Friday, October 16, 2009

Gems of Wisdom From Philalethes

Philalethes is enigmatic and doesn't seem to write in a prolific manner. He is also unorthodox in his writings, and perhaps anyone in MGTOW can glean something from him with his different perspective.

------


For one am increasingly tired of the constantly escalating level of sexual white noise in the culture. In summertime a lot of females parade around practically naked. For a long time I wondered why it is that women seem to have an overwhelming compulsion to bare their bodies in public; in winter I've seen them sometimes with serious gooseflesh when they could just as easily wear a little more clothing and be comfortably warm. Finally I recalled reading in Desmond Morris' classic The Naked Ape (highly recommended) the simple, scientific observation that while other species' sexual signals may be olfactory (scents--which is why dogs urinate on fireplugs) or auditory (birdsong), human sexual signals concentrate on our most developed sense, i.e. sight. When a woman bares another half-inch of skin, it's never an accident: it's an escalation, either of an attempt to capture male attention, or of competition with other females to do the same.

If human sexual signals were transmitted in sound, our present situation would be literally deafening.

Once again, women don't make sense, at least on first observation: they behave in a manner obviously calculated (though often subconsciously so) to attract male attention, then they complain that males "can't keep their eyes to themselves." It's just more testing. If nothing else, it's a test of the male's ability to deal with the stress caused by female irrationality. "I'm not logical. Deal with it." What does not destroy you ... makes you a promising candidate as a mate. From the point of view of Nature, their (and our) ultimate Boss, this makes perfect sense. Nature knows no restraint; She will escalate every contest to the ultimate.

In "traditional" cultures, women generally had the sense to discipline their collective behavior, to keep the sexual noise to a level that wouldn't cause a total collapse of social order. This is the origin of all the restraints which feminists complain so bitterly about, from marriage to the seclusion of women to the burkha: simply varying, often desperate attempts to govern the overwhelming sexual power of the female so that we can have human societies, rather than the life of chimpanzees.

In our "modern," revolutionary culture, these restraints have been broken down, abandoned, and it's a free-for-all. Women themselves are caught in the situation: as the level of competition rises, even women who don't feel inclined to act like prostitutes feel they have no choice. Few women other than Camille Paglia are willing to admit that under the "patriarchy" women were far safer to walk the streets at night than they are now, in our "enlightened" social order, where women are "free to be themselves." The simple fact is that (most) women, like children, on their own don't know what's best for their own welfare.

People who come to our country from traditional cultures say that our women dress like prostitutes: why advertise so aggressively unless you're selling what you're showing? But of course, as our "modern" culture spreads across the world, traditional cultures' restraining patterns are breaking down as well. A recent issue of National Geographic shows this quite graphically, with a cover photo of an Indian woman and her daughter: the mother is dressed in a traditional sari, the daughter is dressed like a typical American teenage wanna-be whore, complete with pout. No culture can last when this behavior becomes the norm.

Some years ago I had the opportunity to meet a woman shaman from the Iroquois nation. She was impressive: one of the few real, grownup women I've encountered. Calm, restrained, gentle, completely aware and in control of herself, she glowed with power. I sat in a room full of women at her feet, and was struck by the behavior of a middle-aged, white-haired Anglo female sitting across from me. She didn't know how to comport herself; she had her legs up so her underwear was clearly displayed to the room. I thought, "This is the best model our culture can offer as an adult woman?" It was sad.

I was amused to see the following passage in the Seneca Falls "Declaration of Sentiments":

The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her.

The truth is, the history of humankind is a history of desperate attempts to escape the unconscious, unrestrained rule of woman, and thus the absolute rule of unconscious, ruthless Nature, by creating social constructs which, whatever their imperfections, at least offer us a life less "nasty, brutish and short" than that of the animal world from which we came--and back into which we may fall at any time. This is the real meaning of "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

7 comments:

JAM36 said...

Women's contradictions and seemingly illogical behavior becomes more clear once female psychology is understood. Women dress naked/slutty to attract alpha males, and get moralistic and offended when they receive non-alpha male attention. From the female perspective only non-alpha males are capable of things like sexual harassment and rape. Feminists are outraged by rape not because of the violence, roughness, disrespect or out of some religiousity or morality. After all, female sexual fantasies (see:romance novels, soaps, etc) revolve almost entirely around such themes of a manly dominant alpha male forcibly "taking" and "ravishing" the female heroine without any overt consent and often against her overt wishes. Objectively speaking of course this is rape. The only difference between whether a woman considers male behavior to be offensive or desired is the status of the male and if the interaction can bring the female status. Iow, rape is a crime only a non-alpha male can commit.

This also explains the driving force behind feminism. Behind all of the moralizing and intellectualism, feminism is nothing more than an immature and selfish attempt to realize a female sexual utopia, by shedding their obligations to non-alpha males (while holding onto benefits provided by said males), by trying to make themselves into female versions of alpha males, to attract alpha males. It was Helen Gurley Brown's "single girl" strategy that is the driving force behind feminism much more than the academic/moralists like Steinam et al, who simply channeled the same sentiment into more respectable high minded vehicles - for essentially the same end result: to gain alpha status, to put themselves in alpha male circles, to ultimately attract alpha males, and to not be held down or forced to marry non-alpha males (but expecting them to subsidize the whole thing like good little cuckolds). Feminism is essentially femdom, with most men forced to play the submissive/cuckold role.

patr333x said...

Good points, Jam36. I think a lot of a woman's reaction to what a man does can come down to her perception of his status. Women don't want respect from lower-ranking males, but rather, they want deference. Of course, they want the "betas" to pay all of the bills while showing all of this unearned deference.

Sociopathic Revelation said...

Bingo, patr.

Burton said...

Agreed, JAM36, female behavior is primal, representing genetically determined mating patterns. All the feminism, you go grrrrl, Cosmo Girl, ad nauseam is a mask for this.

We have had several decades of sexual liberation. The result has been that the average male, as far as I can determine, is more sexually frustrated than ever. Despite the media propaganda about "girls gone wild," most men do not get in on the orgy. With the disintegration of marriage, men are even deprived of the traditional sexual partner of a wife.

George Gilder, I believe, in his book "Sexual Suicide," commented that the Sexual Revolution would allow men to fulfill their fantasy of polygamy. Gilder got it half right. Alpha males can have the harem (see Tiger Woods). But this process takes women out of the mating pool for Beta males.

What the Sexual Revolution has done is given women the female sexual paradise of being in the harem of the Alpha male. Numerous women can mate with the Alpha males and have their children while the rest of the tribe gets to support them via child support and welfare.

We are reverting to a lower form of civilization.

JAM36 said...

Burton, yes, that's what most people (even most MRA's) don't get, that feminism and the sexual revolution were attempts to realize a FEMALE sexual utopia, and have much less to do with equality, politics and other such high minded notions.

Women want equality with each other, inferiority to alpha males, and superiority over beta males, who are to serve as sexless provider/protector drones within the Matriarchy, where most women are the sexual property of alpha males. IOW, women are not pissed about domination or ownership, but about WHICH men are allowed to dominate or "own" them.

Sociopathic Revelation said...

Very true, JAM36---that's the "secret" of female supremacy----it has nothing to do with real equality at all, but feminine license while beta males (who they deem beta, at their whim and power) are burdened with the machinery of society while women who want "choices" are in a harem of sorts of the apex of visible men.

We are in a matriarchy with the trappings of patriarchy.

Good points, one and all---I may just post them openly (again) for more to chew on this. SR

OzSteamer said...

Burton, we are NOT heading towards a "lower form of civilisation" - if you look at the blatant way the Feminists have declared war on men, being a two-gender species, humans need both females and (gasp) males to get together in order to produce the next generation.

If one enters a sustained conflict between the genders (as we have witnessed for the past 60 years (and longer) in the West, then you will see civilisation fall to bits. Oh, sure our technology might enable us to keep going, but don't bet on it, long term.

And in every nation that has adopted Feminism (or, more like had Feminism thrust upon it), we see the birth rate drop off a cliff.