I once wrote an article about how “woman” is just a synonym for “neurotypical.” If you’re young and bisexual it doesn’t matter if you’re a sperg when you’re high status enough. Women just come to you. Yet now I have to understand these same rules you’ve deciphered. This was actually a lot like your recent sperg post about getting better at the alien tongue by studying it like crazy.
Yet remember none of these women/neurotypicals study any of it. This is just how they are. I think the goal should be to make them play your game rather than learn theirs in a social science lab. Theirs will always shift anyway. Fog and ambiguity is something that should be outright rejected the minute they come at us with it, imho. I’d like to see a new normalization in which we reject these behaviors from women/neurotypicals until they become associated with uncivilized and uncultured types.
FYI: I disagree about your conclusions in the last 2 paragraphs. I do think reverting to scared 14 year old girls is the outcome of self-defeating infantilization in order to avoid moral blame and culpability for the actions you take to survive. You cannot be good and selfishly destroy others for your security, at the same time. And yes, if you "Share your feelings", knowing the outcome of doing so COULD hurt another woman, you did intentionally do just that. "I reported that" versus "I need to tell you, I feel uncomfortable" and having that other person tell on you to someone else (HOPING it eventually reaches someone who will DO something), means you don't feel GUILT.
You've just magnified your own pain and vulnerability out of fear that it will result in your harm, until you only see the bulls-eye. Everything and everyone else is crowded out of your vision. This is why you can say "I didn't know...."
I should also like to add that women would benefit from confrontation and discipline. I don't think that's the same thing as wanting serfdom. But realizing you won't die from suffering consequences is a liberating thing.
It's hard to say whether any alternative is possible at scale for women is the thing since men will always create an ambient cultural incentive to act like a terrified little girl just because that's what's hottest.
I suppose that is the difference between feminism - as it's supposed to be beneficial, and the current enabling dogma.
I also think women used to police a nobler code of honor among women. We have to balance the need for the group's "Support" with righteous valor. Someone who is hyper attuned to their weaker disadvantage (Females in a male mammal environment, always deal with that strength advantage. There are just fewer males (Like lion prides) or they must contend with how that affects the environment in which they survive). A girl needs to become brave AND slay her inferiority complex, to be a woman. And for most of history, we have cultivated that virtue and also fought the fight successfully for our self worth separate from men.
Religion could be as liberating to women, as philosophy was to men - Christian/Jewish (and other) religions give women a REASON to transcend their bodies in their sense of self worth. They are a soul. They can believe they can live free and do amazing things and be CHOSEN, too. On one hand, religion can be a tool of the patriarchy - but SIMULTANEOUSLY it has historically ALSO been a tool of freedom for women, individually.
Likewise, philosophy (in the Greek sense), also gave men a REASON to live and govern by shared principals - not just "Might makes right" and vengeance is justice for ME - AKA Tribal and Clan warfare. It gave them a REASON to be men, and not just male animals. Women need to win the quest for their self worth. Men need to win the quest of being GOOD.
Both religion and philosophy are the search for REASONS to INCENTIVIZE us to be better human males and females - men and women. That's what women don't "Get" when boys are trying to figure out "How to be a man". Their bodies are superior tools - so WHY be better if they have the advantage, and how?
It is no accident, that for MOST of history, religion, philosophy and science OVERLAPPED in the minds of the greatest examples. We call those "Renaissance men" or "Polymaths" today. Hypatia of Alexandria, in my opinion - is the greatest woman example of all time. There are other contenders, though.
Women used to face death in their female-led cultures, often. Because of childbirth and no birth control. Women around the world STILL DO. But I theorize that there is no empathy with them, for Western secular AWFLs. People underestimate how controlling pregnancy and death after labor and birth, COMPLETELY changes the calculus for entire civilizations. That's why most modern fantasy novels written by women (and men) for YA/young adults, ALWAYS include a birth control "herb" or "charm" or "magic".
Women used to know, that almost ALL of them will face 1. The risk of death for themselves, and 2. Having to protect small, precious, weak humans that they desperately treasure. You will lose a child, or you will lose your life - or you will know a woman who does. Not doing either of those things, made you able to be "independent" in a man's world - other talents had room to emerge in the public square. Everyone always knew this. There were always examples in every culture. But it separated you from other women is some respects. It was The Gauntlet.
The only equivalent for men, that I can think of, is fighting in a war - in actual hand to hand combat. And we all have heard the "Crisis" of modern men separated from warrior culture, struggling for an ethos they can grasp that celebrates their masculine strength.
But anyway, most men did not let you keep your body to yourself, anyway. Your marriage contract was the best "seal the deal" for important alliances if you were of a powerful family. The best fathers who WEREN'T wealthy married you off to a man who could protect you from rapist/sexual challenger, when he himself got too old and weak to be a deterrent.
This is why this moral crisis of women, is "New". The moral compromise of the feminine vices was always there. It just never had a vacuum. And corporations never profited off of it, so much to encourage it (Looking at YOU internet social media platforms and online consumerism).
FYI: Bismark, you should "Share" this latest essay of yours, with Anuradha Pandey,@RadicalRadha
I'd love to see the two of you go at it. She'd up your ante and your hers :D
It is repulsive in women you aren't attracted to already and infuriating when used as a power play against you but if you're fucking her it makes you her slave
Yes. But he's not talking about love, is he? He's just taking about desire and reactions. So if this childlike helplessness is attractive, I think it's something guys assume is true or take for granted everyone knows.
No notes. This explains why one of my female relatives by marriage and I can't stand one another (I'm not neurotypical enough to be offended by any of this or to embrace this game, she IS this game). This also explains why the things I see as failures (job with no benefits, terrible at capitalism) seem to code as adorbs to the baby daddy. And the AI is fine. Chill people.
Excellent piece. You’ve been stalking this topic for years, but this is the most concise and persuasive to date. All politics / culture follow from status hierarchies and male / female interaction, so the importance of your observations can’t be understated — and the precise description of female power dynamics explains quite a bit about the current state of the world, including why nobody is fucking anymore.
Articles like this are so good and well written. This article deserves hundreds of likes and thousands of views, but the algo will repress. Great article
I wish you always wrote this clearly, Walt. This was magnificent. So, am I wrong that we do not want society to become a beehive? It is a tall order right now to not let it become such. What do you suggest, strategically, for a truly pro-social situation.
And the way to deal with competent players of the feminine power game is via contempt.
"Uh hunh. Sure. You're definitely as necessary to the functioning of society as I am."
The ones who actually are won't be playing those games. The ones who aren't, actually realize it, and the soft derision will make sure they understand that you realize it as well.
Seems like once you've triggered their psychological warfare instinct, you almost certainly aren't going to "win," and should probably extricate yourself from the situation in the most face-saving way possible.
You win by not getting maneuvered into that situation in the first place.
This is overly unfalsifiable. If female power is vulnerability, a cry for help, hence actually a display of perceived powerlessness, it is the classic unfalsifiable territory. This power is indistinguishable from a real reaction to real powerlessness by someone who is likable.
We know such reactions exist, because of the well-observed missing white girl syndrome, that is every time a white girl under 14 goes missing, likely kidnapped, the media goes into an absolutely frenzy, because the combination of distress and extreme likeability is emotionally super powerful. And that might as well happen with adult women, high-status, pretty, likable woman in real distress.
Walt: True, brilliant, insightful, witty, persuasive and damn readable. Are you trying to craft yourself into a Thomas Carlyle for the presently maturing generation? Sure reads like it. ;) Love what you're doing. -Hugs and such
I once wrote an article about how “woman” is just a synonym for “neurotypical.” If you’re young and bisexual it doesn’t matter if you’re a sperg when you’re high status enough. Women just come to you. Yet now I have to understand these same rules you’ve deciphered. This was actually a lot like your recent sperg post about getting better at the alien tongue by studying it like crazy.
Yet remember none of these women/neurotypicals study any of it. This is just how they are. I think the goal should be to make them play your game rather than learn theirs in a social science lab. Theirs will always shift anyway. Fog and ambiguity is something that should be outright rejected the minute they come at us with it, imho. I’d like to see a new normalization in which we reject these behaviors from women/neurotypicals until they become associated with uncivilized and uncultured types.
I can't believe I'm liking this....
From the other side of the fog.
FYI: I disagree about your conclusions in the last 2 paragraphs. I do think reverting to scared 14 year old girls is the outcome of self-defeating infantilization in order to avoid moral blame and culpability for the actions you take to survive. You cannot be good and selfishly destroy others for your security, at the same time. And yes, if you "Share your feelings", knowing the outcome of doing so COULD hurt another woman, you did intentionally do just that. "I reported that" versus "I need to tell you, I feel uncomfortable" and having that other person tell on you to someone else (HOPING it eventually reaches someone who will DO something), means you don't feel GUILT.
You've just magnified your own pain and vulnerability out of fear that it will result in your harm, until you only see the bulls-eye. Everything and everyone else is crowded out of your vision. This is why you can say "I didn't know...."
I should also like to add that women would benefit from confrontation and discipline. I don't think that's the same thing as wanting serfdom. But realizing you won't die from suffering consequences is a liberating thing.
It's hard to say whether any alternative is possible at scale for women is the thing since men will always create an ambient cultural incentive to act like a terrified little girl just because that's what's hottest.
I suppose that is the difference between feminism - as it's supposed to be beneficial, and the current enabling dogma.
I also think women used to police a nobler code of honor among women. We have to balance the need for the group's "Support" with righteous valor. Someone who is hyper attuned to their weaker disadvantage (Females in a male mammal environment, always deal with that strength advantage. There are just fewer males (Like lion prides) or they must contend with how that affects the environment in which they survive). A girl needs to become brave AND slay her inferiority complex, to be a woman. And for most of history, we have cultivated that virtue and also fought the fight successfully for our self worth separate from men.
Religion could be as liberating to women, as philosophy was to men - Christian/Jewish (and other) religions give women a REASON to transcend their bodies in their sense of self worth. They are a soul. They can believe they can live free and do amazing things and be CHOSEN, too. On one hand, religion can be a tool of the patriarchy - but SIMULTANEOUSLY it has historically ALSO been a tool of freedom for women, individually.
Likewise, philosophy (in the Greek sense), also gave men a REASON to live and govern by shared principals - not just "Might makes right" and vengeance is justice for ME - AKA Tribal and Clan warfare. It gave them a REASON to be men, and not just male animals. Women need to win the quest for their self worth. Men need to win the quest of being GOOD.
Both religion and philosophy are the search for REASONS to INCENTIVIZE us to be better human males and females - men and women. That's what women don't "Get" when boys are trying to figure out "How to be a man". Their bodies are superior tools - so WHY be better if they have the advantage, and how?
It is no accident, that for MOST of history, religion, philosophy and science OVERLAPPED in the minds of the greatest examples. We call those "Renaissance men" or "Polymaths" today. Hypatia of Alexandria, in my opinion - is the greatest woman example of all time. There are other contenders, though.
Women used to face death in their female-led cultures, often. Because of childbirth and no birth control. Women around the world STILL DO. But I theorize that there is no empathy with them, for Western secular AWFLs. People underestimate how controlling pregnancy and death after labor and birth, COMPLETELY changes the calculus for entire civilizations. That's why most modern fantasy novels written by women (and men) for YA/young adults, ALWAYS include a birth control "herb" or "charm" or "magic".
Women used to know, that almost ALL of them will face 1. The risk of death for themselves, and 2. Having to protect small, precious, weak humans that they desperately treasure. You will lose a child, or you will lose your life - or you will know a woman who does. Not doing either of those things, made you able to be "independent" in a man's world - other talents had room to emerge in the public square. Everyone always knew this. There were always examples in every culture. But it separated you from other women is some respects. It was The Gauntlet.
The only equivalent for men, that I can think of, is fighting in a war - in actual hand to hand combat. And we all have heard the "Crisis" of modern men separated from warrior culture, struggling for an ethos they can grasp that celebrates their masculine strength.
But anyway, most men did not let you keep your body to yourself, anyway. Your marriage contract was the best "seal the deal" for important alliances if you were of a powerful family. The best fathers who WEREN'T wealthy married you off to a man who could protect you from rapist/sexual challenger, when he himself got too old and weak to be a deterrent.
This is why this moral crisis of women, is "New". The moral compromise of the feminine vices was always there. It just never had a vacuum. And corporations never profited off of it, so much to encourage it (Looking at YOU internet social media platforms and online consumerism).
FYI: Bismark, you should "Share" this latest essay of yours, with Anuradha Pandey,@RadicalRadha
I'd love to see the two of you go at it. She'd up your ante and your hers :D
Sorry, I didn't actually respond fully to your statement.
Is acting like a terrified little girl, really what's hottest? To Western men?
It is repulsive in women you aren't attracted to already and infuriating when used as a power play against you but if you're fucking her it makes you her slave
Some kinda protective instinct?
If you actually love her, yeah you have a powerful protective instinct.
Yes. But he's not talking about love, is he? He's just taking about desire and reactions. So if this childlike helplessness is attractive, I think it's something guys assume is true or take for granted everyone knows.
No notes. This explains why one of my female relatives by marriage and I can't stand one another (I'm not neurotypical enough to be offended by any of this or to embrace this game, she IS this game). This also explains why the things I see as failures (job with no benefits, terrible at capitalism) seem to code as adorbs to the baby daddy. And the AI is fine. Chill people.
Excellent piece. You’ve been stalking this topic for years, but this is the most concise and persuasive to date. All politics / culture follow from status hierarchies and male / female interaction, so the importance of your observations can’t be understated — and the precise description of female power dynamics explains quite a bit about the current state of the world, including why nobody is fucking anymore.
Proletariat = incels
Bourgeoisie = women
Means of production = sex
Once again, a truly epic banger of an essay, good sir. That adderal addiction is really paying dividends.
That being said, this stuff has been common knowledge in RP circles for quite some time. It's just never been laid out with such autistic perfection.
Articles like this are so good and well written. This article deserves hundreds of likes and thousands of views, but the algo will repress. Great article
I wish you always wrote this clearly, Walt. This was magnificent. So, am I wrong that we do not want society to become a beehive? It is a tall order right now to not let it become such. What do you suggest, strategically, for a truly pro-social situation.
And the way to deal with competent players of the feminine power game is via contempt.
"Uh hunh. Sure. You're definitely as necessary to the functioning of society as I am."
The ones who actually are won't be playing those games. The ones who aren't, actually realize it, and the soft derision will make sure they understand that you realize it as well.
So how do you win when a woman is using this against you?
Seems like once you've triggered their psychological warfare instinct, you almost certainly aren't going to "win," and should probably extricate yourself from the situation in the most face-saving way possible.
You win by not getting maneuvered into that situation in the first place.
Shit I just made a substack instead…
I'm worried that after 2 articles of red meat for his audience Walt will complain that we should prefer his manna.
And now you know why John Norman wrote his autistic books the way he did the moment the feminist movement became mainstream
This is overly unfalsifiable. If female power is vulnerability, a cry for help, hence actually a display of perceived powerlessness, it is the classic unfalsifiable territory. This power is indistinguishable from a real reaction to real powerlessness by someone who is likable.
We know such reactions exist, because of the well-observed missing white girl syndrome, that is every time a white girl under 14 goes missing, likely kidnapped, the media goes into an absolutely frenzy, because the combination of distress and extreme likeability is emotionally super powerful. And that might as well happen with adult women, high-status, pretty, likable woman in real distress.
Walt: True, brilliant, insightful, witty, persuasive and damn readable. Are you trying to craft yourself into a Thomas Carlyle for the presently maturing generation? Sure reads like it. ;) Love what you're doing. -Hugs and such
He gave you a prescription in the last two paragraphs. Did you not see it?
Good.