(Warning: this review contains spoilers of the book Anna Karenina)
In an age of Tinder, Snapchat, fast hook-ups and even faster divorces, it is tempting for many to wistfully imagine a past in which the excesses of female behaviour were tightly controlled by a strong patriarchal system, freeing men (and women) of the many difficulties that plague inter-gender relations in 2014. Students of classic literature know that things have never been entirely rosy. Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, which was serialized in The Russian Messenger between 1873 and 1877, remains one of the greatest studies of hypergamy and its effects ever written.
Praised by both Dostoevsky and Nabokov as Tolstoy’s greatest novel, Anna Karenina tells the story of a woman who leaves her stern, unemotional husband Alexei Karenin for dashing cavalry officer Count Alexei Vronsky, charting their ensuing affair and Anna’s eventual downfall. In counterpoint we are presented with the experiences of Levin, a deeply ordinary but decent landowner (and avatar for Tolstoy) and his relationship with Kitty, a young socialite related to Anna through her brother’s marriage. Both women’s narratives dramatize female hypergamous desire and show its damaging effects on family life and the men involved, as well as on themselves.
The Power of Alpha
We are left in no doubt that Anna is an exceptionally attractive woman—Vronsky notes not only her beauty but also her ‘elegance and the modest grace of her whole figure’ and ‘an excess of vitality [that] filled her whole being’ when he first catches sight of her. Vronsky himself is every bit the dashing cad:
‘A very fine sample of the gilded youth of Petersburg . . .awfully rich, handsome, with influential connections, an aide-de-camp to the Emperor, and at the same time very good-natured — a first-rate fellow… he turns out to be educated and very clever — a man who will go far.’
Ticking pretty much every DHV box going, it is little wonder that both Anna and Kitty soon fall in love with him—in fact, it is his raw alpha presence that is the initial motor that sets the plot in motion.
When the novel opens, Levin is on his way to propose to Kitty. Tolstoy draws him sensitively, but we see all the same that he is gauche and not at ease in society. Kitty’s mother is particularly keen that her daughter favours Vronksy, who has also made his desire for her plain, even though we sense that he is a somewhat feckless, superficial man:
‘In her mother’s eyes there was no comparison between Levin and Vronsky. She did not like Levin’s strange and harsh criticisms, his awkward manner . . . Vronsky satisfied all the mother’s desires: he was very rich, clever, distinguished, with a brilliant military career before him.’
We can intuit that Kitty’s mother is tingling at the thought of Vronsky, and so we see the universal effect a hard alpha has on the feminine across generations. It is also interesting to observe how mothers will aid their own daughter’s hypergamous instincts (perhaps as a way of living out their own cougar fantasies). Sure enough, although Kitty is fond of Levin, she rejects his subsequent excruciatingly awkward proposal, expecting to accept his rival’s instead. Levin goes back to his country estate, crushed by the refusal, but all does not turn out well for Kitty either. The grand ball where she expects Vronsky to propose comes and goes, but he spends the evening flirting with Anna instead. This causes her to become physically ill, so much so that she has to go away to a spa where she becomes interested in religion—she becomes the very definition of an alpha widow, spoiled for other men.
Female Cruelty
Anna, meanwhile, returns to her husband in Moscow, pursued by Vronsky. After the three meet when Karenin comes to collect Anna at the station, she reflects on his goodness, honesty and kindness, but wonders why ‘his ears stick out so’ — the first overt indication that she has lost attraction for him. It is interesting to note that Karenin is at no point portrayed as a beta schlub — on the contrary, he is a powerful man, a high-ranking government official. What he lacks, though, is passion, and, we sense, a high sex drive. It is these qualities that Anna’s hypergamous antennae locate in Vronsky. When Vronsky asks if it’s impossible they might be together:
[Anna] exerted all the powers of her mind to say what she ought; but instead she fixed on him with her eyes filled with love and did not answer at all.
Having thus accepted Vronsky’s love, even though she remains married, Karenin now begins to experience the full cruelty of his wife’s emotional departure. How terrible—and yet how familiar to anyone who has suffered female infidelity—-the following lines are:
‘He saw that the depths of her soul, till now always open, were closed to him. More than that, he knew from her tone that she was not ashamed of this … As he spoke he looked at her laughing eyes, terrible to him now in their impenetrability and he felt the uselessness and idleness of his words. ‘
Rollo has written somewhere that when a woman loses attraction for a man she becomes colder to him than if they had never met—Tolstoy encapsulates the phenomenon clearly here.
Meanwhile, Kitty’s sister Dolly tries to explain to Levin why his proposal was rejected:
‘When you proposed to Kitty she was just in that state when it was impossible for her to give an answer — she was undecided between you and Vronsky; she saw him every day, you she had not seen for a long time. I admit that had she been older . . .’
While the reference to Kitty’s age is an attempt to sugar the pill, this is simply one woman’s justification for another’s cold-blooded behaviour. And the fact is that Kitty did give an answer—she refused Levin. What Dolly means is that Levin had forced her into a corner, making it impossible for her to vacillate for as long as she would have preferred to optimise her hypergamy. To put it crudely, Vronsky was Kitty’s first choice, but she would rather have kept Levin dangling until such time as Vronsky had put a ring on it, keeping him on hand as a kind of insurance policy.
Cashing Out
Burned by Vronsky’s refusal of her for Anna, and getting older, Kitty now makes it obvious to Levin that she has had a change of heart, and they marry. Tolstoy makes it very clear that her decision is hastened by her having passed the peak of her SMV curve. She loves Levin because ‘she completely understood him, because she knew it was necessary for him to love, and that all that he loved was good’—hardly a grand passion. A wedding guest remarks that she ‘has grown so much plainer’ , and another that she looks as though she is being married against her will—clear indications that this is a woman ‘cashing out’ on her remaining attractiveness by settling for a wealthy beta provider. That their ensuing honeymoon (and consummation) is described as ‘shameful’ and unhealthy’ merely underlines the point.
Meanwhile, Anna and Vronksy elope and leave for Europe together, an almost unthinkable move, given the degree of shame that this would bring on a society women. In this way, Tolstoy emphasizes the lengths to which women will go when motivated by their biomechanical instincts. In a particularly painful scene at the opera, we see Anna shunned and scorned by respectable (and hypocritical) society women. Even more disturbing, Anna leaves not only her husband but her own son for Vronsky, a separation which does not trouble her much (at first). That a woman is capable of turning her back on even her own child in the face of powerful sexual attraction to an alpha male is a red pill truth many would rather remain unaware of.
Disillusionment
Both Vronksy and Levin end up with the women that they desire, but neither is content.
Vronsky meanwhile, in spite of the complete fulfilment of what he had so long desired, was not completely happy. He soon felt that the realization of his longing gave him only one grain of the mountain of bliss he had anticipated. That realization showed him the eternal error men make by imagining that happiness consists in the gratification of their wishes.
Levin too becomes disillusioned as Kitty is possessive of him, interested only in trifles and hampers his ability to pursue his passion for agriculture and academia. This is a stark reminder of that most important of red pill principles: men must always ensure that women are secondary to their main pursuits, and never the central focus.
Anna’s eventual suicide, motivated by Vronsky’s slow emotional detachment from her, is the tragic consequence of her hypergamous instinct, and a chilling reminder of the power an alpha presence has to make a woman forsake her family, and finally derail her life. The novel is a classic examination of the dark side of female psychology and is a corrective to those who would blame the rise of feminism for all of society’s current ills. While early feminist ideas were slowly gaining credence in Russia in the nineteenth century, they were by no means commonplace, and society as a whole remained staunchly patriarchal. Anna Karenina demonstrates that while feminism today may enable hypergamy, it has existed forever as a fundamental driver of female behaviour.
Read More: Why Tolstoy Rejected The Church
The article would be a lot stronger if the author could have drawn parallels between the story and any specific real life occurances. That would elevated it to be more than just a story, but more into the territory of movies like the Matrix or the Watchmen that effectively use the story as a vehicle to deliver truth.
As it stands this is accurate, but as it is based on a completely fictional chain of events there is no way to take the lessons and relate them to real life.
The beauty of eternal truths is as much their ubiquity as their veracity.
This was one of the best articles ever posted here. Indeed, I believe it has “mainstream” appeal-it could well be posted in outlets like the huff post.
huff post…..get out of here
She can huffpo my sweet bunghole
Outstanding analysis. Bravo!
Great article from, arguably, my favorite writer. Let me piggy back on that with my favorite quote from “War and Peace”: Advice given to young Pierre by his mentor…
“Here’s my advice to you: don’t marry until you can tell yourself that you’ve done all you could, and until you’ve stopped loving the women you’ve chosen, until you see her clearly, otherwise you’ll be cruelly and irremediably mistaken. Marry when you’re old and good for nothing…Otherwise all that’s good and lofty in you will be lost.”
Much like Anna Karenina, I cannot wait to watch the downfall of the western woman. I only hope it happens in my lifetime so I will get to enjoy it. We are witnessing the early signs, the stage is being set in other words, to watch a spectacular downfall.
Yes, right now she has power like she’s never had before, but as this and so many other stories have shown, she will only follow her instincts to her eventual undoing.
I suspect the shit will really hit the fan when Uncle Sugar can no longer print checks out of thin air, and the productive males in society have either decided to quit trying and chill out poolside or have left for other shores. What will all the single moms, spinsters, and sluts do then? Eventually, and we all know this is true, this rotten facade we live under will come crashing down. Who will be there to pick up the pieces for these damsels in distress?
It would give me such a sense of justice to see what happened to Anna Karenina happen to the Anglobitch.
There will always be thirsty betas to pick some of them up.
We must man them up. Spread the word
I’ll tell you what will happen to them. The vacuous bimbos who have cried ‘rape!’ and ‘oppression,’ will get their just desserts, and learn what a truly oppressive, rape culture looks like. The women who have cried ‘my body, my choice!’ to justify the murder that their own promiscuity and fecklessness caused, will see just how quickly they cease to belong to themselves, or to have any choice in anything. The women who took their husbands for everything they were worth in a divorce, and who spoke of marriage as ‘slavery’ for women, will learn what it is to truly be enslaved and tied to a plough, to put some food on a man’s table. They will be considered unfit even for sex; their only value will be whatever labor can be squeezed out of them before they die. Then they will understand that their light-minded activism failed completely, to grasp the reality of slavery, rape and oppression. Not only did it fail completely to understand these topics, it actually proved to be a major contributing factor to visiting these very things upon them. They will eat their words, and rue them bitterly. I don’ know many men (of any consequence, anyway) who would be willing to lift a finger to help them, at this point.
You’re damn right the stage is being set for a downfall for the modern woman. I, and many men I know, see absolutely no use for them at this point. I know a lot of guys like game and “pump and dump,” but to me these women are worse than trash. I would sooner hump my dog. I feel like I dishonor myself by contact with them. Modern grrrls cannot work, they cannot think, they have no skills of any value, and whatever children they conceive, they are incapable of raising, physically or emotionally. Worst of all, they are oblivious, and if any of them read this they will be aghast, thinking that they are such valuable people that bring something individual and special to the table, not knowing that they are completely useless. They bring zero contribution to the table. Scratch that: they not only have *no* value, they have *negative* value. They are a liability. Just to break even, at this point, they will have to spend their lives in servitude, and even then, there’s a good chance that their “labor” would not be worth the rice it costs to feed them.
A very few, perhaps, will then be forced to see what ghastly little quislings they had been, and may experience a movement of genuine repentance. Many more will kill themselves because life will just plain be too hard for them. And plenty more will live like feral savages and die pretty quickly. Some may be kept for the sole purpose of procreation, but any daughters will be ripped from their breasts and given to the few nuns and red pill women, to be brought up right. I don’t think women understand how much ill-will they have generated against them… especially amongst the young men raised by second-wave feminism and now seeing the final offense of third-wave insanity. The only thing protecting them, is a thin veneer of still-functioning society. Yes, when the gubmint can’t be their sugar daddy anymore, and things get real, that thin veneer will be gone. And then, they will have nowhere to hide. I bet they’ll sing a new tune real fast! And I bet 99% of men won’t be in the mood for music.
I just heard a guy say this. “When you live in a modern world gender roles begin to become meaningless” Can you please refute this?
It is and isn’t true. In the short-term, modern technology insulates us, somewhat, from the effects of ignoring gender roles. In the modern world, with contraception and a welfare state and plenty of technological marvels that stave off the consequences of our actions, it is possible for people to temporarily act as though gender were not an issue.
But, sooner or later, reality kicks in. We realize that you have to generate real wealth, and that this requires real labor and real work. We realize that people only work when there is an incentive to work. We learn that male and female psychology is different, and that, by and large, only men have the ability to generate wealth (because only they have reason, emotional discipline, ambition and a detachment from creature comforts and a detestation of mediocrity). There will always be exceptional women, but, on the whole, women want to *feel* special, but they sure as hell don’t want to actually be special, as this is truly a herculean feat for most of them.
Then, we realize that the system that had been corrupted through prosperity, has begun to actively disincentivize masculine behaviour, and reward feminine folly. We realize that the attempt to nullify gender distinctions, even though it seemed like it might have worked for a while, has actually generated an immense amount of righteous, thoughtful, purposeful rage from the capable men, who have been essentially reduced to slavery. They increasingly opt out of the system, and, as this become more difficult, they either quit the system in protest, leave the system, or work to hasten the destruction of the system, which the feminine imperative has already made inevitable.
Thus, the modern world, in attempting to pretend that gender roles are meaningless (which its modern tech allows it to do, for a time), destroys itself. I.e., the modern world can – for a time – pretend as if gender roles don’t exist. But this attempt proves fatal, in the long run.
How would you refuse this? “the convenience of modern technology tends to remove the importance of why gender roles were pragmatically designated originally.”.
How about this? “The Patriarchy allows men to have their cake and eat it too” How would you refute this?
That’s pretty much the same question you already asked. All it does is mask the need for gender roles, for a time, because it allows the genders to survive, for a time, without relying on the vitally essential complementarity that each gender brought to the traditional marital relationship.
But modern women are proving that, when they are permitted to live independent lives aided by this technology, they destroy their own lives, and the lives of those around them. The technology hides some of the obvious, superficial damage… even as it allows a deeper damage to fester. That festering has now reached the boiling-over point.
How about this? “The Patriarchy allows men to have their cake and eat it too” How would you refute this? I promise this is the last question.
You’d need to provide more context. It sounds like nonsensical bitching. Patriarchy is the only system, that has proven its ability to maintain the incentives that both genders need, to pair up and remain committed in a socially beneficial way. In the Patriarchy, men are honor-bound to strive for personal excellence and productivity, and to provide for their families in a stable way, while women are honor-bound to keep a good home and remain faithful. Men are not “having their cake and eating it, too.” They have to abide by the rules, just as much as the women. Feminism acts as though working outside the home were somehow more “human” or “fulfilling” than working inside the home. The truth is, that it isn’t – especially they way women “work” outside the home, where they can neither generate wealth through production, nor, usually, through ingenuity and innovation. Women work outside the home as drones, filling make-work positions and service industry jobs. When a society’s economy switches over to this, primarily, it is in decay. Wealth is generated when men work outside the home, and when women put their husbands’ wealth to work inside the home, keeping her family from incurring the expense involved in childcare, transportation, eating-out, etc., which are necessitated by her working a useless job, and also providing the truly inestimable value, of being home for her children and providing an emotionally nurturing environment during their formative years. Often even the material expenses are greater than her paycheck; certainly the emotional and spiritual cost of her absence, is irreplaceable.
Even if some women now happen to be getting paid more than they deserve, using their Master’s degrees at local non-profits, or acting as human-resources overlords or being useless corporate installations for pc-compliance, this is a symptom of a society in economic decline, rather than prosperity.
Can you elaborate more on why that is a sign of economic decline?
Because it indicates a society that has moved away from producing wealth through the production of goods or through technological innovation, and into economic decline by simply moving money around for low- or no-growth economic concerns.
No engineering firm really wants women engineers around (for the most part); they pay a couple so as to be pc-compliant. Hence, it is a waste of money. Society is certainly not benefiting, from handing our grade-school children over to airheads with toxic politics; but that’s one of the calamitous places where useless women go, when they are encouraged to work en masse. No company wants female HR managers harassing all of their productive employees with emotional BS, sexual-harassment lectures, petty complaints, etc., but the feminine imperative demands such things and we currently cow-tow to it. Nobody wants armies of bitter women staffing desks at the DMV, the courthouse, the IRS, the welfare office, etc., but that’s the beauty of an out-of-control welfare state driven by the feminine imperative: the government can expand and intrude massively, because a lot of women with no skills and nothing better to do, are glad to be a pain in your ass and to find new government tasks to justify being a pain in your ass. I could go on: the point, is that most women are in jobs that an healthy society doesn’t want or need. In addition to these jobs being an economic loss on some level, just as they are, there is still the matter of the inestimably greater loss, that societies endure when women are taken from the place where they are most valuable and generate (and save) the most amount of wealth: keeping a good home.
You get it…
Cui Pertinebit has it right.
For more info, read my inverted population decline comment below, too. I tried to give a scientific explanation.
Dude, Justaredpiller is a chick…
Question after question with no interest in an answer.
The thought had occurred to me… but I thought it better to give the benefit of the doubt. Even if that’s so, hopefully it got somebody else thinking. Heck, if it is a chick, maybe it’ll even get her thinking. Women want to be proven wrong and spanked a bit, after all, when it’s all said and done.
AGREED, that or a feminist sycophant chump, trying to get ammunition against a man who bested him in an argument.
You fucking dumbass. Right after you say “this is the last question,” you reply to yourself and ask the same damn question. Piss off, troll.
I’m not a chick, I was just caught arguing with a feminist dude and didn’t know how to respond to his shit.
Look at your own miserable life you worthless hag. That is proof enough.
Cui Pertinebit – fantastic analysis! You should write some articles for ROK if you aren’t already doing so.
Justaredpiller is proving why domestic violence occurs. Endless pestering/questioning until a punch in the jaw becomes the only recourse.
Modern tech does not remove the importance of gender roles. Modern tech doesn’t make a man have babies or nurse them. Modern tech doesn’t make a woman mow the lawn or fight off home invaders. Modern tech just makes the traditional work easier for each gender.
I don’t understand this obsession with modern tech changing gender roles. It does not. It is modern political structures that interfere with gender roles (i.e. democratic government).
You promised no more questions!
Either way, your responses were great to read. Thank you for taking the time!
When the follower looks at the leader, it appears that the leader has it easy, sitting on the high chair, ordering people around. But it is the follower who has it easy, everything ordered for him, only needing to follow the direction decided for him.
Heavy is the head that wears the crown.
I do not think that the system has been corrupted by prosperity. Rather, it has been corrupted by criminal elements in government who “game” the democratic system, directing benefits to themselves and their constituents. A grand example of this, is the modern system of fractional reserve banking. This system, just by itself, has a massive corrupting influence on society.
“The Patriarchy allows men to have their cake and eat it too”
Sounds like a very successful system.
Yes, precisely. The honest working man who makes it in the world by strength of character and hard work is in every way an exemplary person and should not be looked down upon because he is prosperous. The hatred of enjoying the finer things in life has always confused me. If people wish to be aesthetes that’s fine and well and more power to them, but they should probably log off of their computers, created by the very finest of the economic system they loath, and get down to the business of being hermits, you know?
I see what you’re saying; I also think that prosperity tends to have a softening effect, and that many of these moral problems follow on the heels of prosperity. When the state has no prosperity to redistribute, it is hard to game a system or direct benefits to anyone.
To be clear, I’m not saying prosperity is bad, nor am I looking down on anybody who makes an honest buck (or billion bucks). I’m just saying that it’s a fact of nature: when people are getting rich, there will always be a class of people that are envious, think it’s “unfair,” and will look to get what they can from him. When you have a social welfare state, the theft is made easy and legal. Prosperity attracts its own set of moral problems, just like poverty. That’s not to say that either is immoral; they are just different and have their own difficulties.
Good observation! I just accepted the premise; your reply is much better.
Sure. Thanks for reading, and for the kind words.
Very good points, I look forward to reading more from you.
Feminists think men lived in the land of milk and honey in the past, when in fact they worked hard to make some money.
But as Rollo wrote, women don’t want to see men’s hardship (thus their leaving men after an accident or financial ruin) so they only focus on the good things men had back then while ignoring the bad side.
Sure. Here you go.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Eventually the Fed will not be able to give away enough banknotes to keep bitches surfing facebook all day. Economists refer to this phenomenon as hyperinflation. At that point power will shift to mafias equipped with bullets, beans, and bandaids. Enjoy.
You’re a cunt. Get out, you’re invading male space. You don’t belong here. Go paint your nails or something.
This is a hypothesis that intuitivelly makes a lot of sense. However, to ever get any kind of public credibility for these kind of ideas you’d need numbers and raw data. There has to be a mathematical way to prove this message. We measure things like gdb, but how much of the stuff that is produce is actually unnecessary and raises no one’s standard of living?
Absolutely true. An healthy women can suffer some privation for her family’s sake. But no woman wants to work a man’s job and deal with the negative aspects of that job like a man. She will demand programs and remedies, to make the work as easy on herself as possible – failing to realize that she has now eliminated whatever value (and then some) the job produced in the first place.
Well, I’m a clergyman and, though I couldn’t defend it on the Macro-economic level without doing a lot of research, I can say that I see it play out routinely in couples’ experience on the immediate level of a family’s expenses. Couples come in and there are family problems, both between husband and wife, and the kids. I ask about several things, and, sure enough, the wife works AND insists that the kids be involved in a million extra-curricular activities because this is somehow important for their character.
This inevitably results in massive expenses, all generated by the woman. She’s not home, so there’s daycare. She’s not home most of the time, and when she is “she’s tired,” so this means that every member of the family buys every meal, every day. She’s not home, so she’s driving another car. She’s not home, so she’s paying for the fees for extra-curricular activities, and often for materials related to them. She’s not home, so they’re paying a tutor for basic subjects. Often, she is depressed because of all this, and has lots of expensive activities that she “just needs so she can unwind” (the husband manages to get by with a few beers and an afternoon fishing every now and then). She “needs” to go out to coffee or a movie with her friends a few nights a week. She needs her gym membership. She needs to shop and treat herself a little bit every now and then. She needs a spa trip once or twice a month. She needs to go to a nice little B&B with a girlfriend once in a while.
9 times out of 10, when we sit down and look at it, it becomes clear that in purely *financial* terms, her absence from the home is costing more than she is making at work. Do you know how much it costs to buy a few simple ingredients and make dinner at home, both in time and money, as opposed to going out to eat all the time? And when women can find reasons not to be home with their kids, they seem to have an hard time doing things that don’t cost a fortune. And, as I mentioned above, businesses really don’t want all these women working (which is why they didn’t have any of them, or few of them, working before the big feminist push). On every level it’s a waste of money to have women outside the home – it harms the family’s finances and spiritual life, and businesses hate the expense that women, with higher health care needs, lower industriousness, less intelligence, more griping, more hand-wringing, etc., bring. I suppose you’re right, that it would be good to catalog all of it and prove it all. But I’m saying that, just on the people I do work with, I routinely see, in mere numerical, financial terms, that these women are huge financial drains on their family, and do not begin to make up for the cost they introduce.
And, as I said, that’s just the financial cost. The emotional and spiritual cost to the children, is immense. The cost to the husband, who becomes a silent martyr to his wife’s many expensive needs (and few substantive contributions), is intense. His desperation is exacerbated by the fact that women seem to be able to easily blame others for their problems, ESPECIALLY those most victimized by their behaviour. These women feel, if they have to drive the kids to all the activities they have signed them up for, like “they’re the ones doing all the work.” Meanwhile, hubby is watching chunks of his paycheck go to funding his wife’s recreation while he pinches his pennies for his own wants and needs. It can be very touch-and-go, getting them to see that they are 90% of the problem. They resent the suggestion, even, without bothering to hear the evidence.
Go suck dick stupid cunt.
I don’t see what’s so bad about a man “nurturing” his own children while the women goes out and makes the same amount of money doing more work than that of a man (can we all remember the 77c for every dollar a man makes?)
No more calls, we have a winner.
Thanks for the encouragement, brother.
For me, “final offense” is exactly the right term. Never before in history has the feminine imperative been allowed to play out so completely – where their value is seen to be so abysmally low, and their demands for praise and support are seen to be so giddily stratospheric.
I talk to a lot of guys in my line of work, and I was initially surprised, to discover how widespread and apparently earnest the belief was, that a violent reckoning with women was long overdue. I was also surprised, to find out how hotly the hatred burns in some men. I’m a Classicist and a Medievalist. In all the literature I’ve read from the past 21 centuries of “misogynist” literature from the Patriarchy, I cannot think think of a time or place where the male sentiment against women was so intensely and deeply hostile, as now. The future will probably be a nightmare for everyone; but women have prepared for themselves a special place in the hellhole of tomorrow.
The time of idiotic worship has come to an end? That is great!
“I cannot think think of a time or place where the male sentiment against women was so intensely and deeply hostile, as now.”
Count me in on that hostility. In fact, the rage builds up to a white hot inferno such that if I don’t get out of the Matrix every couple of months, I feel like I could explode.
The more I learn about women, the easier it is for me to screw them, but the less respect I have for them.
There’s only one sad fact that will prevent these feminist whores from suffering their just desserts. A saying that I heard. “Humans rarely live long enough to witness the consequence of their actions.”
The toxic women of today will likely be dying off by the time the start to see the rape culture they created.
Most baby boomers are still alive, the oldest ones just started retiring in 2011, they will suffer a most gruesome fate.
Yes. Someone will have to eat the dog food, and it ain’t going to be me.
Gee thanks. Should I commit a crime and go to jail just for medical, shelter and food?
I’m going to eat your dog.
Bit harsh to slavery and what not but I agree.
Modern women has no skills nor trades, they cannot even be good mothers nor wife’s. They cant raise kids, cook nor clean, they cant do proper careers such as engineering, opting instead for liberal arts (whatever the fuck that is) and are 100% useless at trades.
You don’t know what you have until you’ve lost it. They should have stop’d at the vote, but like a spoilt child they pressed on, slowly killing the goose that laid the golden eggs.
Once they kill the goose entirely it will be back to 2/3rds of full all.
Western women are here to stay. Why even bother to dream?
Inverted pyramid population decline. Read up on it then get back to me.
I will croak around the perfect time when civilization has collapsed according to my genetic profile/current age, it’s the perfect timing to be alive, a mix of technology while it is still not figured out by the technocrats how to REALLY use against us so we get to enjoy the spoils of previous generations with still SOME remaining freedom . When they figure it out for good(in a few generations) than life will be hell. Of course most will be smiling depressives with vaccines that attack the part of the brain which requires freedom to be functional so they will not feel a thing. The world is ran by a collective of highly intelligent and evil kleptocrats far smarter than the 99%, that’s why they ARE the 1%, What are you going to do? Become smarter. Not possible. Just let go of your worries and enjoy the collapse, At least you know
Enjoy it folks! in 40-80 years, Freedom will be an ancient thing, why spoil the best times? 2014, the beginning of the end, what an exciting time! All the reminiscence and glory and none of the consequences to face in our generation yet, That is for the latter populace.
The cause is that men are enjoying themselves too much and not settling down.
Change your name to Chicken Little.
Why would you settle for a western female?
Not a particularly useful label. How about why settle for a shallow, attention seeking, manipulative ho regardless of where they come from?
It’s not as rosy worldwide as you all think. Something you learn from watching your peer’s mistakes in the military is that a LOT of these Asian women aren’t better…..they’re just better at selling themselves in order to get what they want from you.
If I could count the number of guys who marry a Korean woman only for her to divorce them the minute her citizenship is accepted………
Well my friend, the downfall is full in effect. You only need to step back to see it.
Like in Nature and the market, there will be a fast reversal to the norm.
As I’ve said before….you don’t want that as much as you think you do. I’ve spent too much of my life(not saying much, any time is too long) in places that have already experienced that breakdown.
I don’t even know where to begin. No advanced infrastructure, everything smells like shit constantly, people are happy to shoot each other in the face to earn a few bucks(the only loyalty is to tribe), half the population is stoned out bums……not enough food, no showers, no internet…
Trust me. You don’t want that.
Yep, we keep repeating this same point. Unfortunately a lot of well meaning men, for well meaning reasons, wish for this world to go away, yet are still inexperienced in the real world and haven’t seen these kinds of things first hand. When you come from a position of never having actually seen, let alone experienced, life wrenching horror then it’s quite easy to invent a fantasy world where somehow, you’ll be immune from the effects of what you wish for so eagerly today.
Oh, you just have to waite a few years, big one is coming fast.
But you are wrong, she does not have any power at all, she only have the power of betas at her disposal and that power is going down hard.
Only women who do not have powerful male relatives will suffer. Those with the good fortune to be related by blood to powerful men will have it good, as always…………….Totally useless women will still be indulged, if not by their husbands, then by their fathers and sons.
“What will all the single moms, spinsters, and sluts do then?”
When they’re too old to be whores, they’ll pimp out their daughters. “Now that you’re old enough to wear a bra, you’ll be sharing a bed with my fifty-year old boyfriend. Shut up, he’s the only thing keeping a roof over our heads, and he doesn’t want my saggy old ass anymore.”
Don’t count on a quick collapse. The ruling elite are by far smarter and are planning decades ahead in most minute detail.
Both sexes will be hurting, but women will suffer more as they will try to trade their pussies for a loaf of bread and a strong arm for protection. I don’t think that this will succeed though, since the next generation of men will give a shit about these aging sluts with their feral progeny. It will be everyone fending for himself and that is exactly what the elite intend. No families under the protection of a strong man anymore.
Anglobitches are scum, true, but the majority of women in other countries are hardly better than the ones in the wretched West. I’m not advocating celibacy; just fuck the sluts and otherwise ignore women altogether. They have proven they are nothing but sperm sewers.
I’m a feminist because men like you exist. You can’t stand the thought that some women are just as naturally rebellious as yourself. Deal the fuck with it and calm down. Want to marry a submissive girl whose never been so much as given the option to live independently? Be my guest. But when you spew BS like this, don’t wonder why women with brains aren’t clamoring for your attention.
This article describes eloquently what I’ve seen throughout my life in regards to women… and no… it doesn’t always work out for them so well.
I think the fundamental flaw with women’s hypergamy in the modern world is… who they perceive as “alpha” will fluctuate by circumstance. A master basketball player could be alpha on the court but not in academics… A master spokesperson may be hilarious cracking jokes in a safe public sphere but crumble in a survivalist scenario… A master musician is a god on-stage but may be mediocre amongst the gang.
Hypergamy and the ability to attach to whoever is on top (at that moment) makes sense in the more tribalistic primitive world where you had your gang of 100 people where each had relatively stable standing and roles. But in the modern world with its endless spheres there are alphas/betas everywhere in every part of life… your hubby scientist is gonna be a loser in a boxing ring… your hubby boxer is gonna be a loser in the laboratory…
Of course there are those who simply have such strong personas that no matter where they are they always behave alpha. I would argue however that those men may eventually end up on the outskirts of certain male groups however, as one cannot be all talk amongst those with honour and accumulated power.
Women’s attractions and feelings end up all over the place… no central goal or meaning in their lives… they can hardly ever be satisfied as there are just so many men talented in so many different specializations and characters… they just bounce from one place to the other until their ability to purchase a male begins to drop and then they break down… not in public mind you… she would never let the public know of her deep regret for and inability to understand her own motivations and choices.
All the sudden the alpha that she cheated on for a shot at the wannabe that everyone praised for a little while looks pretty good… but she’s lost him forever…
“All the sudden the alpha that she cheated on for a shot at the wannabe that everyone praised for a little while looks pretty good… but she’s lost him forever…”
I’ve noticed a growing trend related to this. Single mothers posting the “Man-up” Memes on Facebook. It’s a personal challenge to you, buddy! Bah!
The funny thing is that, if she gets 3o likes from her meme, 28 of them are from other single mothers. The other two are thirsty betas that she won’t fuck anyway.
Simple. When sexual availability is that high and people don’t learn how to employ virtues like moderation and self control, you get “kid in a candy shop” syndrome.
I just heard a guy say this. “When you live in a modern world gender roles begin to become meaningless” Can someone please refute this?
And Justaredpiller is clearly a troll, and possibly a woman. Should have been able to tell from the stupid name.
You sound like you haven’t had quality dick in a while, Justaredpiller. I can understand how that must be very frustrating for you. Want me to help you out with that? I can meet your needs.
Look at your own miserable life. That is proof enough.
Thanks for such a great paper. excellent!
I just heard a guy say this. “When you live in a modern world gender roles begin to become meaningless” Can someone please refute this?
excellent
I found the article interesting, but you’re forgetting what the end is really like for Levin. He and Kitty have a child, and slowly shift into their own roles in the household; they no longer have to be completely wrapped up in each other, but start to find their proper roles as husband and wife, master of the estate and mother.
Levin turns to nature and embraces his job as farmer and master of his estate, while Kitty becomes a mother and settles into her place as the mistress of Levin’s home and mother of his children. If anything, the book shows a optimistic outcome for the two because they have their own interests and roles in the marriage.
Levin’s devotion to work self-improvement sets him up on a path of self-development, while Kitty keeps the hearth warm for his return; this is less of a negative outcome and more like a picture of Tolstoy’s ideal marriage, where the man continues to discover and develop while having a family waiting for him at home. Contrast that to Vronsky and Anna, who wind themselves up entirely in each other and end up restless, unhappy, and dead!
Just my two cents.
Fantastic points, one and all.
The ending paves the way for Levin’s spiritual conversion. In the final few pages he is able to come to a personal conception of god. This echoed Tolstoy’s own religious awakening.
Agreed that Levin and Kitty reach a kind of contented stasis. Kitty certainly settles well into the role of mother. I would argue, though, that this is because she has no choice — her SMV is by then depleted. My feeling is that they do both grow — but this is in spite of, rather than because of the marriage, which certainly doesn’t turn out to be the paradise Levin had imagined beforehand.
Perhaps, in the end, this is the best anyone can hope for.
It’s true that Kitty’s SMV is no longer important once married; she understood that it was used to attract a husband, and that her value, once married, comes from her actions as a good wife, mother, and model of femininity. I think that women of that time understood that much better than many women of today, who prefer to act like shiny baubles for the magpies, rather than transition graciously into the next stage of their lives.
Also, I doubt that anyone getting married for the first time completely understands or is prepared for life in a married state. Even if Levin had gotten the girl right off the bat, he still wouldn’t have had his “paradise”, simply because paradise is not reality. One can certainly find happiness, but it’s going to be somewhat different than what one imagined beforehand just because that’s life. Marriage is not perfect, but depending on the people, can be successful while being based in reality.
I have a feeling, though, that Levin and Kitty would have turned out OK (and probably produced a wagonload of offspring), seeing as this was written at a time when Tolstoy and his wife were happiest. Their marriage might not be a soap opera like Anna’s, but quiet contentment, devotion to one another, and personal growth certainly sounds like a good ending for them.
The premise of the story is that Russo women are all hypergamous and unfaithful,
That’s the truth. Dostoevsky, Gogol and more have all touched on that. Russo women haven’t changed with centuries. Catherine the Great corrupted their minds.
What you see the, you even see now.
If memory serves she fucked a horse didn’t she?
That’s an unsubstantiated legend if I’m not mistaken. That said she was an absolute slut and had a harem of lovers over her life, and if the bestiality charge is false it’s only false because she died at an early age and didn’t get around to it, as opposed to her having even a shred of morality.
Maybe a legend but from what I remember they were supposed to have built a wooden support for the horse so that Catherine could safely get underneath the stallion and have his large horse cock enter her and she wouldn’t get crushed or injured with his thrusting. Could have been the History channel after the watershed!!! 🙂
A small point…Catherine was around 67 when she died. She was an unrestrained and enthusiastic whore though.
The horse-fucking thing is one of those legends that falls into the category “too good to check.”
I know, but 67 seems far too young for a well off person, even in the 1700’s. The average joe, yeah, he’s lucky to make it to 40 and if he does he’s the old man of the village. The pampered aristocrat however had a much higher age range, for obvious reasons. Dunno, maybe I’m projecting modern sensibilities onto the time when they didn’t apply, you may have a point.
The horse-fucking thing is one of those legends that falls into the category “too good to check.”
Heh, yep.
This was a great article. Excellent writing, interesting topic. Thanks for the work you put into it.
Now that I have resources, I am seriously considering moving to an Islamic country with Sharia law. My money will go a long way in that society. I can fake it when it comes to being a Muslim. It will be worth it to marry 3 beautiful black-eyed virgins and keep them in Bhurkas.
You’re allowed to marry 4 virgins.
What of the Mormons? They enforce modesty but have the advantage of not being in the 3rd world
i contemplated that too but women there are not. just tge rebellious ones here. if i can import a ukrainian japanese brazilian and argentinian as my 4 wives there id be so happy.
Have you ever actually been to an Islamic country?
If the answer is no then I HIGHLY suggest that you visit first……and be very careful what you do unless you want to spend a stint getting flogged in a Saudi prison.
When I was in Iraq, I never saw a Man working the fields. Not once. All of the Men would be drinking Zam Zam cola on the front porch and the Women “Ninjas” were all out in the sun slaving away. I was Blue Pill then, still being cuckolded by my barracks whore wife. I thought the Iraqi Men to be lazy. Now I think them geniuses.
I suggest Indonesia. Parts of it are strictly Islamic, other parts have millions of sluts – Muslim and non-Muslim.
This does beg the question, what does one expect from a woman in terms of good behavior? And is it possible?
“Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.”
Yes, it is possible, but it isn’t very fun sitting in the waiting room. Young people need a guarantee that their preservation of innocence will be worth it in order to convince themselves to go under lock and key. I’ve been gradually coming to the conclusion that arranged marriage is the way forward (and backward). Forward, as in the only way to make marriage feasible, and backward as a return to traditional family structures.
The fatal end to Anna and Vronsky also is largely due to her constant shit testing and paranoia even after they are free and together. It’s as if the fact he slept with a married woman (her) makes her inherently suspicious that he’s untrustworthy around any women. Tolstoy understands the nature of affairs better than most in this; that trust is impossible from a relationship borne of deceit. That it’s Anna and not Vronsky who destroys their happiness only shows the lack of women’s self reflection. Anna was the dog who chased the car but then caught it and was at a loss as to what she would so next.
This is an excellent article. I hope to see many more like it on RoK in the future, and less bull-shit bubble-gum filler articles the usual authors have been putting out as of late.
Fantastic synopsis, esp. in how this applies to us as men.
Fiction or not, there’s so much to learn from the writings of men in earlier centuries. There truly is nothing new under the sun, whether it’s Tolstoy or Machiavelli.
One of my favorite cautionary tales in this vein is that of Lord Nelson, who had successfully managed customs patrols in the American Colonies. When his wife shut him off sexually, claiming that she couldn’t risk bringing a child into the sinful, overpopulated world of the 18th century, he took a mistress, and, for the scandal that caused, was not allowed to return to the lucrative business of taking American smugglers as prizes. No one was ever able to control smuggling to the colonies again, and, as a result, when the trade restrictions became a full blockade, the Americans were still able to import the resources to have their revolution.
Nelson went on to oversee the greatest naval battles in history anyhow.
Yup, read it a few years ago. From the article this line is the most important:
“This is a stark reminder of that most important of red pill principles: men must always ensure that women are secondary to their main pursuits, and never the central focus.”
Live this and see the mist lift from your view. Get on your bike, motor or pedal, breathe the free air (for how long?), climb a tree, run on a beach in your bare feet, feel the warm sun on your face. There is so much more to this life than the lie we’ve been sold.
Get on your bike, motor or pedal,
But never both. Nobody looks cool on a moped. Just sayin’.
Heh heh, I concur!
Females are not cruel, they are simply weaker and less intelligent, they are parasites. Most of them never grow up beyond the age of 12.
If nothing, females are more honest because the instincts are very primal. The men are the ones that fall for the hoax called “love”. Men want to be loved because men know how to love, women just want protection and a workers who earns the money for them as they don’t have to.
Human relationships are a commercial exchange – “If you give me something, I will give you something”. We must accept that and destroys the myth that human relationships are something marvelous or extraordinary.
All relationships are built on the foundation of “What do I get out of this relationship?”. It is nothing but mutual gratification. If that is absent, no relationship is possible.
You keep the relationship going for social reasons, or for reasons of children, property, and security. All this is part and parcel of the relationship business. But when it fails and does not give us what we really want, we superimpose on it what we call “love”. So, it is just not possible to have any relationship on any basis except on the level of mutual gratification.
The whole culture has created, for its own reasons, this situation for us through its value system. The value system demands that relationships be based on love. But the most important element is security and then possessiveness. You want to possess the other individual. When your hold on the other becomes weaker for various reasons, your relationship wears out. You cannot maintain this “lovey-dovey” relationship all the time.
Well, women certainly are parasites, but i disagree with your statement that they are not cruel. It’s a proven fact that women are often far more cruel and diabolic than men, because women have no sense of honor, justice or restraint.
You smell like an white knight mangina. Fuck off.
You sound like an psychopath.
Or a woman…
“men ought to ensure that women are secondary to their main objectives, never the central focus.”
The same is true for women, no? Sure, someone gotta give birth to children and I rather want them to do that part but beside that, the more they are usefull to society at large, the more men can concentrate on their own objectives.
really good analysis.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/05/teen-ejected-from-prom-after-dads-experience-impure-thoughts/
Lets just throw gasoline already
This is very good analysis
Great article. You nailed that book red-pill-style!
Thank you for writing this great article. I am learning a lot and I am going to share this with my brothers.
Huhh it’s really nice how you missed the entire point of the novel. The central characters are Levin and Kitty (even though the titular character is Anna), and the striking difference between a settled, simple life on a farm (Tolstoy has a major hard-on for rural life) with your plain yet beautiful wife of your side, and the life in the big city, trying to pursue your desires which in the end give you nothing but misery, despite fame, wealth, beauty and career.
In the end, Levin is the true Alpha and Vronsky a scared Mama’s boy/bitch
It’s obvious that you didn’t read or understand the meaning of the book. 1. The author always spelled the names “Alexis” and not “alexei”. It was imperial Russia they all spoke French you uncultured swine but 2. You took the excerpts completely out of context and analysed them so, and the whole article was completely subjective and drenched in the twisted thought that women are some kind of stupid creatures that can’t control their feelings because of their ovaries.
The Russian text is easy to find, and Anna’s husband’s name is Алексей (Alexei).
No one is surprised if a man destroys his life by following his lust. We think we are so liberated, but the notion that a woman is capable of the same thing still has the capacity to shock.
If the book were written today and set in the USA, Anna would divorce Alexei and have him removed from his home, where she would continue to live at his expense. She would move her lover Vronsky into the home, where he too would live on Alexei’s dollar. The most remarkable thing is that, what 140 years ago was shockingly wayward behavior, is now considered normal. In today’s version, if anyone threw themselves under a train in despair, it would be poor Alexei Karenin.