such, otherwise stop telling me how to perform my “duties” without meditating on any of your responsibilities other than your independence and “virility.”
Food for thought.
What I find amazing is how much Indian people mirror Americans.
Completely self-absorbed and obsessed with sameness. Inability to understand psychology, obsessed with omnipotence and the complete inability to understand the world around them.
You seem to be fairly physically attractive, so what’s your beef?
You haven’t really bothered to refute Evola’s philosophy. I find it sad that an Italian noble knows more about your culture than you do.
I am an Indian too and these are the broads we would never marry even if she and her family is ready to pay me millions in dowry and let me have mistresses on the side.
Pathetic. A well-balnced person recognizes both sides of their nature. It is a recipe for neurosis, to repress your other side. The Citadel, home to all-male army cadets, is fiercely protected as an all-male preserve, not because they can be macho men there…but because they can actuate their feminine side. It is the only place, one cadet declared, where you can tell another man you love him and not be thought gay. where guys sit and sew and gossip and develop intense friendships and can lean on each other.. and above all, can be vulnerable, can cry. They dont want women there because then they have to act like this idiot article demands they act. Repressing the ‘feminine’ side just causes serious inner wounds, serious build-ups of unrelieved tension. Demanding a man act according to an absurd Western template and making no allowance for the personal..disastrous. Stuff like this is harmful. And no, ‘women’ dont like it. Some women do..some people, in fact many people, are drawn to the person with the loud bullying attitude. This is not a female thing, it is a people thing…as so many Germans followed Hitler. Most people are insecure and the person with the confident attitude gives a feeling of certainty. T say women are more uncertain is a reflection of the society they are raised in. If that society teaches them from the cradle to be dependent and fearful, they will look for fearless people to follow. Just as weak and scared men will do the same..but boys are taught early to overcome fears, girls are taught “Daddy will catch you!” Try and look at the world around you and at history too. And look at how you treat your own daughter and your son. There is no reason for girls not to be great motorcycle racers. Dani Pedrosa is 5’1″ and 115 pounds and is 3rd in the world. But a girl racer…will always be a girl racer. Men will patronise her, or declare she cant do it and while boys will learn to race at age 4, falling over, learning to deal with pain and scarring, girls will be encouraged to avoid dangerous pursuits or if they go ahead, constantly have to face the information that girls aren’t capable. Let girls be as fearless as boys and some will measure up. And there will be great men who will see such women as great and difficult prizes. It is easy to impress a penniless disadvantaged frightened girl: she’ll easily tell you what a ‘special snowflake’ you are. Try impressing a fearless girl. That’s hard. that’s a challenge. Only a real manly man, a man who fears nothing can succeed. You guys want vulnerable women because you know that you just dont have what it takes. So you do what bullies do, behave as bullies behave, as cowards, as the insecure, you try to belittle and undermine. I am aware countless women today are claiming a status they dont deserve. They have been educated to do so, not by feminism, not at all, but by the ‘self-esteem ‘education system which gives a trophy to everyone. And tells everyone how special they are. Now we have all these guys who think they are so great they only need to bring themselves to a relationship while the woman should ‘adore’ the, and guys, if you need to be adored…dont say that out loud.
This isn’t traditionalism. It dates only to the 19th century when the rise of the middle class created a new female, the decorative and infantalized woman. New jobs such as bank manager and civil servant created new architecture, the villa, which no longer needed a wife to run; it was run by the housekeeper. The kids were raised by the governess. The husband worked outside the home and he controlled al the money and only saw his wife in the venings. The new woman was also expected to repress her libido: here we see the first ‘good girls” who did not exist til then. May surprise you to know that the earlier chaperones like Juliet’s Nurse were to keep women from dragging men into the bushes, not the other way round; consider chastity belts, no knight believed his wife would willingly go without sex while he crusaded.
The Victorian era stood it all on its head. Women were forced to deny their libido and their intelligence and to have no utility.
Prior to this, a man made money and then gave it to his wife, the woman he married not for her beauty and her stupidity and her willingness to admire him, but for her fertility, her strength and her intelligence. And also for her cheerful companionship, her wit and her bounciness in bed. “I promise to be bonny and blithe in bed and at board” said the marriage service. Bed first! The money was then invested by the wife, who would usually run one or two business and simultaneously run a good home, checking waste, managing the staff, and keeping the secrets of the still-room, all while bearing children in agony, uncomplainingly.
Come the Victorian era: a wife promised to ‘love, honour and obey”. And “obey’ meant “accept the disgusting demands of your husband”. Men and women now slept apart, and women were taught to dread and endure sex: men felt guilty for ‘bothering’ their wives so prostitution exploded. Porn began: not erotica, porn, twisted porn and the demand for extreme youth. Why? Because the wife, who should not be touched, had been turned into a helpless infant. She didnt control and invest the money now: she did nothing. Nothing at all. She had no experience and she married younger and younger. Her husband controlled the flow of information and everything else. She was a child, like Nora in “A Doll’s House’. Men began to call their wives, not ‘sweetheart’ but “my little squirrel” and “my little girl”. Unable to fuck the little girl at home, men began to go after the actual little girls of the poor. There was a new demand, for despoiling the ‘pure’..a demand for prostitutes to dress as nuns and schoolgirls..we still see it today..to touch the unattainable.
Meanwhile, the women went insane. Alone, useless, infantalized, helpless, controlled…the days stretched out. They began to suffer extreme pain in the stomach. It was diagnosed as “hysteria” and the cure was morphine, in huge doses. Like the housewives of the 50s, they were doped to the eyeballs. Or they just went mad, and like Bertha Rochester, were shut in the attic.
Given such complete control, such autocracy, backed by Church and State and even by a pseudo science that declared the libido-less woman to be normal and the sexual woman mad, the men also became insane. Insane, because nobody should have so much power: it corrupts, as we know. And having got the power, the men didnt know how to give it up…
Today, we still suffer the consequences. There are even men saying eating disorders are attractive, much as Victorians fetishized illness and invalids. Men who fear women controlling money and who fear female sexuality and want it under control. Men lost their manhood somewhere around 1810. Your ‘traditionalism’ is just Victorianism, with all its attendant horrors. If you want to be really traditional, reach back, to when women were sexual beings, who ran life by your side, respected for intelligence and force, and never for beauty, vanity, weakness, vulnerability and all the rest. Back when men really were men, and women were smart.
don’t believe me: check Proverbs 37 for the definition of the Good Wife.
Holy shit thank you. Now the important question: are all women ruined by that era? A man obviously cannot give modern women any money or show them any respect as a person without permanently staining her image of him.
” Invariably, these people think they’re being cute, but all I can think
is how foolish they are. Why are the people of a hundred or a thousand
years ago automatically wrong, while people today are automatically
right? ”
Why have people of a hundred or a thousand years ago have given survived, thrived and gives us our inheritance which was the product of their knowledge and labor, and what makes us think that our new found gadgets and memetical conventions are superior when in fact it seems we are worse going down day by day. Did we all of the sudden start crapping goldbricks instead of same ole crap, are we unique snowflakes that our thoughts will somehow magically defy ever present natural law.
sorry folks a little too much to drink.
Good article. Julius Evola is one of my favorite obscure philosopher/social-critics I have come across. His other works such as “Ride the Tiger” are very important in that they touch upon so many different facets of our time. It’s not only about feminism and the battle raging in the West and elsewhere between men and the newly empowered women. The author also touches the nihilism that’s prevalent in the West and spreading its dreaded wings all over the rest of the world too in these post-modern times. I don’t personally agree on everything he dictates especially about the “traditionalism” necessarily being superior than contemporary society. What is traditionalism anyway? The average man in the past would gasp at how much conveniences we have created springing from the tail-end of consumerist society if he was to be time-machined here..ahh the lost spirituality but we’re not as poor though still fast heading to that side of the spectrum.
Fantastic
There is nothing wrong with this picture. A woman should do this for her man. She should also wash his entire body. She should kneel to bless him sexually also. A man should wash his woman feet. Should wash her entire naked body. He should kneel and bless her also.. People forget life is about service.
a lot of you people here just seem like white trash.
I think if you’re bitching about the roles of men or women in your society it’s probably because your relationships sucks and you’ve settled with a person with a personality that is not for you. But you’re looking for reasons to complain instead of acknowledging how badly you suck at relationships and communication. You look for reasons to say your unhealthy miserable marriage is the way it is instead of blaming yourself.
You say “women are flawed these days, that’s why my relationship sucks. Because this woman won’t cook or clean for me.”
Women say “Men are flawed these days because men won’t work hard to give me all their money.”
When the fact is, no one LIKES working hard to give their money away, just like no one LIKES being a servant.
But the truth is, relationships between men and women are all give and take, compromises and deals where both are constantly adjusting and making sacrifices and reaping rewards for each other.
But you’re incapable of understanding that. So maybe you should stop insisting the world owes you everything, and stop going on about how you automatically deserve your pound of flesh from society but they’re changing and it’s not fair to you.
Man or women, you suck it up, adapt.
Oh, and this:
“I hold nothing but CONTEMPT for these cunts, if that makes me a misogynist then I’m the dominant authoritative boyfriend who gets his expectations met and keeps his females in check. All those non-misogynists are completely at the mercy of their bitch while I’m getting my cock sucked 3 ways to Friday by a bevy of attractive teenage girls. I’d rather be a controlling misogynist than a limp-dick doormat faggot begging his 40-year old warpig wife to love him.”
Both sexes being equal does not mean you now get a little bitch boy excuse to behave badly.
It doesn’t mean you get to forget morally upright principles of loyalty, honesty, and respecting people around you.
That’s another thing I can’t take. I don’t care if you’re a man or a woman here, just because society has changed does not mean you get to use it as an excuse to be a hate mongering cunt.
Incredible article. The relevance in Evola you were so kind to share with us is astounding.
Btw don’t forget to qualify your “we” for some of us (readers) are fortunate enough not to (directly) be in the middle of the quagmire the majority of your readers suffer (at least not geographically).
Yeah I watched this mentality first hand as a child growing up. My parents where married for thirty years and my father treated my mother like crap because they were raised with that old school mentality crap, where a woman does what ‘she is told’ and doesnt leave her husband no matter his many flaws, cheating, physical abuse, etc. As a result I’m a single attractive woman in my early thirties and will remain so for the rest of my life. Happily I might add.
I have absolutely no use for men and I’m grateful every day that I am not forced to subject myself to a human being that I neither want nor desire, and I don’t give a rat’s**** how ugly, cute, built, unbuilt, rich, poor, etc. he is. Im not interested. Although I’m attractive I do my very best to ensure I look like **** so they don’t hit on me, and they still don’t know how to take no for an answer. You want to know what ruins women, that exact crappola that was spewed in this article is what ruins women. I’m perfectly happy to allow my beauty to waste away to nothing rather than to subject myself to men who are lesser than me morally. I don’t give them the satisfaction of dressing up because I wasn’t born to please men, just like every other woman was not born to please men. If a woman wants to marry or partake in a relationship she should do so because it makes her happy.
To all the women out there who buy into this, pick up a history book about women’s history to understand why so many have fought for you to have rights today. Women were owned, it wasn’t all nice happy relationships, we were owned like slaves. My grandmother in the fifties had to have her husband’s permission to have her tubes tied, although having another child was life threatening to her, the Dr. discussed it with my grandfather, because although she had the right to vote, she did not have rights to her own body. Start educating yourselves. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Declaration of Sentiments, says it all ladies.
How fast will your bullshit make-work job disappear when men check out and refuse to subsidize you? You need us a lot more than we need you… and we’re getting sick of your abuse. Count on being replaced by chunks of silicone and steel.
No one subsidizes us stupid ass. And no I definitely don’t need you moron. Ever worked a farm? No? I have and didn’t have to have no damn man do it for me. How many times have you been in the mountains on your own for weeks at a time with no one to look after you but you? No? I have. How many houses have you built with just your bear hands? I just got finished building a log cabin for my aunt, me and my five female cousins. Didn’t have a man fell the logs, we did, didn’t have no man notch out the grooves to fit the logs together, we did, didn’t have no man to insulate it, we did. Oh and the deer I’m eating, didn’t no man do that for me either. I killed her all on my own, bled her, skinned her, cut her up, and now I’m eating her. Next mission, to learn how to extract my own ore out of the ground so I can make my own weapons. So what? I’m perfectly capable of taking care of myself without a man. Have a nice day white collar. Keep chasing the bourgeois. I have a life to live, that goes beyond hair dye and fingernails.
I retract 100% of my previous comment. You’re clearly an exceptional case.
And I never built houses with my bear hands. I built them with my human hands.
excellent article, Evola is by far one of my favorite perennialists/traditionalist philosphers (close second to Jung!) he had the ability to see the downfalls of the modern world, and like Nietzsche, a man too misunderstood and too far ahead of his time to be taken seriously in todays cultural marxist academia cult!
The only thing that comforts me after reading this article and the comment section, is that we all die, and that one day humanity will disappear.
I am a female and I think this was very well written. I think there is undeniably a biological difference between male and female, and thats ok. Like the reading stated, you cant really compare fire to water. I think the over obsession of feminism is secretly driving some of us crazy. When i was about 16 i discovered feminism and feminist. At first it was very empowering. I am a victim of sexual abuse and physical abuse from my mothers ex husband. So knowing there was a gang of women out there ready to back me up felt awesome. Knowing that we as a whole were fighting back, was very uplifting. As Ive gotten older I realize in order to be a “proper” feminist there is alot more involved, and I also realize that men can often take their masculinity to the extreme. Is rape or violence against women ok? Of course not. But feminist go further than that. They take away your pride and soul. They make me feel disgusting and guilty for all the things i cant help but love. In nature I am very emotional and subserviant, thats just me. Forever i put on a front as a strong in your face feminist, when secretly i just wanted to be cared for and swept off my feet. I was zipping through boys like a race car on to the next and next. Then I found my current bf. I am madly in love but still struggle with feminism and guilt. I want to cook i want to clean i want to do his laundry and rub his tummy and suck the life out of his dick. I want to give him everything. I want to have his babies and him fuck me whenever he wants even when i sleep. Ive also gotten sexyally aroused when i think about him going out to sex other women up while im only his. But then i start feeling bad about it all and flip out on him. And yes it does seem like the nicer he is to me the less sexy i find him. I love to serve and take care of others though especially him. Lots of people just say im this way because i have been sexually abused, and yes i think at times i ask him to go a little too far in the bedroom but i like it. I live with extreme guilt constantly. But dont get it wrong he is beautifully dominate and sexy but would never hurt me and is always supportive of me, he has the best manly shoulders to cry on lol i would love to be a stay at home mom forever but know id be terribly judged and viewed by myself and other females as wasting my life.
I am a female, and I agree with this article quite a bit. Many articles degrade women to being less than men, but really this article says it, they are just different. Women and men are equals, but their strengths just vary along with their personalities. I really hate how American culture denies feminine traits in favor of more masculine ones. Feminists make me so angry in the fact that they demonize staying home to raise children and being subservient. In most cases, it is just in a woman’s nature to be that way.
My aunt went to college and got a bachelors in literature because it was an interest of hers and she was told that going to college and joining the workforce was her only option. She has told me that she regrets going to college and working as a journalist. She was the happiest in her life as a mother and homemaker. The issue with this lifestyle is when there is the expectation for women to shut up and do what they are told. Feministis were originally right to fight against that expectation, but ruined it when they demonized anything that is actually feminine! Feminism was needed in the past for American culture, but not really anymore. It has turned into bunch of stupid young girls with a sense of entitlement because women in the past were discriminated against. Yes, there are issues such as the wage difference and objectification, but feminism is seeming to push towards being masculine. The irony of being a feminists is that they are really being the opposite, masculine.
Men in the past were totally different they had different priorities
1- Family.
2- School and then getting university degrees.
3- Career.
Men in the past had different standard about women in addition to beauty like being reserved in her cloth and behavior, modest, soft, good housewife, polite ..etc oh I forgot and a virgin!
Now men thanks to the pop psychology which turned women into the ultimate prize or even the purpose of life which began from the early childhood when they inserted sexual themes into female characters in cartoons which enforced the sexual desire in children abnormally. Later on in movies and songs making men being enslaved by their desires and only care about the external beauty which is only a cover of the real person inside. Just look at the modern fashion industry less cloth more fashionable, more cloth and the girl is considered to be retarded, and by more cloth I don’t mean dressing like a ninja like in Saudi Arabia.
And look at magazines they glorify worthless women only because they have big boobs, but ignore a girl who went to third world countries to help hungry and sick people or a women who is a notable scientist.
Now many modern men make finding a women their purpose in life just as if there is gap in themselves and it cannot be filled except by women’s love, and they think that they cannot be happy without her, putting her above himself, his career and his education making him a total pussy controlled by his desire and his worshiping of what he considers the big prize. Once I was reading an article written by a Taoist practitioner who wrote when a person emotionally attach himself to something or someone he will lose his power and confidence. He also mentioned when the one view something as extraordinary he will lose his cool, just look to many modern men watching porn and listening to pop BS which glorify women into the level of gods. I’m not a misogynist but a women should be thought of as a women not more not less, like a man is a man not more not less.
Plus what happened to many western women is that they worship their celebrities and money. If a girl now is dressing like prostitute and covered by tattoos smoking weed, getting drunk on the streets only caring about twerking her ass at the club
is considered to be cool by many, But if a reserved girls is learning astrophysics and dreaming to be an astronaut she might be ridiculed. Just do the calculation if a party girl took a half naked or naked selfie in the bathroom vs a nerdy girl posting something smart on social media like FB how many likes each one of them will get? just do the math!!
And many men are buying into this shit worshiping girls who do not deserve any kind of attention, while ignoring the good girls if they found one of course!, then they complain like pussies why women are like that? of course if they didn’t worship their desire and turning women into goddesses embracing the real men attitude the situation wouldn’t be like that now. when men dedicate themselves in making women their ultimate prize ready to be dominated by them they will lose themselves unless they wake up.
I remember a story in my country when a guy from high school felt in love with a girl and they were in relationship, and he was totally obsessed over her and he couldn’t concentrate on his education while the girl was an aloof to some extent and she was concentrating on her education finally the dude failed and the girl passed and went into college later on she broke with the poor guy, and then she married a guy through arranged marriage who already finished his college and started his own career.
Women destroy everything, because of their infurious greed, constant lying and egomania. They are inhumane creatures, because they have no humanity within them. Also because they dont contribure any sort of significantly to civilisation and never have.
This is why islam WILL win and take over.
Just a fact. YOu can choose to further ignore it – and i’m sure yu will – but that doesnt help you in any way.
Will women destroy civilisation and nations in the west?
“One must say that the fundamental defect of the female character is a lack of a sense of justice. This originates first and foremost in their want of rationality and capacity for reflexion but it is strengthened by the fact that, as the weaker sex, they are driven to rely not on force but on cunning: hence their instinctive subtlety and their ineradicable tendency to tell lies … Dissimulation is thus inborn in her and consequently to be found in the stupid woman almost as often as in the clever one … A completely truthful woman who does not practice dissimulation is perhaps an impossibility, which is why women see through the dissimulation of others so easily it is inadvisable to attempt it with them.”- Arnold Schopenhauer, philosopher
This question is in absolutely no intention of blaming all women. However, their behaviours from easy influences are causing many problems in society today.
that is great satire!
Women aren’t sex slaves m8.
also lol @ that Rihanna pic, are you THAT scared of her? lmfao
“show her love for him through regular cooking, cleaning and sex”
I didn’t know that whenever I clean my toilets I’m showing “love” to myself.
Grow up, if you can’t cook or can’t clean your own shit or can”t live without seeing women as sex dolls, then the problem is you, no one else.
what a load of tosh!