I’m glad you clarify that the bad guy in this is not women or even feminism but the state.
However when it comes to children this is just a lament. Women own children and the state backs them on this with whatever force is necessary. So as a man your children belong contingently to the state. That’s the reality. The only way out of that is an almost unimaginable overthrow of both the state and the culture.
Really enjoyed from “schooling feminizes boys” down.
I can understand your stance on military. However, I think that sometimes it is just misdirected masc. The warrior mindset and sense of duty to be a protector is definitely masculine. The military is an effective way you gain the skills, discipline and training to do such. There is more nuance to this point of yours.
Thanks for the comment. Yes, the warrior archetype, skills and self-discipline (not discipline to others) are useful, but you can get these efficiently and effectively outside of the military. The military instills a psychopathy that is antithetical to what you mention. There is absolutely nothing good in the military. Don’t fall for its marketing.
My point was that that instinct often leads young men into the military. Unfortunately.
It’s a lack of education. It is hard to hold a person’s choice at fault when they cannot make a fully informed decision (if indeed we can ever be FULLY informed).
I really agree 100%. In my opinion, true masculinity is having a mind of one’s own, standing up for what is right and true, and questioning authority. Everything you wrote in the article rings true. I think it’s quite obvious that the western society is deliberately feminizing men, masculinizing women, and sterilizing both genders as a eugenic process to create a slave population. We need more people to become self aware about their own femininity and/or masculinity. Really great read!
I found a new word in neofeudal review. Gynaecocracy. It has made me very happy.As a grumpy old, dirty old man the sight of todays narcissitic soy boys fills me with loathing.
A great deal of what you talk about here is, I believe, society's struggle with a deeper change that is occurring to humanity.
Males and Females - those two genders are related to body type and function - nothing more.
But a deeper understanding would require acknowledgment of male and female *energy* - "male energy" being left brain and related to reason and logic, and "female energy" being related to right brain and intuition.
Since around the turn of the century, a shift has been taking place in which male-energy left brain dominance is moving more towards female right-brain intuitional dominance.
Again, this has nothing to do with the male and female genders, which is, again, related only to body type and function.
As we move forward, a more centered and cohesive *human* will exhibit a balance between left-brain reason, and right-brain intuition.
The pendulum swings out in extremes in both directions, but ideally will settle back into the middle where both "sexes" will equally express both male and female energies, using both sides of the brain in better balance.
The so-called women's movement of the late 20th century was nothing more than females expressing more male left-brain energy to counteract millennia of male dominance. It did more harm than good. This was a pendulum swing out in extremes.
Much of what you are discussing here is the machinations of society's struggle with this change, and is exacerbated by governments and others who wish to exert control and authority who are exploiting these underlying changes to disrupt society and maintain control.
As we become more self-aware, we can see beyond these surface symptoms to the underlying causes. Better awareness and more information leads to more balanced humans who will understand that they are their own authority, and that balance will lead to better and more powerful humans, both male and female.
None of this need result in a conflict between men and women. We are redefining our roles, and we can do that together as we become more whole human beings.
Actually, donkeys are not passive, they can be ferocious attack monsters and they are often used as livestock guardians for this reason. It's similarly unfair to judge horses by human standards for adapting to a situation beyond their control. I'm broadly in agreement that education is merely conditioning and that the state wants weak men, but where we would seem to differ is that I see that they also want weak women.
As a strong woman, I look for mutual respect in all my relationships, male and female. I've heard a lot of criticism of the feminist movement and some of it rightly so, but for all its flaws, I have no interest in being owned and controlled by someone else, simply because they have a penis. Possession of which, as you rightly point out, is nothing, in of itself. So I am definitely not interested in returning to that situation and I have no interest in submitting to anyone, male or female.
When my husband and I married, we both worked and had the usual trappings of life, like rented houses and bank accounts and jobs. After we married, I was told by my bank that I would need my husband's permission to get an overdraft, the same rule was not applied to him. So, yeah, no, fuck that.
I'm not one, but the Baha'i faith teaches that men and women are like the two wings of a bird, which is an idea I like.
Both men and women are targeted by the murderous culture in which we live, because keeping us weak is how they keep us controlled. This, imo, is where feminism went wrong, in judging all men and not stepping back and seeing the bigger picture that it's all about divide and rule to retain control.
As far as I can see, strength is necessary for both sexes because that's how, as a species, we survive. Strength includes softness, it is weakness that fears it. Both men and women can be gentle and loving with each other and ferocious when needed. That, imo, is how it ought to be.
Nowhere in this article did I insinuate that women should be weak. Women's strength is different to men's. It's indirect, it's influential. A woman's vulnerability is her strength. But a woman acting like a man with unmanly males isn't productive.
Either I wasn't clear or you misunderstood. I didn't think you were suggesting that women should be weak. I was saying that I disagree that it's just men they want weak when I think they want both sexes weak. I would say that one flawed result of feminism was that it encouraged those of us unwilling to be chattel to behave like faux men, which is obviously not what we need. I think we basically agree that we would like to see humans be their best selves and that it all starts with not traumatising your children.
Given we've all been traumatised, it's then incumbent on the individual to do the personal growth work necessary. Unfortunately, many are blind to the need and simply keep passing it on, the "I was beaten at school and it never did me any harm" brigade. Others are simply unwilling because they shy away from any discomfort, a perfectly natural response that you have to teach yourself to push past.
Yesterday, I read this and it reminded me of how whether in conservative or liberal areas, the tendency to dominate the other sex is always there.
Before it was religion, now it's pop psychology.
Keeping both sides of the players of sex and love fighting a war is one of the most cunning ways that they kept humanity fighting and distrusting eachother. It's domestication of nature to make a servant that loves "big brother" above all.
We don't have bobcats in Europe, as far as I know. I think donkeys are better over here than over there because you have more scary predators than we do. I mean, you can be a fierce donkey but a grizzly bear takes no prisoners. Foxes, on the other hand, get pulped by an irate donkey.
True men protect the weak above all else. The amount of what I call only “biological men” who support the democide of abortion/infanticide of survivors, even their own sons and daughters, proves the nation destroying strategy of feminism has broken the natural inclination of these males.
“Protect the weak above all else” makes them servants for victimhood privilege, which is why we are here now. It is no one’s obligation to protect anyone but his own family
Completely agree. My mother of all people sent me this with the caption "Explains the other young guys you know." We are truly in a mass deprivation of true, divine masculinity. Nearly every single guy I know in his 20s is utterly lost and only molding themselves into what they think they should be to gain approval. There is a severe lack of true ethical and moral value sewed into these young men. I honestly do not know how it could possibly be fixed at this stage. All I can do is raise my family to be anything but pathetic and subservient to abusers.
You’re right! I have been alone next year 20 years and I have dated, but I cannot put up with the wrong one. Sometimes I almost wish I could, but I can’t.
I stand up for the weak at the nursing home I live
Word
I’m glad you clarify that the bad guy in this is not women or even feminism but the state.
However when it comes to children this is just a lament. Women own children and the state backs them on this with whatever force is necessary. So as a man your children belong contingently to the state. That’s the reality. The only way out of that is an almost unimaginable overthrow of both the state and the culture.
Really enjoyed from “schooling feminizes boys” down.
I can understand your stance on military. However, I think that sometimes it is just misdirected masc. The warrior mindset and sense of duty to be a protector is definitely masculine. The military is an effective way you gain the skills, discipline and training to do such. There is more nuance to this point of yours.
Thanks for the comment. Yes, the warrior archetype, skills and self-discipline (not discipline to others) are useful, but you can get these efficiently and effectively outside of the military. The military instills a psychopathy that is antithetical to what you mention. There is absolutely nothing good in the military. Don’t fall for its marketing.
Yes I agree.
My point was that that instinct often leads young men into the military. Unfortunately.
It’s a lack of education. It is hard to hold a person’s choice at fault when they cannot make a fully informed decision (if indeed we can ever be FULLY informed).
I really agree 100%. In my opinion, true masculinity is having a mind of one’s own, standing up for what is right and true, and questioning authority. Everything you wrote in the article rings true. I think it’s quite obvious that the western society is deliberately feminizing men, masculinizing women, and sterilizing both genders as a eugenic process to create a slave population. We need more people to become self aware about their own femininity and/or masculinity. Really great read!
I found a new word in neofeudal review. Gynaecocracy. It has made me very happy.As a grumpy old, dirty old man the sight of todays narcissitic soy boys fills me with loathing.
Fantastic article ——Ronin masterless warrior
Thank you. This relates to your comment: https://sotiris.substack.com/p/your-warrior-archetype
A great deal of what you talk about here is, I believe, society's struggle with a deeper change that is occurring to humanity.
Males and Females - those two genders are related to body type and function - nothing more.
But a deeper understanding would require acknowledgment of male and female *energy* - "male energy" being left brain and related to reason and logic, and "female energy" being related to right brain and intuition.
Since around the turn of the century, a shift has been taking place in which male-energy left brain dominance is moving more towards female right-brain intuitional dominance.
Again, this has nothing to do with the male and female genders, which is, again, related only to body type and function.
As we move forward, a more centered and cohesive *human* will exhibit a balance between left-brain reason, and right-brain intuition.
The pendulum swings out in extremes in both directions, but ideally will settle back into the middle where both "sexes" will equally express both male and female energies, using both sides of the brain in better balance.
The so-called women's movement of the late 20th century was nothing more than females expressing more male left-brain energy to counteract millennia of male dominance. It did more harm than good. This was a pendulum swing out in extremes.
Much of what you are discussing here is the machinations of society's struggle with this change, and is exacerbated by governments and others who wish to exert control and authority who are exploiting these underlying changes to disrupt society and maintain control.
As we become more self-aware, we can see beyond these surface symptoms to the underlying causes. Better awareness and more information leads to more balanced humans who will understand that they are their own authority, and that balance will lead to better and more powerful humans, both male and female.
None of this need result in a conflict between men and women. We are redefining our roles, and we can do that together as we become more whole human beings.
Actually, donkeys are not passive, they can be ferocious attack monsters and they are often used as livestock guardians for this reason. It's similarly unfair to judge horses by human standards for adapting to a situation beyond their control. I'm broadly in agreement that education is merely conditioning and that the state wants weak men, but where we would seem to differ is that I see that they also want weak women.
As a strong woman, I look for mutual respect in all my relationships, male and female. I've heard a lot of criticism of the feminist movement and some of it rightly so, but for all its flaws, I have no interest in being owned and controlled by someone else, simply because they have a penis. Possession of which, as you rightly point out, is nothing, in of itself. So I am definitely not interested in returning to that situation and I have no interest in submitting to anyone, male or female.
When my husband and I married, we both worked and had the usual trappings of life, like rented houses and bank accounts and jobs. After we married, I was told by my bank that I would need my husband's permission to get an overdraft, the same rule was not applied to him. So, yeah, no, fuck that.
I'm not one, but the Baha'i faith teaches that men and women are like the two wings of a bird, which is an idea I like.
Both men and women are targeted by the murderous culture in which we live, because keeping us weak is how they keep us controlled. This, imo, is where feminism went wrong, in judging all men and not stepping back and seeing the bigger picture that it's all about divide and rule to retain control.
As far as I can see, strength is necessary for both sexes because that's how, as a species, we survive. Strength includes softness, it is weakness that fears it. Both men and women can be gentle and loving with each other and ferocious when needed. That, imo, is how it ought to be.
Nowhere in this article did I insinuate that women should be weak. Women's strength is different to men's. It's indirect, it's influential. A woman's vulnerability is her strength. But a woman acting like a man with unmanly males isn't productive.
All the amish farms I work on have donkeys...they kick some ass!
Either I wasn't clear or you misunderstood. I didn't think you were suggesting that women should be weak. I was saying that I disagree that it's just men they want weak when I think they want both sexes weak. I would say that one flawed result of feminism was that it encouraged those of us unwilling to be chattel to behave like faux men, which is obviously not what we need. I think we basically agree that we would like to see humans be their best selves and that it all starts with not traumatising your children.
Given we've all been traumatised, it's then incumbent on the individual to do the personal growth work necessary. Unfortunately, many are blind to the need and simply keep passing it on, the "I was beaten at school and it never did me any harm" brigade. Others are simply unwilling because they shy away from any discomfort, a perfectly natural response that you have to teach yourself to push past.
Great comment. Nature isn't wrong, it adapts to reality. Humans adapt to society, which isn't always close to nature.
https://suzannescacca.substack.com/p/internet-to-blame-for-broken-marriages
Yesterday, I read this and it reminded me of how whether in conservative or liberal areas, the tendency to dominate the other sex is always there.
Before it was religion, now it's pop psychology.
Keeping both sides of the players of sex and love fighting a war is one of the most cunning ways that they kept humanity fighting and distrusting eachother. It's domestication of nature to make a servant that loves "big brother" above all.
I read that they are good for attacking bobcats. They sound sweet. I don’t have a farm, though.
We don't have bobcats in Europe, as far as I know. I think donkeys are better over here than over there because you have more scary predators than we do. I mean, you can be a fierce donkey but a grizzly bear takes no prisoners. Foxes, on the other hand, get pulped by an irate donkey.
No, but you have raccoons thanks to Adolf Hitler. He thought it was a good idea to import them.
Not in Portugal we don't. I didn't know that about Germany, learn something new everyday.
Blah blah blah cope
We’re in a culture that no longer recognizes nuances.
True men protect the weak above all else. The amount of what I call only “biological men” who support the democide of abortion/infanticide of survivors, even their own sons and daughters, proves the nation destroying strategy of feminism has broken the natural inclination of these males.
“Protect the weak above all else” makes them servants for victimhood privilege, which is why we are here now. It is no one’s obligation to protect anyone but his own family
I agree a Man and Woman’s first obligation is to family. But we’re also called to do right by others:
Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter. -Proverbs 24:11
I prefer morals much higher than the moralisms of the Old Testament
Completely agree. My mother of all people sent me this with the caption "Explains the other young guys you know." We are truly in a mass deprivation of true, divine masculinity. Nearly every single guy I know in his 20s is utterly lost and only molding themselves into what they think they should be to gain approval. There is a severe lack of true ethical and moral value sewed into these young men. I honestly do not know how it could possibly be fixed at this stage. All I can do is raise my family to be anything but pathetic and subservient to abusers.
I am in my mind. Maybe not in my appearance. I probably look more crazy than tough.
Yes, true.
It was a horrendous con and I never found my life partner. Even if I could now there’s not much time left.
Better to be alone than with the wrong one
You’re right! I have been alone next year 20 years and I have dated, but I cannot put up with the wrong one. Sometimes I almost wish I could, but I can’t.