The Atlantic was once a respectable White Anglo-Saxon Protestant magazine for the New England liberal elites.
Since it was bought by the Jew Jeffrey Goldberg it has devolved into a laughable tabloid trying to sell hardcore Zionist Jew apartheid and Palestinian genocide – and White Genocide – to the remnants of the White upper middle classes. Goldberg actually hired George W. Bush’s old speechwriter David Frum, who coined the term “Axis of Evil” to get Americans to destroy Israel’s enemies, Iraq and Iran. Why? Because Judaism is a racist hate cult that wants to murder Arabs particularly and Muslims in general.
Taking advice from a racist hate cult that wants your people genocided is generally a bad idea.
So of course now The Atlantic is no longer a magazine for intellectual White liberals, but is reduced to Salon.com style Social Justice Warriorism. A recent article asks: Why Don’t More Men Take Their Wives’ Last Names?
But of course the answer is simple. Patriarchy is the bedrock of civilization, and the way you connect fathers to sons – and thereby get men to invest in children and grandchildren – is by offering them immortality through a family name. A legacy.
As my former co-blogger Cly once pointed out, it used to be common for the American (and I suppose European) middle classes to name their small family businesses “Smith and Sons.”
Why this emphasis on the male lineage? Because everyone already knows the matriarchal lineage. “Mother’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe.” You have to convince the father the children are actually his and women have created an entire culture around doing just that.
Not only do grandmothers assure their sons in law that “your baby has your eyes” – they now even claim that the sonograms look “just like” the supposed father!
As soon as patriarchy – including young women being married as virgins – went out of style – so did marriage. Otherwise, what is the point? Of all the problems caused by the destruction of traditional marriage, for me the most annoying are all the articles in blogs by post-wall women complaining “where have all the good men gone?” “How come after spending my 20s engaging in promiscuity that would make a Parisian whore blush I can’t find a wealthy, handsome man to pretend I’m a nervous 17 year old virgin bride and pledge the rest of his life to me in return for a single child that is probably his?”
If I were a petty man, I’d guffaw at all the middle aged single women I’ve seen go ballistic when a successful 30 year old man ignores all the single over-credentialed 30 year old women to take up with young, fertile 20-somethinig baristas. Hell, I know of this because I’ve done it myself – and seen the reaction.
But the costs to my people and my society is just too damn high – below replacement fertility, bitter spinsters and “single” mothers, and an epidemic of divorce.
If any older White women actually cared about our people, they would be the FIRST telling those young, fertile, attractive women – “he’s a good catch – marry him now and start making babies! You’ll be happier in the long term.”
Listening to some nutty feminist being published by a bunch of racist, White-and-Palestinian-genociding Zionist Jews telling us that instead men should take their wive’s name in some sort of bizarre cross-dressing fetish that appeals to no one is pretty much the worst thing that anyone could do.
I have a morbid fascination with the Gender Critical reddit forum. It’s a “radical feminist” forum, and many on reddit consider it a “hate sub.”
It really is just the female version of the “Red Pill” or the “Men’s Rights Activists” or even the “Incels.” They pretty openly hate men, and admit it in a way that the “misogynist” subs would never admit they hate women.
Many on reddit do label Gender Critical a “hate” sub, but not because they hate men – because they don’t consider “transgendered” men women. They refuse to accept the propaganda phrase “Trans women are women.”
Of course, it’s obvious that “trans women are women” is false. If it were true it wouldn’t need the “thought terminating cliche.” “Trans women” are just men wearing dresses. Those that undergo “sex reassignment surgery” are still men, just mutilated men, men with enhanced circumcision that have been poisoned with artificial estrogen – just like Alex Jones’ Gay Frogs, in fact. (OMG – ALEX JONES WAS RIGHT!)
I just can’t help but feel some sympathy for these women. They are right about “transgendered.” They are right about men’s “objectification” of women. AFAIK, homosexual men “objectify” men. It’s just testosterone.
So these women hating men for male biology really are the equivalent of men hating women for female biology.
The Gender Critics are also mostly correct about “gender” too. “Sex” is a biological reality, “gender” is a social construct. There is nothing “natural” about women wearing skirts – see Scottish kilts. There is nothing “natural” about women shaving their armpits or men having short hair. As someone once posted here, sex roles are not entirely socially “constructed” – instead they are socially reinforced.
Only women can nurse babies, so child care is basically a woman’s job – due to biology. Of course, men can take care of children – historically, men took charge or raising boys at about the age of 7. But child care is a woman’s job precisely because of the biology involved – and only ideological fanatics would object to that.
Ironically, it’s precisely at this point that the Gender Critical Feminists become the biology-deniers they rightly criticize the “transgenders” for.
What draws these women to radical feminism? Some perfectly legitimate objections to prostitution/pornography. But also some illegitimate reasons – such as their shallow hatred of men and their obvious agenda to recruit straight women to lesbianism. Lots of them utterly whine about being “invisible” to men as they age – apparently, they DEMAND male sexual attention, until they get it, then they complain about “objectification” – then when they don’t get it anymore, they complain about “invisibility.”
As they say, women want “fried ice.”
Occasionally, they will step right to the edge of racial reality – they hate men of color too – but they quickly correct themselves.
The Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble-Mindedness was a 1912 book by the American psychologist and eugenicist Henry H. Goddard. The work was an extended case study of Goddard’s for the inheritance of “feeble-mindedness,” a general category referring to a variety of mental disabilities including mental retardation, learning disabilities, and mental illness. Goddard concluded that a variety of mental traits were hereditary and society should limit reproduction by people possessing these traits.
But women do not get pregnant by immaculate conception, and they don’t have a “generic” baby when they reach puberty. Women have the baby of a specific man, and especially when they have a boy, they think of the boy as a small version of the father.
The Alt Right should stop thinking of women and natalism in the abstract and start thinking of it in the specific. All the beta boys who complain about women “in the movement” who are making videos instead of staying at home raising a family are just the flip side of the “nice guy” betas, just instead of being “nice” and a “white knight” they are engaging in “aggressive verbal topping” – instead of saying, “M’Lady” and kissing their hand, they are saying, “get your ass in my kitchen” and slapping their butt. But it comes from the same place (and is often more effective.)
As anyone in the manosphere knows – and as anyone who grew up in an intact family or even had an older brother who dated real women knows – holding women to a high standard is far more effective than holding them to a low standard.
So the next time one of the beta boys sees a fertile women not having children, the question shouldn’t be “why aren’t you having babies” – the question should be, “which White man’s babies are you going to be having and when?
If they don’t know the answer, ask the men which one wants her.
No woman wants to be a “generic” mother to a “generic” kid barefoot and pregnant by some “generic” man in a “generic” kitchen. But add in specifics and she’ll generally be fine with it.
When feminists or just normal women complain that they don’t want to be “just” barefoot and pregnant, they are reacting to the idea that they are a generic, undifferentiated baby factory. Women think in narratives, and you can’t have a romance without a leading man. So stop focusing on putting women “in their place” and instead focus on find a man with a place for them.
It seems like years since you held the baby
While I wrecked the bedroom
You said it was dangerous after Sunday
And I knew you loved me
He thinks I just became famous
And that’s what messed me up
But he’s wrong
How could I possibly know what I want
When I was only twenty-one?
And there’s millions of people
To offer advice and say how I should be
But they’re twisted and they will never be
Any influence on me
But you will always be
You will always be
If I treated you mean
I really didn’t mean to
But you know how it is
And how a pregnancy can change you
I see plenty of clothes that I like
But I won’t go anywhere nice for a while
All I want to do is just sit here
And write it all down and rest for a while I can’t bear to be in another city
One where you are not
Women: when you read this, try to reign in your own solipsism and realize it’s not about you personally. Try – really try – to empathize with those invisible “beta” men that you don’t even see as individual human beings. Realize that it’s you that project your own thoughts and feelings on to men, and it’s women that objectify men, sexually and otherwise. Try to stop yourself when you immediately want to scream “but I’m not like that! But you’re a slut too! Rape!!!” Also, it’s not about Hipster Racist, personally, either. I want you to really be able to understand feminism from the perspective of an average man, those “beta males.”
First wave feminism was all about women getting the vote – and it was men, not women, that did the deed. First wave feminist pioneers like Lucy Stone hated their fathers and wanted to be men. So they struck the first blow at patriarchy: she wouldn’t take her husband’s last name. While mostly symbolic, the symbolism is important. There’s an old saying, “mother’s baby, father’s maybe.” Ensuring paternity of children is extremely important to a man, the only way it could really be done pre-genetic testing was guaranteeing that your wife was a virgin. Raising another man’s children is genetic death; it’s anti-self, it’s cuckolding. This is likely why men tend to have a preference for virgins.
Of course women did get the privilege of voting, but shirked on the responsibility that came with it – taking up arms against rival states. The whole purpose of voting was to control the state, and as Mao said, political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. It’s the military that makes the state, therefore democracy was all about the men governed by the state having a say in the affairs of the state. Women weren’t expected to join the military, therefore there was no reason for them to vote. A man’s vote was essentially for his whole family; his wife and children, it was expected that he would vote in the interests of his family, and did. Women were not part of the state, thus wouldn’t participate in either fighting or voting.
Second wave feminism was even worse, this was upper class educated housewives with two (at best) grown children who sat around their very nice suburban houses bored out of their minds. Instead of coming up with something creative and useful to do, they bitched about housework. To this day, you have the aging second wave feminists with so little imagination that anything to do with housewifery is automatically associated with vacuuming or doing the dishes. This, more than anything, illustrates how moronic second wave feminists really were and are. That’s the best you can come up with, housework? Compare to the Biblical description of an ideal wife; the Proverbs 31 wife. She didn’t just sit around vacuuming, she ran the home, as a business. The idea is that the man works outside of the home, with a group of other men, while women ran the home business. Imagine if second wave feminists were smarter, more creative, and less shallow. Imagine the complex economic networks that bored housewives could have made, the businesses they could have started, the education they could have provided for the next generation. Instead, they decided they wanted to wear pants and work along side men not their husbands. The elites and the banksters promoted second wave feminism because now there were two incomes to tax, two bank accounts, two cars to commute to the office, and double the pool of labor, thus lowering wages.
Third wave feminism was essentially a revolt against the lesbians who had taken over second wave feminism by the early 80s and the anti-sex prudes that hated men. Third wave feminism, starting about the 90s, was all about slut power. Women have the notion that men go around fucking their secretaries and living it up in a Playboy paradise. This is projection of their part, most men pretty much only have sex with their wives. The top “alpha” men that do get to womanize are a very limited group, but since women do not even register “beta” men as human beings, they suffer from the Apex Fallacy. Since Hugh Hefner has lots of women, “men” have lots of women, so it’s ok for women to slut it up just like the men do. But because of the nature of the sex differences, women tend to have more opportunity to sleep around then men, basic hypergamy explains this.
The other thing that third wave feminism did was to cry RAPE!!! if a lowly beta man tried to flirt with a woman, or if an “alpha” didn’t call the day after a hookup. Take Back the Night rallies where they spray painted “All Men Are Potential Rapists” all over campus. I’ll never forget a college girlfriend telling me about being raped, this guy she had been seeing came into her dorm room and held her down and forced her. She was crying as she told me this. I loved this woman, and was filled with rage at this man. I had a fantasy about hunting him down and killing him. I learned my lesson a few weeks later when she explained that after the rape, she still dated this guy for a while, had plenty of consensual sex with him before and after the “rape.” Sure, he raped her, but he was pretty hot in bed, so she forgave him and continued to sex him up until he moved on later. Third wave feminism has made it so the actual victims of “real rape” – “rape rape” – are lumped in with post-drunken hookup regrets. Real rape victims should be outraged, but evidently not.
Women love opportunistically while men love idealistically. I think Rollo calls this the “war brides dynamic.” Alice Thomas Ellis famously said, “There is no reciprocity. Men love women. Women love children. Children love hamsters. Hamsters don’t love anyone.” Women have to adjust to the new men that killed their husbands and took them as war brides, so they are evolutionarily adapted to loving whichever strong man has the power, thus ensuring her own survival and, most importantly, the survival of her children. This dynamic likely explains rape/ravishment fantasies as well; if you’re going to get raped by the commander of the conquering tribe, you may as well enjoy it and hope he doesn’t kill your children like he killed your husband. Humanity is messy business, there’s no point in being angry at women for being the way they are, hell, you probably should blame men for being violent and starting all the wars in the first place.
Neither men nor women are monogamous by nature; monogamy was a compromise.
So, what is the nature of humans in the state of nature according to The Red Pill?
1. Male ephebephiliac polygyny–A mouthful. Let’s unpack it. If Men existed in a universe where fully formed, hot 16-18 year old girls with long, silky hair and .7 hip-waist ratios grew out of the ground without agency, wants, needs and desires of their own and without families to care for and protect them, men would kill each other to collect as many of them as possible–replacing them with new ones as the older ones cycled out.
2. Female hypergamy–If 6’2″ 34 year old I-Banker millionaires grew out of the ground fully formed with no agency, wants, needs and desires of their own and no families to look after their interests–25 women would each chase and even consent to share the one that managed to make $1000001, while keeping a weather eye on any one who manages to make $1000002 as an option for jumping ship.
Thanks to modern, reliable birth control, women are able to slut it up as much as possible, and they tend to have more opportunities to do so then men do. The feminists always say that men are “insecure” about a woman’s sexual past, this is true. If your woman spent her college years sexing up Alpha McStudly the football quarterback with 14 inch biceps and a 5 inch thick cock, yeah, Regular Joe is right to feel insecure, that he will never measure up to her first “alpha.” She is likely fantasizing about Alpha McStudly fucking her brains out while her husband is rubbing her feet and tenderly giving her vanilla intercourse. Who wants to sign up for that?
Because men and women are different, even cheating has different ramifications for men and women. If a man cheat with his secretary, he doesn’t stop loving his wife. In fact, it’s a common trope, the mistress patiently waiting for her lover to leave his wife, but he never does. Women don’t cheat like that. By the time a woman cheats, she’s already checked out of the relationship, she is likely already out of love with her husband anyway.
So that’s why feminism is so damaging to monogamy and the family. If a woman really does make more than her husband, she will come to resent him, he will be emasculated in her eyes. If a woman spends all day long working for a man that makes more than her husband and has more power than her husband, that she willingly *submits* to on a daily basis, she’s going to come home and want to tell her husband about her day. What self-respecting man would want to hear the story of his wife spending all day submitting to another man that is more “alpha” than he is?
When men had more social power then women, every woman could fulfill her own hypergamy because her husband was her “alpha” – even if he was only alpha to her. Now, with men and women “equal” women increasingly compete for the very limited pool of “alphas.” Some guys are rolling in pussy now, but most men are not. Half of marriages are ending in divorce now, for just these reasons.
But here’s the deal – these career women did NOT create their own companies. They joined men’s companies. The feminists didn’t continue to invest in women’s colleges, they wanted to join the men’s colleges. They did not create their own female groups and organizations, they joined men’s instead. Why? Because they *can’t.* Groups of women cannot form the complex hierarchy that men can. That’s why once a group gets more than about 20% female, the men start to leave in droves. You can’t really compete with a woman, you lose either way. Lose to a woman, it’s de-masculinizing and humiliating. Win over a woman, well, what honor is it in beating a girl? At best you’re a bully, a mean nasty man hurting a woman’s feelings.
Women’s sexual strategy is “alpha fucks and beta bucks.” She wants the sperm of the top guy – the same guy that all the other women want – but she needs support and provisioning from the “beta” men. This is why women tend to vote for socialism – the beta men are de-individualized, just “society” providing and provisioning for women and children collectively. So women can actually sex up and bear the children of the “alphas” while still getting the “beta bucks” – but in this ideal feminism world, she never even has to sex up the lowly beta, or treat them as an individual human being, she just gets the check in the mail and the services of the nice betas.
How long will this state of affairs last? It’s already crashing down. Men aren’t marrying anymore, because they don’t get young virgin wives who are actual partners in creating a family and a home. They get a career woman, working for another man, bringing home a paycheck, competing with him and other men, just two labor units who like to bump uglies. When she births one or at best two children, they go into day care and the local government run public school while she’s working.
It’s almost like a “gay marriage” now, isn’t it? That’s “equality” for you.
At the end of the day, women simply don’t give a shit, about anyone or anything except themselves and their children. Women are deceptive by nature, ever since humans evolved past the chimpanzees whose ass turns bright red when she’s in heat. Right now, white women have it pretty damn good in America and Europe. No matter what choices she makes, there will always be the feminist media telling her it’s ok. Slut it up? That’s great and empowering. Divorce your husband? Great, he was probably abusive anyway, you go girl. Want a career? Great, they even have affirmative action so you will get promoted even if Beta Slob works harder than you.
But no matter what empowering and flattering lies the feminists tell you, you know deep down that you are not happy as independent wimminz that don’t need no man. Women are less happy then they were back in the bad old days of the 1950s. Your job pushing papers in the HR department will never give you the deep emotional satisfaction that seeing your grandchildren will. No matter how many guys you fuck on birth control, it won’t make you sexually empowered like you think men are.
Misogyny is the hatred of women. Nobody, but nobody, hates women like other women, feminists, and especially, themselves.
But don’t worry, sweethearts, the Man on the White Horse is on the way. The new sexism is just over the horizon; we’ve reached Peak Feminism. White men will win this battle, and you will be the spoils. We’re literally going to drag you by the hair back to our cave, put you back in your place, barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen. If you think that vacuuming your three bedroom suburban rancher and doing the dishes in your brand new, high tech dishwasher (you’re welcome) is hard work, just be warned that home schooling and neighborhood organizing are much harder.
Being a very practical fellow, I’ve decided to do something about this. I am announcing a new program: the White Nationalist Sperm Donation Project. From now on, I am donating my sperm, absolutely free, to any and all white women who are interesting in fulfilling the 14 Words, and I am calling for donations from other white men as well. Free, postage paid delivery. All you have to do is send an email and a delivery address to firstname.lastname@example.org and you will receive, within 4-6 weeks, a postage paid vial of my sperm or the sperm of other donors in the mail, to use in in-vitro fertilization.
I realize now that I have been selfish, keeping my precious bodily fluids away from average, regular white women who are not 19 year old swimsuit models, who just wanted to have beautiful white children. I’ve taken the criticism to heart, and have decided to “MAN UP” and do my part in creating beautiful white children.
If you act now, you can send a picture to the previously mentioned email address and arrange in person delivery of said sperm straight to your cervix, provided a recent clean STD test and, depending on the picture, a few shots of whiskey (Maker’s Mark preferred.)
I encourage all other white men to make this same offer. White men and white women need to work together to preserve our race, and I can’t think of a better way to do it.
Man up, white men, and stop denying our seed to the millions of white women desperate for white sperm. The existence of our people and a future for white children are at stake!