There Is Little Difference Between Women Throughout History

One of the biggest pieces of narcissism that plague our corner of the web is that we think we are among the first to unravel the true nature of women. That we men today, through whatever means we used to discover it, are among the first to know what women think and the fundamental aspects of their nature. Well, sorry to deflate your ego but men throughout all of history have known exactly what women are. What they want, how they act, and all their shortcomings.

My first encounter with an ‘ancient’ mind who knew the truths I was just beginning to guess at as a moody high schooler came from Friedrich Nietzsche and his book Beyond Good And Evil. Amongst the many examinations of human nature in the book, Nietzsche finds time to describe women as they are; flightly, duplicitous, incapable of any great thought outside those concerned with gossip and sex. Yet he did not write these truths from an angry perspective. Nietzsche described the numerous shortcomings of women simply as a fact of their nature. When I first read his book, I thought Nietzsche some truly radical, forward thinker—here was a man from the 19th century perfectly describing the women of my generation! As I later discovered, he was just one of thousands of writers throughout the whole of human history who knew just what women are, and how they’ve always been the same since time immemorial.

The current generations have been brainwashed into thinking that women are by default some sort of angelic being, which can do no wrong, which is perfectly chaste and loving and monogamous; so it’s not surprising that many of us hold a certain pretentious pride in our belief that we have unravelled the mystery all by ourselves. The fact is that the true ancients already knew what we think we have recently uncovered.

Juvenal was a Roman poet born sometime in the 1st century. Amongst his works are the Satires , a collection of poems centring around social issues from Juvenal’s day (which, depressingly, are the same ones we face today). To show you that we are far from the first men to know women, I offer to you some brief excerpts from Juvenal’s VI Satire: Don’t Marry. I suggest reading the Satire in full when you have the chance.

From: SatVI:25-59 You’re Mad To Marry!

Go prostrate yourself in worship at the Tarpeian shrine, go sacrifice a gilded heifer to Juno, if you should happen to find a woman whose life is chaste. There are so few of them fit to touch Ceres’ sacred ribbons, whose kisses wouldn’t appal their fathers. Fasten a garland to your doorpost if you do, deck the lintel with marriage ivy. Is one man enough for Hiberina, then? She’d sooner confess under torture to being happy with only one of her eyes. ‘There’s a girl on her father’s estate in the country whose reputation is good.’ Try her at Gabii, not in the country, try her at Fidenae, then I’ll grant you the father’s farm. Who says she’s not been carrying on in the caves or on the hills?

Even in an era when the goddamned patriarchy supposedly ruled with an iron fist, an age that knew no concept of effective birth control, a time when being a single mother would assuredly leave an ordinary woman destitute and forever burdened; women were still sluts. Some people blame things like the female favouring marriage laws, the birth control pill, or feminism for making today’s women into rampaging whores, but they’ve always been so. Even when there was no societal safety net or byzantine system of white knightery to save women from their own short sighted and often selfish decisions, they still chose to act in vile ways.


It does not matter where she comes from either. Oh, she’s a sweet little country girl from the corn fields of Nebraska? She grew up on a Dairy farm in rural Southwest England where there were no temptations? Surely she must be as pure as the first winter’s snow. Move her into Omaha city without daddy around and see how traditional she is then. Take her to a club in Bristol, and see how pure her country ways are. Odds are the traditional country gal that is oft touted as being the last bastion of the good girl in today’s society was getting railed in a Ford 4×4 when she was 14 on some back country road.

Women are sluts. It’s in their nature. They were sluts when the walls of Jericho were being built, and they’ll remain sluts until the moment Earth begins growing mushroom clouds.

From: SatVI:60-81 Look At Them In The Theatre

Can you find any woman that’s worthy of you, under our porticoes? Does any seat at the theatre hold one you could take from there, and love with confidence? When sinuous Bathyllus dances his pantomime Leda, Tucia loses control of her bladder, and Apula yelps, as if she were making love, with sharp tedious cries.


You’re marrying a woman who’ll make Echion a father, Glaphyrus, the lyre-players, or Ambrosius with his pipe. Let’s set up platforms stretching along the narrow streets, and decorate the doorposts and lintels with laurel boughs, so your noble child, dear Lentulus, there in his tortoiseshell cradle, shall remind us of Euryalus, perhaps, the gladiator!

How many husbands, fiancés and boyfriends in the 20th century alone have been cuckolded by artists and athletes? There was never an age in human history where a woman with sexual options valued a noble husband more than some grungy loser sitting in a dank building strumming his strings. Hell, I bet even back in the Stone Age the cave women were creaming themselves more over Oog, who discovered blowing into a hollow wooden tube would create high pitched sounds, than Uk, who spent all day going out and getting mauled by predators in order to bring meat home to the tribe.

From: SatVI:82-113 What About Eppia?

Eppia, wife of a senator, ran off with the gladiators… She forgot her home, her husband, deserted her sister, shamelessly, left her country, her wailing children… Though, as a child of a wealthy family, she once slept in a richly decorated cradle on soft, downy pillows, that sea voyage concerned her little; nor her reputation… Though the reason be just and virtuous, for taking risks, women are still afraid, their hearts frozen with terror, trembling in every limb: yet they’re courageous when daring shameful things. If a husband demands it; then, boarding ship’s a pain, the bilge is sickening, sky spinning round and round. But with a lover, her stomach’s fine. A wife will vomit over her husband, a mistress eat with the sailors, stride the deck, and delight in handling the stubborn rigging.

Remember the story about this woman, who ran away from her marriage and four kids in Florida, to go all the way to New York to live in a tent during Occupy Wall Street while spending the whole time getting banged by a bunch of losers? As Rollo Tomassi so succinctly puts it:

A woman who wants to fuck you will find a way to fuck you. She will fly across the country, crawl under barbwire, climb in through your second story bedroom window, fuck the shit out of you and wait patiently inside your closet if your wife comes home early from work – women who want to fuck will find a way to fuck. The girl who tells you she needs to be comfortable and wants a relationship first is the same girl who fucked the hot guy in the foam cannon party in Cancun on spring break just half an hour after meeting him.

It has never mattered to women in the whole of history that she has responsibilities or a family to look after; if she falls in lust (which most of her gender do) while supposedly betrothed to another man, she’ll abandon her entire life, her entire future, to go get railed by the object of her cardinal desires. Thus, it ever was. Thus, it will always be.


Bye hun! Bye kids! I’m abandoning you to go bang an Aerosmith cover band!

I have one more excerpt from the satires dear reader, before I let you get on with the rest of your day. I think it is one that is most relevant to our modern society.

From: SatVI:286-313 What Brought All This About?

What brought this monstrous behaviour about, what’s its source you ask? Their lowly status used to keep Latin women chaste, hard work kept the corruption of vice from their humble roofs, and lack of rest, and their hands, then, were chafed and hardened from handling Tuscan fleeces, when Hannibal neared Rome, when their husbands manned the towers at the Colline Gate. Now we suffer the ills of a long peace. Worse for us than war this luxury’s stifling us, taking its revenge for an empire won. No single kind of crime or act of lust has been lacking, from the moment we were no longer poor… It was filthy lucre at first that brought these alien morals here, effete wealth that’s corrupted the present age with revolting decadence. Does Venus care about anything when she’s drunk? …Go on, ask yourself, why Tullia scornfully sniffs the air, what that infamous Maura’s foster-sister says as Maura passes by the ancient temple of Chastity in the Forum, here’s where they halt their litters at night, to make water, and drench the goddess’s statue with flowing streams, and take it in turns to ride and squirm under the moon. Then it’s off home they go: and when the daylight returns you’ll wade through your wife’s urine to call on mighty friends.


In the Anglo countries, America especially, many of the youth in the 1920s and 30s and 40s suffered hardship. As a result of their massive victory at the end of the Second World War, these countries experienced an overnight explosion in peace and prosperity. It didn’t take even take two generations for the children of these countries to become corrupt. They were born corrupted. In the 1950s, under the watchful eye of her veteran father and homemaking mother, little Suzie all-American played with her expensive toys and wore her clean new dresses and grew up with everything her parents never had. By the time she was 20, Suzie was getting high and screwing strangers in the mud like a pig at music festivals.


Women in prosperous societies will always fall into irresponsibility and lustful decadence, regardless of men’s stance on the matter. The only reason Afghani women stay at home and wear burkas in public is because they live in a culture which would literally kill them if they did not. If the harshness of Afghani culture lessened, or became truly prosperous in almost a heartbeat like America experienced in the late 40s, it would take only ten years before the Afifa’s and Ehteram’s were regularly booze cruising to Afghanistan’s long beach, flashing their boobs at Muhammad for a free Buttery Nipple from the Tiki bar and going to the men’s room in the club to do a line off his meat before sucking it off.

There is much wisdom about human nature that has been written in the millennia’s of history. It behooves anyone seeking knowledge of why the world is as it is to seek out the great writers of the past and read their works. There’s more there waiting for you there than some good old fashioned, unchained misogyny.

I’d also like to thank the folks over at the Red Pill Reddit for providing the link to the VI Satire even though I’m pretty sure you guys hate me.

Read More: 20 Things Women Do That Should Be Shamed, Not Celebrated

248 thoughts on “There Is Little Difference Between Women Throughout History”

  1. Man, with all respects to the other brothers contributing to the ROK community, you are easily one of the very best writers here. You have a sense of wider perspective the likes I’ve rarely seen, online and off. Well-done once again, bro!

  2. Yeah great article. One would have to say there is a difference between a womans natural instincts and societies expectations. Women want to be fucked in the most wild ways imaginable and also be a mother, care taker etc. I see no correlation of womens happiness and becoming a corporate bitch.

    1. All I hear is jokers bitching about the problems. It goes on and on and on. Why isn’t anyone speaking about the solution. Ok we’ve established the problem. men are great , loyal etc etc. Women are sluts. Ok All fucking women – your mums your sisters your wives they are all sluts its in their DNA – you can’t change it – the same way you cant change a female baboon displaying her pink ass.
      As “Men”.!!! What is our solution? Clearly we are not ok with this . So what is our way out. Beating out our frustrations on a keyboard? Moving to Mars? Religion? Developing a personal mission and journey independent of women/corporations/ degrees/ lawyers etc? What is it. Lets talk about solutions here

  3. “It is as the magnet said to the bar of iron, whom do you hate most? You, said the iron, for although I am drawn to you, you are not strong enough to pull me towards you”
    From Thus Spoke Zarathustra

  4. “In the Anglo countries, America especially, many of the youth in the 1920s and 30s and 40s suffered hardship.”
    Especially America? I’m an American but I’m not so nationalistically narcissistic that I don’t credit Europeans for having a much harder shit time during those decades than we did. Would a yoot in early 1940’s England say he was better off than a similarly aged yoot in America? What do you think, when he was running to the bomb shelter for the fifth time that week, hoping to dodge the bombs that his parents unfortunately weren’t able to dodge two weeks earlier? I mean sure, right, bombs, Germans and imminent invasion, but you have to consider that the yoot in early 1940’s America often came home with several hard homework assignments, so it all kind of evens out, right? heh
    I’m a bit uncomfortable with the constant need to disdain modern conveniences and comforts. While I’m no fan of iCrap and social media, there’s a lot to be said for your kids not dying from infection because they fell down and scraped their knee while running through the fields. And Romans complaining of luxury still had a hell of a hard life compared to what even folks in the 1920’s experienced, so I wonder at the notion that it is simply ease of life which allows female idiocy. Consider also that war brides are a constant meme throughout history, as well as “omg, I must fuck the brains out of Joe since he’s going to be shipped off to war next week”, and war is, last check, an awful horrible trying time.
    Criticisms above to the side I think that you’re spot on that the nature of women is well known, well documented and a constant theme throughout history. I simply to not restrict it to certain situations/conditions, to me it’s much more rock steady constant.

    1. Well said, Ghost, and lets also remember your namesake, Thomas Jefferson and his fellow Benjamin Franklin had interesting insights into women. Old Ben seemingly was a bit of a player… that dark horse…

  5. Friedrich Nietzsche also said:
    The perfect woman. The perfect woman is a higher type of human than the perfect man, and also something much more rare. (Human, All Too Human – 377)
    The manosphere makes the same mistake as feminism did – demonising of the opposite sex.
    Nietzsche also said:
    Women are still cats and birds. Or at best cows…

    1. I wonder when he said that. He hob-nobbed with interesting people, including interesting women, but seems to have been disappointed with all of them, leading to fallings out etc.
      zarathrustra has an old wise woman say what seems to have been his despairing solution: bring a whip.
      If the manosphere demonises women I’m not sure Nietszche will be the one to correct this. The best that could be said is that Nietzsche may have wished that it was not necessary for whips to be invoked.
      I too would be receptive to a demonstration that whips are unnecessary; that chaos does not immediately ensue from he removal of every restraint.
      I would have women who could be adults, accept responsibility for their actions etc. I have yet to see this though. Their ascent is the ascent of chaos, weakness, and uncontrolled desire, poisoning the environment in the process. If women, as men have any kind of nature, they deny and dissemble it, rather than seeking to rise above it. The consequence has been the poisoning of discourse and debate with whatever lies are necessary to maintain the psychotic fiction that is the modern liberal ‘consensus’

  6. An excellent (short) dissertation on the nature of women. Now we must apply that same critical eye to everything, including ourselves, we would be a force for growth.
    As men we have to admit our own shortcomings to find ways to overcome them. We have to look critically at ourselves to see what is truly a flaw (slovenly behavior, et al.) versus what society tells us is “wrong” (masculinity, et al.) with us. We have to excise, with the finesse of a laser, the cancers that society has heaped upon us.
    We have to push ourselves to the limits of human capability, both mentally and physically. Simply checking out of society does us no good, but conforming to a flawed society is no better. We have to be leaders, to ourselves and others.
    This isn’t about “being Alpha” at all, simply about being men.

  7. Silver lining: If peace and prosperity unleash the true nature of women, while hardship restrains the ugly elements, then America is cruising for a return to virtue!

    1. If you think about it, the only “hardship” a large percentage of American women endure is when they can’t get “four bars” on their iPhones.

    2. Hardship truly begins for women after the age of 30, give or take. That’s when shit gets real for women. Nature does have a sense of humor and does like balance to some degree.

    1. One always has to account for genetic outliers, but they do not disprove the rule in a general sense.

  8. “A woman who wants to fuck you will find a way to fuck you.”
    A hole can’t fuck anything. It gets fucked. Get it right.
    But it’s true. Women have ALWAYS been like this and always will be. This is why discipline is more important than their freedom.

    1. “Women have ALWAYS been like this and always will be. This is why discipline is more important than their freedom.”
      Very true statement. Unfortunately, the last 2 generations of Western women are well beyond any redemption. No amount of discipline will work on them.

    2. “A hole can’t fuck anything. It gets fucked. Get it right.”
      Thank you for pointing this out. People keep using the word wrong, and it bugs me to no end.

    3. “A hole can’t fuck anything. It gets fucked. Get it right.”
      You should try something other than missionary once in a while. Also: denying that women have agency when it comes to sex is blue-pill.

  9. This helps to demonstrate why women should be excluded from the political process. These behaviors do not make for a stable society or civilization. There was a reason that hundreds of years of Christianity built a stable society. For good or ill, it imposed marriage as the only outlet for the sexual desires of both men and women.
    Nowadays, what do we have? We see women like Sandra Fluke pushing for productive citizens to pay for her sexual escapades in Congress. Rush Limbaugh was right to call her a slut. And the young Alpha males cheered her on because they have a much easier time getting laid when women have better access to birth control.
    While it is a good time to be an Alpha male, this trend will not last much longer.

    1. Only if you consider “alpha male” to be a slacker PUA type. A real alpha male, somebody like a King Henry VIII or Charlemange, rules men and women both, commands both his passions and the respect of others, and takes women as he pleases. It will be an excellent time to be a fully rounded out true alpha. Though to your point, being a hollow imitation that learned a few PUA techniques will find you quickly excised from civilization,most likely at the point of a gun, come any kind of major upheaval in society.

      1. “Though to your point, being a hollow imitation that learned a few PUA techniques will find you quickly removed from civilization, most likely at the point of a gun, come any kind of major upheaval in society.”
        This is simply Trad Con wishful thinking. Social savviness and charisma is always extremely valuable. PUA techniques are rooted in human sociology and psychology. They are immutable and the pure truth. The fact that given access that Game can trump looks/money/status even some of the times speaks to it’s power.
        The reason that men like you cling to traditional male power through money and position is that being truly socially aware doesn’t come easy to most men and they aren’t really hard wired for it. So they simply reject it. A foolish move.
        The ancients of high birth were taught by tutors about how to play the social game. Rhetoric was highly regarded and taught for a reason.

        1. And you said nothing that refuted my point. The ancients of high birth were taught social skills/game, naturally. And they were taught the rest of the arts necessary to rule and control their lessers. That was my point. Having only one facet, PUA, is fine and well but it’s not really the whole “alpha” thing. If you go back and read, I did note that real alphas have no problem with women.
          The entire “alpha” pretext is based originally off of wolf pack hierarchies and structure. The alpha male wolf doesn’t just fuck and run, he is rather the pack leader and constantly puts the betas down in combat, as well as acts as the leader of his pack. Alpha thus is more than a simple biological function (fucking) it’s a social function that actually benefits the entire pack (leadership). Learning to pick up chicks is great, but it doesn’t make you a Charlemagne, nor even a Benjamin Franklin (who was a leader, innovator and quite adept at picking up the lady folk).

        2. “The entire “alpha” pretext is based originally off of wolf pack hierarchies and structure. The alpha male wolf doesn’t just fuck and run, he is rather the pack leader and constantly puts the betas down in combat, as well as acts as the leader of his pack.”
          Where the fuck does this come from?
          The alpha pretext is from GORILLAS and CHIMPS. You know the closest relatives to humans.

        3. Chimp Alpha Males:
          “Age is a deciding factor in male dominance hierarchies – the alpha-male is usually between the age of 20 and 26. Other factors that determine dominance and social status are physical fitness, aggressiveness, skill at fighting, ability to form coalitions, intelligence, and other personality traits. Status is either maintained or changed through communication and social interactions, such as physical competition and grooming.”
          Strangely, it doesn’t say anything about being a PUA. Funny that.

        4. Well said. I would also add that a true Alpha Male doesn’t concern himself with being a PUA or how good his “game” is, since women will naturally gravitate towards him. Its like I say, if you find yourself concerned about whether you are an Alpha Male or not, you probably aren’t.
          That is not necessarily a bad thing. Since in any given group, by definition there can be only one AM. If there are two, there will be conflict and one will either leave or become Beta, whichever is most advantageous to him. After all, heavy is the head that wears the crown.

        1. Well thought out post and response, so full of depth and intellectual vigor.
          You can stick to being a weasel, that’s fine. I will continue to develop *all* of my skill sets and not retard my growth as a human being, thanks.

    2. That cat is already out of the bag my friend. When women can vote, the society eventually goes under. At least we think so. Time will tell.
      History has shown us that democracy is extremely easy to undermine. Let women vote. They are an instant majority. Then flood the civilization with immigrants to destabilize it. Then of course you will need a police state to keep it all in check. Poof. Fast track to tyranny.
      If it wasn’t for the invention and rapid spread of the internet, we’d be living in a North American USSR by now.

      1. and of course women will vote for unchecked immigration every single time. Why? Two reasons. One – they are not the ones out there competing for the tough blue collar jobs, so it has no effect on their personal incomes. Two – immigrants are almost all single men, so they tilt the sex ratios in the favor of women. Nothing a selfish whore loves more than to see a bunch of starving, disenfranchised beta males fighting over her. A gender ratio of 5 men to every woman would be a dream come true for western whores. It would allow her to be an obese, obnoxious piece of shit and still have a crowd of beta orbiters. Oh, wait, that’s what we already have today. Thanks libturds!

        1. America is one of the few countries that caters to illegal immigrants. Most other civilized countries remove anyone who is in their country illegally, but no, not America, we need to show compassion and sympathy.
          My state now allows illegal immigrants to obtain a divers license and pay in-state tuition for university. Got to have “diversity” on our college campuses I guess.
          I wish the US had an immigration policy like that of Germany, Poland, or even Mexico so I wouldn’t have to listen to this illegal immigration shit. America has become weak and pussified.

        2. Don’t forget all of Western Europe and Scandanavia. Please don’t forget them. Their immigration problems are SIGNIFICANTLY worse than ours.

        3. Unchecked immigration means an unlimited number of mail order brides. It goes both ways, but then again ex-felons are now denied bringing foreign brides back.

        4. “Mail order” brides do not emigrate to the united states as single women. They are only granted legal status AFTER some guy marries them and brings them back. So, it’s not an apt comparison at all. 20 million male central americans have flooded this country. That’s a fact. Have 20 million beautiful Ukrainian women come here as well, to balance out the scales? Don’t be silly.

      2. I know a lot of women who will vote for a candidate simply because the candidate is a woman. The only reason these women give is that they would like more women to be in office. aka because vagina. Rank and file vagina votes is what I like to call women.

      3. Dude, you may be right, but “history has shown us”? How many prior democracies have there been? How many of them were destroyed by this mechanism?

        1. Which mechanism do you mean? Do you mean by women’s vote and immigrants or by suffrage in general?

      4. This is why I’m a monarchist at heart. Democracies are fucked up systems that eventually get rigged by every cheap soap-box demagogue who’d sell his mother for a single vote from an illiterate hooker. Now, when you have an entire system predicated on this model, and soulless and morally bankrupt commissars who’d “drop it like it’s hot,” for some Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan cash, what do think a system like this will produce? Shit. Of course we all now if a democracy is to work, (they never do), then citizenship must be conferred unto men, especially propertied men.
        Now when some loser politico cannot win in a fair system, he seeks to “broaden the voting base.” Let women vote, crack addicts, Haitian immigrants, etc you name it! Let em’ vote! When these people get the vote, the get to influence laws. When half the voting population or more, are women, then they’ll rig the system in their favor. Give me a monarch any day, inherited in his position without the corrupting need to accept money from bankers and feminists. He doesn’t need it, because he doesn’t need to get reelected into his position. There’s a reason why God, if he exists seemingly preferred monarchy. That wooden tooth bastard, George Washington, should have listened to John Adams and Alexander Hamilton and made that Prussian prince, the King of America.

    3. Anyone who supports Fluke is likely NOT an alpha male by manosphere standards.

      1. Let me clarify: there are men who take every advantage they got. And let’s be honest: in the hook-up world, there is a lot of competition. So not all Alphas will support Fluke. But some will. Hell, I’d argue that the top Democrat leaders are all Alpha males (women included) while the top Republican leaders are Beta crybabies.
        But don’t pull the “no true scots-man” fallacy. Some Alphas are just as dangerous to the rest of us as feminists are.

  10. Is it not ironic that we all want a different slut every night of the week when we’re young, and then when the time comes for a wife and kids, mourn the lack of virgins? What if all women were chaste until marriage, and chaste within marriage: would that be ideal?

    1. Chaste/Chastity: abstention from sexual intercourse; virginity or celibacy
      Chaste within marriage? Why would you propopse that sexlessness be an ideal within marriage? Or did you rather mean faithful within marriage?

      1. “the state or practice of refraining from extramarital sexual intercourse”
        Chastity, in marriage, does not mean abstinence.

        1. You’d have to wiggle a bit to get to your understanding of it, and I can see where it can be done, just think that “faithful” covers the ground more succinctly and without having to wiggle definitionally. In the end it really doesn’t matter, I was just asking for a bit of clarification, not really dinging the guy per se.

        2. Ding accepted, was not paying close attention as I wrote… *faithful within marriage. What is the ideal, then?

        3. Virginal before, faithful during marriage. Combine that with sweet disposition, a lack modern feminist ball busting attitude, a good cook, reasonably sane and goes out of her way to please you sexually and you have a fair start at something approaching an ideal I’d wager.

  11. People become complacent during peaceful times. It makes them weak when they don’t experience true hardship. History has shown this time and time again. History also repeats itself due to our own stupidity and complacency.

    1. Yes, but men overcome this. Cunts, who have no brains and therefore no will or willpower, fall into it every time. This is why men must be in charge and must be the only ones able to vote.

  12. “they live in a culture which would literally kill them if they did not”
    …as opposed to a culture which would kill them metaphorically?

    1. As opposed to a culture which a rewards them for their behavior like in the angloshpere.

  13. OK so nothing is really new.
    Or is it?
    What about the men?
    For ages men were a fighting breed. Now they medicate the masculinity out of boys at the earliest sign.
    So perhaps, if women have always been like this, but men were tougher, civilization was not at risk because the men could handle it. No mangina’s and betas wall to wall.
    Now women are championed in sluttery, or those that swear off men are also championed, the “you go grrl” thing.
    We have changed and we let them change us.
    But the best change is the change that starts with the individual. No movements to be corrupted by manginas and operatives of the control system.
    We only need reality to start with.
    And humans are a dirty nasty creature that fucks a lot. Yes even our own mothers were sluts and those that didn’t act like sluts probably didn’t out of having their needs met by the “structure”. That’s the key to marrying young back in past.
    But what of these women who clip their hair short and dress like boys? Perhaps they are more honest? I have more respect for them than I do for a women, her head full of feminist man-hating crap, who puts on makeup and heels. Not like I would want to bed or wife either type, for one would bore me to death and the other would fuck the neighbor and pass his STDs onto me.
    Discernment will be our best weapon. I’m tired of people wanting to go back to the past because we were there, and we are here now, and if we go back there, we end up here again.
    So going our own way is a new way.

    1. But the bible says to MEN, don’t desire the women of other men, because men are more sexual than women, and they would be more players than women could be sluts. The women who cheat , do it alongside men, who agreed as well, and in fact, those men were the first ones to desire those women, and since women wait for men to take the first move, they started it .

        1. I think he’s going with “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife”, and then starting with the word “because” is offering his own explanation.

      1. The Old Testament came in the form of scrolls and I think the first “edition” was known as the Concordant version. That was written in Greek, and EVERY LINE of it can be translated 5 different ways.
        The “bible” we labor under today is a bastardized version of kings (who needed cannon fodder and people who can be controlled) that is merely one translation that gets pushed as “gospel”.
        I don’t believe that we are horny beasts that must exert constant control. Look at it this way: a black kid in the hood will grow up to wear his pants funny and speak “ebonics”. Why? There is nothing in evolution that says wear pants in a manner that limits mobility and talk like a retard.
        But they are entirely bathed in this “culture” from day 1. It’s normal to them.
        So, why are so many men so convinced that they are so uncontrollably horny to a point where they’ll fap furiously every day?
        Same thing.
        Was it not men, throughout the ages, who embraced martial doctrines regarding the control of ones temper and fear?
        It used to be all about that. And if there was not enough fear, it was considered honorable to confront it.
        We went from that to… what? Neckbeards freaking out because they got blapped or something in an MMO. Oh and fapping your head off every day is now cool or something, and backed by a media engine that has us thinking that if we don’t “Get laid”, we will either die or wake up gay the next day.
        Civilization is in trouble, and according to this article, we really cannot blame women for it, because feminism. Feminism may well be pretty much an expected outcome when MEN change. As if feminism is really nothing new, but something that was always present, always there, waiting, for men to change. The ancient text is on the wall: women are always poised to become empowered spoiled creatures once the going is good. They may not have called it feminism back in the days of olde, but we have merely a new word for an old thing.
        Step one is to get off this “gotta get laid” trip. Women were and apparently still are animals while the emphasis from scripture to media is that men are the animals. But we have proven that we can depart from being animals (or we would still be in caves right now).
        We can prove it again.
        And honestly, I know that a lot of value is put on “game”, but gamesmen appear weak to me. They go through so much trouble. For a woman. If that energy (and the energy of the MMO min/maxer neckbeards crowd) could be harnessed into something productive with a real code of merit and self control and betterment, we’d be Captain Kirking it with warp drives by now.

    2. Going our own way seems to be the only way to fight this monster. To kill the beast, we must starve it.
      Learn to live a minimlist lifestyle. Don’t engage in mass consumerism. This of course means you must forget about marriage and kids. The men that choose to have kids and try marriage are putting themselves in extreme financial peril that could really harm them. It’s much easier for men to suppress the instinct to have children than it is for women. This is a biological gift for men. If you must have children, realize the extreme risks of it all. Don’t go into all romantic and stupid and clouded by pop-culture nonsense that raising kids is FUN and REWARDING. It generally is not. It’s quite difficult and stressful. The stress never ends either.

  14. And then we have the airhead “transhumanist” broads of today. Get a load of the post-Wall blonde at 2:24, deep in denial of her aging, who has had WAY too much plastic surgery:

  15. The future will be interesting. I look forward to seeing how it turns out with intellectual curiosity and dread seeing how it turns out for pragmatic reasons.

  16. Information on the true nature of women has always been available to those who want to read it. The problem is that no one tells us about it unless we discover it ourselves. This topic is considered extremely taboo especially in todays politically correct climate and even bringing it up in discussion will be met with hostility and shaming in order to silence you even though it is true.
    I will assume that most of us were essentially brainwashed from a young age to think of women and girls as perfect angels who can do no wrong only to discover otherwise. The most difficult part of the redpill, for me at least, was coming to terms with the fact that my own mother was a slut and that she essentially brainwashed me from birth setting me up for failure and the disaster that is the divorce and family court system. I wish I had taken the redpill sooner.

    1. In one sense you’re right, but the bigger problem is that we’re conditioned to see Red Pill Truths as isolated incidents of misogyny instead of the pattern behind them.
      For example, in college I read “Taming of the Shrew”, a fairly RP depiction of women and how to handle them. Of course, Shakespeare was either just a product of his woman-hating era, or maybe it was satire.
      Either way, we weren’t ever encouraged to even consider that he might have been RIGHT. I’m sure others have similar experiences with “Wuthering Heights” and other works.
      The truth is out there, but if you’re absolutely CONVINCED that women are sweet and pure and get wet only for rose petals, all the evidence you encounter will be filtered out of your head or spun properly before you’ve even consciously realized what you’re doing.
      And it’s especially difficult when it’s those who brought you up that deceived you. We’ve got plenty of incentives to not recognize the Truth, and that trumps evidence and reason damn near every time.

      1. I don’t agree with that. They were created “perfect and without sin”, so he could logically assume, not knowing her transformation after eating the fruit, that she was simply offering something new to try that was not sinful or dangerous. He was incorrect and of course humanity has paid the price ever since, but his original assumption would naturally assume her to be without sin, since God made this clear. She simply offered him a fruit, but I see no indication in Genesis that she told him directly it was from the Tree of Life, she just handed him a fruit. In a garden full of numerous fruit, why would he doubt her?

        1. Genesis 3:17-19
          And to Adam he said,
          “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife
          and have eaten of the tree
          of which I commanded you,
          ‘You shall not eat of it,’
          cursed is the ground because of you;
          in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
          18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
          and you shall eat the plants of the field.
          19 By the sweat of your face
          you shall eat bread,
          till you return to the ground,
          for out of it you were taken;
          for you are dust,
          and to dust you shall return.”

        2. Why do I always have to waste time correcting you public school “educated” blanket boys?
          In Genesis it says that Adam was created in the image of the gods. Adam does not mean man either, it means “he who blushes” so Adam was White and apparently so were the gods.
          Eve did not offer Adam fruit from the Tree of Life. It was from the Tree of Knowledge. The Lord threw them both out of the area because he was afraid that they would get to the Tree of Life and be immortal like the gods.
          Of course, the gods weren’t really immortal, they just lived a long time. They could die or be killed and in fact in the Iliad Zeus warns a female god not to go near the humans and reminds her of 3 gods who were killed by humans. Females never listen and she got the shit beaten out of her. They had to call their top physician, Asclepius, to patch her up.

        3. Adam does not mean “he who blushes”, it means “red man”. He was an american indian.
          Actually: he was probably a neanderthal. You know they were gingers, right?

        4. Lol at this guy. You can’t “educate” on the principles of the “Bible/Judeau Christian principles” by fusing them with paganism.
          The principles of monotheism and offering a rebuttal to pagan beliefs are one of the cornerstones of the Judeau/Christian teachings and ancient writings.
          According to the very subject matter you profess to educate by, you are in error.

        5. Exactly. It’s perfectly explained right there. I swear; people who claim the Bible is difficult to understand or convoluted have no sense of context or have never read it.
          But then like most things that take study, time and effort; most people would rather extrapolate on hear-say and general knowledge than actually put effort into actually learning about the subject.

        6. Christ, Yahweh, Moses – sounds pretty polytheistic to me. We have no idea how much the words of Christ have been adulterated as they were handed down by word of mouth over the years. Not saying that Dr.Bigg is right about everything, but there’s a lot more going on than we might like to believe. Every era (and ethnicity) has had a great enlightened being come to offer humans salvation. Maitreya was predicted to arrive in this era, which also happens to be the end of days.

  17. I wish were like the Vikings or Romans or Mongols in that regard. Men were actually legally entitled to kill his wife and the other men upon finding out about their affair. In Rome, men could even kill his “son” if it turned out to not actually be his.

    1. “I wish were like the Vikings or Romans or Mongols in that regard. Men were actually legally entitled to kill his wife”

    2. On the down side, if you were a Viking or Mongol you would be forced to go into battle and try to kill other warriors with rusty, bloody, disease infected swords. Sounds like a great trade off.
      I’ll take the 21st Century any day over that.

      1. Yeah, nowadays you get to be a beta, get to be shamed 24/7 for being a man, and if you’re lucky you get your legs and guts blown to pieces by an IED while fighting a war for a simpering mom-jeans wearing faggot. Much better option than standing and fighting another man at even odds and living in a culture where your woman respected you.

        1. Looking at the past with rose-colored glasses ensures that you will not see the great things in the present.
          I doubt many guys on this site would last 2 minutes on a medieval battlefield. We’re keyboard jockeys, man.
          Take the good with the bad. Dealing with some spoiled, bratty women is a lot better than getting draqfted or conscripted to fight some brutal war. Have you ever been to war? It’s not pretty.

        2. “I doubt many guys on this site would last 2 minutes on a medieval battlefield”
          None of these boys would even get to fight because peasants did not own weapons or did they know how to fight.At most, they would be slaves carrying the weapons like we see negroes carrying the White man’s guns on safari, or they’d be cleaning latrines or shining boots or armour. Their wives, if they had any that weren’t complete skags, would be sucking the noble’s and knight’s cocks.The peasant hubbies wouldn’t dare open their mouths and besides the wife would likely be thrown a shilling or two by the knight, more that the beta hubby could earn in a month cutting and separating the wheat from the chaff.

  18. I think there is a danger of tarring all women with the same brush. For there to be women who are defined as sluts there must be those women who are defined as “non-sluts”. Otherwise we may as well do away with the word “woman” and use the word “slut” instead. Those most egregious of women are the ones that stand out to us but I would hazard to say, the majority of women are not the sluts we think, even today. If your experience of women at college is watching (and partaking) them being passed around, keep in mind that that is likely a minority and it is the same women being used by all the guys. I noticed this myself.
    I have known plenty of girls who have had no one or maybe one guy before me (even at age 30). These girls recoil in horror at the dreaded thought of “casual sex”! Then I have met those girls who can’t count how many guys they have been with and I fling them as far away from me as possible.
    If we consider that the average man has 9 sexual partners in his lifetime (average probably increased by you players) and a woman less than half that, then a slut is undoubtedly an exception.
    Cherchez la femme no doubt but her sexual nature is unlikely to be a problem for you. More likely, her anger at your continued dominance is what you need to manage.

    1. More like there are sluts and there are lying sluts. There is no way a 30-year-old has only had sex with 1 guy unless that 1 guy was her dad who kept her locked in his rape dungeon for 20 years.

      1. You’re right, it’s completely impossible, simply because you can’t conceive it. Unless maybe because she got married as a teen to the father of her children.

        1. What relevance does that have to sluts anyway? All that means is a would-be slut virgin was shut down, temporarily, via marriage at a young age. That doesn’t mean she wasn’t a slut before the marriage already, wouldn’t have been a slut without it, or couldn’t become a slut within it via cheating: or after a divorce. She would say she’s “finding herself” and go slut it up.
          You are gullible, and buy into the facade women out there are selling you. There is not a woman in America who is not corrupted by the culture here into being an eventual slut. They’d have to not watch TV, not go to school, etc.
          A chick who’s pretending to be chaste and pure is a slut on the inside, they’re just gaming you. Behind the scenes, their panties are going down.

        2. Irrelevant to my overall point. Is it theoretically possible a woman can sleep with one man in her entire life? No one can deny this is true. If it is possible then at some point in time and space it has happened at least once.

        3. Only a fool tries to psychoanalyze another over the
          Internet. “Gullible”? Please.
          You are taking your opinions, based on your personal experience and
          extrapolating them to the whole of reality which is, frankly, ridiculous. Maybe you can’t tell the difference between a
          slut and a virgin but that doesn’t mean no one else can.
          I don’t live in America btw.

        4. AOC is generally 16 in the US. And some states have exceptions where even a 13yo girl can have sex if the boy is only 4 years older. In England that 16 is absolute so if you’re 16 and she’s 15 you can be prosecuted, although I doubt if this is ever enforced.

        5. It’s likely happened a lot not just once. Yes, even today. Ignore these bitter blanket boys on here who appear to be 1/2 from the ‘hood.

      2. Don’t be bitter because you’re not getting any and have to wank to sleazy porn. Females are not sluts because they have sex and in fact it shows that they are healthy and will propagate the White human race.You’re just a blanket boy loser or some religious nut who wants to keep a woman tied to him because it’s the only way you’ll ever have sex. Face the facts, 90% of you bottom boys are not needed and nature doesn’t care how women reproduce. It’s the Alpha’s money taking care of them anyway so only the Alphas should breed. The rest of you can be drones.

  19. Well, the truth is, this behavior was successful from evolutionary standpoint, that is why it is exists. It will not go away soon.
    Maybe we should start accepting it, and use it to our advantage.
    We should adapt too. This is just the war of the genes, and the survival of the most adaptable.

    1. Agreed. To blame nature and criticize it’s goals is foolish. Nature does not care if we are happy. Why should it? Nature is concerned with propagation of the species, which it is quite good at. There are over 7 billion people on this planet after all.

    2. According to evolutionary biologists, this behavior is only successful in communities of 150 or less. Think tribal life (hardly civilization). However, from an socioeconomic standpoint, it is catastrophic. Main reason, stands out, the destruction of the nuclear family means that those resources that normally are distributed for the permanence of that man’s progeny are diverted elsewhere, causing a lapse into backwardness amongst successive generations, equaling a degeneration. I am brass knuckles realist, and even though the primitive in me, personally deplores monogamy and the Nietzchean ubermensch in me has fucked his share of women (with pregnancy scares), I have to say from just sheer empirical observation; monogamy is conducive to civilization.
      However, this monogamy must be more tied to the woman than the man. 100 women fuck one man, all 100 women get pregnant, they all know who the father is. On the other hand, 100 men fuck 1 woman, she doesn’t know, nor do they, who the father is. Women have complete license to do what the fuck that what, and if men had the same license, we’d live in a jungle pretty soon. I am fine with that, the only thing is, that the law upholds men to contractually monogamous standards while forgoing them for women, completely. It’s a one way street. It’s become a burden for all of us. Either we have the law of the jungle, where we suppress our higher cognitive abilities or civilization. Either, represents freedom from the current imprisonment we face.

  20. Except for some neat gadgets like cars and PCs, society is just the same as 10000 years ago.
    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  21. This begs the question. What would be the exception to this behavior, even if it were only to exist hypothetically?
    What attitude would dispel this? Deference for (male) authority? Introspection and responsibility for ones actions? That would be my guess. Genuine work? Even if it was making dresses and selling them, some kind of situation where a woman stood to fail but also stood to gain.
    Just musing.

  22. Everything that relates to family, monogamy and etc. is centered around sexual repression, largely to make sure the father knows his kids are his own. It’s actually men demanding this more than women, because men know a woman’s true nature.
    Men demanded women be faithful partly to be sure of offspring, but also because they don’t want to have sex with a pussy that’s more used than the London underground. Women get hung up about men being disloyal, not just because it waters down his providing capacity – who gives a damn if Arnold gets the maid pregnant, he can afford it….. the problem is the wife who is repressing her own urge to do the same thing. The reason women mistrust men and make such a fuss about cheating is because THEY know deep down how badly they want to go and gang bang.
    A man just needs one pussy, once or twice a day, but a woman can happily handle 20-30 cocks a day. An ideal evening for a woman is being filled with 10 cocks and later showered with all their loads…. of course it is…. this is the best way to get plenty of genetic possibilities. Why have one man’s sperm competing against each other when you can have 10 men’s loads.
    The only thing that kept this in check was the concept of ‘love’ and that is mainly built out of her need for provisioning. 21st century that parameter is largely removed and in all history we can find plenty of examples, where women never cared much for it in the first place….. they love being sluts…. they love being dirty sluts…… it is their nature.

    1. They do love being dirty sluts. Why is this considered such a bad thing? Why are we all pissing and moaning about this fact, when instead we should be embracing it and adapting to it for our own masculine benefit?
      That baffles me sometimes when I think about the overall tone of the Manosphere with regards to female sexual behavior. Clearly, women have ALWAYS been this way. Why are we trying to fight it?
      Is any man here trying to deny his own sexual desires for the sake of society? I think not. Yet, we foolishly demand the same of women, based on some vague notions that ‘chaste and virtuous” women are somehow better for society. Women have NEVER been chaste and virtuous. Societies have grown and prospered despite this fact. Women can never be fully controlled. EVER.
      Adapt, or fail, It’s that simple gentlemen.

      1. Why are we trying to fight it? Well there’s this little thing called Western Civilization, which some people are keen to preserve. It may not be perfect, but it beats the hell out of the alternatives seen in backward countries.

        1. So a handful of dudes on an internet blog site are going to change the course of Western Civilization?
          Plus, we’ve all established that gender relations are the sole and most important factor in the decline of the West? Not economics and unchecked immigration? Gender relations?
          I’ve been an avid supporter of the Manasphere for a while, but this silly, half-baked crusade to save Western Civiliazation is getting a little old to me.

        2. Defeatism is for the weak. The course of history has been changed by single men writing a single book, so I’d say the manosphere is in a pretty decent position to hasten some much-needed changes. We have many great thinkers and writers, with a medium that allows for free global distribution. There is a sea change coming.
          Those who have been cheerleading the downfall of the West, and praising their good fortune at living in the age of Crass Whores, are in for a rude awakening. Manosphere Phase II is beginning now.

        3. I agree that there are MANY great thinkers who contribute to the manosphere.
          However, other than possibly Roosh, most are not necessarily bold men of action though. Most are just decent writers with a good perspective who are trying to make a few bucks publishing internet material and books. I mention Roosh because he has gone head first against the establishment; specifically the SPLC.
          I am not a defeatist. I am a realist. The Manosphere is a blip on the social radar. VERY few people overall read this material. That is a fact.
          There is no organized movement here. There are pissed off, realistic guys who are bouning idea off one another. That’s it.
          The manosphere is still in the realm of entertainment, not social activism. Be realistc.

        4. Be patient, man. It’s still in it’s infancy. I guarantee you that there are many bright guys out there right now who are preparing their entry into this sphere of ideas. Some of them have money, some have talents in media, some are filmmakers, etc. This thing is going to grow much larger, because it is such common sense. The future is bleak, and a return to traditionalism is nearly inevitable if you use history as your guide.

        5. I agree. It is still in it’s infancy. Also, we are on the same side here. I want these ideas to go mainstream, but I don’t have to tell you what might happen if they did. Many great social movements have been usurped and perverted by bad people with bad intentions. The manosphere deals in telling the truth, something which is terribly unpopular to the powers that be.
          Any real traction that the manosphere makes will be stolen away or perverted/demonized by the elite power structure. Any attempts at telling the truth will be ushered away by corruption.
          I have a feeling that I’m older than you. You seem idealistic. Nothing wrong with that. But, I’ve learned over the years that realism always trumps idealism. I’ve also noticed that readers of the Manosphere are anywhere between 18 and 60 years old, roughly. This is encouraging. Men everywhere are waking up to this bullshit mess that’s going on all around us. But they are not waking up in the numbers necessary for real change. We ALL know plenty of guys out there who refuse to take the red pill and never will. EVER. I know so many good guys that just keep putting their heads in nooses; getting married, buying homes, engaging in endless consumerism, etc. The vast majority of men in this world will never wake up to the truth about women. Ever. I cannot overstate this. This world is full of worthless, pussy beggars who will always unquestionably do the bidding of our enemies, expecting only fleeting scraps of female attention in return. The situation is bad. Very bad. Western society as we know it is inevitibly doomed and cannot be rescued or restored without massive bloodshed.

        6. I agree with all of that. I try to be realistic too, but I am not ready to throw in the towel on western civ just yet. I think the ‘massive bloodshed’ you mentioned in your last sentence may be the only way out. I believe we are headed for a civil war, or a world war, and the victors will determine the future. Right now each side is in the stage of gathering up its army. Shit’s getting scary, and with the economic collapse that I see coming in the next 2-5 years, I think we’ll see a lot of overnight converts to our side. Do I have much to go on besides hope? No, not really.

        7. Sounds like we’re pretty much on the same page. I predict a second US civil war, followed by a totalitarian takeover, followed by entry into WW3. Economic collapse of course will be the catalyst for it all. This is pretty much the same pattern that the Soviet Union underwent in the decades prior to WW2.
          The realist in me thinks that your optimism is encouraging though. I will say that. We have nothing if we don’t have hope.

        8. the world moves fast these days. The change agents have used the internet in particular to good effect. A lot, and I mean a lot of people (both men and women) are deeply pissed of / disillusioned with ‘progressive’ to shout their bizarro visions into reality. You’re right about the current influence of the manosphere, but that’s because at present it does not reflect the levels of real disillusion. For the last twenty or thirty years it has been virtually impossible to articulate unease about what was being done. Now many are beginning to articulate what they think, and they are beginning to sound serious. It is only a matter of time before the mainstream will have to acknowledge the substance of these arguments, and stop allowing 300 hundred million dollar charities like the SPLC to slander a signficant minority as a tantamount to terrorists… fact some serious attention needs to be turned towards the SPLC, particularly with regard to funding and their methods for condemning sites / organisations etc simply because they are politically opposed to what they stand for

        9. The return to “traditionalism”, i.e. male dominance from Biblical times, is a an ancient relic.

        10. “I know so many good guys that just keep putting their heads in nooses; getting married, buying homes, engaging in endless consumerism…”
          And SAVING civilization in the process. Besides, it’s THEIR life. Live your own.

        11. Dude, the conditions for the end of the world are even remotely at Stage 1. Relax and enjoy life.

        12. you are in deep denial.
          even some of the most astute economics professors are saying we are looking at total collapse sometime in the next five years.

        13. “The return to “traditionalism”, i.e. male dominance from Biblical times, is a an ancient relic.”
          History repeats in cycles remember that.

        14. Although i’d like to wager on this, I seriously think this idea is laughable. Men of the establishment succumbed to feminism decades ago… and all this feminist crap has already gained a lot of traction into the “innovative” spheres of new technology, and media. Can you name any up-and-coming organizations or men for that matter? I can’t, all I hear about is the anticipation more social revolutions, war, etc. and people getting fired from their job because of personal beliefs.

        15. I work in industry where only 200 people matter. They make the decisions.
          Society operates in a similar way. Highly focused, highly organized small groups focused on single issues have many times the influence of groups that compose majorities in society.
          Numbers have nothing to do with influence or power.

      2. I don’t care if women are all dirty sluts.
        What I don’t like is how they have an entire system built on them being angels who can do no wrong while men are viewed as animals that must constantly be in check through manshaming and laws.

        1. You should read Rollo Tomassi. This contruct that females have is called “the Feminine Imperative.” Tomassi talks about it in great length.
          Women clearly control the narrative of Western Societies. Everything is framed in their favor, at the expense of men. I highly doubt women created this imperative themselves, much in the same way as they did not truly emancipate themselves from men via suffrage, etc. The economic elites have created this meme to further their own goals for money and power. Women are not smart enough,organized enough, or cooperative enough as a group to come up with social control mechanisms this complex. It was handed to them on a silver platter.
          The truth about “female emancipation” is that the economic elites came up with the idea to force women into the workforce, expand the economy and tax base, and give women( who out consume men 5 to 1) more disposible income to pump into the economy. Then they conconcted the romantic idea of female liberation and sold it to these bitches tooth and nail. It worked wonders for the economic expansion, as can be readily observed over the last 40 years. However, the downside is that it completely ruined the fabric of society by dismatling family and religion.
          Hence, we are now in the mess that we are in. Instead of opting for slow, sustained decade upon decade economic growth, the power elites went all-in and ramped up the expansion efforts at all costs; i.e. the destruction of our culture and ultimately our economy.

        2. I’d say chronologically speaking first you had ‘the woman question’ (wollstonecraft – a proto-feminist), then liberal men / social reformers e.g. J.S. Mill (utilitarianism, happiness principle etc) and then the marxists started to take it seriously (first Engels, then especially, the cultural marxists). The financial elites / oligarch’s and government backing (to widen the reach of taxation) come after this…..60s onwards (i.e. gloria steinem & CIA / rockefeller foundation).
          Pretty strange bedfellows, but the shared interest amongst feminism, marxism and oligarchy / government is state versus traditional stable families.
          If there are such shared interests perhaps it would be worthwhile thinking about what tensions and irreconcilable differences their might be. There are already signs of tensions between the 1% who control most of the worlds wealth and socialists who may be in bed with the elites, but who may also hate them.
          Place pressure in the right places and perhaps this axis of evil will fall apart

        3. The whole thing is predicated on the elite being able to corall the masses into submission. This worked very well during WW2, with relatively primitive communications, ‘private’ yet state owned media, half the current world popluation, limited infrastructure, lack of nuclear weapons, etc.
          But, I have a feeling that the elites miscalculated very badly in many areas, particularly with regard to the power of the internet. They were lilely relying on their own media influences to be dominant, which they are not. Very few people relative to the whole population take the mainstream media seriously.
          The elites are very strong and very smart. I’m sure they have contingencies planned. They seem to always win. However, there are now SOOO many people out there. It will be difficult, if not impossible to restrain the people once the shit hits the fan, whether deliberately orchestrated or not.
          One thing the elites can count on is that there will be chaos. Whether they have the abilty to reign it in when it all goes bad is the real question.

        4. I’ve just been reading this I’ve only just started so can’t assess it. But I think there are many who are now beginning to look closely at how these people, and the institutions and networks they are a part of work. One point the articles make is that its only since about the 1980s that we have started to have global elites and a genuinely transnational capitalist class (i.e. oligarchs).
          Why do you have Soros, manipulating economies, currencies all over the world, and trying to spread his (very particular) version of the ‘open society’ everywhere (as in Ukraine which may well descend into civil war as a result of this type of pressure)
          The elites (apart from soros) like to stay hidden, but there’s some potential to here to shine the spotlight on what they are doing. For a start a feminism shouting that it is about equality will be less attractive to the counter-cultural ‘radical’ crowds in universities etc once it is shown that feminism is being patronised for the sake of corporate self-interest. If this case can be made persuasively (and hopefully in a watertight way) then feminism automatically loses its high ground status.
          Its not about equality, its about the manipulation of the idea of equality, and about making big fat cunts incredible amounts of money

        5. There are multiple factions of the elite. The people who control the media and government are a different faction from the political elites and the people who control the media and state apparatus.
          The tech elite are fighting with technological measures and attempting to shift the balance of power in non-political ways.
          Even the economic elites believe the US is becoming a shit hole and are worrying about “political instability” and “civil unrest”. The international elite are mobile. They are not tied to a country or region.
          Their companies, markets, manufacturing operations are outside of the US and can be moved. They can live in a different city every few months and it does not affect their interests.
          There is an autonomous government bureaucracy that seems to be pushing these idea. They infiltrated education system and then from there get people placed in strategic positions in media and government.
          I do not believe they have support from the economic elites. The tech elites call it the “cathedral”. The tech elites are mobile enough not to be tied to the US and are exploring contingency plans such as Bitcoin and Sea Steading They dont believe its worth fighting the political battle.
          The media overemphasizes Buffet and Zuckenburg and systematiclly ignores the other four thousand people who are opposed to what is happening in America.
          The tech elites dont support it. The military elites dont support it. The people in FBI and DHS at lowest levels dont support it. The international elites dont care, but tend to be conservative Christians and are merely concerned with their own interests. The Europeans elites all agree US is going to hell. The US elites all agree the US is going to hell.

        6. Are you sure? The mainstream media has a huge influence on people, esp when you factor in the PC messages found in movies, books, television.

        7. you’ve clearly looked into this matter a lot. Would you ever consider writing a synopsis for this site?

    2. You can’t be for real, my god. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe women don’t like their men cheating on them because of the emotional pain it causes? If we women are all such dirty sluts then why does pua and prostitution even exist? Projecting much?

      1. “If we women are all such dirty sluts then why does pua and prostitution even exist?”
        I can’t make any sense out of that statement.
        The existence of PUA and prostitution proves beyond doubt that women are in fact dirty sluts.
        PUA is only necessary because women don’t respect love or old-fashioned courtship, and instead only respond to flashy, aggressive, smooth-talking manipulation. It’s pretty fucking slutty to go screw a guy because he charmed you for two hours at some sleazy bar.
        Prostitution exists because women value money more than love and commitment. Prostitution makes women totally unsuitable for love, and yet still thousands (millions?) of them engage in it of their own free will, because they love money and “independence” more than they love men.
        Women are filthy dirty whores when left to their own devices. Because of this, Patriarchy is necessary for a functional civilization. Sorry if the truth hurts your little bitty feelings.

        1. That statement was in response to this silly notion on this
          site that all women can’t control
          their sexual impulses. But hey we had the patriarchy in the past and author of this article is saying women have always been the same. Shouldn’t give you a clue that women can’t be controlled…

        2. I honestly don’t think women can control their sexual impulses at all. It has to be controlled by external forces. A strong patriarchal society, with intense social shaming, is the only thing that has worked in the past to reign in the family-destroying whorish behavior.

        3. Men on average have a higher sex drive then women( has been proven) so are men also wild animals who can’t control their sexual impulses?

        4. Men have higher sex drives but they also possess immensely higher levels of self-control, discipline, and future time orientation. These factors, combined with the fact that women are the sexual “choosers”, mean that female sexuality needs to be restrained while men are perfectly capable of restraining themselves.
          If men had a lack of sexual control like women do, they would go around raping everything that gave them a hardon.

        5. “while men are perfectly capable of restraining themselves”.
          Patently false. Men are like a pack of wolves, salivating and thirsty.

        6. they may be thirsty but they don’t act on it. they are unable to within the confines of socially acceptable activity. Women on the other hand can (and do) go out every single night of the week and pick up some new cock in the local bar, without paying any money, suffering any shame, or facing any legal consequences.

        7. What then do you make of laws or rules that constrain the behaviour of men. Even male prisoners have laws and rules set down by the Alpha of the group.

        8. Don’t respond to women, but I have to agree with this. Women love money and material possessions more than men. Men under patriarchy, viewed these things as the lubricant to maintain a healthy family life, these were means to an end and the end was love for his clan/family. To women, money and materialism is an end of itself. Your entire existence in a woman’s life will be condensed to this simple question, “What can you do for me?” Patriarchy is civilization. There can be no civilization where the “Pater” is not on top. Woman’s behavior is inherently destructive if not bound by a patriarchy. Even an evil man can still be constructive, but an evil woman can only destroy and corrupt. Supposedly in Abrahamic theology, when God created Adam, Adam was lonely, but wtf, I don’t think Adam was looking to be miserable. He couldn’t even get his rib back.

        9. The rule here is we don’t respond to women. And you are proving why. She is sidelining a constructive discussion via nonsensical statements.
          No matter what you say she WILL NOT understand. She can’t! She refuses to except any world view but the feminine.
          Don’t feed the bitches!

        10. “[Men] they may be thirsty but they don’t act on it.”
          Mm. Yes. And over the course of a woman’s lifetime, statistically she has a 33.3% probability of being raped or sexually assaulted by a male.
          This is not even counting all the males who are also raped by males.
          Sounds to me like men have got it perfectly under control.
          [Also, don’t even pretend you wouldn’t fuck any girl immediately if she asked you to, even if it did turn out to be with 20 different girls a day. We men are just as bad]

  23. Top 5 article ever. So true, I keep telling men that the fear of death in the hearts of women keeps them in line. Men and women were born with a number of tactical evolutionary advantages. With men it’s our physical strength, bigger brains and complete agency. With women it’s their evolutionary propensity for acquisition through means of deception, cunning and false pretense. When the other sex has so much natural power as we do over women, the only logical conclusion is that they would seek to counterbalance with lying, deception and cunning by means of her vagina, youth and beauty. When this fails she tries to leverage other men against each other. This is her power. All you fuckers who shun religion should know that it was through the lens of religion that kept this behavior under wraps. They’ve always been this way

    1. It’s funny how I only came to truly appreciate religion after swallowing the red pill …in no way do I endorse modern feminized churchianity but I have been surprised how much the Bible in particular reflects red pill truths … I also find it helpful to think of God as a metaphor for Absolute Truth rather than simply some sort of omniscient being …

      1. same here. was a pathetic leftist athiest, rejecting everything I’d been taught by the church and the patriarchy, until I wised up, took the red pill, and realized the ancients were right all along.
        While it’s true that religion is often used as a tool to control the masses, it is a lot better than rampant consumerism and the religion of “progress”.

        1. Glad you’ve seen the light. If only I could convince my left-leaning friends of their errors. But I cannot.

        2. wait till they get dumped for no good reason by a woman they loved. that will be the perfect time to move in for the kill. they need to be shocked out of their cocoon of lies, before they will be receptive to the truth.

        3. I have a buddy who is thoroughly red pill, but also thoroughly leftist. A smart man who fully supports Obama. How does one reason with this type of individual?

        4. well that one is a real head scratcher. Obama/Biden’s whole campaign rests on the phony “war on women” meme. They are both male feminists, and collectivists. How can one claim to be red pill while worshiping male feminists?? Your buddy is highly confused.
          My play would be to point out that leftism=collectivism=statism=marxism=communism, and that communism is the world’s most comprehensive control grid for human subjects ever devised. If one wishes to be controlled, and to have all the danger removed from society by centralized government forces, then one is a pussy, unworthy of calling themselves a man.

        5. I’ve loved truly only two women in my life, and that’ll be the absolute last time I’ll ever do that shit. There’s nothing you can ever do to make a woman happy, especially western women. Their concept of happiness is like a temporary high that requires higher and higher dosages of bullshit to satiate. They really don’t have higher concept of stable and objective happiness that men do, their brains aren’t that big. Stability for a woman equates to boringness. Eventually, no matter who that man is, he’ll run out dosages of bullshit to feed his fucking hamster. Women are sentinels of the devil, I’m convinced at this point. My last relationship (and I mean the fucking last!), took so much out of me. I mean I was never even beta, slapped her when she got out of control and generally loved her like a man should love his woman (supposedly). This girl would call me handsome everyday, say I love you, we’re perfect for each other. She even wanted to plan a fucking pregnancy. She even brought up names and shit.
          We ended it earlier this year, and not even a month afterwards, she’d stopped by to tell me she was dating someone new, not even casual, but serious. I’m a pretty hard fellow, but this was something new. A part of me wanted to kill her there, bash her skull in on her car but I value my freedom too much. Parading around in the clothes I bought her, telling me this shit, making great money with a job I helped her get and then boom. This guy was already in the works a long time ago, I should have known. This treachery was something that I had never experienced before. No one knows deceit, treachery and lies until they’ve truly dealt with a woman.
          All those experiences, it seemed were only felt by me. It seemed I was the only one who truly loved. I should have realized, to a bitch, I’m nothing more than a participant in an economic transaction to be discarded at will. I ignored all the vital warning signs that she had brought up. I don’t care who you are, how handsome you are, you could be Brad Pitt, there’s nothing on earth you could do to please a woman over the long term. They are all agents of the devil, every last one of them. I truly believe the Mohammadeans, when they say the vast majority of the residents of hell, are women. No sane man could stay sane by living with one of these people without the legal right as in days of old, to beat them or kill them.

        6. Why did you keep a woman if you were not planning to have children?
          If you keep a woman, you have to make sure she’s constantly occupied with children. And once you stop breeding and kids get about 10-15 years old you just make an agreement to make sure she does not steal your wealth.
          Then she’ll be free to go back to being a slut and you can enjoy younger women for pure sex.

        7. Maybe start by recognising the dyed-in-the-wool blue-pillness of a lot of the conservative worldview?

        8. same exact thing happened to me brother. no warning, no attempts at reconcilication. just – ‘my hamster says i deserve something better, something new’.
          now the bitch is with a guy with not even half of my SMV, and she will never ever get a guy as good as me again. Probably too fucking stupid to realize it though.
          but that ending taught me so much about women, and pushed me to dig deeper and answer a lot more questions about life, so I wouldn’t change things if I could.

        9. “you just make an agreement to make sure she does not steal your wealth.”
          Good comedy, buddy.

        10. As much as you may miss her once in a while your heart knows you are fortunate to be rid of her.

        11. For a short while you filled a role in her life. The role is important to her. The actor is not.

        12. There are three types of Obama supporters: turds looking for handouts; narcissists/ true believers who think they get social brownie points for advocating forced wealth redistribution and liberty infringement; and the unscrupulous puppeteers who use the previous two groups for their own political advantage.
          If your buddy is fully red pill and he fully supports Obama, he’s probably in the third category, a Machiavellian. I wouldn’t turn my back on him.

        13. “How can one claim to be red pill while worshiping male feminists?? Your buddy is highly confused.”
          I was thinking the same thing. Aren’t “…thoroughly red pill, but also thoroughly leftist” and “A smart man who fully supports Obama…” both mutually exclusive?

        14. Obama is a fucking faggot. He shamelessly promotes feminism, queerism in the military and disparages traditional living and normalcy wherever he can find it. Unless he’s directly benefiting from Obama by being a beneficiary of his cabinet etc, your friend is not “alpha” supporting pro-feminist Cultural Marxists.

        15. Red pill Islamic wisdom:
          ” Women are created from a man’s rib, which was bent. If you’d try to straighten her, you’d break her. But you could still benefit from her crookedness, if you employed her usefully”.
          “Marry virgins because their mouths are sweeter, wombs are fresher and they are less devious”.
          ” The majority of women will be in Hell because they are deficient in religion, they backbite and are ungrateful to their companions (husbands and good treatment”.

        16. Women and truth are like trying to clean dirty pots and pans with out soap.

        17. Obama is a pawn of the REAL owners of the world. The ruling class. They pull the strings behind the scenes and this fool follows suit. He’s just doing his job, answering and placating to his masters so they can follow through with their plans. Fuck em all. In the end, all you have is yourself, you can’t even save your family from the blue bill influence. All you have is you, your thoughts, your life experiences, your memories. Money, women, fast cars, material objects, fake friends come and go as fast they came in your life. All that shit is replaceable. The knowledge and wisdom that you discovered along your journey stays with you to the very end. Disregard females and this pussified society at large and focus on your self improvement as not only a man, but as a human being. It’s so much more rewarding.

        18. If you don’t mind, could you expand on the “I ignored all the vital warning signs that she had brought up.”
          What are the warning signs so fellow men can be aware?

        19. The little subtle comments. 1.) Mentioning other men 2.) Bringing up your income, or taking a very vested interest in your earning potential 3.) Dysfunctional relationship with her father 4.) Sexual history 5.) Never completes tasks ( means she won’t be serious about you) 6.) Considers herself “special”
          This chick deported her own father, and never completed shit without my help. Mention twice when I was working on my company, “I wonder if we’re going to be rich.” She said she could’ve married Moroccan royalty, if she had wanted to, and made no secret about her sexual history.
          Needless to say, she baited me into a relationship. I’m no sucker. She promised to be obedient, faithful, and a “good partner.” The sex was excellent, but this girl was a House of Lies. I helped get the bitch a job, where afterwards she summarily left and started seeing someone new. It’s not a matter of beating or slapping them either, I did that, and she loved me for it. Women are hypergamous and they get bored. The new guy she’s seeing, I feel sorry for him. He’s a pussy, and she’s going to use that guy the fuck out.
          Be warned when she starts mentioning your income, other men (even past guys), when she wants to try new shit in bed, and never finishes shit. If she doesn’t finish shit, it shows she’s not serious, and if she can’t even complete the most mundane tasks, she’s hardly worthy of impregnating. And if she feel’s in any way she’s “special” this is her self-centeredness which excludes you. The moment you run out of “special” juice to keep feeding the cunt, she’ll get her delusional highs from the next motherfucker. If you’re in a relationship with a chick and she says, “you make me feel special,” do not take the cunt seriously. Doesn’t matter who you are, they will eventually run out of love with you, women don’t know how to love men, they love themselves. The more you can make her love herself, the more she believes you love her. In the words of a certain rapper, “you all about her and she’s all about hers.”

        20. Thanks — really appreciate it. It must’ve been a brutal experience to go through. A friend of mine actually had the same thing happen to him, except this girl had a new bf after a week of breaking up.
          I’ve never heard the completing tasks point before so that was enlightening, but you’re right about the “special” horseshit. One girl said she was a “princess” and I ran, I ran so far away (yes, Flock of Seagulls reference). LTR don’t do it for me at this stage of my life, but I know a good long term girl is VERY supportive, wants to come along for the ride, has either 0 or few sexual partners (usually LT bf), not interested in her own glory (Corporate ladder, news anchor Veronica Corninstone types, etc.) but rather being happy through your glory (think housewife playing with the kids and the golden retriever). They are rare but they do exist.
          The most important factor is the role of the father. If the father was the leader, strong, successful, and family oriented, then she is likely to be normal. If she loved her father and he loved her, then once she’s out in the world she will look for that same thing, except this time with the sexual element. Any abuse, abandonment, adoption, (The 3 A’s) etc. then the likelihood of a crazy bitch increases exponentially.

        21. Yeah it’s true, a woman who can’t complete tasks at the beginning of a relationship will only run when her responsibilities grow. This is also a very parasitic/welfare mentality too. These types of women usually want some “prince” who they can fuck around on, to support them for the rest of their lives. Wow a week? Damn. Looks don’t matter either, I’ve known male models (sounds pretty faggoty, I know) who got their fucking hearts ripped out by 6’s and 7’s. It’s not men, or what kind of man you are. No matter if a bitch says, “you’re the hottest guy I’ve ever dated” ( which she said to me), always take it with a grain of salt. It’s not men, but the quality of women. Yeah that’s a nice story about the potential housewife, but I’m not looking for unicorns. I live in a city with tons of vapid, shallow careerist whores. I’m just going to recycle the girls as they come. Every potential girl I meet here, is an enemy and they only serve one purpose.

        22. She sounds like a total user man. Awful woman. Still, she will eventually run out of men to use and will wind up being her own worst punishment.

        23. Just pump em and dump em. You don’t need the stress these bitches bring into your life. Say focused on making money for yourself and have fun. Improve yourself. Learn about life. Fuck a bitch! Bitches never get my money, respect, sympathy or approval.

        24. Lance, I’ve had similar relationships with women. I wonder what your thoughts are on relationships that are long term marriages? I mean, obviously there are millions of women in the world that have been married to the same guy for decades and for all practical means, the man and woman have settled into “boringness” of a long term relationship. So….based on this large number…there must be many women who are willing to do this. Is it possible that the type of woman you talk about is only the really attractive ones? Or is it possible that due to the society we now live in ( instant gratification via texts and FB, etc) that women can’t handle getting “bored”? I suppose that’s not true if you believe the muslims since they didn’t have cell phones when they coined these tenants of women.
          I guess my question to you is how do you square the fact that millions of women do settled into long term marriages and raise families? Here’s a posit for you; Let’s say a woman gets married early…by her mid 20s or so. Let’s say her and said husband go ahead and have 2 – 4 kids spread two or more years apart. Now, I think I may have just figured something out here…..if a man were to do it this way…he would be assisting the woman in achieving her biological needs/goals. ie….making her an instant mother with offspring to care for for ….say….the next 20-30 years by raising these kids who you “spaced out” by two years in pregnancies? I realize there are multiple questions to this post …..but what do you…..or anyone else for that matter……think of this?

        25. Feel for you man. I’ve been hurt in relationships too , including a divorce. I also agree that these traits are feminine and of the woman. At the same time, people are people. I mean, look at guys. You’ve got assholes, liars, truly nice honest men. Giving men. Brave men, Cowards. Backstabbers. Extremely loyal men. Born leaders . Born fathers. etc.
          I think to extrapolate these transient qualities to all women is painting with a bit too much of a broad brush. While I agree that you must always have your antennae up when dealing with women…..they are obviously people too. So, you’re going to have them from all across the spectrum on their personalities and characters. I think what we’re talking about here is character. Inevitably, there will be women with good character. Just as we, as men, have the character to not smash someone’s head in when we disagree with them because our character, in the form of self restraint, kicks in. Just as we, as men channel our innate rage and capacity for violence, because of our character. I believe there are women….indeed hot women….out there with enough character to rein in their innate base instincts and traits.

        26. Ol Brad’s probably catching hell from ol Angie as you wrote this post.

        27. You’ll just miss the convenient access to pussy, not the negatives which escalated over time.

        28. Are you actually a man of color, Lance? As your profile pic suggests? If so, you must be mildly retarded for engaging with the males on this site, 95% of whom are white bigots who feel the same raging hatred for blacks and Jews as you feel toward women. That’s some masochistic self-hating shit if I ever saw it. You’re not the brightest bulb, are you?
          Secondly, I hope you realize that your posts reveal you to be a flaming psychopath and criminal. You do realize that assaulting a woman is still illegal, don’t you? You have some extreme anger issues, and it’s pretty “beta” and pathetic that you are consumed with rage over some bitch who broke your heart, like a true pussy faggot. Hilarious. I
          I seriously laugh my ass off when I read your posts. You’re like an angry little pitbull, foaming at the mouth. Did your mother not hug you enough? Or maybe the teacher ignored you when you had your little hand raised? Only deep psychological issues could warrant such sociopathic rants. But like I said, they entertain me, so keep performing like the trained seal you are, bitch boy.

        29. No. All women are like that (AWALT). It is a matter of biology.
          Given your emotionally based argument, I have to ask:
          Are you a woman or a white knight?

        30. It is always nice to hear from the feminists on these kinds of topics. It helps to put things into perspective.

        31. That’s the attitude I came to adopt as well. Religion’s nothing but a tool to control the gullible… and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. The “prophets” didn’t “receive” laws to suit their whimsy, they wrote down things that would be useful for structuring society.

        32. I hear ya, Lance. Think of how bad it will get for the other guy. You got lucky because you were able to walk away clar and free. Futre “boyfriends” of your ex-female in question will get tapped for palimony, alimony and whatever some fascist judge decides should happen in her favor.

        33. Be careful about believing the words of fork-tongue Mohammad (aka The Obliterator, in his day). He admitted in The Satanic Verses that he was being controlled by demons when he wanted to back-track on something he said. He was making plenty shit up to suit himself, but was definitely a conduit for demons (who are now known as Allah) having a good laugh at humanity. Having said that, who bertter to send humans a postcard from hell than demons?

        34. Even Catholicism and many Christian sects have Prechrustian non Judaic influences from Babylon , Sumerian or Egypt aka some people call pagan. Christmas is saturnalia plus sol invictus rehashed. Trinity akin to enki , ninhursag, Marduk.

    2. Lance gets it right yet again. I keep talking voting, but he’s right – it’s all of civilization that needs to be kept out of the hands of cunts. Men have to have sole control. It’s the only way things will work.
      And another thing Lance points out. Cunts fear dying. That keeps them submissive and obedient. We men have, on average, superior physical strength. For those who don’t, get weapons. We all need to assert our role over cunts and let them know that they need to accept their place either beneath us or beneath us and six feet of dirt.

      1. Women should never be allowed in a position of power. They ruin everything. Everything they touch, turns to shit. They are terrible decision makers. As long as they stay where they belong, everything is fine.

    3. “All you fuckers who shun religion should know that it was through the lens of religion that kept this behavior under wraps.”
      That is why the Joel Osteen self help type of Christianity is for shit. A dangerous non-shaming direction. Sounds like Jesus calling out “you-go-girl” from the sidelines of the America’s cultural car wreck.

      1. The Holy Roman Inquisition.
        That`s were it`s at. Return those fellas their former splendour, and they`ll burn all the feminist-witches for witchcraft and heresy, in no time.
        Problem solved.

    4. Lance, you really should write some articles. You are a talented writer and your comments are usually the best of the lot.

        1. The provocative pot-stirring notwithstanding, ‘keeping women in line via keeping the fear of death in their hearts’ is a losing proposition. You really want to go through life like that? Soon enough it devolves into threats to go public with your explicit, even implicit physically-violent fallback strategy (unless you are incredibly subtle about it) – and lo and behold, you become a poor man’s Donald Sterling of sorts. You can’t swing that in these modern times. And even if you could, I wouldn’t recommend it. Beyond legitimate ethical questions of applying this, you as a man remain completely attached to the outcome of her omnipresent submission to your violently-enforceable will. Does that really make you feel alpha? I’d rather keep my woman in line by keeping the threat of *me leaving* as an ever-present option. And that’s what I’d recommend to others as well.

        2. I disagree.
          Instead we should have a judicial system that enables men to say:
          “…Aah..! So you`re not “happy”?? Well, try walking out that door, bitch and I`ll have you stoned for aldultery within the hour. Try it! There`s the door! Here, let me hold it open for you!! What`s that?? Oh so you`re happy after all?? Well, good, – then have dinner ready in 35 minutes and if you`ll excuse me, I`ll go take a good, long crap, while you cook….!”
          That way, with the threat of stoning lurking behind the door, your women will not see you as merely “some dude she`s free to leave if something “better” comes along”, but instead you`ll be “the focal point of her existence, on wich her life depends.”
          And that way “your happiness” = “her survival”
          And such a system is nuch more practical and much more efficient, when it comes guaranteeing quality living for every man.
          So if the judicial laws of society enables you to have her stoned if she steps out of line, that is the best guarantee for a happy love-life.
          Because she`ll do her absolutely best to please you in every way, every second, if not for love, then to ensure her own survival.
          And in that process, she`ll become the sweetest and and most devoted woman in history, because every kiss she gives you, every sandwitch she makes, and every loving look that she gives you, will bring her one little step further away from being stoned to death.
          So think big, Fellas.
          Think big,

        3. Well, it would make life easier for us, but what entitles us to make them slaves, especially when so many men would take advantage of that and become tyrants? I would like to have a wife who is obedient and works hard at home, but not if she was doing so only out of fear that I would call up the imam to have her head cut off.

      1. Seconded. The content I’ve read in this man’s response-comments are quite regularly damn high-quality. I for one would love to read some Lance articles.

    5. “Citizenship as in antiquity, should only be conferred to men”.
      Except we live in a more civilized, mature society. Besides, what men? Who decides? How?

    6. Re: religion you are right that kept the bitches in check BUT I think you can be areligious or irreligious and still be red pill, anti feminist etc. There are atheist/heathen right wingers out there which I guess I’m one . Will concede the great good religion does for societies.

        1. @ PG tips.
          Go fuck yourself, you homo.
          We used to burn feminists at the stake for witchcraft, so suck it.
          We kept this world free from feminism for centuries, free of charge, courtesy of The Holy Roman Inqusition.
          So go fuck yourself. Thouroughly. Here`s how we treat feminism were I`m from, you faggot:

    7. Which “inner city” school did you attend, my boy? Women were citizens as well as the men in Rome. You’ve probably read of the Rape of the Sabine Women but it never happened. There was a shortage of women in Rome so the Aryan King of Rome went to the Sabines, an Old European group of people and offered the women Citizenship in Rome, marriage, and all the stuff that females like-hot tubs, baths,cash and jewellery etc. so the founders’ women did have citizenship and they certainly did later under the Republic and then Empire.
      All of that nonsense written by Juvenal (juvenile) proves that bitter pyjama boys have always been around and bitching about women. Juvenal was a satirist and if he was writing today he’d be doing some sitcom like The Big Bang Theory. He’d be good at it too because he was a blanket boy nerd himself with women. There’s not much known about Juvenal but it is believed that he died at about 40, still a virgin, from a terminal case of blue balls, something you boys must be familiar with.

      1. Maria. Send me some nude pics of yourself. Do something useful you dirty cunt. You need a good pounding, you probably haven’t got you some in a while eh?

    8. Lance, remember the old Roman era quotation, “Once women become your equal, they become your masters”?
      Maria is intentionally forgetting that for leverage.

    9. > All you fuckers who shun religion should know that it was through the lens of religion that kept this behavior under wraps.
      This came up on Reddit’s red pill sub recently and I thought one of the comments summed it up pretty nicely:

      “Catholic church got it right.
      Man-woman marriage, no pre marriage sex make couples marry early in their twenties, lots of time for multiple pregnancies, men grow up faster because they become fathers early, no pregnancy prevention means lots of babies, keeps women busy with family and men working harder, earning more, spending more, which is good for economy. Many kids = many tax payers = good for economy.”

    10. Lance, you gotta write a full article for this site. As an older gent, I enjoy all your input. I think you are a very bright young man.

    11. If you decide to write some articles I can take on one more author as an editor. If you have something you want proofread send it to [email protected]. Since I only have 2 people to edit for at the moment I can get them back to you in 48 hours. It’s my way of keeping my skills sharp and giving back to the community. Molon Labe

    12. Article? I think Lance should write a book his comments are pure gold many times better the the article hes replying to

    13. Think that women back in 1914 where just like in 2014?
      I wouldn´t insult average 1914 men by comparing them to 2014 ones.

    1. Their evil unlike the evil of men are not restrained. Men are regulated by the violence of law. Women are unregulated.

  24. Billy Chubbs, knocking it out of the park once again! I swear this dude is one of like 3 guys worth reading in the Manospambotbutthurtjesusfagosphere.

    1. depends what ‘of note’ means. Not first tier. Arguably second, definitely third (if that counts). I rate simone weil (more mystic catholic than philosopher but a serious thinker nonetheless). In antiquity hypatia (also a feminist philosophy rag) – a worthy philosopher rather than someone of note – some would disagree). Later Hildegaard of Bingen – not sure why she’s known really, but feminists like her. In modern age I suppose hannah arendt, martha nussbaum and a bunch of feminist idealogues & psychoanalysts who might also be considered as philosopher – the ones who come up most often I’d say are melanie klein (child-psychoanalysis) and the frenchies, helene cixous / luce irigeray (who you could happily flush away. Kristeva – unreadable but made some impact with ‘intertextuality’ etc, and latterly the likes of judith butler etc (gender is performance) who has been treated elsewhere.
      so, basically no, but nonetheless some who have made notable contributions to feminist philosophy….contradiction in terms perhaps? You’re not going to get a Plato, Aristotle, Kant etc, what you will get is quantity.

      1. oh and de Beauvoir, who played second fiddle to her other half JP Sartre, but who wrote the second sex and some stuff about lesbianism.

      2. Cool…thanks for the references. I will look these gals up.
        So no “heavy hitter ” types ie Plato , Aristotle etc amongst the ladies. What about Ayn Rand? I would consider Rand 2nd tier also. Rand , I believe founded “Objectivism” …

        1. well spotted – I actually haven’t read her work, although its on my reading list. I have mixed feelings about objectivism from what I’ve read about it, but there’s still lots that seems attractive about it (and Rand). I love the fact that Rand is on the Guardian hate list (they keep doing articles hating on her) so she must have something right. Another thing Atlas Shrugged is a thick book

        2. I’d also point out that without male philosophers like Hegel, Marx, (as well as Freud), and latterly Wittgenstein, Austin, Barthes, Bakhtin and especially Lacan, Foucault and Derrida, its difficult to imagine any kind of modern feminist philosophy. In other words modern twentieth century male philosophers, typically of a leftist persuasion and concerned with ‘marginality’ etc have laid the groundwork for the ladies to play on.

        3. The Virtue of Selfishness is a good intoduction to her work which doesn’t require as much time investment. From there you can work out if you’re interested enough for Atlas Shrugged or the Fountainhead.

        1. Say what you wish, but she is the most famous and prolific composer of Gregorian Chant. She also composed the first known musical drama- 500 years before Monteverdi.

        2. Yes, she was a prolific composer, but she did not bring anything to the broader structure of chant at the time – Pope Gregory I did. I am not diminishing her achievements, but i think your comment was overbroad.

    2. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that women were not allowed to read or write for most of recorded history.

  25. Original sin ppl….This was how Eve was after taking the apple…again reinforced in Pro 30:20 “This is the way of an adulterous woman: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, ‘I’ve done nothing wrong.’

  26. I think the last section is the most telling. Read the literature from times of war and hardship and the men are men and the females behave. In literature from tines of prosperity the men are effeminate and the women are sluts. Men benefit in every way from being men. Women benefit in every way from behaving themselves. It’s why weak men and whores are so full of self-loathing and regret. Men and women raised in dangerous areas or counter-cultures where resources are scarce and require hard wwork still represent the values we think lost. Poor girls without welfare to support them are the only ones who generally stay chaste. Poor men in the same situation are the only ones who generally are men. Prosperity breeds weakness. We’ve known this for long.

    1. Don’t hope for war or bad times loser because men like me will either exterminate you or make you a slave lol
      And btw, my ancestors owned slaves in Jamaica and became very wealthy supplying the mills in Lancashire with cotton.

  27. Great article !Since friendship for romans had to be between two equals ,latin had the word Amicus referring to a male friend,but it didn’t have the word Amica for women,which instead meant hooker.
    Greets from italy

  28. I have a Penguin translation of Juvenal, where the various names of people (whom the people of Juvenal’s times would have recognised) are replaced with brief descriptions. Instead of ‘Sullia’, it has ‘that hard-drinking unfaithful wife’. It unpackages all the little in-jokes and makes the satires a bit more accessible at the price of being a bit more wordy.
    Good stuff. His other satires are worth a read too – basically all of them are about life at the end of an empire, during the decay of a once-great society. They resonate with out times.

    The greatest misery for man = WOMAN.
    The greatest trial for man = WOMAN.
    Men today live like King Kong who’s eventually die for a beauty (BITCH). Women DESERVE PAIN AND MISERY. SO INFLICT IT UPON THEM, BROTHERS! I hate women so much that the best sound for me are the whimpering cries of a woman when I’m fucking her relentlessly. When I am spanking her ass with a wooden holed mallet. When I am choking her throat, strangling her with my shoe laces and pulling her hair so hard that she decides to shave it in fear! When I’m twisting her clit and her nipples between my nails till she pisses in pain! FUCK WOMEN AND SPIT ON THEM!

    1. you are over-invested against women just as blue pills are over-invested in favour of women. Both positions serve women and feminism equally because they feed of emotional reaction. Rein in your emotions

  30. Women are the scum of this world.
    And the worst scum of this world is the white or fair skinned woman.
    Whether she’s born in America, or the Anglo countries, Asia, Middle east, Europe, Russia or anyone else where in the world, white women are the most vapid and depraved of all women in the world, for no other skinned woman will fuck so fast and shamelessly with any men anywhere on this planet. White skinned or fair skinned women are the easiest lays of all women, they are the biggest sperm toilets of all women.
    The real reason why men get married is not for sex. It is for offspring and companionship in old age (avoid loneliness, someone to take care of the man), for a man’s home is his castle. The reason why women get married is to fuck, and leach a man’s resources, have children and fuck other men. Women are God’s most ungrateful and wretched creation.

  31. I was wondering just yesterday what, if anything, women have actually accomplished as leaders or visionaries. I came up with “that one black chick sat in the wrong seat.” Not one prophet, revolutionary leader, world-changing thinker, or scientist (to my knowledge) has ever been female. Let’s stop pretending we’re all the same and go back to knowing our roles, OK? Ladies, we need you. You’re important and we love you. But please stop pretending you’re men, it doesn’t work for anyone.

    1. Elizabeth I and Margaret Thatcher are the only two that I can name. In fact despite the so-called “greatness” of Catherine the “Great,” it was her ineptitude, smuttiness and depravity that encouraged the Romanovs after her death to adopt the “Salic Law.” Basically prohibiting women from ever becoming Tsarina of all the Russias, ever again. This is why Nicholas II of Russia was adamant about having a son despite having 5-6 daughters. However, in our times, a female monarch, slutting it up with and desecrating the crown would be lauded, applauded and mimicked (think Princess Diana).

    2. – Sappho, the original poet, had a huge influence on ancient Greek poetry and literature today, world-changing thinker at the time
      – Joan of Arc, inspired a French revolt against the English occupation, revolutionary leader
      – Harriet Beecher Stowe, wrote novel which Abraham Lincoln claimed were a major factor behind the American Civil War (anti-slavery campaign)
      – Marie Curie, world-changing research into radioactivity
      – Eleanor Roosevelt, head of UN human rights commission, helped draft 1948 declaration of human rights
      – Simone de Beauvoir, one of the leading existentialist philosophers of the 20th century
      – Mother Teresa, need I explain? Revolutionary figure of selflessness
      – Dorothy Hodgkin, world-changing discoveries in chemistry, specifically penicillin and insulin
      – Rosa Parks, “that one black chick [who] sat in the wrong seat”
      – Shirin Edabi, Iranian lawyer, revolutionary defender of human rights and democracy
      – Benazir Bhutto, as prime minister, helped move Pakistan from dictatorship to democracy
      Shall I go on?
      Do you want to know why there aren’t more female “prophets, revolutionary leaders, world-changing thinkers or scientists”? It’s because since the dawn of the human race they have been condemned for it and forced into the full-time path of marriage, housekeeper, cook, cleaner and motherhood. The few who managed to break that mould before the 20th (even 21st) century were exceptional, much more than I daresay most men could be, if they were hypothetically confined to the rules of a matriarchal society. People may think the 21st century has equal rights for women (which it does), but that does not equate to equal opportunity. Female ideas, inventions and employees are still overlooked due to their gender. Don’t believe me? Let’s ask your question again, but this time apply it to black males and perhaps other ethnic minorities. Why aren’t there more black male “prophets, revolutionary leaders, world-changing thinkers or scientists”? Why are the best scientists that you can think of in history (Einstein, Newton, Aristotle) white males? Years of oppression maybe? Just a guess.

  32. “It has never mattered to men in the whole of history that he has responsibilities or a family to look after; if he falls in lust (which most of his gender do) while supposedly betrothed to another woman, he’ll abandon his entire life, his entire future, to go rail the object of his “cardinal” desires. Thus, it ever was. Thus, it will always be.”– A very similar excerpt from my blog..
    Whoops I should change “cardinal” to “carnal.” Cardinal doesn’t make sense in that context.
    Oh, another correction- “It has never mattered to a man in the whole of history that he has responsibilities or a family to look after…” That makes more sense right?

  33. Good job taking the musings of one Roman poet (from the 1st century!) and using it to apply a blanket statement to over 3 billion women.
    “There was never an age in human history where a woman with sexual options valued a noble husband more than some grungy loser sitting in a dank building strumming his strings.”
    “It has never mattered to women in the whole of history that she has responsibilities or a family to look after.”
    I hope you’re purposefully utilising hyperbole for a poetic touch, because even you could not believe this.

  34. Hi Billy,
    “One of the biggest pieces of narcissism that plague our corner of the web is that we think we are among the first to unravel the true nature of women.”
    The Shopenhauer essay “On Women” is a masterpiece. It should be given to all lads for their 16th birthday.
    This is a good read too. 2,500 years old.
    Women are no different today than they have ever been.
    The only thing different today is that the mass media has been promoting the “there are good women out there” line since before most of us were born. And manginas are stupid enough to believe that propaganda.
    Hell, in WW II the british government banned all reporting of women having affairs with the GIs for fear it would damage moral of the british men on the front lines.
    Notice they did not name and shame the women into being faithful to their fighting men. No. The government knew that to stop british women being sluts and having sex with any GI who promised them a pair of stockings was impossible. So what they did was make it a crime to talk about the women being sluts.
    Same in post war Germany. Women would have sex for the price of a pair of stockings while the few men that were left were locking in prisoner of war camps. So much for respecting their fallen dead.
    Women say that I speak very poorly of women. Well? Since I usually speak in my own name I have to limit what I say. My view of western women is actually far worse than the view I have presented in public.

Comments are closed.