There are some good points here, but this Schopenhauer feller overshoots the mark bigly!
Women don't do art? WTF? Go to an art supply store and what do you see? Women! The estrogen levels at a typical Hobby Lobby are so high that you better get out quickly if you don't want to go
trans.
Who do you think made the tapestries in the Middle Ages?
Women and piano lessons? Very common. Very common for the church organist to be a woman. Lot's of incredible female musical performers on YouTube, especially at piano. Art and music were part of the core curriculum at upper class girl's schools in the 1800s.
Literature? Get real! Plenty of female writers going back to Jane Austin and before. True, the number of women writers writing two-fisted science fiction is limited, but when it comes to "Great Fiction", it's mostly girls and gurly mans.
Physics and engineering are definitely male dominated, however. Rrrr rrrr rrr!
----
And let's remember that a very large fraction of the economy was home economics until the 20th Century. Women worked. A lot. The idea of men doing the work and women just taking care of the kids doesn't happen until electricity and appliances are invented. Simply cooking back in the day was more hazardous than being a police officer today. Cooking using a fireplace while wearing a dress was a recipe for getting burned alive.
By all means verbally smack down today's feminists. They aren't just whiny bitches; they are idiots. The 1950s were a golden age to be a woman. To be a tradwife under today's conditions is to be the envy of women throughout civilized history.
I think Schopenhauer's point re: art isn't that women don't create art, but that women don't create *great* art. As he states, "they have not a single great painting to boast of, just because they are deficient in that objectivity of mind which is so directly indispensable in painting." Is there a single woman painter on the level of a Rembrandt, a Da Vinci, a Van Gogh? If so, who do you think it is? What about musicians or composers?
This was my point about men having much longer "tails" than women on bell curve for traits, on both ends: much more geniuses, but also much more homeless, mentally ill, etc. It's not better or worse, it's just different.
Artemisia Gentileschi and Élisabeth Louise Vigée Le Brun to start. There are many others.
I could never understand why they weren’t included in the art classes I took at school. (Not that I’m a fan of woke revisionism, but these painters are worth studying and many regarded them among the best during their lifetimes.)
Look up their biographies and see how awfully they were treated.
LeBrun was forced to stop painting to back up her husband’s career. And Gentileschi was horribly abused.
Heinrich Himmler on How Bolshevik Christianity Spreads Homosexuality and Hatred of Women...
❝ . . . I am of the conviction that the Roman emperors, who eradicated (ausrotteten) the first Christians, did exactly the same thing that we are doing with the communists. These Christians were then the worst yeast which the great city contained, the worst Jewish people, the worst Bolsheviks that there were.
The Bolshevism of that time had now the power to become great on the carcass of the dying Rome. The priesthood of the Christian church which later subjugated the Aryan church in unending conflicts goes on, since the 4th or 5th Century, to long for the celibacy of priests. It relies on Paul and the very first apostles who derogate the woman as something sinful and permit or recommend marriage as merely a legal way out of prostitution — that is in the Bible — and derogate the procreation of children as a necessary evil. This priesthood continues along in this way for several centuries until in 1139 the celibacy of priests is fully implemented.
I am furthermore convinced that the way out for the few who do not want to yield to this homosexuality, especially for the country parsons, the majority of whom — more than 50% — I estimate not to be gay, is to procure for themselves in confession the necessary married and single women; I assume that in the monasteries the homosexuality ranges from 90 or 95 to 100%.❞
Hi Clarence, it's fine to post in the comments but please don't spam them, thank you. You posted about 20 responses here with mostly the same stuff this morning and I trimmed the repeats.
I was heading North on Gen. Jim Moore Road going to work at Fritzsche Airfield that morning when the second aircraft struck . . . My first thought was . . . 'here we go, it's going to be another Vietnam' . . . then, I found myself in Afghanistan with all the British opium poppies. Yes, I said British opium poppies . . . The Opium Wars . . .
Three ingredients for warfare are required: 1. personnel, 2. explosives, and 3. opium.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh . . . Brzezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’ . . .
That is all there was to it, 9-11 was blowback from our own CIA operations . . .
Bob Ross was a very competent landscape painter and his paintings are technically good...if it were not for The Joy of Painting, however, his works would be fit mostly for selling at a local coffee shop. He is not known for his artwork itself, but for his show. The Austrian painter, as well, was a competent landscape painter, but the only reason his art is known about is his...other work. What I am trying to say is that there is a big difference between a hobbyist or even a professional artist and a truly great, historic artist.
Heinrich Himmler on How Bolshevik Christianity Spreads Homosexuality and Hatred of Women...
❝The attitude about the inferiority of women is a typical Christian attitude, and we also who have been national socialists up to this day — many even who are strict heathens — have unwittingly adopted this set of ideas. I know even today very many party members who believe they have to prove the special firmness of their worldview (Weltanschauung) and their own special masculinity through very rowdy and truculent behaviour toward women.❞
Fertility is also decreasing because of the massive amounts of hormone disrupters in our environment. Geoengineering, fluoridation, glyphosate, micro plastics, the list is long.....
In what the late Saddam Hussein once dubbed “the great Satan,” roughly two-thirds of the United States enlisted military corps is white . . . The fat, bulbous U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin once confirmed in a 93-2 vote of the U.S. Senate, immediately embarked on a whirlwind media tour of duty, telling the pseudo-secular sycophants in the state-controlled tabloid press and state-controlled television talk show circuit about how the U.S. Army is full of bad racist white men.
Senior Defense Department leaders celebrating yet another Pride Month at the Pentagon sounding the alarm about the rising number of state laws they say target the LGBTQ+ community, warned the trend is hurting the feelings of the armed forces . . . “LGBTQ plus and other diverse communities are under attack, just because they are different. Hate for hate’s sake,” said Gil Cisneros, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness, who also serves as DoD’s chief diversity and inclusion officer.
And now the U.S. Army is doing ads begging for more young white males? What happened?
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, and even if Gavin Newsome could be cheated into the Oval Office by ZOG somehow, with Globohomo diversity brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition, the invasion at the Southern border is going full tilt, and the drugs are flowing in like never before.
Get ready for it . . . the fat old devil worshipping fags on Capitol Hill, on Wall Street, in Whitehall, and in Brussels are in no shape to fight a war themselves, and most Americans are armed to the teeth with their own guns . . . NATO hates heterosexual white men . . . they said so themselves . . .
Yeah, I'm generally on board with the ideas in this substack, but these red pills about women never resonate with me. My wife is an angel, my best friend is a woman, I frequently collaborate with a woman whom I respect and admire, and I have always liked and gotten along with women. I had female friends growing up, I was reasonably popular with women and successful in dating, and I'm a 5' 9" manlet.
I'm not saying there isn't food for thought in these pieces, but they seem grossly overstated. Or maybe I'm just lucky, or deluded. Yes, I see lots of female misbehavior in the general population, but I chalk that up to the population being full of contemptible, mouth-breathing retards (of whom women are 50 percent).
I guess I would say the points in the article stand, but to a much subtler degree. Maybe these observations apply to the average woman, but average people are mediocre by definition and I don't care what they think or are like anymore. And average people would never read this substack. Maybe we need to stop focusing on Big Normie and invest energy in people who matter and can accomplish things (and that group includes some women).
Hi Martin, thanks for this feedback. iI sounds like you are blessed to have excellent relations with women. But I would say this is pretty unusual today. There's a guy at the gym I go to who's this way as well; he's always chatting with women as friends, I actually get the sense he's kind of uncomfortable around men (not saying you are), even though he's both straight and married. So such a thing does exist... The hope here is to offer a generalized, predictive model for why things are the way they are, even while understanding that there are exceptions to any particular generalization such as yourself with women.
Well, I will do some misogyny posting in this thread when I have the time and inspiration. Here's one thing that is true about most women: they can't re-tell a joke to save their lives. I know they say women aren't funny, and while I do know women who are funny in their own way, I know almost no women who can hear a funny joke, re-tell it, and have it still be funny.
To do this requires a specific set of skills. You have to recognize that something's funny, identify what's funny about it, and be able to re-convey that to someone else with only the relevant points, timed correctly, and tailored to your audience. Even a good-humored woman will take a funny joke, leave out crucial details, add a bunch of irrelevant ones, put the punchline in the middle, and she doesn't know how to clean up or dumb down the joke for the listener so it's just a trainwreck every time.
The reason I think this is significant is because you need this same set of skills to listen to an argument, become convinced by it, and then re-argue it in a way that will convince another person. A man seems more able to do this, so when an argument spreads through society it spreads through men. A woman usually can't, so even if she is skeptical and can be persuaded by a well-reasoned, well-delivered argument, she can't repackage and re-sell the argument, rhetorically, so it just stops with her.
When I speak to a woman who has decided to homeschool, or not vaccinate her kids, or something else I agree with, and when I ask her for her rationale behind the decision, she'll get shifty and seem put on the spot, even when it's clear I agree with her. Then, she'll start telling me a story of her experience being convinced by the thing, and how it made her feel—which is fine and good, but that's not the same as arguing a position.
I don't think that comes from general timidity or self-doubt. A woman can get upset about something and plead her own case for what she thinks is right, but she can't re-plead a case.
Why is any claim made of women that isn't glowing or congratulatory automatically deemed 'misogyny' ? In some cases, pointing out the faults in men and/or women is to recognize their humanity.
I'll tell you another thing that pisses me off about women: they try to feed my kid sugar. They always have—family members and family friends. I will tell them we're a no-sugar household and they will bring sugar anyway, and when I tell them again they'll wait a while and bring it again, and then make some excuse how it's a special occasion.
In many cases, these are women who are vegetarian and who are raising their kids vegetarian. When they're over, my wife and I will make vegetarian food so their kids aren't left out but these bitches will still bring a pie or something.
The other day this mom brought candy and I told her my kid can't have that, and she said 'well it's for Valentine's Day.' And I told her no, and she said she would just leave it for later and I could decide what to do with it. Then I told her not to leave it and she took it back. Then she started telling me some long story about how she is trying to walk more, and how she was in such good shape during covid but it's hard after the holidays...
Anyway, this reaction proved exactly what I always suspected: that these women want to eat sugar, but they know it's unhealthy, so they push it on kids because somehow, that sanctions the behavior and makes it OK. Which, of course, makes no sense at all, but I think that's the motivation.
This same mom was someone I went to in June of 2020 and told her they're going to roll out some shot and try to force it on everyone, and she said her family would never take it. And, of course, when the shot came out, not only did they all take it but she tried to single out my kid in some group text with my wife for not taking it. Same mentality.
Great essay! Not wanting to derail the comments, but I might add I'm even now tinkering with an essay on other issues where Western Civ went wrong by not listening to Schopenhauer, to whit:
1. Our metaphysics would not only be correct, but already quantum-mechanical compliant;
2. Dismissing Hegel as a charlatan and windbag, would not only have prevented "continental" philosophy from mistaking obscurity for profundity, to this day (hence, no postmodernism) but would have given Marx no reason to co-opt an unpopular Hegel, thus no communism.
3. On a side note, Nietzsche's "philosophy" was an attempt to "overcome" Schopenhauer by childishly reversing his ideas; this ultimately led to Fascism (Mussolini) and National Socialism, which also were reactions to communism. Imagine the history of the 20th century without postmodernism, Communism, Fascism or National Socialism! A veritable Utopia!
Jewish messianism has been spreading its poisonous message among us for nearly two thousand years. Democratic and communist universalisms are more recent, but they have only strengthened the old Jewish narrative. These are the same ideals . . .
The transnational, transracial, transcultural ideals that these ideologies preach to us (beyond peoples, races, cultures) and are the daily diet in our schools, in our media, in our pop culture, in our universities and on our streets, have reduced our biosymbolic identity and ethnic pride to their minimal expression.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are death cults that originated in the Middle East and are completely alien to Europe and its peoples.
Sometimes one wonders why the European left gets along so well with Muslims. Why does an often openly anti-religious movement side with a fierce religiosity that seems to oppose almost everything the left always claims to stand for? Part of the explanation lies in the fact that Islam and Marxism share a common ideological root: Judaism.
Don Rumsfeld was right to say, "Europe has shifted on its axis," the wrong side has won World War II, and it is becoming clearer by the day . . .
What has NATO done to defend Europe?
Absolutely nothing.
My enemies are not in Moscow, Damascus, Tehran, Riyadh or some ethereal Teutonic bogeyman, but in Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv.
<<"Or if you do decide to proceed with marriage, at least you’ll have a bit of an understanding that the female brain changes biochemically after having children and therefore their personalities and actions dramatically change.">>
Add to that, the effect in many cases of coming off of birth control and you have some very real hormone-driven insanity.
I must admit I laughed when reading your article. After having read many of your articles, reading you quoting Schopenhauer on women was only a matter of time.
Regarding the idea that "you can't find a women with whom to have deep, meaningful conversations"... You can, but the "smarter" she is, the more "educated", and the more incompatible she is with what we would expect of an actual woman, potentially the mother of your children. Increasingly I've been noticing this: if I want a proper woman, she needs to not be very smart AND have an inclination towards solitude, hence an inclination towards not using much social media. On top of that, she needs to be single and interested, the combination of which is harder to find the more "suitable" she is, which is a bit of a catch 22.
Thankfully, male friends to have deeper discussions with are not that hard to find.
Another thing to note is that women don't care that much about the content of what you're saying. She will agree depending on the combination of 1) how much she likes you and/or is attracted to you 2) her social environment 3) how what you say makes her feel.
I've sometimes explained to women how guardianship should be reinstated, and that they should be forbidden from attaining jobs not conducive to community service, child/elderly care, etc. and they would agree if I came from an angle of complementarity instead of spite. Telling them that it is their natural role to be protected, cherished, loved in a motherly role works better than telling they're like half children with vacuum for a prefrontal cortex. Yet the conclusions are the same.
To be fair also, but you've said it, most men today are so incredibly basic and mediocre that I can't fault women for despising them.
"They don’t understand that work sucks, men generally don’t like doing it but do it in order to support a family.". Aham, right. Imagine that I do understand, I work since I was 16h years old, I could provide for all of my family - mother, brother and father, because we were extremely poor and could also study and beat so called men in high tech. It is not want I wanted, this is the product of a system which makes you strong to survive. Otherwise you die or end up married to a drunk. I have several questions. How many men do you know can "support" a family? Or even want a family? Or even are mature enough to start a family? Or to understand what family means? Where are those men slowly but surely maturing into men as some natural thing. I keep hearing this mythology about men being strong, glorious, smart, etc. What seems though is that men are caught in some infantile state their whole lives. It seems that they mature so slowly that it is like in their 80-ies that they become a grown up. I know, I know, women are to blame. But I told you. This only proves that men are you know... I hear them blame women their whole lives for everything. As a woman I can tell you it doesn't look like manly. As a woman I can tell you men are pathetic. I wish, I truly wish men could beat globohomo and prove that they are not pathetic. Or to just you know be able to support a family, but most can't. Sorry, I just understand I have such a low opinion of men, but I truly wish it was different, I was different. Let's, lets somehow find those glorious, strong, loving, mature men, not you know - 10 exceptions to the rule, but where are those men really, naturally smart, mature, etc? Men have these extremes - men can be intelligent and always beat women, but this is the extreme. Men can also be dumber than most women- another extreme. The general rule though is men comparing themselves to the high extreme and think this is somehow the rule for their gender. Sorry, it is not. And just to be fair, how exactly do you expect women to excel in anything while looking after family and kids? You do expect, you never factor it when stating - men are for the world, women are for home. Ok, better suited, I agree. But how do you expect somebody playing with kids and reading them stories to excel in anything? And then you use it against him to paint him in a way that suits a narrative. Now, Rurik did his best to blame the war in Ukraine on women. No, it was not men in the West kissing Putin's ass, no, it was women. Women made their men fight Zelenski. Women write 5D, women listen to 5D chess nonsense. All men listen to Rolo you know with his 3000 followers. Do you think this whole narrative is true? I don't take it personally, I am old enough to not give a shit who tries to analyze my sex. But do you think this makes sense? Or that it paints men in a positive light?
Hi Vanusha, thanks for the comment. I don't disagree with your points and I touched on your main point briefly with this line, I think: "men are largely unworthy of respect due to lacking masculine role models, dealing with obesity and depression and lack of work opportunities, and especially due to these inverted gender norms. Why would women want to stay with an effeminate, sniveling so-called “man”?" Men are emotionally children today deep into adulthood and their behavior generally speaking is far from worthy of respect. Short sighted, unwilling to think for themselves, unwilling to take hard unflinching looks at the world around us, settling for what is expected...it's no wonder women aren't attracted to them.
The hope of this post wasn't to assign moral blame to women (or men), but rather to delve into what comes natural to people and how these processes have and continue to be inverted on a societal level. The one thing I "blame" women for, although it's not really blame, is how liberal they are in the sense that they favor security over freedom *generally*, much more so than men do. It makes sense as the weaker sex that they do so, but female participation in political life has really supercharged shitliberalism and the expansion of the leviathan globohomo state.
The line ""They don’t understand that work sucks, men generally don’t like doing it but do it in order to support a family" was in relation to women who choose career over having families because society tells them to. Regarding your personal story, I don't know anything about you and I stated at the start: "As a preface, the following discussion does not apply to all men or women. It offers generalizations based on how men and women are generally based on bell curves; there are always people at the extremes that don’t conform to such norms". It sounds like you've been working from a young age and you supported your family, which is laudable, and that you understand that work (for many or most people) sucks, and I hope you get the chance to have a family if you so choose...
You are respectful Sir, this is a true surprise. :) Women are just like people you know. Show some respect and good words and they are happy. Ok, now not joking, deadly seriously. We must have this conversation as humans and as men and women. Things are not ok in the world, we all see it. I will be very happy that we talk and discuss some day. Just hope you are not trying to win women for the cause of a different society with Sharia. Rolo envy the muslims because they stone their women. This is not going to work. Women will prefer the globalists.
Some interesting and contentious stuff in this article. At times, Schopenhauer contradicts himself in his analysis of female nature. For example, he cites women's lack of a sense for justice and their disregard for women below them in status in one place, and then laments how they over-extend their concern for the oppressed in another. With that said, he puts his finger on a few important aspects of the divide between male and female nature, too. Nice work on the whole, NF!
What I've found that works best is to view the other sex as a completely different animal, and not fight or rue their different tendencies and abilities, but instead learn to work with and around (and sometimes against) them. Sort of like being a human learning to safely live around, and work with, a large and unpredictable animal like a horse. The trick works pretty well for both sides of the sex divide (just ask my wife of 50+ years). Given your views on the whole matter, I can easily see why you like Schopenhauer.
Eliminate the labeling, the “swimming against the tide” role reversals, maybe even some common sense “what makes me tick” intraspection(not an actual word) and you might achieve true happiness and societal success. But then the powers that “invented” this/these messes, for lack of a better word, are all in it for what. The money?, the hollow prestige?, etc...-----but they are and will defend it, kicking and screaming, if need be, to prolong it.
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
Cultural Marxists encourage abortion, birth control, divorce, homosexuality, “carrier women,” drugs, miscegenation, the destruction of the traditional family, and unrestricted immigration of racial foreigners into white countries. This is a reflection of what the Cultural Marxists preach: white reproduction is evil, and that which prevents white reproduction is good.
When the Roman republic collapsed into corruption, degeneracy and civil war Julius and then Augustus Caesar transformed the system into a dictatorship in order to combat the oligarchy and led to multiple more centuries of prosperity. Whether that will happen here, who knows. We always need to find hope though wherever we can find it as life is not worth living without it, the black pill is too hard to swallow permanently. We should always look to the bright side even if we acknowledge the darkness.
[26] The fairies are not to be seized on, and brought to answer for the hurt they do. So also the ecclesiastics vanish away from the tribunals of civil justice.
[27] The ecclesiastics take from young men the use of reason, by certain charms compounded of metaphysics, and miracles, and traditions, and abused Scripture, whereby they are good for nothing else but to execute what they command them. The fairies likewise are said to take young children out of their cradles, and to change them into natural fools, which common people do therefore call elves, and are apt to mischief.
[28] In what shop or operatory the fairies make their enchantment, the old wives have not determined. But the operatories of the clergy are well enough known to be the universities, that received their discipline from authority pontifical.
[29] When the fairies are displeased with anybody, they are said to send their elves to pinch them. The ecclesiastics, when they are displeased with any civil state, make also their elves, that is, superstitious, enchanted subjects, to pinch their princes, by preaching sedition; or one prince, enchanted with promises, to pinch another.
[30] The fairies marry not; but there be amongst them incubi that have copulation with flesh and blood. The priests also marry not.
-
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994 . . . Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness . . . Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness, and to Whom it Accrueth . . .
Brave man. I know a few high level professional women who appear to relish their work and be very good at it. I've occasionally shared tough, physical situations with women who also relish and are very good at that. I know a few who sparkle with intelligence; a few who think deeply and are worth a conversation with anyone.
And I know countless men who are soft and limp, and worry about their feelings and other people's, and aren't much use to themselves, or anyone else.
I'm not suggesting any of that invalidates your argument, but that drawing lines between us is probably not the solution. Perhaps valuing male and female archetypes is. Or, is part of it, at least. I find myself in service to women and children (well, one and two, specifically), and to those below me in my domain. That relationship flows one way; they are not in service to me. It naturally comes with privileges as well as responsibilities. It is probably what I am for, before I am for anything else.
Women on dating apps select men based on looks but in real life there are all sorts. There are as many good women as there are good men. If you’re in the top 2% of men, that’s still 1 in 50 women in your age bracket. You just have to talk to 50x as many women as the average Joe to find yours. And the same goes for you (mutatis mutandis), fine ladies who read this newsletter 😘
Good luck, everyone! Illegitimi non carborundum!
EDIT: if the average Joe is 50% (1 in 2) then 2%ers only have to talk to 25x as many.
The math in the 5% vs 50% is off. The two groups compared only make up 55% of the total population, and nothing at all is said about the remaining 45%. Thus we cannot conclude that the 5% are having half the sex unless we know that the 45% are having no sex at all.
Feminism: A Jewish Psyop to Demonize White Women . . .
Just when we were really making some progress in exposing the jewish orchestrated genocide against Whites, a toxic narrative was injected. Instead of blaming jews for their obvious role in flooding all White countries with hordes of non-White invaders, while also condemning all the White traitors who let it happen, some of the biggest figures in our “movement” started pointing the finger at White women. Women are too horny and want to be ravaged by the savages, they are all feminists, they opened the borders because they are pathologically altruistic, and so on.
After our women started getting raped and assaulted en masse, some men started saying these women were asking for it, that they deserved it, and that they actually liked it, since “scientific” studies show many women fantasize about rape and even orgasm while they are being brutally defiled. Many of our kinsmen, acting as “good goyim,” lapped up this poisonous narrative that has been spreading like the plague.
There are some good points here, but this Schopenhauer feller overshoots the mark bigly!
Women don't do art? WTF? Go to an art supply store and what do you see? Women! The estrogen levels at a typical Hobby Lobby are so high that you better get out quickly if you don't want to go
trans.
Who do you think made the tapestries in the Middle Ages?
Women and piano lessons? Very common. Very common for the church organist to be a woman. Lot's of incredible female musical performers on YouTube, especially at piano. Art and music were part of the core curriculum at upper class girl's schools in the 1800s.
Literature? Get real! Plenty of female writers going back to Jane Austin and before. True, the number of women writers writing two-fisted science fiction is limited, but when it comes to "Great Fiction", it's mostly girls and gurly mans.
Physics and engineering are definitely male dominated, however. Rrrr rrrr rrr!
----
And let's remember that a very large fraction of the economy was home economics until the 20th Century. Women worked. A lot. The idea of men doing the work and women just taking care of the kids doesn't happen until electricity and appliances are invented. Simply cooking back in the day was more hazardous than being a police officer today. Cooking using a fireplace while wearing a dress was a recipe for getting burned alive.
By all means verbally smack down today's feminists. They aren't just whiny bitches; they are idiots. The 1950s were a golden age to be a woman. To be a tradwife under today's conditions is to be the envy of women throughout civilized history.
I think Schopenhauer's point re: art isn't that women don't create art, but that women don't create *great* art. As he states, "they have not a single great painting to boast of, just because they are deficient in that objectivity of mind which is so directly indispensable in painting." Is there a single woman painter on the level of a Rembrandt, a Da Vinci, a Van Gogh? If so, who do you think it is? What about musicians or composers?
This was my point about men having much longer "tails" than women on bell curve for traits, on both ends: much more geniuses, but also much more homeless, mentally ill, etc. It's not better or worse, it's just different.
Artemisia Gentileschi and Élisabeth Louise Vigée Le Brun to start. There are many others.
I could never understand why they weren’t included in the art classes I took at school. (Not that I’m a fan of woke revisionism, but these painters are worth studying and many regarded them among the best during their lifetimes.)
Look up their biographies and see how awfully they were treated.
LeBrun was forced to stop painting to back up her husband’s career. And Gentileschi was horribly abused.
Heinrich Himmler on How Bolshevik Christianity Spreads Homosexuality and Hatred of Women...
❝ . . . I am of the conviction that the Roman emperors, who eradicated (ausrotteten) the first Christians, did exactly the same thing that we are doing with the communists. These Christians were then the worst yeast which the great city contained, the worst Jewish people, the worst Bolsheviks that there were.
The Bolshevism of that time had now the power to become great on the carcass of the dying Rome. The priesthood of the Christian church which later subjugated the Aryan church in unending conflicts goes on, since the 4th or 5th Century, to long for the celibacy of priests. It relies on Paul and the very first apostles who derogate the woman as something sinful and permit or recommend marriage as merely a legal way out of prostitution — that is in the Bible — and derogate the procreation of children as a necessary evil. This priesthood continues along in this way for several centuries until in 1139 the celibacy of priests is fully implemented.
I am furthermore convinced that the way out for the few who do not want to yield to this homosexuality, especially for the country parsons, the majority of whom — more than 50% — I estimate not to be gay, is to procure for themselves in confession the necessary married and single women; I assume that in the monasteries the homosexuality ranges from 90 or 95 to 100%.❞
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/138320669/heinrich-himmler-on-how-bolshevik-christianity-spreads-homosexuality-and-hatred-of-women
Hi Clarence, it's fine to post in the comments but please don't spam them, thank you. You posted about 20 responses here with mostly the same stuff this morning and I trimmed the repeats.
I was heading North on Gen. Jim Moore Road going to work at Fritzsche Airfield that morning when the second aircraft struck . . . My first thought was . . . 'here we go, it's going to be another Vietnam' . . . then, I found myself in Afghanistan with all the British opium poppies. Yes, I said British opium poppies . . . The Opium Wars . . .
Three ingredients for warfare are required: 1. personnel, 2. explosives, and 3. opium.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh . . . Brzezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’ . . .
That is all there was to it, 9-11 was blowback from our own CIA operations . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
I generally agree on the long tails for the most part. And there aren't many notable female composers to my knowledge.
But painters? I've seen too many good paintings by female members of my extended family alone to buy that.
Bob Ross was a very competent landscape painter and his paintings are technically good...if it were not for The Joy of Painting, however, his works would be fit mostly for selling at a local coffee shop. He is not known for his artwork itself, but for his show. The Austrian painter, as well, was a competent landscape painter, but the only reason his art is known about is his...other work. What I am trying to say is that there is a big difference between a hobbyist or even a professional artist and a truly great, historic artist.
Bob Ross was a dude.
Heinrich Himmler on How Bolshevik Christianity Spreads Homosexuality and Hatred of Women...
❝The attitude about the inferiority of women is a typical Christian attitude, and we also who have been national socialists up to this day — many even who are strict heathens — have unwittingly adopted this set of ideas. I know even today very many party members who believe they have to prove the special firmness of their worldview (Weltanschauung) and their own special masculinity through very rowdy and truculent behaviour toward women.❞
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/138320669/heinrich-himmler-on-how-bolshevik-christianity-spreads-homosexuality-and-hatred-of-women
"But painters? I've seen too many good paintings by female members of my extended family alone to buy that."
"What I am trying to say is that there is a big difference between a hobbyist or even a professional artist and a truly great, historic artist."
Fertility is also decreasing because of the massive amounts of hormone disrupters in our environment. Geoengineering, fluoridation, glyphosate, micro plastics, the list is long.....
In what the late Saddam Hussein once dubbed “the great Satan,” roughly two-thirds of the United States enlisted military corps is white . . . The fat, bulbous U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin once confirmed in a 93-2 vote of the U.S. Senate, immediately embarked on a whirlwind media tour of duty, telling the pseudo-secular sycophants in the state-controlled tabloid press and state-controlled television talk show circuit about how the U.S. Army is full of bad racist white men.
Senior Defense Department leaders celebrating yet another Pride Month at the Pentagon sounding the alarm about the rising number of state laws they say target the LGBTQ+ community, warned the trend is hurting the feelings of the armed forces . . . “LGBTQ plus and other diverse communities are under attack, just because they are different. Hate for hate’s sake,” said Gil Cisneros, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness, who also serves as DoD’s chief diversity and inclusion officer.
And now the U.S. Army is doing ads begging for more young white males? What happened?
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, and even if Gavin Newsome could be cheated into the Oval Office by ZOG somehow, with Globohomo diversity brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition, the invasion at the Southern border is going full tilt, and the drugs are flowing in like never before.
Get ready for it . . . the fat old devil worshipping fags on Capitol Hill, on Wall Street, in Whitehall, and in Brussels are in no shape to fight a war themselves, and most Americans are armed to the teeth with their own guns . . . NATO hates heterosexual white men . . . they said so themselves . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/138320669/nato-an-anti-white-and-anti-family-institution
Yeah, I'm generally on board with the ideas in this substack, but these red pills about women never resonate with me. My wife is an angel, my best friend is a woman, I frequently collaborate with a woman whom I respect and admire, and I have always liked and gotten along with women. I had female friends growing up, I was reasonably popular with women and successful in dating, and I'm a 5' 9" manlet.
I'm not saying there isn't food for thought in these pieces, but they seem grossly overstated. Or maybe I'm just lucky, or deluded. Yes, I see lots of female misbehavior in the general population, but I chalk that up to the population being full of contemptible, mouth-breathing retards (of whom women are 50 percent).
I guess I would say the points in the article stand, but to a much subtler degree. Maybe these observations apply to the average woman, but average people are mediocre by definition and I don't care what they think or are like anymore. And average people would never read this substack. Maybe we need to stop focusing on Big Normie and invest energy in people who matter and can accomplish things (and that group includes some women).
Hi Martin, thanks for this feedback. iI sounds like you are blessed to have excellent relations with women. But I would say this is pretty unusual today. There's a guy at the gym I go to who's this way as well; he's always chatting with women as friends, I actually get the sense he's kind of uncomfortable around men (not saying you are), even though he's both straight and married. So such a thing does exist... The hope here is to offer a generalized, predictive model for why things are the way they are, even while understanding that there are exceptions to any particular generalization such as yourself with women.
Well, I will do some misogyny posting in this thread when I have the time and inspiration. Here's one thing that is true about most women: they can't re-tell a joke to save their lives. I know they say women aren't funny, and while I do know women who are funny in their own way, I know almost no women who can hear a funny joke, re-tell it, and have it still be funny.
To do this requires a specific set of skills. You have to recognize that something's funny, identify what's funny about it, and be able to re-convey that to someone else with only the relevant points, timed correctly, and tailored to your audience. Even a good-humored woman will take a funny joke, leave out crucial details, add a bunch of irrelevant ones, put the punchline in the middle, and she doesn't know how to clean up or dumb down the joke for the listener so it's just a trainwreck every time.
The reason I think this is significant is because you need this same set of skills to listen to an argument, become convinced by it, and then re-argue it in a way that will convince another person. A man seems more able to do this, so when an argument spreads through society it spreads through men. A woman usually can't, so even if she is skeptical and can be persuaded by a well-reasoned, well-delivered argument, she can't repackage and re-sell the argument, rhetorically, so it just stops with her.
When I speak to a woman who has decided to homeschool, or not vaccinate her kids, or something else I agree with, and when I ask her for her rationale behind the decision, she'll get shifty and seem put on the spot, even when it's clear I agree with her. Then, she'll start telling me a story of her experience being convinced by the thing, and how it made her feel—which is fine and good, but that's not the same as arguing a position.
I don't think that comes from general timidity or self-doubt. A woman can get upset about something and plead her own case for what she thinks is right, but she can't re-plead a case.
Why is any claim made of women that isn't glowing or congratulatory automatically deemed 'misogyny' ? In some cases, pointing out the faults in men and/or women is to recognize their humanity.
I'll tell you another thing that pisses me off about women: they try to feed my kid sugar. They always have—family members and family friends. I will tell them we're a no-sugar household and they will bring sugar anyway, and when I tell them again they'll wait a while and bring it again, and then make some excuse how it's a special occasion.
In many cases, these are women who are vegetarian and who are raising their kids vegetarian. When they're over, my wife and I will make vegetarian food so their kids aren't left out but these bitches will still bring a pie or something.
The other day this mom brought candy and I told her my kid can't have that, and she said 'well it's for Valentine's Day.' And I told her no, and she said she would just leave it for later and I could decide what to do with it. Then I told her not to leave it and she took it back. Then she started telling me some long story about how she is trying to walk more, and how she was in such good shape during covid but it's hard after the holidays...
Anyway, this reaction proved exactly what I always suspected: that these women want to eat sugar, but they know it's unhealthy, so they push it on kids because somehow, that sanctions the behavior and makes it OK. Which, of course, makes no sense at all, but I think that's the motivation.
This same mom was someone I went to in June of 2020 and told her they're going to roll out some shot and try to force it on everyone, and she said her family would never take it. And, of course, when the shot came out, not only did they all take it but she tried to single out my kid in some group text with my wife for not taking it. Same mentality.
Great essay! Not wanting to derail the comments, but I might add I'm even now tinkering with an essay on other issues where Western Civ went wrong by not listening to Schopenhauer, to whit:
1. Our metaphysics would not only be correct, but already quantum-mechanical compliant;
2. Dismissing Hegel as a charlatan and windbag, would not only have prevented "continental" philosophy from mistaking obscurity for profundity, to this day (hence, no postmodernism) but would have given Marx no reason to co-opt an unpopular Hegel, thus no communism.
3. On a side note, Nietzsche's "philosophy" was an attempt to "overcome" Schopenhauer by childishly reversing his ideas; this ultimately led to Fascism (Mussolini) and National Socialism, which also were reactions to communism. Imagine the history of the 20th century without postmodernism, Communism, Fascism or National Socialism! A veritable Utopia!
Jewish messianism has been spreading its poisonous message among us for nearly two thousand years. Democratic and communist universalisms are more recent, but they have only strengthened the old Jewish narrative. These are the same ideals . . .
The transnational, transracial, transcultural ideals that these ideologies preach to us (beyond peoples, races, cultures) and are the daily diet in our schools, in our media, in our pop culture, in our universities and on our streets, have reduced our biosymbolic identity and ethnic pride to their minimal expression.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are death cults that originated in the Middle East and are completely alien to Europe and its peoples.
Sometimes one wonders why the European left gets along so well with Muslims. Why does an often openly anti-religious movement side with a fierce religiosity that seems to oppose almost everything the left always claims to stand for? Part of the explanation lies in the fact that Islam and Marxism share a common ideological root: Judaism.
Don Rumsfeld was right to say, "Europe has shifted on its axis," the wrong side has won World War II, and it is becoming clearer by the day . . .
What has NATO done to defend Europe?
Absolutely nothing.
My enemies are not in Moscow, Damascus, Tehran, Riyadh or some ethereal Teutonic bogeyman, but in Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/pardonne-mon-francais-va-te-faire
<<"Or if you do decide to proceed with marriage, at least you’ll have a bit of an understanding that the female brain changes biochemically after having children and therefore their personalities and actions dramatically change.">>
Add to that, the effect in many cases of coming off of birth control and you have some very real hormone-driven insanity.
I agree with Schopenhauer and I am a female.
I must admit I laughed when reading your article. After having read many of your articles, reading you quoting Schopenhauer on women was only a matter of time.
Regarding the idea that "you can't find a women with whom to have deep, meaningful conversations"... You can, but the "smarter" she is, the more "educated", and the more incompatible she is with what we would expect of an actual woman, potentially the mother of your children. Increasingly I've been noticing this: if I want a proper woman, she needs to not be very smart AND have an inclination towards solitude, hence an inclination towards not using much social media. On top of that, she needs to be single and interested, the combination of which is harder to find the more "suitable" she is, which is a bit of a catch 22.
Thankfully, male friends to have deeper discussions with are not that hard to find.
Another thing to note is that women don't care that much about the content of what you're saying. She will agree depending on the combination of 1) how much she likes you and/or is attracted to you 2) her social environment 3) how what you say makes her feel.
I've sometimes explained to women how guardianship should be reinstated, and that they should be forbidden from attaining jobs not conducive to community service, child/elderly care, etc. and they would agree if I came from an angle of complementarity instead of spite. Telling them that it is their natural role to be protected, cherished, loved in a motherly role works better than telling they're like half children with vacuum for a prefrontal cortex. Yet the conclusions are the same.
To be fair also, but you've said it, most men today are so incredibly basic and mediocre that I can't fault women for despising them.
"They don’t understand that work sucks, men generally don’t like doing it but do it in order to support a family.". Aham, right. Imagine that I do understand, I work since I was 16h years old, I could provide for all of my family - mother, brother and father, because we were extremely poor and could also study and beat so called men in high tech. It is not want I wanted, this is the product of a system which makes you strong to survive. Otherwise you die or end up married to a drunk. I have several questions. How many men do you know can "support" a family? Or even want a family? Or even are mature enough to start a family? Or to understand what family means? Where are those men slowly but surely maturing into men as some natural thing. I keep hearing this mythology about men being strong, glorious, smart, etc. What seems though is that men are caught in some infantile state their whole lives. It seems that they mature so slowly that it is like in their 80-ies that they become a grown up. I know, I know, women are to blame. But I told you. This only proves that men are you know... I hear them blame women their whole lives for everything. As a woman I can tell you it doesn't look like manly. As a woman I can tell you men are pathetic. I wish, I truly wish men could beat globohomo and prove that they are not pathetic. Or to just you know be able to support a family, but most can't. Sorry, I just understand I have such a low opinion of men, but I truly wish it was different, I was different. Let's, lets somehow find those glorious, strong, loving, mature men, not you know - 10 exceptions to the rule, but where are those men really, naturally smart, mature, etc? Men have these extremes - men can be intelligent and always beat women, but this is the extreme. Men can also be dumber than most women- another extreme. The general rule though is men comparing themselves to the high extreme and think this is somehow the rule for their gender. Sorry, it is not. And just to be fair, how exactly do you expect women to excel in anything while looking after family and kids? You do expect, you never factor it when stating - men are for the world, women are for home. Ok, better suited, I agree. But how do you expect somebody playing with kids and reading them stories to excel in anything? And then you use it against him to paint him in a way that suits a narrative. Now, Rurik did his best to blame the war in Ukraine on women. No, it was not men in the West kissing Putin's ass, no, it was women. Women made their men fight Zelenski. Women write 5D, women listen to 5D chess nonsense. All men listen to Rolo you know with his 3000 followers. Do you think this whole narrative is true? I don't take it personally, I am old enough to not give a shit who tries to analyze my sex. But do you think this makes sense? Or that it paints men in a positive light?
Hi Vanusha, thanks for the comment. I don't disagree with your points and I touched on your main point briefly with this line, I think: "men are largely unworthy of respect due to lacking masculine role models, dealing with obesity and depression and lack of work opportunities, and especially due to these inverted gender norms. Why would women want to stay with an effeminate, sniveling so-called “man”?" Men are emotionally children today deep into adulthood and their behavior generally speaking is far from worthy of respect. Short sighted, unwilling to think for themselves, unwilling to take hard unflinching looks at the world around us, settling for what is expected...it's no wonder women aren't attracted to them.
The hope of this post wasn't to assign moral blame to women (or men), but rather to delve into what comes natural to people and how these processes have and continue to be inverted on a societal level. The one thing I "blame" women for, although it's not really blame, is how liberal they are in the sense that they favor security over freedom *generally*, much more so than men do. It makes sense as the weaker sex that they do so, but female participation in political life has really supercharged shitliberalism and the expansion of the leviathan globohomo state.
The line ""They don’t understand that work sucks, men generally don’t like doing it but do it in order to support a family" was in relation to women who choose career over having families because society tells them to. Regarding your personal story, I don't know anything about you and I stated at the start: "As a preface, the following discussion does not apply to all men or women. It offers generalizations based on how men and women are generally based on bell curves; there are always people at the extremes that don’t conform to such norms". It sounds like you've been working from a young age and you supported your family, which is laudable, and that you understand that work (for many or most people) sucks, and I hope you get the chance to have a family if you so choose...
You are respectful Sir, this is a true surprise. :) Women are just like people you know. Show some respect and good words and they are happy. Ok, now not joking, deadly seriously. We must have this conversation as humans and as men and women. Things are not ok in the world, we all see it. I will be very happy that we talk and discuss some day. Just hope you are not trying to win women for the cause of a different society with Sharia. Rolo envy the muslims because they stone their women. This is not going to work. Women will prefer the globalists.
Some interesting and contentious stuff in this article. At times, Schopenhauer contradicts himself in his analysis of female nature. For example, he cites women's lack of a sense for justice and their disregard for women below them in status in one place, and then laments how they over-extend their concern for the oppressed in another. With that said, he puts his finger on a few important aspects of the divide between male and female nature, too. Nice work on the whole, NF!
What I've found that works best is to view the other sex as a completely different animal, and not fight or rue their different tendencies and abilities, but instead learn to work with and around (and sometimes against) them. Sort of like being a human learning to safely live around, and work with, a large and unpredictable animal like a horse. The trick works pretty well for both sides of the sex divide (just ask my wife of 50+ years). Given your views on the whole matter, I can easily see why you like Schopenhauer.
Eliminate the labeling, the “swimming against the tide” role reversals, maybe even some common sense “what makes me tick” intraspection(not an actual word) and you might achieve true happiness and societal success. But then the powers that “invented” this/these messes, for lack of a better word, are all in it for what. The money?, the hollow prestige?, etc...-----but they are and will defend it, kicking and screaming, if need be, to prolong it.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Woke,” “wokeism,” “wokeness,” etc., are weasel words used to hide the truth about the Jews and the Frankfurt School.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
Cultural Marxists encourage abortion, birth control, divorce, homosexuality, “carrier women,” drugs, miscegenation, the destruction of the traditional family, and unrestricted immigration of racial foreigners into white countries. This is a reflection of what the Cultural Marxists preach: white reproduction is evil, and that which prevents white reproduction is good.
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/what-is-cultural-marxism/
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Is there any hope for Western civilization or do we just rot from within until the bitter end?
When the Roman republic collapsed into corruption, degeneracy and civil war Julius and then Augustus Caesar transformed the system into a dictatorship in order to combat the oligarchy and led to multiple more centuries of prosperity. Whether that will happen here, who knows. We always need to find hope though wherever we can find it as life is not worth living without it, the black pill is too hard to swallow permanently. We should always look to the bright side even if we acknowledge the darkness.
[26] The fairies are not to be seized on, and brought to answer for the hurt they do. So also the ecclesiastics vanish away from the tribunals of civil justice.
[27] The ecclesiastics take from young men the use of reason, by certain charms compounded of metaphysics, and miracles, and traditions, and abused Scripture, whereby they are good for nothing else but to execute what they command them. The fairies likewise are said to take young children out of their cradles, and to change them into natural fools, which common people do therefore call elves, and are apt to mischief.
[28] In what shop or operatory the fairies make their enchantment, the old wives have not determined. But the operatories of the clergy are well enough known to be the universities, that received their discipline from authority pontifical.
[29] When the fairies are displeased with anybody, they are said to send their elves to pinch them. The ecclesiastics, when they are displeased with any civil state, make also their elves, that is, superstitious, enchanted subjects, to pinch their princes, by preaching sedition; or one prince, enchanted with promises, to pinch another.
[30] The fairies marry not; but there be amongst them incubi that have copulation with flesh and blood. The priests also marry not.
-
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994 . . . Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness . . . Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness, and to Whom it Accrueth . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/leviathan-part-iv-of-the-kingdom
Brave man. I know a few high level professional women who appear to relish their work and be very good at it. I've occasionally shared tough, physical situations with women who also relish and are very good at that. I know a few who sparkle with intelligence; a few who think deeply and are worth a conversation with anyone.
And I know countless men who are soft and limp, and worry about their feelings and other people's, and aren't much use to themselves, or anyone else.
I'm not suggesting any of that invalidates your argument, but that drawing lines between us is probably not the solution. Perhaps valuing male and female archetypes is. Or, is part of it, at least. I find myself in service to women and children (well, one and two, specifically), and to those below me in my domain. That relationship flows one way; they are not in service to me. It naturally comes with privileges as well as responsibilities. It is probably what I am for, before I am for anything else.
I hope she sees this bro.
Women on dating apps select men based on looks but in real life there are all sorts. There are as many good women as there are good men. If you’re in the top 2% of men, that’s still 1 in 50 women in your age bracket. You just have to talk to 50x as many women as the average Joe to find yours. And the same goes for you (mutatis mutandis), fine ladies who read this newsletter 😘
Good luck, everyone! Illegitimi non carborundum!
EDIT: if the average Joe is 50% (1 in 2) then 2%ers only have to talk to 25x as many.
The math in the 5% vs 50% is off. The two groups compared only make up 55% of the total population, and nothing at all is said about the remaining 45%. Thus we cannot conclude that the 5% are having half the sex unless we know that the 45% are having no sex at all.
Feminism: A Jewish Psyop to Demonize White Women . . .
Just when we were really making some progress in exposing the jewish orchestrated genocide against Whites, a toxic narrative was injected. Instead of blaming jews for their obvious role in flooding all White countries with hordes of non-White invaders, while also condemning all the White traitors who let it happen, some of the biggest figures in our “movement” started pointing the finger at White women. Women are too horny and want to be ravaged by the savages, they are all feminists, they opened the borders because they are pathologically altruistic, and so on.
After our women started getting raped and assaulted en masse, some men started saying these women were asking for it, that they deserved it, and that they actually liked it, since “scientific” studies show many women fantasize about rape and even orgasm while they are being brutally defiled. Many of our kinsmen, acting as “good goyim,” lapped up this poisonous narrative that has been spreading like the plague.
http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-psychological-operation-to-blame-white-women/