What is Feminism?

Feminists will usually define feminism as a somewhat abstract demand to equality and justice between the genders. Any other description of feminism and its effects on society made by non-feminists will be ignored based on “you can’t tell a feminist what feminism is” type arguments. In fact, any social movement will define its values in heroic and moral light but ignore other unwanted effects created by the movement. For example, socialists will define socialism as “social justice” and economic equality while ignoring  that socialism is also things like reduced competition and encouraging dependence on the state, etc. 

Here are some “other” things that feminism is, beyond the feminist stated goal of equality:

Feminism is a morbidly obese, sexually promiscuous, short-haired, tattooed, cussing beast whom no man can ever love or trust.

Feminism is a family which hates itself.

Feminism is a line drawn inside your home between you and your wife.

Feminism is a woman furious over ‘rape culture’ and who masturbates while fantasizing being beaten and raped.

Feminism is opposing telling girls what they “need” to like (e.g. cooking and dolls) while telling girls what they “need” to like (e.g. engineering and math).

Feminism is a woman who cannot be loved anymore since she hates the domineering man she lusts and sexually despises the submissive man she likes.

Feminism is alimony and every other weekend

Feminism is a son hating his father

Feminism is equality as the only measure for progress of a society

Feminism (and MRAs) is nationalism applied to gender

Feminism is more and more laws to force reality fit feminist ideals

Feminism is a demographic annihilation due to low birth rates

Feminism is destruction of the most fundamental unit of society   

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 10 Comments

Economics is Essential Knowledge for a Patriarch

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, 1776

Due to a recent promotion at work I have much less time to focus on this blog or my other hobbies. Posts are thus more limited in scope and the final version of The Guide for a Young Patriarch will be significantly delayed. I do however still have time to read and recently began reading texts on economics, including the classic book “the wealth of nations.”  

Books on war are of clear importance to a patriarch since they involve conflict and fight for dominance, which are in the essence of masculinity (i.e. both create and emanate from testosterone). The motives to study economics are far less clear and emanate from the solid red-pill observations in the heart of classical economic text. We can see the relation between economics and the red pill when we discuss the sexual market place, or when the economists talk about money as a social contract, or when pre-seletion mixes with supply and demand, or when goods are valued due to nothing but scarcity.

To put it bluntly: If war is the most brutal and honest form of conflict, economics is the most brutal and honest form of human relationships. I recommend any young patriarch to read at least one fundamental text in classical economics as part of his education (I added recommendations to “Education of a Patriarch” reading list and you can check the Captain’s blog). It will be relevant to much more than just economics since it will give perspective to sexual relationships and other human interactions.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

Misogynists love women more

The blue pill view, which is the common view today, and specifically the view of nice guys and male-feminists (which is any blue pill man), sees women as victims and blameless angels. This is how most of society views women. It is the pedestal on which society puts the modern woman. Many young men believe this view and see women as morally superior in every sense and basically believe in women as ‘good’. In a way, you can see this when mothers tell their sons “do not hurt women”, not “be careful women hurt you” as well as when single mothers are hailed as heroic and not irresponsible

This view is highly detrimental to young men since women, unfortunately, are not blameless angels. When the nice-feminist-guy gets hit with a more realistic view of women (and specifically the promiscuous modern woman which have no moral code other than ‘follow your feelings’), the pedestal turns into anger and resentment. The resentment follows naturally from unrealistic expectations and can be observed in most men who begin thinking heretical red pill thoughts. This, initially, can hurt your relationships with women, but the resentment will fade in time while the knowledge will remain.

The red pill eventually results in thinking less of women compared with the common western view and for stating such views you will be label a misogynist.  However, the red-pill evo-bio based knowledge of women and their sexuality will actually allow you to love them more and much more honestly than the standard feminist nice guy. A red pill man can understand the deceitful and concealed nature of female sexuality, the ruthlessness of hypergamy, the contradictions in their desires, and understand the moral void in which the modern secular humanist woman exists . He expects no more than is possible and can enjoy the great joy, warmth and passion women, and especially those women with an intact sense of femininity, still offer. In the end, the love of a misogynist is stronger and more honest than the feminist-male love based on a shell of pretty lies.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments

Read "No More Mr. Nice Guy" by Robert Glover

The book “No More Mr. Nice Guy” by Robert Glover had already been recommended by various voices in the manosphere. I recently read it and I fully support including this book into the manosphere bookshelf and I now include this book in my “Education of a Patriarch” book list. Like it or not, some part of the nice guy existed in most of us. The “Nice guy” of Dr. Glover is a coward who believed what he was told and mainly believe that if he will be ‘nice’ (which is in practice being submissive to others) nice things will happen to him. Unfortunately for him, this is just not true. Also, since masculinity is dominance, the nice guy destroys his masculinity and himself in the process of being nice and appeasing others.

It is not a perfect book, and many times the examined cases are too extreme and the suggested solutions are incomplete and whiny, such as “share it with a safe person”. In addition Dr. Glover lacks any perspective from evolutionary biology which is a shame but expected. (Personally, I support rearranging the academic departments so that psychology will be a field studied in biology faculties by biologists from an evolutionary biology perspective and thus become a “real” science.)

Even with these limitations, it is a great breakthrough book. It is in essence a moderate version of the manosphere published years before the manosphere came into existence. Dr. Glover insights are relevant more than ever and the ideas he discuss should be studied by young men in the western world. If you seek growth, I highly recommend reading this book.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

A well spanked wife is a happy wife

Spanking your wife/girlfriend is a fun way to communicate dominance (e.g. alpha or lover value) without hurting comfort (e.g. beta or provider value). While many or most of the ways to communicate dominance involve openly stated demonstrations of your higher value (or dark game demonstrations of her lower value) this is on the surface just a sexy game. However, routinely spanking your wife sends her a strong unstated message of dominance, even if the spanking is just a game.

With time your wife will get used to more and more spanking and since her hind-brain will see her husband as her ‘spanker’ she will see her husband as more alpha. Since her husband is more alpha she will be more happy and satisfied compared with non spanked wives.

(hmm, yes, I spank my wife.)

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

The first part of the ‘Guide for a Young Patriarch’ is finished

The first part of the Guide for a Young Patriarch is finished. The first section, entitled simply ‘analysis’ focuses on applying biological ‘red-pill’ perspective to understand ourselves, sexual relations and tribalism and includes 12 arguments. The second section will focus on self-growth from the red-pill perspective and I expect it will be finished in a year or so (based on the current rate of progress and my available free time).

You can view or download the first section here. Comments and suggestions are welcomed.

Dicipres

Video | Posted on by | 1 Comment

The Essential Laws of the Red Pill

(This post is part of the ‘Guide to the Young Patriarch.’ The current draft of the Guide can be found here.)

We assume that there is no god, or other higher power, and that knowledge of our world can be achieved by observation and deduction. Human beings are viewed as organisms and accordingly, human behavior is a biological function of the human animal. Thus, analysis of human behavior should begin from biologic perspective. From the biological perspective, and specifically from genetics and evolution, we obtain the following simple argument.

Argument 1

  • Premise 1: Our genes evolved to maximize reproductive success.
  • Premise 2: Our biology, which is a manifestation of our genes, significantly influences our emotions and desires.
  • The First Law of the Red Pill, Contention 1, based on Premise 1 and Premise 2: Our biology, emotions and desires developed (by an evolutionary process) as a tool of our genes to facilitate reproduction of genetic data.
  • The Second Law of the Red Pill, Corollary 1 to Contention 1: We can estimate what emotions a given set of circumstances will create in a human by estimating what emotions and behavior will be optimal for reproduction of genetic data (at the time of the evolutionary development of the genes).
  • The Third Law of the Red Pill, Corollary 2 to Contention 1: One can create a given emotion in another human if one can create a set of circumstances for which that given emotion will maximize reproduction of genetic data (at the time of the evolutionary development of the genes).

Discussion
While this argument is simple enough, its implications are not widely accepted or understood (perhaps due to habit or emotional distress of accepting the red pill). Essentially, we claim that all human behaviors, such as love, empathy, sexuality, war, family, etc. are to be understood primarily from an evolutionary and biological perspective. This is widely different from the common essential premises used in society. The most common premises guiding the majority of the population are, or at least similar to, the following:

The religious premise: There is a god and human behavior should follow the will of the god.
The humanist premise: Society and human behavior should be such as to minimize human suffering.
The egalitarian premise: Society and human behavior should be such as to minimize inequality between various sub-groups of humans.
The libertarian premise: Society and human behavior should be such as to allow maximal freedom to individual humans.

Unlike the views of majority of the population, the Red-Pill view does not have clear ‘good’ and ‘bad’. Life exists since it creates life, a self-excitation solution of the universe function. The closest thing to such definition of ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is reproductive success and reproductive failure, respectively.

This second law of the Red-Pill is the main tool used in this text for predicting and interpreting human behaviors and emotions. However, this approach has limitations. Nature design might be “optimal” (e.g. a fish shape is optimal for swimming in water), however, it is never optimal with regard to a single parameter, but to a wide array of parameters and biological limitations acting on the organism. Not all of these parameters might be obvious and clearly visible. In addition, species are still evolving and many species might be still far from the optimal configuration, thus there might be significant imperfections. Even after taking these limitations into account, this approach is an effective tool to analyze our world and allows for reducing the influence of morality and current governing ideologies on our observations of the world.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments