Feminist Germaine Greer Seems To Know What She Has Wrought

Submitted by Henry Armitage

When we see a bunch of women wearing pink “pussy hats,” and even vagina costumes, screaming against “The Patriarchy,” we might be forgiven (though not by feminists) for thinking “daddy issues.” Likewise, when we read a gruesome, blow-by-blow account of how When I went back to his apartment, so-and-so put his hand on my thigh… we might be forgiven for wondering why the hell Ms. Important’s bad date from a decade ago is front page news.

But when a pseudo-intellectual feminist celebrity weighs in on exactly how far is “too far” when it comes to humouring female hysteria and infantilism, we know we had better catch those pearls of chardonnay-laced spittle and mount them in 24-carat gold.

AUSTRALIA’S renowned feminist, Germaine Greer, has said it was “too late now to start whingeing” for many women who have made allegations against men.

While she called on women joining the #MeToo movement to be direct and take action against men, she said some instances of alleged sexual harassment were “tantamount to consent”.

“I want, I’ve always wanted, to see women react immediately,” she told Fairfax Media.


Greer, 78, also told Fairfax Media she was working on a new book titled On Rape, a sequel to her essay 10 years ago On Rage.

But she said she felt the concept of rape should be ditched altogether.

“So I’ll do On Rape because I’ve been arguing about rape for a long time,” she said.

“My feeling is we ditch rape altogether [as a crime] because it’s hopeless. I have seen the police working up a rape case trying desperately hard to build it up so it will stand up in court — and wasting their time.

Well, that’s actually a good idea. Right now, the law says you can rape your own wife. If a woman comes back to your place and you’re making out, or you’re already copulating, and she decides she’s not into it, you can end up like Brock Turner. Hell, you can even rape a prostitute if you just don’t pay her!

Rape used to be understood differently. It was a crime that could only be committed against a chaste woman who had done nothing to invite a sexual advance. Whether she was a virgin or a faithful wife made all the difference.

The idea that you could “rape” an actress would have been pretty funny back when (rightly as it turned out) “actress” was a euphemism for “whore.”

But that sensible definition of rape belongs to an honour culture, which ours obviously is not. Where a woman feels just fine about broadcasting her sluttery the way these #MeToo Hollywood prostitutes have done, seeking to benefit twice over from their whoring, we obviously are not living in a society where you can have a concept of rape that makes any sense, or that protects the innocent.

Which brings us back to the feminist zombie Greer.  A least you can say she’s consistent (in a way)!

“Now it’s becoming if you’re in a position of power or influence, you can’t make a pass at somebody, because it will be considered to be inappropriate use of influence, force and so on.”

“How do you express desire without putting pressure on people?”

“Why can’t we have a rational attitude to sexual offences?” she asked.

You tell us, boss lady. Back in the ’60s and ’70s you were all about the sexual revolution, destroying social norms of decency and restraint. Now you want to complain that the women you taught to slut around and complain about everything are slutting around and complaining about everything?  Ok then…

There should be a category of sexual assault where there are “different degrees of gravity according to the amount of damage that you do,” she said.

Just as I was saying.

Greer liked being an enfant terrible back in the heyday of boomerism, defining women as just men without dicks while exhorting them to burn their bras, walk out on their husbands, and kill their unwanted babies. There was nothing to set her apart from Gloria Steinem and the rest of the freakshow (except that, interestingly, she was not Jewish but Gentile from Downunder). Now the woman pops up occasionally to make “shocking” comments and remind us all that she’s still alive and believes fervently in her continuing relevance.

She’s no different to the #MeToo-ers, of course, disclaiming responsibility for her own shameless and self-serving behaviour, in the hope of making herself the centre of attention again.

Guest Writer
the authorGuest Writer


  • She’s now a laughing stock and oddity downunder, after telling one ridiculous lie too many (she said that she never landed in Oz unless an Abo approved of it, then denied saying it vehemently).

    People don’t turn up listen to her, they turn up to gawk at her. She has ruined her own life with her behaviour.

    I believe that witches should be burned at the stake and buried before sunset but this one should be caged and set before womankind as a warning.

      • Is anything good owed to a woman that has worked her entire life to destroy us? You need to learn how to invert your female ingroup preference. There are many women doing their best to destroy everything you love. Fire is a pretty damned good answer.

        • No Rex. It has nothing to do with female ingroup preference. It’s the fact that I am appalled by the notion of torturing people to death, despite the fact that I supposedly lack empathy.

          • She and I have what may be the longest-running conversation on the site at the moment. There have been some interesting things said. If you have the stomach for it, you should check it out. Very revealing tidbits in there.

          • Look Rex, you and Barnabas have long since overstepped your bounds.

            You always go on and on about obedience and hierarchy, yet you two seem to have no concept whatsoever that there are limits on your own conduct/authority on this site.

            Barnabas has no fucking authority to impose ideological litmus tests on me and neither do you.

          • Do you think Barnabas as true young to suggest that i am disloyal because I’m not keen on burning people alive, Rex?

          • I am having a hard time following some of your comments since words seem to be combining and appearing in weird ways. Are you on a mobile device?

            No, I do not think you are disloyal for not wanting to see people burned alive. Neither does he. He is asking if you will put anyone or anything foreign to us before us.

          • It sounded rather accusatory to me. Frankly, it sounded like a shaming attempt.

            I am very concerned about purity spiraling.

            When saboteurs want to destroy a movement, they can do it by setting the most radical against the more moderate.

            I’m not accusing Barnabas. It doesn’t matter whether he is a saboteur or not. I assume he is not, but it doesn’t matter. His conduct is counterproductive.

          • I understand that concern. I share it. Here is how this looks to Barnabas.

            B: “This vile demon has done terrible damage to our society, culture, people, children, etc. She should be treated like the vile witch that she is and burned alive to set an example”

            L: “That is terrible. Who would do that? If you advocate for harming a woman, even a godless, evil, vile, wretched, malignant, hateful, vengeful, spiteful, demonic woman like her, you are what is wrong here.”

            B: “I found a feminist!”

            His logic is sound. No woman should defend a feminist. Under no circumstances should that happen. There is literally no reason for an AR woman to EVER defend a feminist. They are the very worst sort of creatures to ever stalk the dark corners of the Earth. Cthulu went to sleep, not to hide from the poisonous stars but to hide from the damned, twisting, madness of the feminists.

          • Two things:

            (1) She is actually reconsidering her youthful folly.
            (2) Burning people alive is cruel.

            I am truly morally outraged by the notion of burning a person to death, even a feminist. Even if I weren’t outraged, I would pretend to be. Barnabas should too.

            I am not interested in your arguments as to why I shouldn’t object to burning old women alive, Rex. They are irrelevant. Comments like that are going to keep this movement confined to the ghetto.

            I don’t really think Barnabas cares about growing this movement. You must understand. That’s really pisses me off. My children’s future is at stake.

            I care about one thing: Winning.

          • If feminism lives, we lose. It is too late for her. Her youthful mistakes have cost countless women their sanity and countless unborn children their lives. Who cares if she gets it right just before she dies. Her legacy IS death.

            How do you want to win and what does victory look like? Paint me a picture of how the world would look and work if we won.

          • I still don’t understand what the point is in piling on. Talking about burning people alive does nothing but disgrace this movement. Absolutely nothing. All of this spite is holding us back.

            Have you ever seen any episodes of the Jetson’s? It’s a silly cartoon. It’s set in the future where the White man’s drive and intelligence has taken us to the stars. Still, Mom is at home being Mom.

          • There may come a time you beg white men to break out the flamethrowers. South Africa in the USA will get you there quick. Eventually, you will have to stop worrying about bad things happening to those that want us raped to death, drowned in boiling water, disemboweled while hung upside down, and other creative nigger methods.

          • There may well come a time for throwing flames, but that time I see not now, nor even to talk about it.

          • And it should be foreign to you. It should be so far from your sheltered womanly world that you never even know it is happening. The problem is, the men you are talking to will do the fighting and the dying to make sure that stays out of your world. You have to let us do our job without trying to moderate us. As it stands right now, the world is full of predators and we are going to have to do some serious population control.

          • I appreciate that Rex, but I think you underestimate me on this. I am not squeamish, but you can’t fight while the overwhelming majority of your own people at against you.

          • This is very true. Want to hear the really sad part about all of this? It isn’t the blacks, browns, and jews that need to go. It is weak, wretched, godless, evil Whites. The lefties, the anarcho-communists. If God sank both coasts of the USA, there would never again be a jew problem or a refugee problem, or a welfare problem. Kill the potential hosts and you kill the parasite.

          • Ya and what do you think changes their mind, slow coddling like their babies or a few quick and truthful notions that brings to light everything they thought they knew. You may think the former but it’s actually the latter because simply we can’t bring everyone to our side and those whom we can will naturally be open to question and seeking some truth.

          • You know, Barnabas. I think we need a multitude of approaches. Go ahead and do your thing, but you don’t need to wreck other people’s thing, by, for example, trying to “separate the wheat from the chaff.”

          • Ofcourse. It’s perfectly legal to organize and have part of that organization be militia. Shit, that’s actually about as constitutional as one can get

          • Those on this site are already miles ahead of any normies. Public policy and discourse should pander towards some of their ideal but we should be honest and unflinching amongst our selves.

          • If it matters any, I’m on your side. When the radical left wing calls us Nazis, they shouldn’t actually be right. If our cause is just, as we say it is, then we can succeed without actually killing people. Our ideology will win, if we use it as our weapon. By all means, if we must, then we should fight, but that time is not now.

          • No, it isn’t now but we both know those insane lefties will push us there before the end of this century. Long before.

            The farm murders are not happening here yet. Give it time.

            The problem with winning without bloodshed is that it is impossible. Winning is living in our own countries as sovereign States. They will not allow that. This isn’t a war that will ever be won. It will remain an ongoing battle until we can live on more than just the Earth.

          • I regrettably agree. I’ll admit, this Trump presidency is a big test for me. Perhaps he will be followed by someone even more in line with ourselves, we shall see. But, if not, and Trump achieves nothing, then I have to reconsider my position. (EDIT) Brexit is another key test. Is the left so radical that they can actually ignore voting results? As Farage said, “if you take away democracy, then all people are left with is violence.”

          • I’m shilling for Jews? How? Because I’m not ready to start killing them? If that’s your plan, you’re not AR. We’re white people, not MS-13 or ISIS. That’s my point, violence is a last resort. If we reach that point where it’s unavoidable, then so be it, but again, that should be the final option. I’ve spent 27 months at war, so trust me when I say, you can’t win all your battles by fighting.

          • Where did you serve? Are you willing to help build local AR organizations and head them? I have a plan but I need help.

          • I served in Eastern Baghdad with 4th ID and again in an-Nasiriyah with 1st CD. Depending on what you mean by “local AR organizations,” I might be interested. I’m not interested in applying my technical combat skills for the AR, at least not right now. I don’t think that’s appropriate. Of course, if I were at an AR event and there was a need to defend ourselves, then sure. But, as a general rule, I don’t think violence is the best course of action. There’s almost always another way. If there’s not, then do be it. Patience is my watchword as a member of the AR. We’re whites, not MS13 lowlife scum. So, that said, what do you have in mind? One thing I have noticed a need for regarding security is white women having trouble getting to their cars late at night from the DC Metro Rail stop near my home. I’ve had to intervene twice in the last few months and perhaps a simple act of helping them safely get home is a positive program. Looking forward to hearing from you.

          • Do you not belive in the Militia, as the founders advocated. To be a true least organizationally ready. For both practical and for virtue purposes, with a chivalric ideal in mind. How does that correlate to gang scum? You seem soft, imo. Did you suffer ptsd or something, couldn’t handle battle?

          • It is probably best not to antagonize him. I believe he may be useful with regard to what you and I spoke about last night.

          • Fair enough. I’m probably going to cut down on my use of this site anyhow as its hard for me not to antagonize some of these folk. Not sure if it’s them or me, or just the nature of the medium….

          • No, I’m fine. I think what you’re saying is we should engage in violence right now. I don’t think that’s needed, yet. If I’m right, and we still use force, then we’re thugs. I do agree that being ready is important. I’m fit and keep myself sharp. So, I’m only going to say this once: we shouldn’t be arguing. Our differences aren’t great enough for that. Start talking to me like a normal person and quit acting like you’re hard.

          • Well, you haven’t been reading my posts then. My point, and I’ve been very clear on this, is that violence will be needed in approximately 20 years and that while we should do all that we can now, by 2045 we will need to be ready to strike.

            As far as your last statement. How about you stick that dildo farther up you’re ass, I’ve been fairly reasonable with you.

          • I’ll take that last comment back for the sake of you and I ultimately on the same team, Richard.
            I confess that your first sentence threw me off because I have never advocated for immediate violence and then I immediately scrolled down and read only your last sentence. Ignored the meat until now, so I do concur with your second to last sentences.

          • I have expressed no opinion on whether violence will pro will not be necessary. The question I should how many Whites will fight with us, and how many will fight against us?

            I’d Barnabas et al continue to alienate people, we won’t have the numbers to put up a fight.

            Here is the reality of the situation: Barnabas can essentially turn this site into something contrary to Richard’s vision. I don’t want him to have that power.

          • I agree that our time to fight is not now. Now is the time to build our movement and get prepared to fight. Whether you have the stomach for it or not is the question because by 2040 we are fighting, theres no doubt there and we need to be prepare s to dispose of the non whites, there’s no peaceful solution.

            I disagree on the nazi part, own it, we’re , we belive in white supremacy, we for white pride and white power. Make racism acceptable again. Why cuck.

          • What I mean by not being Nazis is the idea that we would kill non-whites so as to intimidate our way into power. Our ideas are sufficient to do that, in my opinion. Additionally, Nazis fought other whites and that’s something we must not to do. We, the AR, must be a uniting force and bring in whites who are on our side and perhaps aren’t aware of it. I grew up in the Midwest and I talk to people from there all the time who don’t even know what the AR is, who Spencer is, etc., but once I point them in the right direction, they are typically quite supportive of our cause. So yes, we do need to make white nationalism, so to speak, and racism, acceptable again, but I don’t think we should act like Nazis to achieve that goal.

          • Eventually non whites will either self deport, be deported forcefully, or be killed. This is the inevitable future, doesn’t mean you’ll be around for it though , could be thirty years from now.

          • I can’t tell you how grateful I am for your kind words, brother.

            Barnabas massively underestimates our people. He seems to think that while the Jews can run this country wit his 2%, Whites can’t run it with 49%.

            The hour is late, but not that late.

          • Sure, the majority of our people are not currently a bunch of weak materialists too huh.

            It is 11:59.50. We act within the next two decades or we die

          • You could be right. I’ll go as far as to say, you probably are right. But, here on January 29, 2018, I think we have other options besides violence. I’d never rule out use of force in the future, but let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. The present day is the most encouraging for a peaceful white victory we’ve seen. The fact we are even talking about a Trump presidency, discussing a wall, the end of chain migration, etc., tells me that while many people on our side are silent, we are indeed larger in numerical support than it appears. We must be firm, but also patient.

          • It’s barbarian time honey. We are way past acceptable speech. This movement doesn’t succeed by pandering toward the petit bourgeois. We succeed by unleashing the spirit that conquered the earth, along with the inferior races. If we need to pander towards any one it’s those who are ready to fight, not those who still want to debate and construct theories endlessly. Everything we need intellectually has already been determined by other men, AH, Evola, Nietzsche, not too mention Rome, Greece, etc. We are here to act, that’s it. We can fine tune once the bodies hit the floor. Now step aside.

          • Evidently, Richard doesn’t agree with you. If you want to raise a militia to take on the most powerful military in the world, knock yourself out.

            You shouldn’t be doing it here. Richard has labored in obscurity for years for our people, and here you are single-handedly undermining him.

          • That’s his whole schtick.

            At least he has a plan, whichever is more than you have at this point.

            You’re not willing to give basic civility a shot, so what options does that leave?

          • That’s not what my track record indicates. Plus, there won’t be “bullets,” just one bullet, and it’s the only one I need.

          • He wasn’t talking about you. He was talking about Richard Spencer. This impertinent little douchebag has insulted virtually every White man who has put his ass on the line for our people. He needs to be bitchslapped.

          • Stfu you stupid Cunt. I haven’t insulted anyone. I’ve simply failed to bow down to them or kiss their ass like you have. I recognize plenty of great white men who died for our cause, none of whom diced for our cause, you living little cunt.

          • I’m either a willful uppity tradthot or an asskisser. It’s the old damned if you do, damned if you don’t quandary.

          • So you think we will succeed without any violence, not even in the future?

            I wouldn’t mind hearing your strategy because every thing I think of always comes to some violence

          • I don’t know. I’d like to avoid violence, if possible. My plan? Make laws that favor white people to such an extent that all non-whites self-deport. We often talk about that idea concerning Mexicans and other Latinos, but it actually applies to all non-whites for me. They will all find somewhere else to go, and then if a few idiots stay who don’t get the hint, then we can assist them…

          • I can agree with everything you said. My point is only that we need to be ready for everything, including violence. Enough so, to organize and be able to carry it out effectively if need be, in the future. Of course this is not our only concern though.

          • Growing white nationalism and saving the white race are the only two things I care. Without em, I’m better of dead. Nice try, Lexi.

            This is precisely why I’m extreme. In my head it’s ten seconds to midnight and we don’t have any time for political correctness nor sensitivity. We need those who are ready to give their last breath and whole would rather die on their feet then compromise on their knees.

          • Don’t waste any thoughts on me. If you can’t resist then I should say that I look nearly identical to Tom Cruise, this should help with your borderline rape fantasies.

          • A sincere question: Are you deliberately trying to run people away from this site?

            Have you run this strategy by Richard Spencer?

            Do you care about his opinion, given that this is his site?

            Do you feel you have a duty to follow our leaders I need regard to strategy/tactics, or do you consider yourself free to pursue whatever strategy you prefer, even if it runs counter to the approach our leaders are taking.

            I have to say Barnabas, it doesn’t seem like you are being a team player, and regarding this site, I’ll say, “You didn’t build this.”

            As I understand it, the original vision for this site was that it was to be an interface with public, like a foyer or an entryway to a house, our home as white people, a place to dump your stuff and settle in. This is not the place for you to purity-testing people, which in effect I see really just attacking them.


          • My goal is to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Those who are put off by my comments are not worthy of calling themselves white nationalists.

          • I don’t recognize any leaders in our movement and until one of exceptional character presents himself, I will lead those around me and force my will.

          • That is actually a good question. Should AR men who are actively building real-world groups co-operate? Should we use Spencer as some sort of organizational hub due to his, and his associate’s, notoriety? Should we have monthly “board meetings” to discuss how we are growing, what we are doing, and what works? I am certainly open to that with what I am working on but others would have to be willing to play ball. I am not even sure Spencer and Co. have enough free time to participate. We need organizational structures in place to handle finance, communication, Admin, HR etc… There is no reason each of our groups should have its own. Maybe we could each act as an organ within a larger body. Anyone who wants to discuss this can look me up on GAB @Rexterminatus.

          • We should co operate but there is currently no man in our movement worthy to be followed, in my opinion. If there is, then he’s currently a no body and should make himself known, if this happens I’ll be his most loyal follower, like Rudolph Hess.

          • DM me on GAB and let’s get this party started. Do you have free time Monday afternoon?

          • Fantastic. What time works for you? I run my business from home so I can make myself available to talk with you directly at your convenience.

          • Early afternoon would work best. Heads up, It’s currently 6:42 where Im at.
            I’m gonna relax over a couple beers right now, but expect a DM from me on Gab in say 2 hours and then we can work out the details. If that’s not too late

          • Great. You’d be surprised how many young men yearn for action and not endless speculation. I have a spot open for a groupies if you’re interested. My men need something to wind down with.

          • If you actually have started a group of AR men, hit me up on gab. I have some ideas that I think If you actually have started a group of AR men, hit me up on gab. I have some ideas that I think you can use. I am starting a State by State chain and maybe we can work can use. I am starting a State by State chain and maybe we can work together.

          • WTF do you mean a soft spot?

            I don’t believe in burning people alive. Are you imposing anther litmus test, Barnabas. Now, you have to be cool with torturing people to death to be alt-Right now?

            I’m warning you, Barnabas. You’d better stop purity spiraling.

            You are out of control.

          • I don’t care what your opinions are when it comes to the solutions that are decided upon. Others, more intelligent, have thought longer, harder, and deeper with regards to our situation. You only need to accept it, shut your trap, quit counter signaling, and go with the flow. Your grandkids will thank you.

          • Yes you are right. Many have thought longer and deeper about our situation. You are not one of them.

            I a man following Richard Spencer’s lead on the primacy meta politics, a consensus shared by almost everyone who is anyone in this movement, to wit:

            Greg Johnson
            Millenial Woes
            Kevin McDonald
            Jared Taylor
            David Duke
            Traditionalist Workers Party (community building and service)
            Jazz hands McFeels (electoral politics)

            Who agrees with you, Barnabas?

          • And how could I forget Hunter Wallace?
            And even Anglin, who says he wants to awaken “the masses.”

          • What are any of those guys to me?

            They’ve done decent work up until this point. Now it’s time to move past. I wouldn’t follow any of those men into battle as theyre all a bit soft. We need leaders not intellectuals.

            Take your bs simewhere else

          • the greatest leaders in history were always the most extreme. The look warm panderer never succeeds. If another AH rises upon the scene then I will pledge my life but unitl then, I’ll enforce my will.

      • After 30 minutes I barely got halfway down the page after your 50+ posts evidencing your utter stupidity at which point I decided that it was lost enterprise to continue.

        Much as a like the input of Rex and BW, they had to engage you on such utter toddler rubbish all the time. There was one jew who jumped to your defence but not interestingly.

        Firstly, your reading comprehension is that of an illiterate 6 year old nigger.

        Secondly, you are indeed womankind incarnate, flailing around desperately trying to get something that you are not prepared for or capable of achieving yourself.

        You are not a witch. You aren’t smart enough to polish their black buckled boots. But you are a tool that they will use, and dear Lord you are happy to be that tool and to move among us and cause trouble.

        • Here I see the deal AB. You are a god-damned shit-disturbing traitor who should be booted off this site for sabotage.

          Not only that, you are colossally stupid. Let me try and bring this down to your level, you loathesome dumbfuck.

          I want my people to survive. In order for that to happen, women must reject careerism and embrace motherhood.

          Why should they do that? You White men have handed over our society to your enemies out of sheer greed and cowardice. The Jew rules over you, whether you like it or not. In case you hadn’t noticed, the Jew is using feminism to destroy you.

          Now, in order to convince women to side with you instead of the Jew, you are going to have to give them a reason to reject feminism. That reason is White Pride.

          White Pride, until subversive elements like you showed up and derailed this movement, was the whole point of this thing. Just when we were finally starting to get mainstream traction, you all started showing up and making a God-damned laughing-stock of this movement. Your tactics are transparently Jewish, shaming, name-calling, posturing as purer-than-thou.

          Traditional gender roles are not an end in themselves, if your race I say your first priority. They are the way to survival. First you have to convince people of the importance of the cause of White Survival, then they will embrace traditional family values as a necessary means to that end.

          If you run people off by being a total prick for no reason whatsoever, then you can’t persuade them to embrace White survival to begin with.

          In retrospect, you’re right. This discussion was in some sense a waste of time. I am trying to get the menfolk to tone down the gratuitous woman-bashing just a little bit so we can have a fighting chance, but in reality, you shouldn’t be talking about it at all. About menfolk need to do one thing: STFU about it.

          If you will kindly STFU, then the women can pitch traditional family life’s in a way that’s doesn’t drive women back into the arms of the Jew, which I have tried to do as earnestly and as persuasively as possible. I try to make a positive case for motherhood, rather than say fantasizing about burning regretful old ladies alive.

          All I have gotten in return is hatred and derision. Well how about you go fuck right off to the ovens. You are a menace and snake.

          There’s I still no point whatsoever to you being here. There was already a men’s movement, but there was also a white identity movement. Now there I see no White identity movement, because it hasn’t been swallowed whole by your MGtards.

          • Don’t you have anything better to do than shout down a white housewife?

            You are going to lose this battle.

            You will be driven out for you blatantly divide and conquer kikery.

          • Shout? I’m sipping vodka and ice while poking a retarded Mumsnet reject who wants to be the Martha Stewart of the AltRight (in between my more important work of antagonising Abos and jews on Instagram, I might add).

            I guess you’ll try and sell aprons or cookbooks to up-and-coming trad mums. Hmmm. I love it when I the oven is on.

            This isn’t the forum for talking to traditional women. And you have only used it to scold men. Because they need that more than anything in the world…

          • Genuine LoL at your lack of self restraint.

            I’ll take a scolding if I deserve it, from someone who’s worthy of handing it out.

            If WWAP wants to hop on this thread and rip me a new one, fair enough. Your disclosure that you’re a cock chugging coed gone good doesn’t qualify.

          • You’re a confessed whore who thinks that having white children has redeemed her enough to interrupt, libel and scold men while admitting that you will not say anything to your equally hollow female friends who dump their husbands because you don’t want to be cut from your social circle (of whores).

            There is nothing you can offer men or women, it seems.

          • Here’s the problem as I understand it. The outstanding intellects of our movement don’t really care about the woman question. Unfortunately, they have left the field to half-wits like you.

            I was just reading an article about human mating tendencies. Unfortunately, ugly, high IQ women don’t fare well in the dating market. It occurred to me that you would probably burn them alive, because you are a psychopath with no human remorse.

          • A fitting solution to the sadistic MGTOW psychopath question: Turn them over to our brilliant, compassionate White men of medical science for experimentation, up to and including vivisection for the most vicious.

  • Ok, Lexi, I have a good start to those questions. Naturally, not all of them will apply to you specifically, but try to fill in the gaps as best you can. Other women are welcome to chime in on certain questions should they so choose.

    0. What do men consistently get wrong about the nature and motivations of women, in detail? List as many as occur to you from your own experiences.

    General Motivation:
    1. Why do women want men? Is the man himself (his personhood) the end goal or a means to an end?

    2. Why do women want children?

    3. Why do women want careers?

    4. Why do women want money? I mean big money. What would women do with effectively unlimited wealth?

    5. Why do women do everything they can to hide their natural features behind surgery and makeup?

    6. Why do women divorce men once they have what they wanted initially?

    7. Why do women take children from the father and yoke him with perpetual debt for reasons other than genuine abuse?

    8. When a woman says she loves a man, what does she mean? What is love to a woman? Can it be defined? Is it different than her love for children or herself? If so, How?

    Core Ideology and Consistency:

    9. Why do women from the past get in contact with a man, out of the blue, when her current relationship is looking like it might end? Why do women then get upset when men accuse them of monkey-branching?

    10. Why do women give away their virginity to a man that isn’t their husband but get upset when men value them less than virgins?

    11. Why do women, after years of a relationship, tell the man that they never actually loved him, but just thought that they did?

    12. Why do women who claim to be Christian totally oppose God’s paradigm for marriage? God>Man>Woman>Children?

    13. Why do women, who are most able to relate to children due to their biological function, not understand why men see them as large versions of children to be cherished and protected?

    14. If a woman is programmed to be willing to die to protect her child, but would be very unlikely to do so for her own husband, why is it such an alien idea that men might have to see women as vulnerable children, on an instinctual level, in order to be willing to die to protect them?

    15. Why do women see men as oppressors when men try to keep women out of things like the military and heavy industrial jobs with high casualties?

    16. What makes women want to compete with men at masculine things?

    Culture and Values:
    17. What do women value in society?

    18. Do women value their own chastity?

    19. Do women value their fertile years? If so, what exceeds them in value?

    20. Do women value Monogamy? If so, why do women have affairs with men who do not provide what their husbands provide for the family? Would that same woman be comfortable with the man giving away his paycheck to the woman across the street?

    21. Are women opposed to Polygyny? If so, why? Can women see any benefit to such an arrangement?

    22. Why do women undermine their own cultures by voting for measures that destroy their civilization and family?

    • Good Lord. This would take a book to answer. Anyway, I’ll try and start.

      0. First thing that came to my head: Thinking that we are asking a smart-ass rhetorical question, when in fact we are sincerely asking for information.
      Also, thinking we don’t know how they are feeling in a given moment. Consider the following conversation:

      Wife: What’s wrong, honey?
      Husband: Nothing. I’m fine.
      (10 minutes later, husband is still pouting.
      Wife: Are you sure there’s nothing wrong?
      Husband: Yes, I’m just tired.
      (another 30 minutes later, husband still pouting)
      Wife: Honey, I can tell something’s bothering you. Why don’t you tell me what’s wrong?
      Husband: I told you nothing’s wrong!?
      (An hour later.)
      Husband: I’m concerned about ….
      Husband finally tells Wife what the matter is and it gets resolved.

      1. This is not explicable. It isn’t not a rational decision that you up and decide you want one out of the blue. Changes come along, you start noticing boys; they smell nice. It feels good to be near them.

      So, I guess he’s an end goal.

      2. Before your first is born, you want one or two because they’re cute. After you have your first, you want more because parenting is fun.

      3. I think I wanted one for two reasons:
      (1) I was fearful of being trapped in an abusive situation with no way out.
      (2) Reverse psychology. I grew up in a working class background. I felt that the men in my extended family were dismissive of my potential. I had something to prove. This is why I firmly believe telling women they are stupid is a very bad idea.

      (4) This is an interesting question. I have never cared much about money. I have always been puzzled about why someone like Bill Gates would keep working to make more money when he already had more than he could ever possibly need. Obviously, now I’d have a cause to donate to, but I wouldn’t have had that before the red pill, so I’m not sure how to answer that. Obviously, financial security for my kids, or at least start-up money, would be a priority.

      (5) I don’t know. I don’t do this. I did for a few years when I was younger, because of the desire to get the attention of boys as I mentioned above. I eventually reacted against that, and went almost grunge. After meeting my husband, I started to dress up and put on small amounts of makeup on occasion. I still don’t bother with makeup very often, but I do dress nicer.

      I know some women do this because they want to find a rich guy, and have outright told me so. This is a very small minority of women. Most aren’t that calculating.

      (6) Unrealistic expectations of what marriage is supposed to be like. They think it’s supposed to be a fairy tale. All romance, no hard work. There is no other source of meaning in their lives. No religion, no love of nation, no cause to fight for, etc.

      (7) I have only seen this a couple of times. In one case, the reason was that the husband spent too much money on toys and gadgets while family was struggling. The other case, there was no reason whatsoever that I know of, other than that the romance had burned out, and the wife was bored, because she was a boring person who had no interests of her own.

      (8) I think it means that a pair bond has been formed. She is dependent on him, emotionally I mean. She is saying, “If you tear yourself away from me, it will leave a gaping, bloody wound.” She is also saying that she is empathically connected to him. As in my sample conversation above, she knows how he is feeling, and cannot be carefree or happy when he is not.

      It’s different from love for a child or self. I can’t say how or why just now.

      (9) I don’t really know what you mean by monkey-branching. I’ll assume you mean jumping from one relationship to the next. I don’t know about that. I’ll think about it.

      (10) We don’t agree with you that women who have had sex are worth less than virgins, at least not in a categorical sense. We don’t agree with you that assurance of biological relatedness, which I assume is at the root of this, is of the utmost importance. If my husband had a child when I met him, I like to think I would have embraced the child as my own, because of my love for him.

      Men’s demands for assurance of paternity ought to be balanced against women’s freedom. By freedom, I don’t mean license to go to sleazy bars or disappear without telling your husband where you are going and with whom. I’m talking about the ordinary freedom to move about. My family could not function if I couldn’t go to the grocery store or the post office by myself. My kids’ lives would be much diminished if I couldn’t take them to the park or the pool or whatever.

      Theoretically, anytime you let your wife out of your sight, there is a possibility of being chucked, but then anytime you drive a car, you’re risking life and limb. How much quality of life, for both Mom and Dad as well as the kids, are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of strict guarantees of chastity?

      Now I’ll address the reasons we “give away” our virginity. It is rarely premeditated, or at least that was the case when I was young. As I said earlier, we are drawn to boys, and we get ourselves into situations where it happens without us having intended it. Men use guilt, “if you love me” type manipulations, and sometimes subtle threats in order to get it. Girls are very naive about what men are after, and “lead them on” without ever having intended to do so. Then, they give in because they feel they can’t turn back.

      (11) No idea. I’ve never seen any such thing happen.

      (12) No idea.

      (13) If we are large versions of children, it would make no sense whatsoever to leave children in our care, so you either don’t really see us that way, or you do and you recklessly leave us in charge of children anyway. Do you have any idea how harrowing it can be to take care of small children? They are a constant danger to themselves. They cannot assess risk. They have no impulse control, and we have to keep them safe. It makes no sense to speak of us as children.

      (14) I suppose it’s not that alien, and I’m fine with being thought of as a child in some respects. Indeed, that is the chief joy of motherhood. Solomon said there is nothing new under the sun. That is true, until you have kids. Then, you get to do childhood all over again, and everything is new again. That does not mean that women have no insight or impulse control, which is the implication of this trope as I understand it.

      (15) We don’t. That is a fringe notion.

      (16) I already answered this one. Being told you cannot do something makes you want to prove you can.

      Men often have an overly broad sense of what are “masculine things.” I have no desire to compete with men at all in anything, not even in philosophical debate. I don’t get involved unless I’m being threatened or at least feel threatened. I much prefer a sincere, collaborative discussion in pursuit of truth. I know he thinks I’m hot for him, but in truth I cannot abide the likes of Weimar, who care nothing for truth and reason, but only power, domination, and winning. Whites should deal this way with out groups, not with each other.

      (17) A sense of solidarity and belonging, a sense that we’re all in this together. I think women are national socialists by nature. Absent massive propaganda, women will naturally have concentric loyalties that start with her own family, and end with all of humanity, with our duties to the latter being weak and tenuous, but there nonetheless.

      (18) Not particularly. As I said before, this can develop into an unhealthy obsession that seriously undermines everyone’s quality of life.

      (19) Women by and large do not have a clear sense of what their fertile years are, and so really cannot value them properly. This is easily rectified with proper education about fertility. I don’t think there is anything that exceeds them in value.

      (20) Yes, women value monogamy. Women are often provoked to a great degree of anxiety at the thought of cheating. It is very threatening. I don’t know why women have affairs. I also don’t know how often it happens. That is an empirical question that can only be answered with data. I personally am not aware of a single case of adulery among any person or couple I know. Obviously, I wouldn’t expect people to advertise. I assume your question about the paycheck was rhetorical.

      (21) I am opposed to polygyny. I am even more opposed to serial monogamy. It’s better for a man to support more than one wife throughout her entire life than to abandon their wives in middle age and pick another one.

      I do see potential benefits to polygyny, namely sharing household chores. Also, I suppose that would mean access to more desirable mates for a greater number of women. I don’t know any women who would be interested in polygyny, at least not on a conscious level. You wouldn’t get a monopoly on your mate’s resources.

      (22) I’m not convinced they do. Married White women voted for Trump did they not? They did this despite a lifetime of White guilt propaganda. Imagine how they would have turned out for Trump without such propaganda. When I posted evidentiary support for this, you said it proves that women should be married and pregnant as soon as possible. I disagree, but it does prove that people who don’t have children should not be voting. As I have previously stated, women who marry without ever getting a chance to find what makes them happy as individual persons are going to be easily bored in marriage. I would be very uncomfortable about my sons marrying a very young girl with little or no life experience and no sense of personal identity. I absolutely could care less whether she was a virgin or not.

      All that said, women are vulnerable to appeals to pity, much more so than men. It is of course easy for elites to manipulate this, as in the case of the dead child on the beach.

      I’m afraid I haven’t given you complete answers, but I have done my best to be honest and complete. Having gone through this exercise, it appears to me that our disagreements are empirical.

      My fundamental objection to the idea of “women’s nature” is not so much that I think women don’t have any dark propensities. Rather, I object to the notion that there is no rational override. I think men are prone to philandering, but that doesn’t make them wicked. What matters is whether they act on it.

      • I quit reading after “husband continues to pout after 30 min” only a bitch or a child pouts for longer than 10 seconds, let alone even pouts at all. Idk what “men” or what world your used to but those aren’t men and that’s not earth.

        • For the love of Pete, Barnabas, I’m not talking about ostentatious pouting. I’m talking about the kind of subtle moping about that only your wife would notice. You are such a curmudgeon, your wife probably won’t notice when you’re in a bad mood. Fortunately, I’m married to a happy-go-lucky, fun-loving guy.

          • Fair enough. Though in all honesty I’m not sure I understand the distinction here, heh….

      • 0. An interesting observation. I think it has to do with the fact that even if a man feels like something is wrong, he will not accept it since there is no rational explanation for those feelings. Once you bring it up, he begins thinking about what you have observed in his attitude and eventually has an answer for you.

        1. This is strange to me since my desire for girls/women is directly related to what I can do with them. Men see women as objects/creations to be acted upon. I want several women, not because I need women in my life to have joy or companionship, but because I want many children. I have never known a woman that had enough of a functioning personality/soul that I could fellowship with. Most women are simply not that interesting. A certain depth is missing. This is that end goal stuff I mentioned. Women never seem to want to actually know the person inside the man’s body.

        2. That is as expected. Women are supposed to want babies. That one is hardwired in.

        3. I agree. Telling anyone they are stupid is a bad idea. It is much better to guide a person to where they will succeed.

        4. Also as expected. Most women want comfort. Money brings comfort and stops being able to provide more comfort at a certain level. This is why women leave their careers and go have babies. More money doesn’t help them. “Wage Gap” solved. Men seek more and more money because it gives more and more leverage. I can buy a car. Can I buy a boat? I can buy a boat. Can I buy a ship? I can buy a ship. Can I buy an island? It keeps going from there. There is no end to what a man wishes to possess and rule.

        5. Nothing surprising here.

        6. Do the women realize this lack of a higher purpose? Do you agree that the man is supposed to provide that higher calling? If Eve was to help Adam, is Eve fulfilled if Adam never uses her to accomplish something good?

        7. So this one comes down to the woman simply being a failed specimen and/or the husband failing to provide a direction for the family.

        8. This one is the key. Your definition of love and the male definition of love are very different. As in East from West different. Your answer is built on a reciprocal emotional cycle. They are emotionally related to one another and if those emotions change, the relationship can/will change. The male definition of love is: I choose to protect, provide, and potentially die for this person/family even if/when I don’t feel like it emotionally. There have been times where I did not have good feelings for the woman I loved but I still loved her. Love is not an emotion nor related to emotions for men. Love is a choice.

        9. Take your time. I specifically mean why women prep a new relationship to fall into as her current one is falling apart. She shows a lack of love or empathy to the man she is currently with by using her energies and affection on a new man as opposed to doing so with her current man to save the relationship. It proves that women objectify men and fail to see the person inside the body.

        10. Men value virginity as it is the primary indicator of how your wife will handle marriage and be able to relate to you. Women who have been with a man before have lost that awe that they need to have for their husband. Virgins ARE simply more valuable to us whether women agree and like it or now. This is simply the truth.

        11. Ok.

        12. Ok.

        13. When I look at women, I see a creature specifically designed to relate to children and be the voice of the child. This gives the woman childlike qualities, not the least of which is innate neoteny. Women are terrible at situational awareness. They have very little impulse control in general. Men feel the need to keep them safe. I have seen more women get attacked by ooga boogas due to lack of situational awareness. They don’t even see the nogs around them because of innate solipsism, very much like a child.

        14. Women do have insight. It can be valuable to men when having to deal with emotional awareness that we suppress. “I have a bad feeling about that guy”.

        15. Femenists claim to speak for women. You have claimed this is a fringe notion. If it is a fringe notion, who do tens of millions of women not shout these feminists down for trying to destroy what women have going for them?

        16. I still don’t understand why women, in general, feel they have something to prove. If a woman ever told me, “I can put on makeup better than you”, I would smile and agree with her. I would never be tempted to challenge her assertion.

        17. So why is it so easy for civilizations to fall apart once women get any small measure of power in the civilization? There are plays dating back to the glory days of Greece that mock the insanity of womanly politics. Those plays perfectly mirror the reality of today’s female voting trends. Women instantly destroy that solidarity in favor of the out-group. You clearly disagree so a better question is: Why are you different from all of the other women who vote for enrichment?

        18. Interesting. Protip, teach your daughters to die before losing their virginity to a man that isn’t their husband. You will see a major turn around in how men treat women. It is that important to us. It is usually a dealbreaker for certain things like marriage for any man not willing to compromise his value.

        19. How do you propose we educate girls that they are temporarily more valuable than anything else, including careers and what the State expects of them? Should we remove the feminists and you go girl teachers that push competition with men at the expense of childbirth? If we do, and the women in society resist, how should we handle that? Are you going to complain if those women are put down harshly, made to obey?

        20. A paycheck is to a man what sex is to a woman. A medium of exchange. If a woman wants to keep her husbands entire check, it should come as no surprise that a man wants to keep his wife’s sex to himself. The sad thing about women is that if that anxiety goes away, she is less interested in her man since other women seem to be as well. This is why Dread Game is a thing. Women hate being equal or more important than her man. It tells her she chose poorly. She will attempt to choose again…soon.

        21. This one is most amusing to me. Women like resources. Women like the freedom to do as they please or at least the option should she desire it. Polygyny is the one marriage system that actually lets women have children and careers at the same time. It is the feminist paradise made manifest. Imagine that you have a man and three wives in a large estate. The man runs a business. Wife A is a stay at home mom. She is pregnant every 2 years and is pissed if she isn’t. Wife B is a lawyer making damn good money. She can eventually have a baby and then still go back to work since Wife A is at the house all the time to take care of all the children. Wife C functions as the personal assistant to the husband and has a direct hand in helping run the business. She can have children, or not, at her leisure. Everyone, every personality type, is happy in that environment. The man is fucking beside himself with joy. This is also the most unlikely arrangement since women hate sharing anything. Hence hahahahaha.

        22. Half of the women voted for Hillary. For me, that is an executable offense. Same goes for those sissy boys who voted for Hillary, more so actually. I agree that women are better without propaganda. This used to be handled by keeping women in the home and away from snakes in the public world, but you know how women responded to that. How do we handle this issue? Will you complain if we handle it quickly and harshly?

        Our disagreements are empirical. Women are people just like men. You have the same flaws as men. The reason I advocate discipline for women is due to your major difference:

        What is best for women isn’t what women want. Their nature is to be rebellious against their own good. There is no rational reason for this rebellion. It simply happens when a man isn’t there to set frame. The reason virginity is so important is that it is a low mileage indicator. Ownership passes from Father to Husband in an unbroken chain of custody. The frame is set and maintained from Father to Husband. Mark, Rick, Steve, DaQuon, Jamal, Jose, Juan, Brittany (college teehee), Michelle (also college) just get in the way. Who knows what damage is done? Women may not value virginity, but men do. You would never tell your child to ignore what employers want in a candidate. Why let your daughters do exactly that?

        Thanks again for your effort.

        • I’ll start with 8 through 10.

          8. You asked me what women mean when they say, “I love you.” I gave you an answer.

          In my experience, when men say, “I love you,” they usually mean, I want to have sex with you. My husband rarely says, “I love you.” He doesn’t have to. He shows it by what he does.

          On a radio show, a caller asked Wife with a Purpose how to find a good wife. Her response was spot on. She said to not worry so much about compatibility, because people change. What will keep a couple together is the commitment to stay together.

          All marriages have tough times. You stick it out, whether you feel like you love the person just then or not. The end.

          9. Your sweeping conclusion doesn’t follow from your premise. Empathy is a personality factor. Some have more and some have less. As I explained above, I am very much in tune with my husband’s feelings.

          The conclusion you draw here characterizes women according to their worst behaviors. I could just as well say, “The fact that men lie to women to get sex and show no regard for how they feel after being pumped and dumped shows they lack empathy.” Many do say this. They are bitter, uncharitable man-haters.

          (10) Is there any evidence for this? I have been told the risk of divorce increases with number of partners the woman has had. I do not believe there is a causal relationship. You would have to control for psychopathic personality factors that are known to correlate with sexual promiscuity.

          A question for you: If premarital sex ruins a woman for marriage to another man, why are men allowed to go around having sex with girls they are not married to and have no intention of marrying. If you are correct in your beliefs, the solution is not to shame women for being seduced, which is of course tantamount to shaming women for being women, but rather to compel men who seduce women to marry them. Fathers used to have the right to effectively compel marriage by way of the tort of seduction. Now, if a girl has sex with a young man she is not prepared to marry, she is worthy of being shamed. In that case, she hasn’t been seduced or swept off her feet, she has just been reckless with her sexuality.

          (13) If women were terrible at situational awareness, our children wouldn’t survive toddlerhood.

          (15) I’m honestly not sure what you mean by this. Do you have any specific suggestions as to why you would like us to do? Feminists have the megaphone. We do not.

          Feminist notions are more popular among the young and childless than among more mature women who have families and/or jobs. As a WN, you should understand the concentrated power of radical minorities better than anyone.

          I will remind you that Phyllis Schlaffly defeated ERA.

          (16) That’s because putting on makeup is trivial.

          (17) Women are more prone to outgroup empathy, but not suicidally so without intense propaganda.

          (18) I’ll do what I can, but I’m not going to make her feel that all is lost if she makes a mistake. How could I do that in a Christian household. That wouldn’t make any sense.

          (19) I can’t imagine what I would have to complain about. Rex, I firmly believe that delayed childbearing is deeply harmful to women, and undermines rather than promotes our freedom. We do not know how many children we want until we have at least one. Even then, you still don’t know for sure. You don’t really know if you want anymore until your youngest is about four or five. I have heard stories about women getting their tubes tied, then regretting it when their children get to be about that age, and that definitely squares with my experience. Eventually, you have older siblings to help, and it stops getting harder with each child.

          The truth of the matter is that one single reform would solve these problems: Teach girls to have children in their early to mid twenties. Then, let them do whatever the hell they want after the children reach school age. What would happen is this: The most traditional women would keep having more children. Less traditional ones would stop and have a career. In a couple of generations, there wouldn’t be nearly enough feminists to make trouble. I’m not saying I would oppose any reform more draconian than that. I’m only saying I suspect it would prove sufficient all by itself.

          (20) You see Rex, this is why women need their own personality/identity separate from their husbands. If you don’t have such, you may very well get bored in a stable relationship. I don’t know what Dread game is, but I have a feeling that it is some sort of God awful, manipulative head game men play on women to undermine their sense of security in their relationship.

          I absolutely could not stand this when I was dating. I don’t need a “challenge” in my relationship. If I’m bored, I’ll go sit with my cat and read a book. If my every thought is consumed with how to keep hold of my husband, how could I ever spare a thought for anything else. It would be like the Harrison Bergeron character who can’t think because he’s always being interrupted by a bell in his head or whatever it was. Miserable.

          (21) We’ll, there you go. Except you forgot to mention all the men who don’t get wives at all, the sons of the very women in the feminist paradise. Unhappy sons—> Unhappy Moms.

          (22) Whatever it takes, I suppose.

          I don’t agree with your views on Wife-spanking, but I will say this. It would be preferable to abandonment.


          • 8. I agree that married couples should just stick together, but this isn’t about our agreements. This is about women’s nature in general. Why do 7/10 divorces get initiated by the woman?

            9. Fair enough.

            10A. Yes, there is evidence for the number of dicks ridden decreasing a woman’s ability to bond with her husband or any other future partners.

            10B. I agree entirely. Men should have the authority and the power to force or deny men that fuck their daughters to marry them. To do that, we have to go back about a century or more. This will not be clean or pretty. This is not on men, it is on our gynocentric legal system. The western world has always been a Matriarchy administrated by a Patriarchy. There has never been a point in time where those two systems didn’t coexist until recently. Women are valuable so they are carefully guarded treasures. Men are not as valuable since one man can literally breed every woman on Earth. This is why men administrate the society, do the fighting and dying, and work the dirty jobs. You want balance back, put the feminists back into the kitchen and the weak men back into the real world.

            13. Women are good at spotting things that can hurt a child. Women are terrible at spotting things that can hurt themselves. This is why you have men.

            15. Imagine a world where any time a feminist “celebrity” opened her mouth, every woman for miles around rushed to cram literal dogshit into it. Shame these disgusting, nation wrecking, haints back into Hell. Make them earn their keep instead of rent-seeking in academia. At the very least, support men totally when they do that job themselves. Murderers should fear the law, rapists should fear the Father, feminists should fear women.

            16. Not to women. Most women do it from the time they are preteens until the day they die. The point is, I have never felt the desire to out woman a woman.

            17. Why are women prone to outgroup empathy? Why are women so easily swayed by propaganda that goes against their children’s best interests?

            18. No, make sure she knows about forgiveness and a fresh start. This is normal and sane. Also, stress to girls that it IS a huge loss. I don’t want a previously worn pair of boxers. I don’t want a half-smoked cigar. I don’t want to kiss lips that have sucked some random dudes penis. The men in this equation deserve better than someone else’s leftovers. Marrying a widow is a different issue.

            19. Excellent. Tell every girl in the world this very thing. Start a girls group. Ignore women your own age. They are already either there with you or will never get there. Help the young.

            20. Dread game is basically keeping the wife aware of the fact that the husband has options by virtue of his actual worth. This is used to channel her inner hypergamy towards the current relationship. A woman should be mindful of her amazing husband. Anything less than abject awe at the sight of him is a woman slipping. This will make more sense when our society is more like South Africa. The sight of a white man will be the ONLY thing that gives girls and women comfort. This is what our safe, law-abiding society has removed from the natural order. It is a good thing, but it does have that one negative consequence.

            21. Not all men deserve a wife. Part of our problem now is that weak men are producing weak sons and rebellious daughters. Let the weak enjoy their sex dolls or go and compete with men of other tribes for their women. Which actually raises another question: Why does a man like The Golden One have to “look” for an enlightened woman to marry? He has made 2018 the year he intends to find a wife. Why are women, or at least AR women, not throwing themselves at a man like him? He is in shape, his mind is sharp, and he has strong Patriarchal values. Why is he alone? Why can he open his mailbox without a metric ton of panties pouring out?

            22. Excellent.

            The wife-spanking thing is just my method. Do what your husband wants. A wife is to submit to her husband, not all men. MGTOW would not have progressed into a real thing over all these decades if men had a legally protected recourse against the stupidity and evil of the modern, unregulated Matriarchy like we used to. Remember, Matriarchy administrated by a Patriarchy. Both exist. Both will exist. Balance is needed.

          • (8) I don’t know about those numbers, Rex, but I will say this. The fact that the actual divorce is initiated by women doesn’t actually mean that the divorce is her fault. I’m open to the possibility that it is, but it might just be that the husband has already divorced her, but has no interest in formalizing it. I know of one couple where this is the case. The husband treats the wife like absolute garbage. The situation is so bad that his conduct would have been considered constructive abandonment, if not actual, habitual abandonment, before no-fault divorce. She has been contemplating filing for divorce for years, but holds off hoping things will improve. The problem is that if she doesn’t file soon, he may squander all of their savings.

            (10A) I’d like to see it then. I feel that this is the kind of empirical analysis our movement should be doing. We need to actually dig through the data and figure out what’s going on. My guess would be that extremely promiscuous psychopaths are busting the curve, but again we don’t know that until we sift the data. I can’t do it, because I have a family.

            Moreover, if indeed it is true that there is a direct linear correlation between number of sexual partners and inability to bond, thereby increasing the risk of divorce, both men and women should be held responsible, not only women. If premarital sex is as damaging as you say, pumping and dumping is an act of racial sabotage is it not?

            (10B) As I was trying to explain above to another poster, I am totally fine with that, and I think most women would be. Certainly, the brightest alt-Right women have a role to play in persuading women that reform is needed for the good of our people. We can’t do that if we’re bullied out of the movement.

            (13) OK.

            (15) The trouble is that women are misguided. The good news, Rex, is that I think we are already beginning to see the effects of selection for conservative tendencies. Devlin seems to think this will be an undetectably slow process. I disagree. I think feminists are removing themselves very rapidly from the gene pool. I don’t know the exact statistics, which I would be very curious to see, but I suspect that the most fecund quartile of White families are already having the majority of children.

            (16) Yes, even to women, makeup is trivial. If you’re curious, find out when the next curriculum fair for homeschoolers is in your local community. Go there and browse. Look at the women you see. How are they dressed? What sort of hairstyles do they have? Are they wearing makeup?

            Now, you might say that this is a selected, unrepresentative group of women. That’s true, but that is who we are talking about anyway. Mediocre women are not competing with men for choice careers. Exceptional ones are. In my view, the answer is to detrivialize and elevate motherhood. You cannot do this I feel we go around implying that women are subhuman psychopaths. By definition, if subhuman psychopaths are qualified mothers, then what does that say about motherhood as a calling?

            (17) I think it’s just a function of being more empathic in general. Let’s be honest, would you really want White women to not be moved by a picture of a dead child on a beach, of whatever race? This propensity may render women categorically unsuitable for leadership, but it doesn’t make us defective or treacherous. That is a separate issue.

            I’m also not sure to what extent women do show outgroup empathy at the expense of their children’s best interests. As I mentioned before, most married White women voted for Trump. Do we have any data on White married women with children? I would imagine they voted for Trump in a landslide, and again this despite a lifetime of White guilt propaganda that is intended to and does in fact cause intense feelings of shame about taking our own side.

            The kind of pathological altruism we are seeing is not natural, Rex. It’s not natural for women, and it’s certainly not natural for men, who you must admit have not exactly been very successful at resisting the programming, either.

            (18) We’re not gonna agree about this Rex. When you call human beings leftovers, you are dehumanizing them. It cannot be otherwise. Women are going to bristle at that. Again, I’ll do what I can, but I’m not going to make my daughters feel that they are subhuman, and I’m going to have to be honest here, Rex, that is what you are asking.

            (19). I’m doing my best.

            (20) “Abject awe” Get a grip. I don’t expect this from my children, even though their obedience is in many cases a matter of life and death.

            Rex, you are slipping into idolatrous humanism here. Woman was made from man’s rib. We are bone of your bone, flesh of your flesh. Humanity comes in two complementary varieties: male and female. Male is not the ultimate human, with female as a substandard derivation.

            Now, if men are finding success with some of these tactics, I’m not going to countersignal too much. I wouldn’t only ask that men be open to new information about women. Maybe you’ll meet one who is repelled by these tactics, as I was,, and she might be the one. Just be flexible that’s all.

            Also, this might not be the place to talk about game. It’s alienating.

            (21) That is a very good question. When women try to get people to cool it on the woman-bashing, we are told that the alt-Right is a radical political movement, not a dating club. Therefore, we don’t have to make any effort even to be minimally civil to women, let alone attract them.

            Now, if that is the attitude, there aren’t going to be any single women around. Alt-Right, even in it’s current state, has appeal to women, but only insofar as it serves the best interests of our children. Women who don’t have children yet are just going to be repelled.

            (22) OK. I don’t have any interest in telling other people how their marriage should work. What I would like to see you menfolk start seriously thinking about is whether is really the appropriate place to talk about how to discipline your wife.

            There’s an appropriate time and place for everything, Rex.

          • 8. There are situations like this, certainly. Most divorces are about divorce rape. Look into how many of them end up with the man owing money to the woman. If a divorce was just a split, fine. It almost never is.

            10A. There are threads on /pol/ daily that exist just to spam infographics with this very sort of data. It takes a lot of women to change the curve that much. This problem would be solved by doing away with birth control. Consequences matter only when they occur. Yes, men who pump and dump should be held liable. Men need to have public beatings on a daily basis to root out the degeneracy in the male population. Which means we need to make such things legal or the police will step in and stop it. Everything about our current legal system works as an antibody against righteousness.

            10B. Excellent.

            15. Correct.

            16. We are saying that women who do not have children BECOME subhuman psychopaths. Having children keeps women sane. That is why we are stressing this so much. Imagine a hammer that doesn’t want to hammer nails. How sick is that hammer going to be trying to succeed as a hair dryer? Who is going to get hurt from that hammer’s choice? Try to dry your hair with a hammer just once. It doesn’t work very well, but you will wake up with mostly dry hair depending on how zealous you are.

            17. I want any white woman that lives in and serves in my household to feel relief everytime the news shows her one less barbarian to worry about. That boy would have grown up as a muslim whos primary function is to find white girls and breed them into islam. Fuck that little orc. I want women to go back to being utterly preoccupied with the success of their own children. I remember what my Grandmothers were like. They were genuine Matriarchs and were loved by the entire family for their contributions. Those ladies didn’t have a problem with propaganda. I do not want women to stop being evil, I want them to be evil for me and my children. I want them willing to burn the entire fucking world just to see the flag of my house flying over the ruins. I want zealots. Let me worry about righteousness.

            18. I want you to represent the highest standard to them. If you are going to set the bar, set it as high as you can reach. They might just get there. It is good for women to bristle at that. That is the point. It should sting to hear that a non-virgin is looked down upon by possible husbands. That is entirely the point. Shame exists in the white man for a reason. It is there to let you know you fucked up and you will keep feeling it with every remembrance just so the point sticks. That is the measure of God’s love for us. Eternal correction. A widow, a rape victim, etc, special cases like that do not apply here. This is talking about the initial act in the correct context. Lack of virginity is only important in the context of how it was lost.

            19. Excellent.

            20. What I mean to convey is that the way a woman treats her man has a lot to do with how her man will act. If a woman treats me like a god-king I tend to see myself as such and act accordingly. It isn’t about what you say to your man but how you interact with your man. Many women have said they loved me but none of them could display love towards me. “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” The husband is the representative of God in the family unit. This is a situation where you respect the office distinctly from the man himself.

            21. We are talking about The Golden One specifically, not the AR comments section. The AR isn’t a radical political movement yet. It is the egg that will either give birth to a movement or it will be a tomb. The AR isn’t a dating club, it does have a greater purpose. That doesn’t mean that people in the AR shouldn’t form relationships within it. This should be encouraged.

            22. This sort of thing comes about as a result of interactions like you have with WR. Both of you are spot on. You are correct that AR women are allies. He is right that you are allies for your own reasons and not out of a desire for a change of female behavior. You said so yourself when you pointed out that women are still attracted to the AR, despite its treatment of women, for the sake of their children. No woman here wants to stop having the right to vote. No woman here wants to repeal suffrage and live under coverture. Women just want to halt the coming damage to their own security and their children’s future by using the AR as a shield. Women are right to be here and give support. WR is right to say to the men, “Don’t get to excited, they are not demanding traditional ways, just protection from their own bad legal choices with migrants and diversity.”

          • (8) Still no empirical data.

            (10) OK, then it should be freely available to look at. Shoot me some.

            (16) OK. That may be what you mean, but it is not what you say. Any lurkers around here are not going to walk away with that message. Do we want to win, or not?

          • I think I have the answer to all of this. A good woman/wife will follow her husband, if he’s man enough to lead her. Every problem you people are discussing just got solved. Own your women like a man, or be a little bitch and let your relationship go into the toilet. That doesn’t mean you abuse, neglect, or belittle her, it just means you’re willing to put your effort into owning her for who she is. Problem solved. You’re welcome.

          • (17) More heresy. If god intended us to be amoral as the lioness, he wouldn’t have given us souls, which he did. It sounds like you need to come to grip s with God’s creation, good Sir.

            (18) Rex, go to your bookshelf and take another look at that big book with the gold letters. Now, read the second half, the part called the New Testament. It makes very good reading. It’s all about getting a fresh start when you sincerely want to lead a better life.

            If God says a woman is clean, the next who are you to say otherwise?

            (20) The husband is the representative of Christ in the family, the one who was born of a woman’s and laid in a manger and rode in to his death on a cross for His love of the People.

            I know my husband would lay down his life for me, and because of that I would follow him to Hell. I suppose that means I worship him in a sense. But he EARNED that. He didn’t treat me as though I owe him that. His servant leadership preceded my devotion.

            I sincerely hope that you too find this sort of relationship some day, but if that is what you want, I am telling you right now, you are going to have to start being more judicious with your words, and you are going to have to learn a bit of humility.

            I a man your older sister, so I will hear you our a million times, no matter how much you piss me off. Dating prospects will not be so patient.

            (21) I agree, but there aren’t going to be any single women around to form relationships with if y’all don’t f******tone it down a little bit.

            Time and place.

            (22) Here you are incorrect, Rex. I have stated repeatedly that I could care less if you

            Take away my right to vote.

            Legalize discrimination in favor of men in the workplace.

            Ban no-fault divorce.

            Nothing ever seems to persuade anyone that’s I am on your side, unless I am literally willing to agree to legal femicide.

            What I said the basis of your demand for couverture, Rex. If you have a case for why it’s necessary for the good of our people, let’s hear it.

            It sounds very suspicious to me. It sounds like a complete negation of women’s most basic rights as human beings. Indeed, my impression from what little I know of it is that Sharia law isn’t positively feminist by comparison.

            Like I said, if you can state a case as to why something so draconian is necessary, I’m willing to hear you our, but I’m not going to get into some ridiculous cycle of constantly acceding to ever-moreover humiliating demands to prove I’m not “feminist.” You menfolk have better things to do than to constantly test our loyalty in that way. It’s almost like you don’t really care all that much about the ongoing destruction of our people so much as you just want to make damned good and sure we women know our place. That is, you just want to humiliate us for jollies.

            I’m just as White as you are Rex.

          • There is a lot going on in my post. Can you give me the context of what you are saying?

          • Paragraph 18: You stated: It should sting to hear that a non-virgin is looked down upon by possible husbands. In some cases these situations are not by choice.

          • Oh. Yes, in that context what I am talking about is a woman that has lost her virginity, by choice, outside of the confines of marriage.

            In the ideal world, girls would lose/give their virginity to their husbands. A woman who has had a husband who is now dead or who has abandoned her is not to be ashamed nor has her value decreased. She did what was right. This same logic applies to every single situation that is out of her control.

            There is only shame if she gives it away, by choice, to a man who isn’t her husband.

          • The truth is that really isn’t the issue.

            People make mistakes. I’m not sure why Rex thinks Christ died on the cross if we’re supposed to be capable of fulfilling the law. None of this makes any sense whatsoever from a Christian perspective.

          • Why are you conflating the Law of Moses with not having premarital sex? There is a difference between God forgiving you and a man not wanting to have sloppy seconds.

          • If you continue to use terms like “sloppy seconds” to refer to human beings, I’m gonna have to call you out for undermining this movement.

          • A movement that shames sluts. Between me and bewitched, I think we have covered who I am talking about and in what context. I know this one is a personal one for you due to wild oats but still. Try to understand what I am talking about. See the big picture. It is ok to admit you slutted around and be sorry for it. That will never make it ok nor should it. It simply is what it is.

          • I a man in on ways asking you to say that anything I didn’t was OK. That I said another matter. I a man asking you to say that I am ok.

            Truthfully, I’m not really even asking you to say that. What you think of me isn’t not really that important.

            What’s is important is your expectations of what sort of girl you and your brothers are going to find in this world as we know it today.

            Suppose I were to go around saying, “Men are useless these days. They are such losers, the Yankees can’t even support a stay-at-home wife.”

            This would be really obnoxious of me for a few reasons.
            First, I’m running down White men who might still be good have stands if someone will give them a chance. How does that help our people? Moreover, part of the reason men can’t support families is because of feminism. Women are now holding jobs that a man might have otherwise held. So it’s partly women’s fault that men are in this situation anyway.

            It seems to me that is essentially what you are doing. Men were all onboard for sexual freedom, as even Devlin admits. In order for men tomorrow “get laid,” someone has to do the laying. It seems rather hypocritical and uncharitable to impose the expectations of the past on the present.

            But apart from all that, you are actually preventing the birth of White babies this way. You are not supposed to be doing that, Rex. You are doing the enemy’s work. It needs to stop.

          • You are still missing my point. Men who do not provide for their families deserve to be called out. Women who are sluts deserve to be called out. The only way to stop deserving to be called out is to stop failing in those specific ways.

            If you were a slut then but are not a slut now, you are fine. Not being a slut now doesn’t mean you weren’t a slut then. Likewise being a slut then doesn’t make you a slut now. Things just are what they are. I don’t know how else to put this. It isn’t about forgiveness or shaming. It is a categorization.

          • Although its 3 hours later and I’m sure you’ve digested this but I’ll say it again. She cannot understand your point. Never will she. These women will submit once we have power. Then they will purr like kittens all the while exclaiming “you have no idea how long I dreamed of a powerful man such as you” blah blah blah….I don’t know you personally, so while I do talk this, it may be a little brash for you as you seem to be a pious guy, but she’s probably already fingered her pussy to the thought of us on here putting her in her place. It’s the way these things are.

          • Kek. I don’t know about that. I have long since given up trying to guess what will get any given woman going. Half the time it requires a level of degeneracy I refuse to indulge in. The other half of the time you have to be able to hear purple whisper to even get started.

          • You ain’t lying. I personally have a level of engaged detachment towards such things, which while not recommendable, certainly comes in handy.

          • Pure projection from her once again. With her past she knows that under our definition she qualifies as sloppy seconds. That why it’s hopeless with women like her. They are incurably subjective.

          • Blaming shifting whore, to quote WR. No matter if the woman initiates the divorce she is innocent, always. She’s can’t accept that most women are responsible. They may not share all the blame but they are still to be held accountable

          • “They may not share all the blame but they still are to be held accountable.”

            Let’s see. It’s partly women’s fault and partly men’s fault, but let’s blame the women.

            And no I don’t hate women.

          • OK Rex, I google docs “abject.” Definition #2:

            “Completely without pride or dignity.”

            You have to consider what sort of women are going to be attracted, or even open, to the alt-Right. By definition, women who are interested in alt-Right ideas are not going to be “completely without pride or dignity.” Ths kind of language is unhelpful. I’m not I need charge, and can’t tell anyone what to do, but I can tell you what the likely consequences will be: no women, no mainstream appeal, no future, failure.

          • AR women are not to be craven. I used the term correctly. If you were to find yourself before God, should you bow in abject humility? Before God, what pride or dignity should you have? What can you have? Just because you would be without pride before God doesn’t mean you do not have pride. It means you know when and where to express that pride.

            A wife should be without pride or dignity before her husband. She has nothing to hide from him just as she has nothing to hide from God. In public, you are to be dignified and graceful to reflect well upon your husband. If you focus on your husband’s dignity, you will find that yours takes care of itself.

          • “A wife should be without pride or dignity before her husband.”

            Good luck with that.

            I’m done.

          • As a man is without pride or dignity before God. I didn’t say to not have pride or dignity. I said to forgo displaying it before your husband since it is a barrier to intimacy and submission instead of a virtue.

            This is why WR uses the tactic that he uses. I spend days talking with you, explaining things to you, listening to your points and either agreeing or countering. After all of that, you either misunderstand or pretend to misunderstand a single point that isn’t in keeping with your view of women and you say you are done.

            That is exactly why WR simply says, “Don’t talk to them. They will come around when we take over.”

          • It wasn’t one point, Rex. It is clear from your comments taken as a whole that you either

            (1) Think women are subhuman, or

            (2) Think men are semidivine.

            It can’t be otherwise.

            If you are think humiliating your partner is sexy or “intimate,” and she’s ok with that, it’s your business.

            If you attempt to have a successful movement by humiliating women, I don’t expect you’ll have much success. Have a go.

            ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

          • Women are not subhuman. Both men and women are semidivine. How can you be a Christian and not understand deification/glorification?

            The lack of expression of pride and dignity does not equal humiliation. Pride is a shield. Dignity is a shield. Both of these things are constructs used in social situations. You do not need to have your shields up at home with your partner.

          • I agree Rex’s. Go ahead and let your shields down. I feel you are always on the lookout for a slight, you won’t be married very long.

          • I am on the internet, using my actual name, talking openly about the most intimate thoughts and ideas I have. My shields are down. I want people to see me and understand that what it says on the tin is what you get. It is for this reason that I will never be married. There are no women that want to buy what I am selling. There is nothing cool about a “Southern Christian Patriarch.” It is hard to get more unfashionable than that.

          • Damn, your parents must be some real badasses if they named you Rexterminator. I may even like to meet them.

            As to marriage, we’re the men who must sacrifice marriage and possibly even children so that our fellow white men in the future can enjoy the fruits of a true and just marriage. Tough job, but someone has to do it.

          • I’ll look you up. I’m under James K Polk over there. Barnabas was my ancestor who came here from England in the 1630s name and James K Polk was an ancestor of mine as well. Have to represent the old blood.

          • Sayonara. Hopefully whatever genetic defect makes you hate your own women will die without you.

          • You know, Rex, I’ve heard the aphorism that “Feminism is the radical notion that women’s are people” and dismissed it as ridiculous hyperbole.

            Evidently, I was wrong.

            If you think man is to woman as God is to man, you either think women are subhuman, in which case you are a heretic, or you think me not are superhuman, in which case, you are a heretic.

            I suppose I’ll see you in hell.

          • Feminism is the idea that God didn’t know what He was doing when he made Man the Head of the Woman as Christ is the Head of the Church. Feminism is not the idea that women are people. I am not a heretic and I will not be seeing you in Hell as neither of us should be going there if Christ is a Man of His word.

          • Sorry, Rex, but it’s plain a shame day. Men and women are both made in the “image and likeness of God.”

            What kind of Head I should Christ? He is the servant Leader of the Church. He builds up rather than tears down. He restores our dignity rather than trying to beat I think out of us. Who the hell are you to deprive me of the dignity He has restored to me. God doesn’t want you on your knees. If you don’t understand that, you have failed to grock the whole import of His Good News.

            Our traditional marriage vows are:

            Love, Honor, and Obey

            You have rewritten them as

            Fear, Worship, and Obey

          • You see submission to your earthly husband in terms of fear, worship, and obedience. This is YOUR filter. You are making the assumption that giving up feminism will put you under tyranny.

            I am talking about Love, Honor, and Obedience. If you do these things, there will be no need for tyranny.

            I am now forced to agree with WR without reservation. Women are unable and unwilling to give up feminism.

            Thank you for this lesson. I will attempt to curb my naivete going forward.

          • Whatever. If you insist on continuing to define the belief that women are human as “feminism” then you are right. We are not going to allow you to negate our humanity.

            I do not see submission as “fear, worship, and obedience.”

            I already said I submit to my husband. It is you who said that is not enough. You are the one who started going on about “abject awe” and comparing yourself to the Almighty.

            Don’t forget, Rex’s. There is one unforgivable sin, an equal it is NOT losing your virginity before marriages.

          • Your biggest concern, out of all of this, is that men are allowed to have and express a preference regarding virginity. It is not enough that you found a man that would accept and marry you without you being a virgin. No, men must also stop having that preference. It is slut shaming. Do you see the inherent feminism in that or do I need to point at it harder?

          • No, that is entirely reasonable. I have no problem wit him that whatsoever.

            As i said, watch your tone and you’re language.

            It doesn’t matter whether you think it is fair or right that’s you should have to watch your mouth. The simple fact is that’s you represent oh right movement and you need to be mindful of that.

          • Pure projection and insecurity. This is the main reason why it is hard to bring feminists toward our side. They whored it up back in the day and now they feel threatened.

          • Glad you came to the light brother. It has to be forced upon them and while we do it with concern, the action must take place with a zero fucks given mindset

          • Go to hell, Kike. Yes, I’m talking to you Barnabas.

            I don’t know if you were born a like, but you serve the Kike, and therefore are a Kike.

          • Genesis claims that man was made in the image of God and that woman was made from man’s Rib bone. Do you disagree?

          • You’re mixing up your passages.

            1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created.”

            “named the men Man”

          • The Bible says this very thing and although myself am not big on scripture, how do you rationalize that?

        • Well, what should the 25 year practising catholic virgin girl do when after she marries the man and he leaves her. Shouldn’t she have a second chance? Sure we all have problems, but still.

          • Pumping and dumping is leaving the girl, whether she is in a marriage, committed relationship. Men are supposed to protect and they don’t leave……..balogne! Men will leave, and they don’t care either.

          • If you can find a man, in today’s world, that will get into a legal marriage, he is not the type to leave. A woman is not to be held responsible for a man’s failures. These sorts of things can be judged on a case by case basis.

          • Naturally, she should. We rarely talk about what needs to change among men. I am open to that discussion since everything I propose requires a shift from both sexes.

          • inb4 WR rightly jumps your shit for that post…unless rando actually got him banned.

          • Eh. I’m not too worried a young catholic girl with only “one” notch don’t sound too bad.
            The only Catholic girls I can find out here by me are mestizas and although a lot of them are hot, I prefer white womenz.

            A lot of counter signaling trolls here lately. Hopefully no one gets banned.

          • Does banning even happen here? This place has people who are paying to be here. Has that ever happened before?

          • I wouldn’t think so but I’ve only been visiting regularly for about 6 months now.

            I have seen more than few people on this thread asking for WR to be banned. Little dandies need to increase their T levels. It’s one thing to disagree but to need views stifled is soft.

          • my mistake was not marrying a religious man I guess. Non-religious men should not ask religious women out. Period.

          • The wife should be more religious than her husband, but he needs to atleast be willing to sit in church every Sunday. The woman should pray and read the Bible a lot more than the husband. Imo, it’s not even nessecary for the man to neither pray nor read scripture. Meditation is the better substitute for a man. At the same time, the husband must act as enforcer upon his wife’s piety and make sure she is praying and conducting bible and saint study daily. Any slip in the wife’s piety, if she was pious to begin with, ultimately rests on the husbands shoulders, I don’t care what anyone says. It’s the man’s responsibility to keep his woman in the mold of putty within his hands, at all times. Any minor slip in frame is detrimental and she will begin to seek another.

          • I think a lot of girls get trapped in a negative cycle when they get used and abused. When you’re treated as though you’re only good for sex, eventually you start to believe it. The question is how to halt this cycle and turn things around.

          • What about obedient sons? I see no inclination whatsoever to rein in the antisocial behaviors of young men.

            That’s because this movement is by and for young men. Until that changes, we’ll remain in the ghetto.

          • That response was in context to the question post it answered. Strong Fathers raise strong sons. Sons do not need to be obedient, they need to be co-operative. They need to know why obedience is needed and how to use it.

          • This gets to the heart of the matter. I know your heart is in the right place, Rex, but at the end of the day, you just don’t respect women. You don’t ultimately think we can be persuaded or reasoned with, so our daughters must “obey” while our sons must “cooperate.” I passionately disagree with you about this, Rex.

            In the last couple of generations, women have poured into higher education in droves. This was not “obedience” for they were not ordered to do it. They were advised and counseled to do it by their elders.

            This alone demonstrates that your premises are incorrect. If women could be talked into careerism, why can’t they be talked into traditionalism?

            This might sound petty, but the truth of the matter is that tone and language matter. This is an unforced error that could cost us our very existence. We cannot afford that.

            I’m not going to carry on with this much longer with this one-woman battle. Y’all are either serious about winning or you are not. At some point I’m going to have to let this anti-woman purity spiral run its course.

          • I would also note, Rex, that you have here’s actually subordinated women to their sons.

            Instead of this:

            Father–> Mother–>Children

            It appears you are now proposing this:

            Father–> Mother –> Sons–> Daughters.

            Apparently, you think that adult women must “obey,” while adolescent boys must “cooperate.”

            You’re not gonna get anywhere with this, Rex.

          • God>Man>Woman>Children

            I already stated this. A boy has to be a man eventually. A man has to be able to disobey and put forth his own orders. A man who obeys is a slave. Boys are taught to co-operate once they are old enough to be out from under their mother’s skirt. Men need to work together but not obey each other. While a boy is a small child, yes, he is totally under his mother’s authority and instruction. Once he is old enough to have his own agenda but is not yet a man, he needs to know WHY he should co-operate with what his mother wants even though he is now big enough to ignore her if he so chooses.

          • Obedience is either slavery or it isn’t Rex. If it’s slavery for men but not women, all you’re really saying is that women are made to be slaves.

            How can I explain to my sons why they should cooperate, Rex? You already told me I can’t understand it myself, and therefore must obey.

            Here’s again, if women are stupid, we can’t raise our sons. I keep telling you this, Rex. This route you are going down is not traditional. It isn’t anti-woman.

            It is anti-family faggotry is what it is.

          • I am trying to decide if you actually have missed my point and I should try again, or if you are going for distance and irritation. Can you clarify for me so I know how much serious effort to put into this?

          • I am not trying to be difficult, but I am exasperated.

            I will read your post again and see if I missed something.?

          • Try this: If you have a question, ask me a question. Don’t make a declarative statement. Ask me what I mean.

          • I could probably spend days analyzing that one post, Rex. You are going to have to be patient.

            Now, I’m trying not to straw man.

          • Part of what you don’t understand, Rex, is that women have our own agenda, too.

            To not have your own agenda is effectively to be dead. To have no will of your own is to be not-alive.

            Now before you start thinking this isn’t some awful feminist impudence, let me try to explain what I mean.

            We are helpmeets. We don’t sit around and wait for orders. We have to take the initiative on things. I’m sure you wouldn’t want your wife to show initiative. You may not understand that yet, because you are not married. This is why I think you need to show some more humility. You don’t have all the ans, Rex. You need to learn to listen and learn.

            Suppose you ell your wife to do something with the garden. Do you want her to come to you for every decision? No, you want her to develop her own vision and run it by you so you can talk about it. If you beat all the will and confidence out of her (figuratively or literally), she won’t be able to complete even that task.

            Really, Rex, maybe you should go talk to some married people about this stuff.

          • Actually, I want her to let me make the choice to devote her attention to a garden in the first place. Maybe I want her to help me manage my rental properties. Maybe I want her to learn how to perform a skill and that learning will take most of her free time.

            I don’t want to micromanage. That is an erroneous assumption on your part. I want her to do what I say, in the spirit of what I intended. I do not care about her agenda. If her agenda isn’t me, I married the wrong woman.

          • Ok, but here again this is going to get you into a situation where you have to play games to keep her interested. That in turn is going to undermine your own efficacy.

            If you don’t let her do the garden if that’s makes her happy, then you are not being a loving spouse.

            She isn’t not going to be happy. This isn’t why we got feminism. You know what they say about history.

            I need that kind of marriage, my husband would probably get exasperated and bitchslap me Fromm here’s to Kingdom come and that would be the end of me.

            I sometimes wonder if that’s why Arabs are so dumb. They killed off all the smart women.

          • First things first. If she wants a garden she can have a garden. This isn’t the tyranny you seem to imagine. We are using specific examples in context. Maybe we need to have a list of questions about men’s nature. You women seem to be terribly misinformed.

          • OK. I stand corrected then. My original question actually assumed that you had asked her to do something about the garden.

            And of course, if you need something done, you need it done.

          • I’ve read most of lexis comments and I have to say that she is bad for our movement, imo. She pretends to accept certain things only to renege and then double down later. She’s a textbook 40 years old feminist, her mind can’t be changed. She believes with 100% certainty than men and women are equal and that men should not dominate women. Bad news.shes all for women in careers, male spaces, sports, police, military etc..

            All that said, I do commend you for spending all that effort. Hopefully those who have blue pulled thoughts on women read your thread. It will help them.

          • That was my hope as well if nothing else came from this. At this point, I am actually worried about WR. This should have been too good for him to pass up.

          • Give it a couple days. If we don’t hear from him by then, well shit, you may have to swap emails with me because I may sign off……

          • Other readers can be the judge. What do you think the point of having long back and forths with you is? Not to convince you of my thoughts but expose you and other feminists for what you are.

          • When you say feminist what do you mean Barnabas, a White woman who doesn’t hate herself?

            You’re like a kike that goes around screeching “racist” at every White person who doesn’t apologize for their existences every five seconds.

          • Barnabas, I am trying to tell you how to toss women back in the kitchen without being a total prick about it.

            Unfortunately, you are too stupid to know when someone is helping you.

          • Yes: This isn’t sarcasm, for the record. I am serious.


            Barnabas, I am trying to tell you how to toss women back in the kitchen without being a total prick about it.

            Unfortunately, you are too stupid to know when someone is helping you.”

          • I still don’t understand. It sound so like what you are saying I say this:

            Sons must cooperate, so you have to tell them why they are expected to do or not do X.Y, Z.

            Girls must obey, and do not need to be told any reason she for what I said expected of her.

            I am trying to understand this in a way that doesn’t deprive women of any capacity for judgment. If it does imply that women lack judgment, presumably you would need to charge someone else with that sons’ upbringing.

            Whom would this be? And when?

          • A pilot can be a co-pilot. A co-pilot can be a pilot. Those are specific chairs. Those are specific roles. Just because they both have the same abilities doesn’t mean they sit in the same chair. Either the husband is the head of the house or he isn’t. When you raise a son to be a man, you are raising him to be the head of a woman. This is why feminists hate having male children. They are aware of the truth of how the world works, they just hate that truth.

          • Fair enough. I am convinced of your sincerity. It is God’s job to look out for a man. It is a man’s job to look out for a woman. It is a woman’s job to look out for children. It is a child’s job to do what their mother says.

            At some point, the male child is physically capable of ignoring his mother and maybe even his father if a. the boy is fit as all hell and b. if the man is a weakling. The female child will NEVER reach this point unless you give her a gun.

            Due to this factor, it becomes important to teach the boy why he should continue to co-operate with his mother’s authority even though he can physically overpower her. His father needs to be strong enough and wise enough to teach the manling why it is proper for him to co-operate and subordinate his will to his mothers. Once the boy is a man, he must make choices that directly go against his mother’s wishes and she will still try to use her authority to stop him.

            Thus: A boy needs to know how to co-operate so as to be a useful member of society. He needs to have decision-making skills when the time comes. So for males co-operation is superior to obedience.

            This doesn’t hold true for women. The more agreeable and submissive a girl is, the more likely she is to survive and thrive. Aggressive women get treated like men once they push far enough. See any white hoodrat getting her desire for diversity slapped right out of her mouth by Di’Quan. Act too screet, get da heat…gnomesayan? etc…

          • OK. Fair enough. I think you would be very surprised how much men prefer to leave matters of discipline almost entirely to their wives. They think this is fair and reasonable, since they only get to see their kids a couple of hours a day.

            I a man fine with this. Indeed, studies have show no that numerous positive interactions are needed to offset any negative interactions in a relationship. Ergo, Mom should do most of the discipline. However, gen does intervene when I need him to, and because he rarely takes on the role of disciplinarian, it get some the kids attention.

            I still think you are underestimating the responsibilities of the Wife/mother.

            If you run a business, and go on vacation, you leave your manager/second in command I need charge. You’re not going to choose an unthinking person for this role.

          • I know that. I would leave a competent and obedient person in control. I am not underestimating anything. I am directly advocating for those things.

          • If I didn’t think you could be persuaded or reasoned with, why did I write a book here in the comments section over the past 3 days? I believe women can be persuaded which is why I have used you and my conversation with you as a tool to reach any lurkers here who read but do not post.

          • OK, fair enough. Then, what is the basis for the obedience/cooperation dichotomy?

            You tell me.

          • Addressed in a large post below. Co-operation is obedience by choice, because it is the right thing to do, even when you are capable of doing anything but. There is a very little distinction. Obedience without much thought or question is best for people in subordinate roles. Men and women have different roles in society. A virtue in one can be a vice in another.

          • There is no such thing as obedience without much thought, aRex. You don’t realize it, yet, but you will rely on your wife to exercise independent judgment all the time and to carry out your wishes with common sense. You underestimate and devalue the role of Wife because of your lack of experience.

          • Yes, I know this. I still want a woman who knows how to just fucking do what I tell her to.

            Example: “Get the kids, get in the car, drive three states over, find a hotel, pay with cash, and wait for me to call you back.”

            I do not want bags packed. I do not want extra food left out for the fucking cats. I do not want my clothes ironed or the garden tended. I want her to do exactly what the flying fuck I just said. The state she stops in, the hotel she picks, that shit is up to her as long as it is three states over and accepts cash.

            Do you know why I want that? Because as fucked up as that ludicrous example is, that shit actually God damned happens. Loan shark didn’t get paid back in time? Witnesses a murder and got identified? Who knows? Should she think about it or just obey?

            Is this starting to make sense? I just want a woman who doesn’t have so much pride and feminist brainwashing that she fails to do what needs to be done. Do you know what my favorite kind of Ents were from Lord of the Rings? The OBD Ents.

          • Believe it or not, Rex, I do get this, and I understand and agree.

            I have told my son exactly the same. He is my second-in-command. I have told him that I need him to follow orders. If later, he wants to ask me why I gave a certain order, he I said more than welcome to do so, but in that moment he needs to do as I say just in case its an emergency.

          • My disagreement lies in your distortion of Christian marriage.

            The husband’s obligations:

            love, honor, and cherish your wife

            If you won’t so much as give your wife some time to pursue a constructive pastime of her own, then you are not being a loving husband Rex. If you compensate for her dreary life by playing head games with her like Dread Game, thus depriving her of the security to which she is entitled by virtue of your marital vows to her, you are compounding the error.

            The wife’s obligations:

            Love, honor, and obey

            On the other hand, you have taken the duty to “obey” and scrapped in favor of your own new-fangled “abject awe” standard. Of necessity, this demands self-abasement of your Wife. This is not “loving” your wife.
            It I said most certainly not “honoring”your wife.

            I see a great deal of talk around these parts about tradition, but that always seem s to leave out the traditional obligations of men and protections for women.

            If we’re going to go back to tradition, we should go back to tradition; not keep the one way you menfolk like and discard the one single you don’t.

          • You do not seem to have been paying attention to what I have written. So far you have mischaracterized literally everything I have talked to you about.

          • Same old song and dance Rex. The knee jerk attack “your just a woman hater. Maybe some can but not Lexi.

          • New Living Translation
            Then he said to the woman, “I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy, and in pain you will give birth. And you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you.”

            God made this the norm as a punishment for Adam being a pussy whipped simp and for Eve being a disobedient fool.

          • What are you doing here, Barnabas? Aren’t you suppose to be of fun plotting an armed revolution or something?

          • You’re such a counter signaling bitch. How is a coup 20 years from now, and armed rebellion. What’s your alternative, persuade those in power lmao. Ask nicely?

          • Fuck you, Barnabas. You know perfectly well you can’t do shit until we get more normies on our side. Why the fuck are you sabotaging this site?

        • Seems comprehensive and correct.

          This “I’m an Altright / Conservative woman and don’t you dare disrespect me while I show you my cleavage / signal my wilfulness” is so fucking old already.

          I have watched enough high IQ white women from conservative families grow barren after dating / having open relationships.

          Women are deliberately destroying themselves and expecting men to pick up the pieces. At the same time that they are taking jobs from men and arguing for precedence in the workplace, at law and socially.

          Their choices are always fucking wrong. Always. They sneer at tradition and celebrate chaos.

          Anglin is starting to look more correct every day.

          • I feel the Alt-Right as a whole continues down this path of hating women, all will be lost. Willfulness and resistance is indeed all you will get.

            If you are going to take away our freedoms, do it because you have determined it is necessary for the wellbeing of our people, not out of spite, vengeance, or simply to break our spirit and make us hate ourselves.

            Women are not going to trust your leadership otherwise. That wouldn’t be good for our people.

          • Okay. We are you still counter signaling then. I and others have determined that taking away women’s rights is absolutely nessecary, and that we cannot compromise on this even in the slightest. No amount of emotion created this desicion. So now that we’re on the same page, accept your place with grace and quit counter signaling and fucking our movement up.

          • Barnabas, you are the one fucking up our movement. First of all, I don’t know that it’s necessary at all.

            Should it prove to be so, I’m fine with that, but this would be a lot easier if you would let the women do the talking.

            Barnabas, do you remember this song?


          • “our freedoms”

            Two words you never should have used.

            Almost every man reading this knows exactly what is wrong with that use. Immediately.

            Immediately – but we don’t have to spend 30 minutes trying to explain it to some self centered respect me respect me respect me bimbo. Or 60. Or really all day. You don’t understand 10% of the world. Most women don’t. They show this in everything that they choose to do. Much of it is harmless but a lot of it isn’t. You are ones destroying our society by getting in our way.

            Now, Lexi. Everything that you type on this site is utter garbage. And you simply do not realise it. I had to wonder at one point if you were a kike, but no, they would overplay their hand by being clever at some point. I have concluded that you are not a kike. I’ve been wrong before but I think you are just another white woman with no fucking idea, realising that she and her kind are destroying her civilisation but still not bright enough to understand that she and her kind are doing their damndest to stop it being saved. My typing this won’t stop you doing that. You are simply incapable of stopping.

          • Blah blah blah.

            It must suck to get thwarted by a woman. I have no idea why you want to stop me trying to convince White women that being married to a White man and raising children for him is a delight rather than a curse, but it sure is (((suspicious))).

            Nothing says lovin like a (((MGTOW))) snake in the oven.

          • They agree with you on that. Here is what the men want here:

            We want women to WANT to stop being sluts.
            We want women to WANT to go back to traditional gender roles
            We want women to WANT to leave the career world and make babies.
            We want women to WANT a traditional husband.
            We want women to BE AR instead of just supporting the AR as “fellow travelers”.
            We want women to WANT to change because it is the right thing to do. Because suffrage was a mistake. Because egalitarianism was a mistake.
            In other words, we want pigs to fly. We know we are not going to change any woman’s mind here. We may convince her that we are her safest bet but she will never ideologically become US.


          • most women don’t want to be sluts. They want to be part of a family. Sex ain’t all that great, and having more than 1 sex partner is a turnoff.

          • I wish the evidence was weighted in your favor. It isn’t. If women wanted to stop being sluts and be part of a family, the marriage statistics in the western world would prove that. Currently, they prove the opposite. Not to mention the rate of STDs from the CDC or the rate of children born to single mothers. The evidence seems to suggest that women love sex but really don’t care for the whole wife and mother thing.

            Most women want whatever they feel like they want at the time. I have met very few people, of either sex, that were intentional about their lives.

            I think girls, young girls mind you, want to be part of a family. I think when a girl becomes a woman, she has mostly let that fairytale go in favor of modern practicality. This is what happens with men too. We learn very quickly that “I love you” doesn’t really mean what it should. It means “I feel like I love you right now”. After a couple of these, we get the message and stop believing in an equal companion.

          • True. We all loved playing with our dolls as though they were our babies. But the education systems tells us we must engage in a career. However, it is possible the trend can sway back to traditional. The men must lead…they have to really want traditional women, like they have to go to church etc. Then the women will follow.

          • I hope you are right. The problem here is twofold. We are also facing what is probably the prophetic falling away of the church. I don’t think we will see a revival of the church until Christ returns.

          • First of all, Rex, you Ned’s to stop pretending you have evidence that you do not have. I have continuously pointed out the holes in your case against White women for the destruction of Western civilization. The evidence isn’t there. I have repeatedly asked for evidence that female Hypergamy is impeding White family formation, and see no none. As I have told you, evidence that women usually initiate a divorce does not prove they are at fault.

            You continue to ignore these objections. Nobody will provide me with the evidence I request, presumably because there isn’t any. After awhile, this starts to look like bad faith, Rex.

            Even if you could prove your case, I don’t see why anyone would be remotely surprised that women aren’t interested in starting families with White men have allowed the Jew to demoralize us for the past 60 years. I’m still not getting that. If we’re taught our race is a curse on the planet, why on Earth would we want to have children?

            Nobody really understands the joy of motherhood until the year have a child. You are going to need to give women a reason to jump in sooner. Screeching “thot” and “slut” at them isn’t going to do it. It works for the Jew, because the Jew is in control of the culture. You are not. Moreover, the shameables aren’t going to be open to our views anyway. They’re too ashamed of being White to even consider them. You’re going to have to use a more constructive approach.

            This is why I keep telling you that we need to get back to the core message of our movement: White Pride.
            Everything will follow from that. How do I know? Because that’s how it happened for me. I didn’t reject feminism until I understood that it is destroying our people. Nihilistic women are not going to embrace motherhood. There is no reason to have children when God is dead and your race is evil. I’m really struggling to understand how this is not common sense.

          • I would also add, Rex, that assigning blame is not ultimately going to help anything. You will learn this when you are married. It doesn’t do any damned good. The point is to find a solution.

          • Richard has many supporters and more than a few doubters. I am not one of his doubters. Were he to come to Nashville, I would gladly buy him a drink and a cigar and talk with him for as long as he had to spare. Richard is a big boy and can take care of himself. Barnabas isn’t trying to hurt Spencer or his family. ANTIFA is.

          • OK fine. My problem I see that Barnabas is deliberately trying to make this site as normie-repellent as possible. If I’m reading him wrong, ok. But I’m pretty sure that’s what he said.

            You’re helping him, albeit not on purpose.

          • My sense is that an awful lot of the bros here are more concerned about maintaining their chummy locker room atmosphere than they are about actually forwarding our agenda as a movement. I don’t begrudge the menfolk a place to blow off some steam, and I’m sure that in some ways male bonding is not just an indulgence but mission critical in all sorts of ways. Again, time and place.

            I fear the problem may run a bit deeper than that, though. I think there is actually a fear of female influence, or even subversion, of the movement. I understand this to an extent. For all I know, our enemies could even use a woman to cause all kinds of trouble. I’m afraid I don’t really have an easy answer for that. All I can say is that y’all are going to have to find some confidence in yourselves and loosen up a bit. Otherwise, I fear we’re gonna stall out.

            So the point is, I think Barnabas is “thot-patrolling” me, if I am to be charitable. That would be fine, except for the constant insults. Obviously, I am not, on the whole, particularly sensitive. I think you’d have to admit that I can handle a male environment better than most women, and if this place makes me feel like shit, it’s probably going to make others feel like shit, too.

            Again, I don’t know how’s y’all want to handle this, but at the end of the day, it’s gotta be about the good of our people, not trying to maintain some sort of edgelord subculture.

            Thanks for hearing me out. ??

          • The men here just need a leader to reach out to them. Most of this is talk since what they really want is action. They are frustrated.

            Any man here who wants to be an active part of something hit me up on GAB @rexterminatus.

          • I’m not worried about Richard’s person. Well, I am, but not from Barnabas. I’m worried about his life’s work.

          • 1. I am not going to spoon feed you facts. I told you that /pol/ has you covered. Go lurk there. Look for infographic threads that are on AR topics. You won’t have to wait long. We put one up daily and once slide threads nuke it, we start all over.

            2. Everything you just said IS the reason why women should fall in line with us in the trenches. How is subversion lasting decades NOT enough of a reason to get in line?

          • Finally. Glad you took the gloves off and that mask. Everyone here can see how brutally honest I have been with you these past 4 days. What you just said is shameful to you.

            Edit: You know what? Fuck it. I will spoon feed you. Tell me what you want stats for and I will do my best.

          • Rex, cut the crap. I am trying to help you and all you do is disrespect me. You haven’t sincerely listened to a word I have said.

          • I have not accused you of anything. You, however, are accusing me of a great deal. If you think I have been nothing but treasonous and disrespectful, cite my words. Quote me directly to make your point.

          • I’m not accusing you of being treasonous. I’m accusing you of being stubborn and inflexible.

            It’s Barnabas I’m accusing of treachery.

          • What I’m saying is this. I feel you have something to say, think about how you can say it in a way that doesn’t diminish them to the greatest extent possible. Don’t get attached to specific language or formulations.

            Of course, I’m really not talking about you in particular. I’m talking about the whole movement.

            I’ll have to look back and see if I can find any specific examples of where you could have been more flexible.

            I kinda feel like shit even raising these things, because I do understand that y’all need to be able to speak freely. Again, all I’m saying is that you consider whether it’s the right time and/or place.

          • All i can say is, go back over this thread. See if there is anything you can us, anyway of talking that’s might be just a little bit less gratuitously abrasive.

          • I need specific examples. I use very conversational language. There have been a few times where you have gotten me exasperated and I used the word “fucking”.

            Are you sure you don’t mean: Go back and look for anything you might have said that criticised women for legitimate, eons old problems in their base character?

          • “Sloppy seconds”

            There’s just no need, Rex.


            This is not going to go over well. Feminism is like anything else. You don’t go full 1488 over night.

            There aren’t probably more, and I’ll look through the thread again later, but I think you get the idea.

            Of course, if y’all want to talk like that in private, fine. But I really don’t think it’s appropriate for a public forum.

            Also, re criticism of women’s base character:

            The thing about criticism is that ordinarily it is unhelpful unless it is constructive. Is it something that I can act on? By definition, criticism of my “base character” is not something that I can act on. It doesn’t help me be a better person in any way. I mean I feel I say to a person, “You lack empathy,” I am basically telling them they are defective, and that’s not really fixable.

            Maybe it’s therapeutic for the person saying it, and maybe it is a truth that needs to be said in order to make sensible policy. I mean, Rex, we’re all race realists right? We all know we can’t pretend we’re all equal. If we do, our policies are going to be a clusterfuck on numerous levels. On the other hand some of us have black acquaintances left over from our normie days, and I’m quite sure we don’t go on about race differences in IQ unless there is a good reason for it in that moment. Otherwise, let’s face it. You’re kinda just being a dick.

            Unflattering things may also need to be said for the purpose of warning women about it! This is very important! But remember, the alt-Rights attitude towards women is very fatalistic. My sense is that most think women can’t really change our behavior. If you don’t think it is changeable, it’s probably not worth going on about beyond what is minimally necessary to formulate policy, which is hopefully based on a thorough assessment of the facts.

            In short, I don’t understand the constant going on about it. Again, as I have already said, this should be a mudroom for our people. You come in, take off your shoes, hang up your coat, and settle in. Otherwise, I don’t see the point.

            If this is not to be that comfy place, then we need one. Again, I thought this was supposed to be that, especially since it is called “alt-Right.” It’s likely to be the first place a curious person finds after doing a google search. I just don’t know that laying into women about destroying society is the way to go.

            I’m really not trying to be a killjoy. I just think that I feel we want to grow this movement, we have to think about showing basic courtesy to folks and think about time and place.

          • I wasn’t wearing any mask, Andy I wasn’t wearing any gloves. I was honestly engaging with you. You, on the other hand, had your mind firmly slammed shut the whole time.

          • I already told you. You’re case against women for

            The Destruction of Western Civilization

            I still patently deficient. You will not admit this. Rather you prefer to keep calling women whores, traitors, and Thots for some reason that’s I said beyond me.
            You menfolk accuse me of insolence even though I a man the only one here who is actually following our leadership. Fucking Barnabas I said blatantly insulting Richard Spencer’s right here on this very site. But you’re fine with thar.

            That is rank treachery, Rex.

          • 1. I will get you the stats.

            2. I have not called anyone here a slut, a traitor, or a THOT. If you believe I have, quote me.

            3. I literally just disagreed with Barnabas about Spencer’s quality.

          • OK. But you’re not getting the broader point. I a man trying to support Richard’s “radical mainstreaming” approach by helping you all find moreover constructive way so to talk about the Woman Question without selling out your objectives, but you’re just not having any of it.

            Barnabas here thinks he’s going to lead an armed fucking revolt against ZOG.

          • Barnabas is fueling your fire to mess with your mind. He is giving you the answers you expect and letting you run with them.

            I have a very gentle approach to the WQ. I have spent 4 days talking to you, a woman, about this very issue. I have been nothing but civil. The point here is that women do not tolerate being questioned and are never wrong. It is always the men that need to change. There is always some other scapegoat that gets tossed out.

            In the spirit of hearing you out, please tell me your ideas. How do we handle the WQ specifically. No generalizations. If you were Empress of the AR, how would you handle that issue?

          • That’s what’s I’ve been trying to tell you all this time! If you go back and look through my answers I’m not really disagreeing with you about much of anything but tone and language. People dismiss this as “tone policing,” but it matters!

            Now, the question is how to restore some kind of normalcy to gender roles. How much coercion is necessary? How much deviance can be tolerated?

            A minimally coercive approach would be getting rid of gender discrimination laws and letting the chips fall where they may. Maybe that would be enough. I don’t really know. Maybe something more is necessary, like outlawing birth control. I don’t really care all that much tbh fam. I just want you all to talk about it without so much manifest contempt and spite! You have to look at the data and figure out how to set things right.

          • Also, I will definitely look at these stats and such. Thank you for providing them. If we are going to get into all this, we have to have the data, because otherwise it seems like you’re just dealing with irrational hostility.

            I don’t know if it will answer my questions or not, but we’ll see.

          • OK. So this is one of the more reasonable treatments of hypergamy that I have seen, because it is even-handed:

            “In secular, sex egalitarian, established civilizations like the West, the great anti-feminist truth may be that Male Hypergamy — the desire of men for ever prettier and younger women, and the ability of HMMV men to fulfill that desire — will be the heart matter force that saves the advanced cultures from navel-gazing themselves into oblivion.”

            This is why I don’t accept this hypergamy theory. Men are choosy in heir own way, specifically they demand youth and beauty. Look at the following study.


            Men say that they find most women reasonably attractive, but in practice they are hypercompetitive for the most physically attractive mates. Two thirds of men’s communications went to the top third most attractive recipients. By contrast, women say only only 20% of men are “above average” in attractiveness, but in practice they spread their responses out more equitably than men do. They agree that only a minority of men are attractive, but they don’t agree who those men’s are.

            The fact that women are hypergamous I need the sense that they prioritize wealth and status has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not their expectations are reasonable. In other words, if you define hypergamy as something only women do, and then claim hypergamy is antagonistic to timely marriage and child-bearing, the new voila you can’t blame this whole mess on women. But it doesn’t consider the other side of the equation: Are men being realistic about their own SMV, or are they reaching out of their league, possibly because they can just use porn?

            Look, I’m not trying to be nitpicky here, Rex, but y’all menfolk have literally put us on trial for the destruction of Western civilization. Y’all (not you personally) are threatening to take away our right to choose our own spouses, confine us to the house, etc. and really there is no factual basis whatsoever for this.

            From what I’ve heard, there is nothing wrong with women that can’t be reined in by:

            (1) keeping boys out of girls’ dorms
            (2) outlawing no-fault divorce
            (3) getting rid of anti discrimination laws

            Rex, when we were having our q&a about women’s nature, I told you that I oppose no-fault divorce, and you argued that this was irrelevant. I understand your point, but it’s not irrelevant, Rex. It is the very heart of the issue. If there is a simple solution, but MGtards demand a more drastic solution than is necessary to rectify the problem, they are revealing their true motives. They are not trying to lay a firmer foundation for our people going forward, Rex. They are indulging in what appear to be petty revenge fantasies, and this is why they are accused of irrational hatred of women.

            “Absurdiness Brown” came right out and told me that I should never have said the words “women’s freedom.” I don’t know what to say about that. It is clear that this guy feels no solidarity with me and doesn’t care about my well-being at all. If I advocate for women, he viciously attacks me. If a man advocates for women, he shames them, too.

            This situation is out of control, Rex. I don’t know what else to say. I think the problem is that our leaders are White nationalists, but the rank and file are not. They have a different agenda. White nationalism is a means to an end for them. It’s a massive clusterfuck and I have no idea what to do about it.

            We cannot have mediocrities determining our approach to the Woman Question, but the big-brained nibbas don’t care about it, and in any event they’re afraid of alienating the MGtards.

            Hang it all!?

          • By the way, Rex, this article mentions that ugly, high IQ women fare poorly in the dating market, and turn to feminism. I of course immediately thought of the woman this article was written about and the talk of setting her on fire.

            Rex, we can’t talk about setting old women on fire. We just can’t. It needs to stop.

            I would think if anything at all could be a matter of consensus, it would be not talking about setting old women on fire.

            I can’t tell you how black pilling it is for me to see that. Worse still, it got up votes, and I got down votes for calling him out.

            This is a low point for me. I have never felt so pessimistic about our cause, not even back when I used to listen to Colin and Andy and Richard years ago.

            I really need you to let this sink in Rex. I’m having to ask you all not to talk about burning old women alive. Please, for God’s sake, people are depending on you!

          • This is why I advocate for polygyny and Patriarchy. I have never had one of those high IQ women, who fare poorly in the dating market, kneel at my feet and tell me they will serve in order to be accepted. Ugly men are not accepted unless they bring cash to the table. Ugly women are the ones who should be leading the charge for servile obedience. They have literally nothing else to offer.

          • “Kneel at my feet”
            “Servile obedience”
            “Literally nothing else to offer”

            I can’t figure out who you are from one day to the next, Rex.

            When we started this conversation, I think you were trying to prove to me that women are evil (women’s nature), or governed by anti-social passions or something, and therefore need to be ruled with an iron fist.

            You got nothin’.

            Now you want to talk about how churches have gone feminist. That is of course irrelevant to the question of whether women are incorrigible or not. I just gave you evidence to show that I need a healthy society women comport ourselves just fine. You have neither acknowledged nor rebutted this evidence.

            You’re going on about how men’s want an obedient wife. Again, that wasn’t the question. The question was whether women are governed by anti-social passions.

            NOw you tell me “ugly women” have “literally nothing” to offer other than “servile obedience.” You are no woman tellme that the love and companionship of a woman is worthless to you. If you’d have just told me that wasn’t how you felt before, I wouldn’t have wasted your time.

          • What can a woman, lacking in sexual market value but high in cognitive function, offer me that a man can’t offer without the messy connections of an intimate, sexual relationship? If I want good conversation, I go to the cigar lounge. If I want to take off my armour, I go to a woman that I trust to treat my weary flesh.

            Women do not comport themselves well in any society that isn’t male lead and dominated. This means that your example is based on men making women mind.

          • We settle for youth and beauty since we can buy that. We actually want an obedient wife. That is impossible and we know it so when we reach our high market value, we settle for Suzie the floozy and her three best friends for a couple thousand bucks a month each.

          • I’m not sure what to make of this Rex. All sorts of possibilities occur to me.

            Do you think this was a voluntary or forced arrangement? As we discussed before, I would not expect women to willingly share their mate, unless there is a massive shortage of mates who were capable of providing for them and their offspring, which it appears was probably the case here.

            I would imagine some men were better at cornering land and other means of agricultural production than others, and were able to consolidate large, productive holdings, possibly using excess males as field labor, voluntary or forced.

            It’s hard for me to see what relevance this has in a society where wealth is broadly distributed, which obviously is less and less true in the West now, but is still the ideal we have in mind I would suppose.

            If I’m failing to grasp the significance of this, spell it out for me.

            Again, interesting reading.

          • 1,000 women will share 1 strong man instead of each having a My Little Pony fan for a husband. Women like nice things.

          • If the alternative is starving to death because a few men’s have cornered all the resources, I suppose that’s true.

            You didn’t answer my question as to how this is relevant I need a society where the necessities of life are more equitably distributed.

          • Because that isn’t the natural state of woman. Women are only allowed that level of equality due to men tolerating it or surviving to maintain it. Take that away and a woman in the wild is a slave.

            The quality of a man is not related to his resources. A man that likes MLP and makes a billion dollars a year is still not worth a sweet fart. This is something a man either IS or isn’t. It can’t be taught.

          • OK so I haven’t looked at the marital satisfaction data yet, but I have looked at some divorce data.

            I never have really disputed that there’s is a general correlation between number of sex partners and divorce. My only quibble is with the question of causation, as well as the precise nature of the correlation.

            So first things first, virgin brides have the lowest divorce risk by far. The question here is to what extent is the stability of the marriage a function of church attendance, and to what extent is it a function of sexual innocence.

            Women who had one premarital sex partner were substantially more likely to divorce than virgins, suggesting that at least part of the lower risk for divorce is a function of religiosity rather than ack of prior sexual experience.

            Also, very interestingly, divorce rates for virgin brides are on a downward trend, probably because virgins become disproportionately more religious as society becomes more secular. It is less likely with each passing year that a girl will remain a virgin without very strong religious convictions, which then reduce her risk for divorce.

            Next, what about girls with exactly 2 partners? According to this study, this was the group second most likely to divorce. This was an improvement upon prior data, wherein they were mostly likely to divorce of all.

            The authors speculated that one prior sex partner looms large (? , sorry) in the woman’s sexual memory and therefore may diminish the husband in the wife’s perception. I am skeptical of this. I would suspect it is rather a portentous combination of youth and weak or absent religious convictions. Without either maturity or the agreeableness that comes with religious faith, I would imagine it would be tough going. I also wonder I feel there may be some sort of rebound effect. ?

            Now, your garden variety college slut with 3-9 partners prior to marriage has the second lowest divorce risk according to these data. This was unsurprising to me. From the chart, it look like the risk of divorce starts to rise at about 8-9 partners. Unfortunately, the data don’t really break it down beyond that, so I really don’t know if there is a curve buster phenomenon or not.

            The question here becomes whether women who marry after “only” 3-9 partners are just more agreeable than women who marry with 10+ partners, with her agreeableness lowering her risk of divorce. There is also the question of whether women, and for that matter, men, just get more set in their ways a strong the years go by, and have a harder time adjusting to the constant give and take of marriage.

            I don’t know, Rex. I don’t know what to make of this data other than to say that there is no need to despair. Obviously wedding night virginity is the ideal, but women who fail to live up to this standard may yet be salvageable.

            One more data point I think I should orthopedic considering: As late as the 80s, over half of women were either virgins or had only one partner (presumably their future husband) on their wedding night. This is consistent with what I told y’all. That’s when I was young, high school girls did not put out. It was only when we went to college that the slutting around started, exactly when our (((professors))) started running down our parents and our Faith. It seems to me this is rather difficult to square with the idea that we need to put women in a burqa and confine them to our houses.

            Link to follow.

          • As you know, Rex, I do think exceptional women should go to college for reasons I’ve gone into elsewhere, but some very simple reforms could solve a great deal of this. Why are boys allowed in girl’s dorm rooms? I mean, ?!

          • Well, I agree with much of that. The issue with forcing women to submit is like a crash course in humility since Mohammed is going to do it the old-fashioned way. Vagina meet scimitar. What the men in the AR are talking about is a grown-up version of sitting little Suzie college floozy down and making her sit at the table until she finishes eating all of her peas. If she doesn’t learn to eat her peas, she will never be as useful as she needs to be when Momo and his shitskin pirates come knocking on the bedroom door.

            I have never met a girl, who wasn’t related to me, who knows what her Christian faith actually stands for. We do need to get women(girls) back into the churches, but first, we need women to obey us without question. This is complex.

            Women are in the churches already>The churches are institutions of anti-Christ>We men want to burn those churches to the ground with those faggot pastors>Bitch, get up out of your seat and wait for the flames to die down>Stand there looking pretty while we rebuild the churches>Sit back down and this time, keep your mouths shut>No more equality and diversity in the church since women cannot speak, only listen.>Improved women as a result of correct doctrinal teaching in church>Virginity>Marriage>Children>White Civilization.

            We can’t start that program until women are willing to obey when we say stand up and wait outside.

          • You know, I wouldn’t be opposed to letting the menfolk determine women’s rights issues in our movement. The trouble is you are shaming men who love their daughters and driving them out of the movement. That is fucking beyond unacceptable, and certainly not “trad.”

            It’s one thing to not listen to us, but when you try to shame even our fathers into silence, you have jumped the shark. You don’t get to exclude our fathers from the discussion and then claim legitimacy for your consensus.

  • Reading these comments. I can see why some women wanted freedom from men. Perhaps they sought to be ladies. It’s clear to me that the men from whom they were seeking freedom were caddish brutish beastly bores. Men and not gentlemen.

    This so-called traditionalism is shameful. You hide behind that vacuous word, believing in some rosy, golden country where everything was fine until women turned into whores. You are nothing but a bunch little boys.

    Such a lot of nonsense.

    Thank goodness this idiocy is dying off.

    • And, then again, perhaps it’s a necessary lower class thing. All of your boundless sexual deviant energy pent up. You just need to be hidden at the “bottom” of this movement, until we have need for your swords.

    • Back when we had unions that cared about their members, employers knew the best way to keep out a union was to treat the employees well. Yet here so many guys think the way to prevent a feminist infiltration is to be as boorish as possible. I guess if you start out with false assumptions about women’s nature, everything that follows will be nonsense.

      • Ok. I will take the opportunity to get my assumptions (and lived experiences) corrected. Would you be willing to answer some specific questions regarding women’s nature to set the record straight?

        • Anything for you, Rex.

          But I may not know all the answers. Moreover, I may not agree with you that there is a universal “women’s nature,” depending on the question.

          Fire away.

          • Excellent. I will spend some time in thought so as to make a quality post. There will likely be several questions in a group of related issues.

        • I’m doing a piss poof job at articulating this to you.

          They do not think like us, look like us or act like us, no matter how badly you want them to. You have to look at them like another species. Some people think of them as children. I don’t because that’s creepy. Their minds do not advance beyond adolescence even tough their bodies do. Women do not have ‘conviction’ like us, just like we don’t give a shit what our curtains look like, but they do.

          They put dozens of hours into it and make dinner dates with friends, sisters and mothers to find the right match. We think it is silly, just like they think our ‘convictions’ are silly. They laugh at how we kill ourselves over such trivialities. In a way, they are right. We care too much about such nonsense. Take a look around here. We don’t need this decorum with alleged females. Everybody here is a gigabyte. No pic or name. Yet some try to gain leverage by having a cyber pussy and that has this catalytic effect on many guys, where they start self-flagellating…’I’m not worthy and neither are these vulgarians, Milady!’ They are so not used to this conversation that they cannot handle it without counter-signaling their discomfort. It’s an immune response.

          • No, I know exactly what you are saying. I am choosing to take Lexi at her word so we can have this conversation. I think there is something that can be learned here and I want it out in the open. Our ways of thinking are so drastically different that certain things will simply never occur to the other party without being made aware of it via questioning. Take a look at my fuck huge list at the top to get an idea of what I am driving at.

          • You had your chance to tangle with me and troll, but I cannot take to seriously since you serve no purpose. You’re not an Ivy Leaguer or an eastern establishment WASP. If you were, you would not mention it. I don’t call people Jews as rhetorical device like many here do. I just think you are an apolitical doofus who thinks he has found a meaningful shtick, but you haven’t. You’re like a shitty chess player in the park pretending to be Bobby Fischer.

      • You’ve been posting the same nonsense for ages. I can hear my careerist mother and my barren female relatives and colleagues in everything you say. Women truly are ignorant. Add wilfulness and movements like MGTOW (which are probably jew run) seem to make sense.

          • Isn’t that a typical feminist response. You are indeed a feminist, and not conservative in any respect.

            I’ve already had children, unlike my unfortunate female relatives and colleagues who swallowed the BS that you are promoting while pretending not to promote it (probably because you hate working).

            My children are already race aware, I will ensure that they are aware of the jewish origin of feminism and its destructiveness.

    • Lol the wannabe aristocrat is at it again. We all read The Great Gatsby in school too. I appreciate a dedicated troll, but you suck at it. Haha tell us all about how you went horseback riding in the Andes with the king of Transylvania and tore your rider pants playing croquet.

    • If you go to google map’s search you can probably find a decent sex shop that specializes in dildos not to far from your house. Who knows, they may even have anal beads for ya as well.

  • If there is any issue where Christian conservatives and feminists should agree is that girls and women should not be sexually harassed and abused.

    Unfortunately, most Christian conservatives made excuses for Roy Moore. Most feminists promoted the sexual revolution which has made Moore’s caddish behavior more common.

    • I am not an Alabama voter, but I am a Christian who worships the divine Jesus, not the earthly Jew. My sentiment was “no matter what Roy Moore did in the past…” It was preferable to the multi-culti, tranny-bathroom building, diversity training, open-border advocate, full-term baby killing Doug Jones.
      Jones’ current policies are much more morally apprehensible than Moore asking the mothers’ permission to date girls 10 years his junior back in the 1970s.

      • This.

        Plus, Jesus was of a certain stock of people who either converted to Christianity and fled from Judea or they stayed behind, without believing, and were put to the sword by the Romans.

        The jews of today are not the same people from which Christ came.

          • Jesus was a Judahite, not a “jew”. Jews are a mixed race of Semitic peoples that are hopelessly blended and scattered upon the Earth. Christ preached against everything that would eventually be codified into the Judaic religion. Christianity was the continuation of the Covenant established with the original stock Israelites at Sinai. Judaism was the religion of the Pharisees. Go home and rethink your life. You do not want to sell me death sticks.

          • Jesus was not a Jew or a Judahite. The Jews claimed he was a Samaritan, (John 8:40 ) and they would have had access to all the genealogical records. Both of the lineages in the NT go to Joseph, not Jesus. Jesus was born into the house of David, but he’s not of the house of David. Big difference.

            When Pilate asked if he was the king of the Jews, Jesus responded “Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?”. He continued that ““My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews.” John 18:33

            Obviously, if his servants fight that he not be delivered to the Jews, that means the Jews are NOT his people. It also means when Jesus comes to establish his kingdom, Jews will be on the other side of the battle.

          • There are quite often times that I believe the theory that Jesus was the son of a Galilean Greek (Mary) and a Roman soldier. That would him a bastard, sure, but one great, God sent bastard.

            At other, very seldom times, the theory that he was actually Caesarion appeals to me.

            Anyhow, he was no Jew, that much is sure.

  • I’m glad articles such as this regularly appear on the AR internet. Just when I start to get carried away and feel romantic about the movement, I’m reminded that I should be just as careful around many White nationalist dudes as I am around niggers. Not every AR man is made of the same cloth as Woes, Henrik Palmgren or Jared Taylor, unfortunately.

    To Lexi: Lexi, dear, you have an idealistic, passionate voice that yearns for fairness, but it saddens me that you keep putting yourself in the line of fire over and over trying to prove god knows what to some really low quality people on this site. You don’t have to subject yourself to this. Peace.

    • Yeah, cunt, better not get too comfortable throwing your anti-male Jewish feminist garbage around the Alt-Right. This is our immune response. I am gleeful seeing you worthless bitches finally giving up hope on continuing your rein of terror you have had on society for decades. I will not rest until every last one of you abandons feminism and submits to men. Every father should lock his daughter outside in the cold the moment she disrespects men and until she learns the meaning of respect. This amoral evil that is the female will to power must be crushed early in a girl before it poisons her soul and she grows into the vile creatures so many white women have become today. I’d rather witness planet of the apes than any matriarchal ethno-state you stupid THOTs keep scheming to hoodwink everybody with. What a joke.

      • I’m worried how, after reading lexis garbage, that this reply could receive 5 downvotes(I tried to counter act 1)

        I’ve been realizing lately that a sizeable amount of men in our movement are soft on women. It’s almost as if they really would settle for an ethnostate that allows women to stay in their current condition. It’s very troubling. I’m not a big fan of “pick up” or “gaming” and while I slept around quite a lot in the past, those days are mostly behind me. That said, I do think that for a lot of these guys here it would be beneficial for them to get out there and sleep with a fair amount a white girls. This would show them the true nature of women and allow them to come to the right side, having the right knowledge. They may be worried about “spoiling” girls but the reality is that all of these young white girls are already sleeping with dozens upon dozens of guys.

        • I get your point. That advice is still counterproductive. We have to agree on what reality is. The last sentence of your post is the reality. There is no denying that. Right now, there is nothing in society to keep women’s special brand of sin in check. Going out and using those broken women just to see how messed up they really are is like smashing your television to find out how hard it can hit the floor before it shatters. You now know how much force it can withstand before smashing….you also just smashed your TV. It is better to know that crack cocaine is bad without experiential knowledge. It is better to know that HIV sucks without contracting it.

          Once we know what reality is, we can start to work on what it should be. We can call this the Telos of the AR or of civilization in general, making the world into the best approximation of the ideal that it can be.

          • You’re not wrong. For some of us the WQ brought us to the JQ and all its associates. So you’re right, it would be counter productive for those men who skipped the WQ and went straight towards the JQ to then go out an experience these dirty little truths. But we need to find a way to shatter these blue pulled ideas some guys have towards women. Maybe more essays on AR about their current condition and how it affect thems all, with the corresponding solutions, would do the trick.

          • The real red pill is that modern men are just as degenerate as modern women. The more time I spend around these parts the more misanthropic I become. We need to thin the herd and start over, because these huwhytes are simply not good enough.

          • I disagree Johnny. Men are a far cry from their ancestors but there is still a fair amount of good ones out there, this website and the WN movement are good examples. Finding a good white woman, on the other hand, is comparable to finding a needle in a hay stack, good luck.

            I will concede that it has taken men to degenerate into weak and effete territory for women to be in their current state, but that is our only responsibility. The rest must be placed upon women, the Jews, and the elite, effete traitors.

            Between the white nationalists, the alt right, and as I always say, blue collar and country whites, there’s still pleny of good, masculine men to be found. Not as many as in the past but, unlike women, they are there.

          • Agreed. We also need to let quiet, submissive women know that is it ok to advertise those virtues to us. Maybe we need to provide AR political pins so women that are sympathetic to our ways can stand out in public. The women we are interested in are, by nature, invisible.

          • I concur. This is paramount. They need to know that if they seperate from the herd, embrace true femininity, and become submissive, that we will take care of them.

            The pins are a good idea. We need some sort of real life program that reaches out to young white girls and shows them that there’s another’s way, one that includes strong white men and a better life.

          • All futile without changing the feminist laws. My dog follows me everywhere I go, but when I let him outside without a leash, he runs off every time to the first Good Samaritan he thinks is his new master. Why? Because I wasn’t his first owner. That is what happens when a dog bonds with more than one man.

          • Very true. Since I am working on being more specific in my language and conversations, which laws are you referring to specifically that might help change the current situation?

          • Oh I agree brother. I think we can attempt something, however futile, on our way to changing the laws though. Marriage, imo is off the table, just say no until a future where the laws are changed.

            The dog, is the perfect analogy.

          • Yeah, legal marriage is a BAD idea gents. Have a spiritual marriage if you want, but avoid the legally binding contracts that only YOU will be held to.

          • I will talk with some of our classy AR ladies: Lana, Tara, Bre, Ayla, Faith, Brittany, Melissa, Lacey, etc. We’ll put our heads together for the implementation of the “purity pin” program. One pin color for single, available women. A second color for married or engaged women.

          • What is needed, until the laws are changed as Weimar said below, is a sort of outreach program for young white women, Highschool and college aged girls.

          • Go for it. Push this. I actually want to see videos from these ladies talking about it publicly. Make sure to point people back here to see the source of the idea and to push traffic to this site.

          • Tara, Brittany, and Lauren Southern are thots. Faith slept with Stephen Crowder. Brittany with “Based Stick Man”. You’re going to need to keep looking. None of these media figures (except maybe Lana, who is married) are traditional by any stretch of the imagination. Their social media platforms are just tools of thottery.

          • Perfect idea! I will be the first to parade my “purity pin.” I will have to ask permission from AR, IE, GI, etc to use their logos. Instead of Race for the Cure pins, we need Cure for the Race pins! #CureForTheRace

          • This needs to be a thing. I am glad I mentioned it.

            I wonder if we can get #CureForTheRace pins trending on GAB and Twitter?

          • Yeah, the dudes hiding behind Pepe avatars, advocating white sharia are much better than the pussy hat wearing hags. I feel much better now.

          • Although I detest the term “white sharia”, yes, I think they are. They go extreme, but ultimately everything about our movement and it’s future actions needs to be extreme.

          • I should add, for the sake of the discussion, that I am against white sharia, and that while I think guys pushing it are okay for now, eventually they will need to dissapear and more European solutions will need to be presented. I thinkt coverture or some form of derivative is the answer but either way we’ll find an answer. Women need their “rights” repealed though Johnny.

          • There is another option. Instead of trying to get people to see how black the darkness is, why don’t we show people the light. If we focus on the positive outcomes, we can let people look back on the way things were and see just how dark their reality really was/is.

            We need to live honorable, traditional, Godly lives, with women who do the same and let the world see us. This is the Christian principle of the city on a hill. We need to be the salt of the earth.

            This should be the direction of most conversations between AR men. HOW do we do this task? HOW do we shine the light? HOW do we help young women who want to do what is right? HOW do we shore up the convictions and courage of young men who want to live well?

          • Again, all good points and nothing I can disagree with, sir.

            These questions are what keep me up all night, scratching my head. It may take alittle time but we’ll find the solutions.

          • I couldn’t disagree more. Although women need religion far more than men, ‘church ladies’ are some of the worst types of ‘modern’ women. The Deep South has the highest divorce rate for a reason. Think of Tammy Fay Baker.

            Men do not need to be reformed during a war. They need to be unchained and become the best junkyard hounds they can be. They need all their senses at their disposal, instead of willingly dulling them by some Current Year standard that no other race follows.

            There is a reason why most suicides and overdoses look like us. No other race handicaps itself.

            Just because we are different from other races does not mean we must eschew basic nature in order to be different in every fathomable/unfathomable aspect….that is suicide. Hence our monopoly on self-harm.

            We have tried all this and paid dearly.

          • So you think we should double down on the darkness? If we are sick we should get sicker? That sort of thing? Push it all into the ground as hard as possible? If not, what exactly are you disagreeing with?

            I am advocating for fewer words and more actions. If we are going to have words, they need to be planning strategy.

          • Finding a trad woman at church is iffy. It depends on which church you attend. Richard described to Baked that he finds the “coffee house and sweatpants” churches to be irreverant – a hijacked version of Christianity.

            Go on a church search: A single woman or a girl with her parents who attend services at Cathedrals, Mainline, traditional Protestant churches, even the local Latter-Day Saints wards – are going to be more classy who appreciate tradition, reverence, stained-glass aesthetic beauty.

            If you attend a “coffee house and sweat pants” house of worship, you may find only irreverant girls.

            Richard, Greg, Evan and Eli recently recorded a “How To Gentleman” podcast. It’s PLUS content, and it’s an amazing inspiration for our AR men.

            Aim high, gentlemen.


          • Traditional Catholic for Westerners, Orthodox for Easterners. These churches are exceptionally low-pozz

          • Certainly by comparison to Protestantism. Do you not think Orthodoxy of any flavor is fit for westerners?

          • I can’t speak for TJ but that there is a good example of the type of question that can keep you up all night searching for an answer. What demonination is the right one for us to reverse course and make our women chaste again?
            Tough one.

          • Very. They all seem to have that one item at the bottom of the list that blows the entire thing out of the water.

          • Ya, if you walk in for service and all the women are wearing head veils and ankle length dresses, it’s probably a decent church.

            A dime a dozen, unfortunately. I do have a Catholic one near by, sedevacantist, I was gonna check it out but since I’m in AZ it’s probably all Mestizas.

          • I know this is creepy and corny in regards to meeting girls, but to quote Dr. Evil, ‘Not where, Mr. Powers, but when?’

            The answer is earlier…before they have been corrupted. It is a time-tested formula.

            ‘Teen pregnancy’ is Western European invention. Everywhere else it is called normal.

            So the location is not important since women have been homogenized into the lowest common denominator by modernity.

            I have been hitting the gym a lot lately, usually this time of year to prepare for maximum partying, which requires a chiseled physique to get away with being as proactive with women as I am, and not get #MeTooed, because muscles to women are like big tits for men.

            I actually tried it out today with a client. Let her run her hands all over my midsection. Not at all attractive or white, but this practice is necessary to remain a top form flirt….but I digress.

            Anyway, EVERY chick at the gym is always trailing a guy. Smart move on his part. Most of them have exposed camel toes in painted on pants. The only ones that are safe (for now) are the homely ones. The bookish, frumpy kind that don’t know how to dress or clean up or ditch the old lady specs. Basically simulated arrested development.

            But even then, it’s only a matter of time before these Gen-Z chicks learn minimal social skills and receive tons of dicks, which is spurs on another phenomenon – aggressive plain janes.

            No greater turnoff than an aggressive woman. Gives off too much masculine energy.

          • The blue eyed devil needs free reign.
            That’s why I say we shouldn’t get too bogged down in “morality” at the moment. One law for both the predator and the prey is ridiculous.

          • We have to be in keeping with our own spirit. If we take on the likeness of the negro, the jew, or anything else, to win, we will lose what we were fighting for even if we defeat our “enemies”.

          • Oh no doubt. I’m not suggesting that at all. My point is that when a white man of sufficiently good genetics unshackles himself from the Jewish and feminist poison and becomes truly free, outside of a little self awareness and discipline, he doesn’t need much else as far as morality. He should check his appetites when they veer into excess but he should allow the normal appetites to express themselves freely without shame. We don’t need to become puritans and in fact a healthy does of borderline reckless aggression is good for us.
            The “Blonde Beast” of Nietzsche I see the archetype I’m speaking of.

            Niggers are animals. Jews are soulless rats.

          • That is our morality and it is that morality that I am invoking. I don’t mean some churchian standard of righteousness. We have to be true to our law, our spirit, our ways.

    • You are not trad you are an entitled bitch the vast majority of women up until the 60s got at the very least a hard slap in the face when they insulted, acted irrationally or disobeyed their husbands.

      • Hitting any person in the head is a direct declaration of war as you are using violence on the part of their anatomy that contains and protects their brain.

        If you want to discipline a woman in a way that hits her chemical reset switch, smack her bare ass for half an hour. There is no reason to show your woman that you are willing to risk actual harm to her in order to correct her behavior. That defeats the purpose.

        A correction is an act rooted in love that seeks to alter a bad behavior to prevent future bad outcomes. This means that pain without injury, or even the potential for injury, is what is called for.

        Men on the AR must refine themselves just as they refine their women. That means adopting the proper language, outlook, and methods of quality men.

        • A 30-min spanking on the wife’s bare not only teaches us discpline, but enriches our intimacy and trust in each other. J

          • I’m sorry you feel the need to be spanked in order to learn discipline. I have more confidence in you than that.

            Now if you just like being spanked, that’s your kink, not mine.

          • Ok. You just counter signaled another AR woman for not holding to your definition of a strong woman. That IS feminism. I have to point that out.

          • I can’t stop you calling me names, Rex, but I can point out that it’s (1) intellectually dishonest, and (2) very Jewy.

            Argument by name-calling is shit-tier. Go ahead and make your case for wife-spanking. I’m all ears. Make an argument on the merits, though. Why is it good and necessary? That is the question, not whether it is or is not “feminist.”

            This is how the Jews have shamed and silenced Whites. (1) Establish a consensus that racism is bad, (2) Gradually expand the definition of racism until it encompasses any and all White self-assertion.

            I’m not going to fall for that.

          • I didn’t call you a name. I defined what you were doing as having the traits and characteristics of feminism.

            Name calling is shit-tier.

            In no particular order:
            Spanking a woman proves to her that you will not put up with chemically induced emotional insanity. You, women, are incredible creatures but your chemistry makes you neurotic. It also lets you make babies. Hence why we discipline you instead of treating you like the criminally insane.

            Spanking a woman proves to her that you love her enough to keep your word when she crosses your established boundaries. Women shit test just to see where those lines are and then they cross them just to see if you will put them back in line. Women are like flood waters. Without boundaries, they are dangerous and idle. With boundaries, they can carve through mountains and reshape continents.

            Spanking a woman produces a chemical effect in the brain that balances out the unstable mental state that landed her in your lap in the first place. I can’t stress this enough. Women get so hung up on winning, having the last word, etc that they will keep talking while crying, even though they know they are torpedoing their relationship. It is the man’s job to just tell her fuck no and handle business before she destroys everything.

            Spanking a woman is the ONLY acceptable form of physical correction. Everything else can and eventually will cause damage that can’t be repaired. A red ass gets the point across without anyone getting injured. Keep in mind, this isn’t fun bedroom stuff. It should hurt like hell. You should dread it while also appreciating that it is there.

            I am sure I could think of more but I think I have made my point. Your comment was trad-shaming. You expressed disappointment in another woman for needing to be handled by her man and for appreciating him for doing it. That is feminism. Feminism shames women for having or espousing traditional gender roles.

          • The “bitch slap” is nigger-tier thinking and wording.

            It SHOULD be beneath a man’s dignity to strike a woman like that. If a smacked ass doesn’t do the trick, the society should step in with things like the scold’s bridle. Don’t marry a woman you feel the need to beat about the head, neck, and shoulders.

          • I agree, it’s nigger shit, unless a woman smacks you or hits you first, then you must instantly smack her. Anything else you must calmy( key) bend her over your knee, pull her pants down until your reach bare bottom, and then spank her, repeatedly, hard, like you said, and make sure you leave a hand print for days.

          • Agreed. My solution only fits in the context of a relationship where the man is the head of the house and there is a woman under his protection and dominion. If a random woman attacks you in the street, knock that cow into the next age.

          • I suspect your solution I should a dysgenic disaster waiting to happen. I personally would slit my own throat before I laid down for a man who treated me like a child.

            My husband may have to live with an uppity tradthot, but then he’s getting numerous big-brained children out of the deal.

          • Good, the idea of casual clothes and women dressing like men will need to be resolved in the ethno-state. I say we ban t-shirts and jeans on any store and we once again forbid women from wearing pants or anything that men wear.

          • Damn.. you got me. I thought your were being sarcastic, yet I didn’t even realize I used the word pants up there, scpecifically. Youre right though man, dresses only.

            Shit, even when you’re fully redpiled and a “chauvinistic, sexist pig” such as myself, the feminist indoctrination still subconsciously asserts itself. Long road ahead of us.

          • Yeah… I always found it interesting how it was so much formal that people dressed and that they stopped doing it on a regular basis in the 60s when we basically lost our civilization completely.

          • Well, I am ashamed of you. All women need to be spanked. It is the safe alternative to what the natural mind wants to do when women bring out the venom. People don’t die or get maimed from a spanking.

          • “Feminism shame shame women for having or espousing traditional gender roles.”

            Except that I didn’t shame her for having or espousing traditional gender roles, Rex. If you need a spanking to do your duties as a wife/mother, then you’re not trad.

          • Tres bon. The women to whom these men are referring are what we call bait. As in bear-bating.

          • That is not correct. That is like saying that if you need forgiveness of sin, you were never a Christian in the first place. Everyone messes up and needs to be corrected eventually. God corrects men. Men correct women. Women correct children.

          • I completely disagree with you here, Rex. My children have a duty to obey me, but I do not “correct” them when they fail. I just talk to them about the consequences of their actions. It’s working swimmingly so far.

            If I don’t do my chores around the house, everything will spiral out of control very quickly. That’s what you don’t get. You’ll understand the power of natural consequences when you have children. Either that, or your whole life is going to be a miserable power struggle.

            Also, God does not “correct” men, God forgives men. We have a New Covenant.

          • I’m trying to think of a jurisdiction where this wouldn’t result in gaol for the man. The legal system is fully semiticised and this would constitute aggravated assault in most places.

            Molyneux the tin rattling jew is right that wrong woman can cost an innocent decent man his wealth, health and liberty. Women know this and use it without mercy.

        • You deserve a hit on the head. Maybe it will knock some sense into you. Women are bitchy precisely because men are weak and go along with them. They are built to shit test and their relationships are nothing but an endless stream of them. Men who tolerate this shit are just making it harder for the men who know how to handle their women.

          • Did you read what I said? Have you read any of my other comments here? If you need help with any words, just ask.

          • No, I didn’t read it. I synthesized a completely random comment just for argument’s sake. When encountering mouthy, adversarial, uppity behavior I fully advocate bitch slapping and you want to “spank” them? “Oh Dear, I’m really agitated, and you’ve profoundly disrespected me. Why won’t you stop? I’m going to remove your pants and spank your bottom, tee hee.”

          • Your answer is slapping them in the face and you are mocking my ideas? Are you serious? You have to have at least a 100 IQ to post here.

          • I said at least 100. That statement covers everything below 100, so my statement stands.

          • It was wrong then, and it’s wrong now. And I don’t need to prove my faculties to be here, clown.

          • Why are you arguing with a clown? Why not just slap me? That is your well thought out solution, isn’t it? When the power goes out, just slap the switch. When the fridge is empty, just slap it. That way of thinking is Simple Lazy And Pathetic. SLAP.

    • I’m not trying to prove anything to these obviously disturbed men. I’m trying to prevent them destroying this movement.

      Barnabas thinks men should be allowed to legally kill their wives. I didn’t realize it had gone that far.

      • I still think you guys are missing each other with all of this.

        You want men to accept that there are good women so that those women are not run out with the rebels.

        The men you are arguing with are angry brown bears. If you don’t stop moving, submit, and play dead, they are going to keep roaring, scratching, and biting.

        Feminism is that home invader that just won’t fucking lie down on the ground and put their hands on their head, even at gunpoint. Eventually, that person has to be made Holy.

        For this analogy, if you are not a home invader, lie down and put your hands on your head so the homeowner knows you are not a persistent threat.

        • Rex, you have it wrong. I have not invaded anything. I have been here for many years, mostly remaining quiet because there is no need for me to say anything.

          It is the MGTOW that are the invaders. They will ruin this movement.

          • No, I get that. I was calling feminism the invader. Feminism in the AR is like the creature from “The Thing”. It could be hidden behind any face, male or female. The guy with the flamethrower hits anyone who twitches wrong as a matter of prudence.

      • You’re must be an aging cat-lady, because you’re insufferable. Your arguments are childish (imagine my shock), phony, full of hyperbole. You post here in vain thinking you can convince men who’ve been disabused of their fantasies about women and persuade them to go along with your agenda. Sorry toots.

    • You’re living in a fantasy. Wake up and smell the roses. Learn the nature of women now, while there is still time.

    • Oh and…it’s funny how you compare us to niggers, as you don’t seem to know much about niggers nor women.

      You see, having grown up in the south, I’ll can tell you that niggers, niggers play up the women’s lib thing to the max. A nigger will make a women fell independent, powerful, and stuff her head with all kinds of fluffy, you go girlisms. Kind of like you. They do this because they’re fake, sleazy.

      So get a grip, we’re the opposite of a nigger.

  • I joined the AltRight movement because I realized I had been saved. My “conversion” from conservativism to embracing authoritarianism was not unlike a religious awakening. The principals of the AR saved my self image, saved my marriage, saved my hopes for the future of our children, saved my image of Christ as transfigured divine diety rather than mere historic Jew. The AltRight saved my love of European culture. It saved my soul. It saved my life.

    Women need to get back to exercising at home, get beauty makeovers, get back together with their white husbands, cook healthy meals, respect their husband, submit to his love and affections willingly, get off the Pill, have as many babies as healthily possible, quit our meaningless jobs, raise a large family steeped in European morals, faith & traditions, and homeschool or send kids to religious schools.

    After making these important changes in ourselves… speaking out and decrying female degeneracy, gold digging, Hollywood film filth, promiscuity, the leading on of men, divorce, abortion of healthy babies, and suicide… is – dare I say – our “supreme” duty as white European women.

    As Mr. Spencer implores, we need to “Become Who We Are.”

    My best, J

    • Many men in this movement don’t believe you exist.

      They think White women need to be shamed and/or beaten into submission. They don’t believe women will freely embrace traditionalism.

      • This is partly true. I wish it were easier to trust women and take them at their word. I can honestly say that I have never heard a woman say those sorts of words out loud, ever. Whenever I express my belief that women should act a certain way, the hackles rise and then it is all “but, but, but”. I never get any women nodding in agreement or seconding or expounding upon my suggestion, no matter how innocently I worded it.

        It also doesn’t help that mentally ill men are posing as traditional women and catfishing men in the AR movement. I don’t blame women for that one. I blame My Little Pony.

        • Have these experiences been with dissident or normie women?

          You have to be realistic about people, Rex. People feel threatened when confronted with ideas they have never heard or considered before, some more than others.

          • I have never met a dissident woman in the real world. If by dissident you mean AR or equivalent. This is part of what makes accepting tradwomen so hard. Where are they? How have I never encountered one in the wild or in church? They are all over the internet, patreon especially.

          • How would you know if you did meet one? Remember people don’t feel free to speak their minds.

            Anyway, you answered my question. What I said above is all I got. Just don’t give up. You only need to find one.

          • That is a fair point. I just wish women were as open about being chaste and traditional as they are about being seen as beautiful. Women wear makeup and nice clothes to get men’s attention. Why not work out some way to advertise your virtue? Why do all superheroes wear capes?

          • Don’t listen to a woman, EVER. She wants ONE thing from you and it isn’t the fun thing. She wants you to ‘stay the course’ because SHE ALONE benefits from a beta-simp making himself disposable to the matriarchy, without the guarantee of a reward, as she hints, ‘if only you just try harder.’

            I refuse to let another man be hoodwinked when I see it. I am an expert.

            You aren’t the problem, as she suggests.

            She is trying to rally the troops again and use that phalanx, not against just any enemy, but guys like me.

            She is whispering sweet nothings in your ear. If a woman wants you, she will make it clear to the world and fuck you that day, regardless of culture. That’s why people ‘eloped.’

            If she does not have sex with you that day, she never will, and she will never submit to you…but she will cock-scotch along and submit to a more powerful man the same day.

            Do what you must, my friend, but know that I warned you about female nature.

          • Agreed. Observe what people do rather than what they say. If a woman isn’t willing to stand up for her convictions she either doesn’t have them at all or doesn’t believe in them enough to risk her current comfort level to make a change.

            This also applies to men.

      • Lexi,
        I know this seems like a foreign idea to a lot of men: the act of submitting to one’s husband (Head of Household.)
        If more women were open to such a marital lifestyle they would experience the most delightful husband-wife intimacy. The turn-on of submitting is inescapable.
        Maybe my mission is to encourage women more openly.

        • Women need to be taught, as young girls, how to identify quality men. As it is, parents just go with a “she/he will figure it out with trial and error” mentality that destroys their children.

          As for intimacy, if I met a woman who knew how to follow me and help me I would be overjoyed. Every woman I have ever met has tried to take control out of her own fear and insecurity. She had zero faith in my ability to lead and that was day 1 to day 365.

          Every woman I have ever met was scared to let herself depend on a man. My grandfather died when my mother was 8. She watched her mother fight to stay financially stable since my grandfather didn’t “believe in” life insurance. That made her choose a power career and she works 16 hour days and makes six figures a year but is totally unable to relax and relate to her husband.

          • Yes, indeed, fear is a huge problem. I was afraid to give up my independent earning, too. At the end of the day, though, I just didn’t want to be miserable anymore, so I decided to take a chance. It was like this: I could either go on trying to have it all and be miserable for sure, or I could take a chance at being happy and risk the possibility that I might be miserable at some point in the future. Obviously, when the question is properly framed, the answer is clear as day.

            The pickle you’re in, Rex, is that you are looking for a woman who already knows she wants a trad lifestyle before she has kids. That is going to be difficult, and I can’t say I have any easy answers. I will say this. Remember that having children clarifies a woman’s priorities. If she is willing to have children sooner rather than later, I would say that bodes well, even if she doesn’t seem totally committed to traditionalism just yet. I know more than a few whom you would not have considered suitable, and not without reason, but who nevertheless are now very happy in their traditional marriages.

          • Also a fair point. Women are afraid of losing independent income and men are afraid of divorce rape. We need a new way to meet in the middle, some sort of neutral ground. Like churches in the old Highlander movies. No taking heads there….actually, that analogy works a little too well.

          • Rex, the solution to both is the same: getting rid of no-fault divorce. It’s not going to happen anytime soon, though. It serves the interests of rich men who wish to trade in their aging wives for a younger model, as well as young, beautiful gold-digging women who have no compunctions about stealing another woman’s husband, scoundrel though he may be.

            This is no mystery. As I have pointed out to Weimar, even some feminists recognize that no-fault divorce is terribly unjust.


          • Yeah, that, along with voting rights reform, citizenship reform, and other things will go a long way towards fixing things.

          • Dude, they already know what a ‘good guy’ is and isn’t. They just CHOOSE not to go with him because he’s not exciting.

            Women are as high-time preference as any nigger. They chase orgasms (more than white men) over stability.

            No matter whatever fateful decisions women make, it is all kosher since society has absolved them of any consequences.

            Women have made the nü male we see everywhere. They understand male nature more than most men do because THEY dictate it and men defer their disposable utility entirely to ANY woman who virtue-signals (verbal placebos).

            Lol look at all these bitches telling us what’s good for us and how to behave and how to win.

            Why are chess tournaments segregated? Why are sports segregated? Lol

            They have never been men yet think they know what’s it’s like.

            Why have they been allowed to spew this bullshit narrative even though it is disproven ad infinitum?


            That is being civil.

            Letting women sow chaos in every home, business and environment…and calling it equality…is what is uncivil.

            I’ve had enough PUSSYFOOTING (how apropos) around this issue.

          • That is why I said quality men instead of good men. Good men are not exciting. Quality men are exciting and dominant.

        • ??. Well, I can’t say being submissive is erotic for me. Rather, it’s really just a practical necessity. Mr. Lexi and I rarely have serious disagreements. As I have said elsewhere, we agree that our focus is to provide our children with a happy, joyful childhood while building up their character and preparing them for the future. If a couple agrees on those things, everything else follows logically.

          However, on those rare occasions when we do disagree, I speak my mind and defer. He makes it very easy to do this, because he sincerely listens to all I have to say and tries to find win-win solutions wherever possible. At the end of the day, though, someone has to make the decision when Mom and Dad disagree.

          • Either way, Jill I’m so glad to hear that you are happy in your marriage. I meant to ask, you a Mom yet?

          • Hi, Lexi: Yes, my husband and I have 4 amazing children. (2 boys & 2 girls)
            They, too have benefitted tremendously from our marital lifestyle. Oftentimes the kids will exclaim, “Mommy and Daddy don’t fight anymore!”
            I know we need to live in a 97% white town. I worry about their prospects in finding quality gentlemen and fine ladies.

        • I really wish you would cosign more of my comments on this. All the implicit evidence of a woman’s innate desire to submit in every way to a powerful man is all out in the open. You don’t need a crayon to connect the dots. You just need to ignore every screeching harpy who says otherwise, as she bookmarks her copy of 50 Shades of Grey.

          Women are always irritable around the very men they pretend to want, but entirely docile, agreeable and childlike around brainless oafs with excellent cocksmanship, gamesmanship and brinkmanship.

          I wonder why?

          Goddamn it…what a waste of resources on the WQ.

          We’re so close, yet women and their beta-orbiters won’t let us deliver the utopia to our people.

          I’m trying, folks, but I can’t do it alone.

          • Exactly why we need to White-Knight shame these idiots. That crap might have been applicable in the 1940s, but treating these entitled nigger-fucking skanks and cat-ladies like “muh Aryan princesses” is just suicidal and self-deprecating.

          • White knight shaming should be one our top priorities. Any time you encounter put that shit in its place.

    • Exactly. My words may seem hurtful, but women know in their hearts that I am trying to liberate women from women’s liberation. Feminism has been nothing but a burden on everyone. We young white men can work miracles if given the chance, but we need full authority or we cannot do anything, and we won’t even try otherwise because there is no finessing around white genocide.

      • You see Weimar, this is why I hang around here. If you didn’t have me to attack and demean, you’d be telling Jillmarie she needs to shut up and suck your dick just for daring to have an opinion at all. Since you can’t be an asshole to all the women all the time without exposing yourself as an irrational, monomaniacal petty tyrant, you have to be nice to her.

        OK, I’ll be that woman.

        • Get over yourself you desperate housewife. You don’t mean shit. If you disappeared right now, nobody could recite even one sentence you have ever said. If I disappear, which will probably happen sooner than later, my absence will be felt. So while more obviously hate me, more also like me. All you have is the pity support, while I genuinely engage and reverse opinions. People like passion. Fact.

          This LADY is exactly how I want a woman to behave and that scares you. If I did not have to THOT patrol desperately unhappy spoiled brats like you, it would free me up for more important topics. WOMEN should be THOT patrolling, not me, just like they always used to. But because of your quest for conflict, which you absolutely love being the center of, I have to get dragged down to your level…and trust me, you won’t win. Unless I am banned, which I would not rule out you resorting to, I won’t let up until this feminist virus has been ejected from all right wing politics.

          Women LOVE when a man is passionate and honest like I am because it is like holding a mirror to themselves. Even you LOVE what I say, but you’ll never admit it.

          Why don’t you start being honest around here about how you truly despise your role as a hausfrau. It is so blindingly obvious you hate it, but it’s too late for you to change anything. Look at how you counter-signal women who yearn to be a doting wife. You think you are a queen bee rallying the troops with blueprints to everything and you want to be told you are special. Lol

          • You are a lying piece of shit, Weimar. You have attacked and belittled me ruthlessly and for no reason whatsoever.

            You know perfectly well I support traditional gender roles for women, so you dishonestly claim I actually hate what I claim to love and do in fact love!

            Downthread, you said a man should “never concede.” In order to have a good faith dialogue in pursuit of the truth, Weimar, you have to be prepared to concede. Otherwise, you have already admitted that you are both close-minded and irrational.

            What you are Weimar, is a liar.

          • Holy moly the cognitive dissonance in this one is strong. You go paragraph by paragraph oscillating between ‘muh equality’ and Gynocentrism.

            ‘Traditional gender roles’ means the man never errs and the woman submits. He is The Lord of the manor and she is his governess.

            But we have the exact inversion of that…’women are wonderful.’ Combine that with female nagging/relentless male-shaming and we have the dystopia of today.

            You demand men ‘defend thy honor’ when your ‘equality’ runs amok and becomes a little too real for your delicate sensibilities.

            Before you try to pull my other quote and shame me, I’ll beat you to it…I would rather watch every creation and gene of European peoples be crushed overnight than continue this disaster entirely unaltered as you cuckservatives demand.

            Nope. Not doing it. You want my disposable utility, you have to turn in your ‘rights’ and give me my authority. This is a man’s only card to play in this situation and I’m not folding. I’m giving women their equality – it’s your move.

            The America Revolution was not a singular revolt, neither is the Alt-Right – the British AND monarchism were expelled from the colonies. Most of the Founding FATHERS wanted to make Washington a king, just as you women want to continue the matriarchy. He said NO…and we are too.

            That would have been just a lateral move. Too many MEN had their lives ruined then and now for this half-assed job to remain unfinished.

            I’ve driven tens of thousands of miles in the last two years searching and searching for truths…and I have found it. I fought the unfamiliar ideas and discomfort like you, but alas this is indeed the only way.

            You are playing the victim. Who here have I not brutalized or ‘bantzed?’ I already explained that this is how men ‘play.’ It does not get any more impersonal or equal than anonymous comment sections, yet even you empowered women find a way to ruin that.

            You women so casually and reflexively deride male nature with cliche misandry that men have internalized it as true without even objecting, while turnabout isn’t fair play to you feminists. Why do you think MEN…WHITE MEN have a monopoly on suicide and overdoses?

            This really is zero-sum: Your rights or your security. Choose or we’ll choose….and you’ll get neither.

            I didn’t like this concept at first either, but you get used to it.

            Tits or GTFO, milady

          • “Traditional gender roles’ means the man never errs and the woman submits.”

            This is your problem Weimar. Unless you admit that you are a fallible human being who must submit to a higher law, you are not entitled to any deference from a woman let alone submission.

            The man is the head of the family as Christ is the head of the Church. You don’t get any authority unless you recognize God’s law, or at the least some transcendent morality.

          • Yeah it’s like every woman. They want to have their cake and eat it to. They want empowerment and equality, but they want chivlary. They want to be ladies, but they want to join the Marines. They want to fuck 21 year old chads, but be married to 40 year old “beta” millionaires. Birth control has fucked us. Never cave to a woman’s demands.

    • I am looking forward to the day that I do not have to suspend my disbelief when I read a post like that from a woman. I want to believe! I really do.

  • My first thought reading this was to wonder if the article was written by someone in the alt-right or by Ayman al-Zawahiri. I know the alt-right is controversial (to understate it) when it comes to their views on women’s role in society, but the beginning of this article could be read as going beyond that. But then I kept reading and loved many of the points made. The very same behaviors and morality that liberals mocked in the 60s are those they earnestly seek today. In the 60s it was considered inappropriate among conservatives to talk about boobs or sex in the presence of respectable women. It literally offended them. Liberals mocked those values and claimed the talk was just words – as in Seven Words You Can’t Say on Television. Words, they argued, should not be banned, and should not be considered offensive. The societal respect for women that existed in the 60s was destroyed by liberals and their sexual revolution. (Some scientists say birth control – the holy grail of the 60s liberals who mocked conservatives for saying birth control could be dangerous – may be destroying humanity. Women pass the chemicals which go into our water, and are slowly sterilizing all of humanity.). Now women see first hand why those morals mattered, but it is too late. The liberals have destroyed all morality and any impetus for anyone who lacks a sense of right and wrong (which are most liberals and many conservatives) to respect others. Not even the rule of law, which was always the first line of defense for commanding respect for others, matters anymore. The liberals, including liberal federal judges pushing their agendas, have destroyed it.

  • Women use sex as a weapon if allowed. We created the institution of marriage to take this weapon from them. They had a one off deal: pledge allegiance to one man for life. In this deal there was no concept of rape in marriage as part of the deal was her giving sex on demand for life without the choice of using said sex as a tool of manipulation.

    Our ancestors were not stupid.

    Men who attack women on the street and rape them should be treated as cattle theives and quickly hung on the town square.

    A woman who brings a man home into her bed and then claim she only wanted to be fingered or eaten out or the like and not full on sex should be ridiculed.

    Many of our men have their lives ruined at a young age by the maddness of entitled feminism. Some languish in prison where they are subjected to real rape by apemen.

    • If anyone reading this joins the armed forces, never ever ever date, hook up with, or marry a military woman. They literally give out feminazi briefings about ‘consent’ and all of the ways that a woman can cry ‘rape’ and destroy a mans life permanently. All they need are rumors, half truths or even flat out lies. I even saw this happen to a friend of mine when his shrill, immature, cheating liberal excuse of a wife threw him under the bus. FYI this nonsense all started under Obama.

  • The backlash against #MeToo that we’re seeing now is not more than The Tribe’s running interference for its poobahs.

    Too many important jews were getting inconvenienced by the accusations of real victims and lying whores, so now we’re being told that it’s time for “reason and restraint.”

    Jews wouldn’t know reason or restraint if these bit them in the tuchas. They will continue to support the threat of SJW terror in sex matters when it comes to ordinary people. The next Weinstein deserves “reason and restraint”; the next Smith will get firing or reeducation as usual.

    • Ahhh, after reading miles of insanity posts, you’ve brought it back to reason. In the end, it always comes back to the Jews. Our challah masters are absolutely monstrous when it comes to abusing women and getting away with it. Ok, sure, Weinstein, Franken, and a few others will fall on the sword, and that’ll put the problem to rest. But imagine if it were whites in the same positions? There would not be enough swords to repay the price. How the Jews get away with this so easily, is not something we should emulate, but definitely something we should exploit.

  • In former eras public drunkenness and dressing indecently meant if you were raped, you were in the wrong. This was rational and virtuous, and we need such ideology again.

    • Evidence?

      If you go out and get drunk and then get raped, is it just that one rape that is justified and appropriate? Or do you agree with this author that the girl is then fair game for all comers thereafter? Or maybe she recovers her right to refuse after a certain time period. Or is it a set number of rapes?

      • CBH is a Muslim. As a liberal you are mandated to accept his religion. Nor can you criticize his culture. Your Islamaphobia is so ugly.

        • What is the basis of your assertion that I am a “liberal”? Who the hell is CBH?

          Look Charles, I am attempting to save this movement from the MGtard wreckers. I understand that Richard is in an awkward position. In his video on Thotgate, Millenial Woes said that there are men in this movement who agreed with him, but felt they could not say so. Unlike the menfolk, I am not overly concerned about what the bros in this movement think of me, so I speak my mind. The abuse and insults hurt, but it’s nothing I can’t handle. I fight my own battles and try to avoid even the appearance of trying to create drama and sow division.

          I will sooner or later give up on my efforts here. There is no point in carrying on when everything I say can simply be dismissed as “female hysteria” (the ad feminem). You menfolk are going to have to get this situation under control. You all are failing the White children who are depending on you to secure their future. That is a source of great disappointment and anxiety for me. In his debate with “David” Richard declared Thotgate over, and claimed the purity spiral was under control, but here we are sinking to an appalling new low.

          • Sorry. I thought you were a liberal troll and that was my attempt to be humorous while criticizing liberal double standards. CBH was the original poster – not important. I totally agree with you. If the white race depends on these folks, we are dead. They need to learn and emulate great persuaders like Aristotle (Rehtoric) and Carnegie. They are not going to win over the masses by judging individuals based on (false) stereotypes. The masses will reject them if they fail even to pretend to show all people fundamental human dignity. They should focus on the unfairness, inequality, oppression, and hostility directed at whites – of which there is too much – rather than insults and attacks aimed at over half the population. Nobody is going to accept a movement that is accepting of rape (except for Muslims and their liberal defenders – wait, what?).

          • Who accepts rape. I’ve yet to here one commenter or one OP on this site advocate rape. Get off the hysterics.

            Your an old man with daughters who have you bent to the knee in capitulation.

          • I guess it depends on how you define accept and/or rape. Here are two quotes from comments on this article. Can you explain how they would not tend to fall within the scope of acceptance of rape?

            “In former eras public drunkenness and dressing indecently meant if you were raped, you were in the wrong. This was rational and virtuous, and we need such ideology again.”

            “Only 3 rapes should be allowed. Then her right to refuse should be respected.“

          • The second one was clearly a joke, come on man.

            As to the first, I don’t think he’s giving the green light or even ok’ing it, I think what he is saying is that women are responsible when they get drunk, act and dress like whores and that IF something happens they should be held responsible for facilitating it and not coddled with a bunch of fluffy “you go girlisms”.

          • Cut the crap Barnabas. You’re right. The second one was a joke, and it was prompted by the article itself, which clearly countersignals a right of refusal to any unmarried woman who is not a virgin.

            I’m not sure if the joke is on me or the author; probably me.

          • Rape jokes are always funny, Lexi.

            With what point exactly in my second paragraph do you disagree with, not whether that is what the other guy meant, but with my logic?

          • Answered above. Why do you deny wanting to legalize rape, when in fact you wish to legalize not just rape but also murder?

            Be honest, Barnabas.

          • Why are such a dishonest little bitch, huh?

            I’ve been fairly reasonable in my replies towards you, but your so full of shit that it’s been counter productive. I should know better.

          • OK Barnabas, look I’m trying to be constructive. If I’ve misunderstood, fine.

            I attempted to watch the video. About three minutes in, the narrator said that under couverture, the wife is “allowed continued existence” only at her husband’s discretion. I took this to mean the narrator thinks the husband should have the power of life and death over his wife, i.e. he should be allowed to kill her. You referred me to this video, Barnabas. If you disagree with legalizing wife-murder, tell me so and I’ll take you at your word, but that burden is on you, Boss.

            According to the video, a woman who leaves her husband has no legal existence. I took this to mean that she had no rights and could be raped and/or murdered at will. How can you victimize a person who doesn’t exist?

            I have told you already, I am not familiar with the details of couverture, so maybe the video is wrong. Or maybe you just don’t agree with that part. For fuck’s sake, Barnabas, you’re the one who posted the video. I took this to mean you agree with it. If you don’t, like I said, you have to say so.

          • My comment before this one stands.

            Murder is illegal, whether within a household or outside.

            A woman is deprived of rights after divorce so she must then return to her father and live under his roof. If the father picks a suitable husband for the daughter, why should she have any reason at all for divorce. If by chance the husband is a real piece of dirt ( which is slim, compared to how feminazis make it seem) then there is always a legal way for the father to take back his daughter from the husband, where in turn she would be under the father’s custody once more.

          • My comment in reply to yours about the vid*
            Pertaining to the feeding, clothing, etc.

          • Ok, fair enough.

            Still, I reject your view that the father should pick a daughter’s husband. There is no need for that whatsoever. Amish girls choose their own husbands, and from what I understand it works just fine.

          • Not feasible. Women are so misguided and screwed up that having their father choose the husband is the only solution.

            Admitting that the father knows better than the daughter is common sense.

          • You didn’t address my point. Free courtship works among the Amish, because they are not, as you said, “misguided.” If you have the power to impose arranged marriage, you have the power to stop letting Jews misguide your daughters, rendering the former unnecessary.

            You may have a case for coerced marriage, but so far you have not stated one.

          • This comment is muddled. I nor any other man has either of those powers at the moment. The goal is to obtain both in the future. What is your point?

            If we kicked out the Jews tomorrow, non of our women problems nor the WQ would be solved. This is what some fail to understand. The JQ and WQ are intertwined, yes, but they are both problems that need to be solved exclusively and with specific care towards the issues and solutions of them both. The JQ ks easy, they are getting gassed, no matter what, so there’s no real difficulty there it’s just a matter of time. As to woman, that’s easy as well, the only difficulty is getting these weak men that you pander towards to accept the truth and what needs to be done.

            You, as a women, will not understand any logic for arranged marriage. It’s your nature and not too mention, you are to our hung up on “my rights, my independence, my choice, my big girl pants”.

          • What did you mean when you said girls should be “held responsible” if they are taken advantage of while drunk? Depending on how far you want to go with “honor culture,” some might say the father and/or brothers must kill her in order to restore the family’s honor. At the rate we are going now, Jared Taylor will be endorsing honor killings in a few months.

            I will assume you did not mean anything so extreme, but rather you are just saying that women are assuming a certain degree of risk when they get drunk in public.

            I more or less agree with Charles that drunkenness, by itself, should not be construed as lack of consent. For one thing, if you can’t be raped while drunk because you are incapacitated, then you can’t really rape either, for exactly the same reason. Otherwise, you’re saying that men, but not women, are responsible for their actions while drunk. That would be absurd.

            Moreover, you are probably not competent to testify against your rapist if you were drunk at the time.
            I’m not sure this is even really a thing, but I’m open if you have some evidence.

            Now on the other hand, if a girl is totally unresponsive, and men take advantage of her in the presence of competent witnesses, they are going to get the book thrown at them.

            Now I appreciate your sincere question. If I have said something here that you disagree with, tell me so. There is no need to attack me.
            Now I’ll check back later. I have to go to the grocery store.

          • I knew it was a joke. If the alt-right wants to make a difference, they need to drop the frat-house mentality, at least in public. Be the men you claim to be. As for the other, getting drunk is no justification for rape. I agree though that being drunk is not alone a basis for later claiming lack of consent. There is a lot of grey. The bigger issue is we need to show greater respect for women. Women in the 1950s were given more respect than I’ve seen on this board. Finally, although I am old, you should remember this. The devil is old, and to understand him you have to be old too.

          • Women were different in the 1950s. Majority of white girls behavior today does not deserve respect. Should I treat them all cordially just because their white, without any due consideration to their behavior. If so, what separates that logic from treating the antifa scum and liberal whites well also.

            You don’t have to be old in order to be wise. That’s a fallacy old men like you push in order to maintain relevance, especially when challenged by a younger man with clearer insights. If anything, age only increases biases and makes it, in some cases, nearly impossible to look at things objectively.

            As far as acting like “frat boys”, I’ve never been one so I cannot relate. If you mean don’t act or talk like a man when in the company of men, the I’d say that you make have simply grown soft in old age.

          • Your comment was mere subjective drivel. You are an old man with a daughter(s) whom you havecoddled and whose head you filled with a bunch of “you go girlisms” and now you are worried because us younger men don’t view your daughters as princesses. We see through both the father and the daughters b.s.

            Im unsure as to what exactly is Faustian about your worldview but, your right I’m not alt right, I am a White Nationalist who prefers patriarchical, hierarchical, and aristocratic societies.

          • “I am a White Nationalist who prefers patriarchical, hierarchical, and aristocratic societies.”

            In the words of the wise and sage SpongeBob SquarePants: good luck with that.

          • Your old, withered, and filled with cowardice and capitulation I.e a boomer.

            Where as young men like myself are ambitious, determined, and filled with courage and resolve.

            I don’t need your good luck wishes.

          • Fine. I’ll find another movement that is truly interested in pursuing fairness and equality for white people. I see the alt-right movement is not for me. Goodbye Alt-right.

          • It appears the weakness of the leadership in dealing with this issue is going to force out not only women, but also men who care about their own sisters, nieces,and daughters.

            What a shame.

          • Translation: “mods please censor any views I don’t agree with, specifically anything that goes against the feminist narrative.”

            I hope some of our fellow men, who aren’t fully redpilled on the WQ are able to follow your comment progressions, as I do. The true nature of your thinking becomes more evident with every comment you type.

          • Fairness and equality are the buzz words of the Devil. All of his kingdoms on this world are ordered in such a way.

          • Old timer, your mentality does not sync with the Current Year. It’s like trying to play an old play station game on a play station 4. We are a beautiful race fighting an ugly menace, but must meet them on their level, so of course things are going to get ugly. That is why we are losing and they are winning – they are committed, we are not.

          • You see Barnabas, that’s the trouble with gender politics. You wind up countersignalling your own brothers or sisters, as the case may be, for not hating their own family.

          • See what I mean? You take something that has nothing to do with you because it is bigger than you, and then you internalize it and make it all about you because that is the female prerogative – stir conflict amongst men and make yourself the center of it because it reifies you. The more melodramatic the better.

      • Please stop warring with the handful of mentally ill, inconsequential, scorned mgtow men-children that comment here. They are few but they loudly and proudly represent the worst and most toxic segment of the altright. You are correct about almost everything you said in your comments*, but they will never admit it because they don’t want to give you the satisfaction. They respond with the sole intention of pissing you off, and it seems to be working extremely well. You are giving them precisely what they want. Don’t waste your time with peons.

        You spoke of a high voibal IQ, and that IQ is evident. The most intelligent among us should be creating content (youtube, podcasts, blogs, twitter, memes, flyers, etc.). Content, not comments. Too much of our time and energy is spent on comment section pissing matches. Meanwhile an anchor baby is born every 8-9 minutes in this country. We need positive, legal, constructive action that moves us forward, and we need it fast.

        *Spencer -definitely- did not mean that women want to be raped with his ‘taken by a dominant man’ comment. What he meant was that women have an strong, deeply innate desire to courted and eventually seduced by a strong, dominant alpha male they trust and (ideally) love. A man that takes charge, the ‘leader of the pack,’ blah blah blah.

        • BTW I certainly understand that Spencer was not intentionally counseling rape. Unfortunately, we have to consider how his comments might influence guys who aren’t the brightest bulbs in the White chandelier.

          Nobody wants to see our guys get into trouble. Thanks again for your comments.

          • No actual man thought Spencer’s comments actually promoted rape culture. However, since a lot of males aren’t men, I’d recommend that you dress conservatively or keep yourself in the company of a man you trust and cling to him, obnoxiously, if necessary.

      • Why is a woman out in public without her father, brother, uncle, cousin or husband? We as a society have forgotten what it means to be prey for predators. I am a 6’5″ tall 335lb man and I still prefer to have a brother with me when I am in a place that I am not fully familiar with and/or dominant in. We men have made society too safe and women don’t realize how fragile and precious they really are.

        • It’s funny you mention that, Rex. I have made no secret about the fact that I sowed some wild oats in college. My friends and I looked out for each other, though. If one of us was drunk, we simply would not allow her to leave alone with a man. We didn’t shame each other; we protected each other. Obviously, this is not fail safe, and some bad things happened, but I can honestly say I never, ever saw a girl try to retcon a drunken one-night stand into a rape. Ever.

          Now that was some time ago, so perhaps things have changed. We girls may have been more on our guard because of the AIDS scare at the time, as well. We were all being told that a heterosexual AIDS epidemic was just around the corner, so we were more careful.

          • Didn’t you hear? There is always a heterosexual HIV/AIDS epidemic just around the corner. Can’t have people thinking blacks commit crimes, browns chop people up on camera, jews connive their way to the top, Asians replicate white society, and that gays spread sickness everywhere they go.

            It is good that you protected each other. I just wish you didn’t put yourselves in situations where you had to.

          • See RIGHT THERE. You soften your whoring to infantilize yourself and women with ‘wild oats,’ while holding men to any and all standards and blame.

            Let me tell your REAL story… You weren’t a white nationalist in college…you were a little more ‘diplomatic.’ And you still would be today if you could.
            You took giant cocks, several blacks, in college. You swallowed loads and loads of cum. Some of it got in your eyes and hair. A lot of it in your pussy got washed away thanks to birth control. Your pussy has been licked by many men.

            You had ‘fun.’ Then when you were done, you found a more successful man, probably baited your manager into a beta simp husband role when you saw your opportunity to leave the ‘workforce’ and retire early.

            The problem is most of us see this and say no thanks. I’d rather our perish than pretend to make an ‘honest woman’ out of some unrefined whore. It’s disgusting and unsustainable.

            You didn’t ‘learn your lesson’ or ‘see the light.’ You ran out of time and cashed your chips.

  • I crossed paths with Greer during her brief teaching career at the University of Tulsa, of all places. I took a course she taught called “The Educated Eye,” and it was an incoherent mess, something to do with knowing how to see and interpret art, I guess.

    I could also see from trying to talk to her that she despised having to teach men at a coed university.

    I dropped out of it after a few weeks.

  • I have no issue with this article, in fact I agree with it it. Good work, Henry.

    I’m sure that you are not advocating men to go out on the streets and grab up any woman who doesn’t look chaste, then proceed to rape her in the nearest alley way, lol.
    Anyone who is suggesting that a whore who didn’t like the satisfaction of the guy or guys she slept with last week( which happened to be the fourth notch that month) and who then decides to press charges or make rape allegations, in an attempt to rationalize her escapade, that this is somehow synonymous with actual rape, is a little slow.

    White Women can either act feminine and chaste while reviewing the ladies treatment or they can act masculine, unchaste, and brazen whilst receiving the whore treatment. It’s black and white.

    • Nice try Barnabas, but no cigar. About a month or so ago, our own Richard Spencer said, correct me if I’m misquoting here, “Women like to be taken by a dominant man.” His support for this is that millions of women bought “50 Shades of Gray.”

      Now, Richard is of course one of the more genteel men of our movement. If he is saying this on a public podcast for all the world to hear, I can only imagine what the true misogynists in our movement are saying in private.

      Now, I have to tell you, if a man takes this statement as truth, and habitually acts upon it, eventually he is going to be accused of rape. That’s probably because it is rape. It doesn’t matter if you menfolk think women like being raped or not. Nor does it matter if you are correct that lots of women, or even most women do in fact secretly want to be raped. As of now, rape is illegal.

      Now, you fucktards shrines to get a God-damned grip on yourselves and put a stop to this purity spiraling before it destroys this movement.

      • Jordan Peterson, the dumb man’s smart person, said during his controversial interview with a thot journalist on a British TV show something to the effect that women really want men who dominate them in the sense of displaying competence and mastery in doing the things that women generally can’t do, at least not as well.

      • Your just as delusional, and at times, since you can write in coherent sentences, even more full of shit than that nigger, Site665.

        Quit being insecure Lexi, and accept reality, as it is.

        The fact that most women want rough sex that borders rape is not even a controversial statement. Everybody with a clue knows it’s the truth.

        • I happen to disagree with you that women like to be raped or even quasi-raped. As I said above, it doesn’t matter with way. Rape is illegal.

          Now tell me, if you are a White nationalist who wants to promote White family formation and put a stop to all this thottery, why wouldn’t you want to encourage men to get married rather than go around exposing themselves to ruin and criminal liability for strange quickies?

          • I’m not even sure I should waste my energy responding to you. Your dense as a brick and will never change your views, I.e. a woman.

            Anyway, your first paragraph is B.S. plain and simple.

            As to the second, the only white men who can marry a young, attractive, and fertile white woman are those who exist in the top 20% of men with regards to looks, status, personality. As I’m fairly confident that not all of the men in our movement meet that criteria, why would I advocate for my fellow white nationalists to settle down with a 30+ semi fertile/infertile and used up woman?

            A return of patriarchy is needed first.

          • Don’t give me that bullshit, Barnabas.

            You all say only these hotties are getting sex, and average women are holding out for a commitment from them. If you remove these men from the dating pool sooner, women would have an incentive to cast a wider net.

            I do not believe that shit about female hypergamy. I think mediocre men feel entitled to women out of their league and are refusing to settle.

            But assuming the Female Hypergamy Hypothesis is true, allowing desireable men to go around seducing if not raping women is going to make the situation worse not better.

            You know what, Barnabas. I don’t think you care about solutions. I think you just have an axe to grind about women. Like WR, you’d hold open the gates of our civilization to the enemy in order to get your way on the WQ.

            You are trouble, Barnabas. You and all the rest of the MGtards need to fuck back off to the manosphere where you belong unless and until you get your damned priorities straight.

          • You can try to play Dr Philberg with me all you want but the men who have been in the dating pool long enough to get their fill know that what I say is true.

            Our entire white future rides not just on the JQ but the WQ as well. In order to fix our woman problem we need strict patriarchy and a complete reversal of women’s lib. Hypergamy is real and nobody gives a shit about what a women’s opinion on it is.

            My priorities are saving my white brothers and then saving my white sisters. The latter is so far down the Jewish rabbit hole that she can only be saved after the white man succeeds. Then all these womanizers will be dealt with. Not before.

            It’s late, go give your husband some attention .

          • TJ. I have been asking for evidence that female choosiness is impeding White family formation for weeks, every which way, and seen none. Do you have any?

            The following study indicates that it is actually men who are hypercompetitive for the most attractive mates. While women say they find most men attractive, they actually spread their dating site responses around more equitably than men.


          • Your so full of shit. You just don’t want to give up you rights. You want to keep your cake and eat it too. It’s not going to happen, most men are awake to the WQ. the only ones who side with you are the little neck beards like Pepe frog, who have little to noe experience with women.

            You should stop counter signaling and accept fate. Support the movement and women she natural place.

          • No. I’m not going to accept the leadership of people who hate and wish to enslave me. I’m glad we had this illuminating chat, though Barnabas.

          • This is where I cannot take you serious.
            Patriarchy does not correlate with enslavement.

            Neither does shaming whorish behavior correlate with “hate”.

            Your too hysterical.

          • I agree patriarchy does not amount to enslavement., but this movement has gone beyond that now.

            Is there a legal difference between chattel slavery and couverture, which you advocate. I assume you don’t think men should have the power of life and death over their wives. Is that the only difference?

          • I stopped watching after “allowed continued existence.” I didn’t think even you would agree that men should have the right to murder their wives.

          • Lol, God are you thick, he’s referencing feeding, housing, clothing, I.e providing with that statement.

            You really do show your level of intelligence at times.

          • Not buying it.

            To be charitable, though, you’re saying husbands should have the power to deprive women of the bare necessities of life? Do I have that right?

          • Doesn’t matter where your cognitive dissonance and solipsism takes you. The statistics don’t lie – This system is collapsing. It is unsustainable. Patriarchy is going to take its place because too many men are being left out or refuse to participate.

          • ‘Your too hysterical’ – again, genius, that would be YOU’RE. Why should any White woman respect you? Respect must be EARNED, retard. Go ahead, keep attacking White women because you’re too effeminate and weak to go after the JEW.

          • How about you go watch the kids while your wife works buddy or add some value besides little grammar points.

            You’re a little white knight, and you wouldn’t survive in my world.

            FYI, you must be new here, I call the Jew out more than most in this comment section.

          • White female nationalism already exists – it’s called feminism. Every minority group ALREADY had their interests met via leftism, while white men have none. Your gynocentric rent-seeking redundancy is unwelcome in the Alt-Right. We have cleaned house. Make yourself useful and give me a blowjob.

          • I’m trying to win an argument nor even to persuade her. My purpose is to offer a counter to the pro women’s lib in a white ethnostate b.s. she spews. This hopefully benefits other guys who may lean towards her views and can help them most see the light

          • There are only three ways to handle a hysterical woman:
            1. Open fist
            2. Backhand open fist
            3. Closed fist

            Always let her see that the door is open, but once she does leave, that door slams shut for good.

            That’s when she comes back on her knees….and things get really interesting.

          • Female hypergamy is a biological fact. Because I have been a man on advantageous side of said hypergamy I know.

            Honestly, we need some sort of arranged marriage for many men and the women need to be coerced into it by their families.

          • ‘Your dense as a brick and will never change your views, I.e. a woman’ – that’s ‘YOU’RE’ dense as a brick, not ‘your’, O White Male Genius. Why don’t you pick up a spelling book instead of reloading jewtube and Pornhub all day?

            Assuming you’re actually even White (and one never knows how many here are kike trolls…I assume quite a few!) – you’re a disgrace to our race. White men seem to have lost their honor and intelligence in a manner concomitant with the poisoning and mongrelization that has occurred post-world wars.

            Disturbing and depressing.

          • Do you live on planet earth, bud?

            Have you been with more than five women?

            You need to wise up, learn women, and quit counter signaling men who want patriarchy back.

          • Lex, it’s like I said… This Current Year hellscape will collapse, not from the force of many, but the apathy of a few. You’re seeing the ‘lowly’ pillars, the bricks and mortar of society…the unsung heroes renege on their thankless duties because they have been betrayed, used and abused…and it is finally sinking in.

            There is no honor in sacrifice – that is called suicide. A cardinal sin in nearly every religion.

            There is an entire ideology we all tried called libertarianism dedicated to this phenomenon…and it works – we all die and our enemies win because we kept ‘muh principles.’

            Eventually men realize that swimming upstream does not work anymore…so they let go and realize they can get a lot farther just going with the flow.

            All it takes is a few loose rocks, then the foundation crumbles and brings the fortress walls tumbling down off the cliff and into the sea.

            That is when you will have your Amazonian queendom with no evil men left to stand in the way of you and the harsh environs.

            I know this makes no sense to you, but hey, I tried. Well, not really. I only respond to you so other guys can piece together a more lucid picture.

            You cannot nag or man-shame your way out of this one.

      • I don’t think you realize (by virtue of female solipsism), but women have become so horrendous in just the last 5 years. They are an unbearable chore to be around. They’ve lost every cell of soothing softness.

        It isn’t men I have to worry about writing terrible online reviews about my business…it’s women. Everybody knows the terrible things men do, but we aren’t even allowed to mention the evil things women do…so much so that women have made it into an art.

        Have you ever had sex with a women? Guess what…Those of us who have can verify that women indeed demand rape simulation…yes, hair pulling, throat grabbing, handcuffs are not just ‘kinky’ – only women have these bizarre fantasies and men just go along with it…and if they don’t, women find ‘better’ men who will, regardless of his marital status or hers. Briffault’s Law.

        You can’t blame men for this one or
        even equalize blame. Just own it and stop being such a..such a….woman.

        Also, rape jokes are hilarious.

          • Heh. That made me chuckle just a bit in an otherwise depressing comment thread . Seriously, Lexi, you’ve given a valiant effort here but give it up. There is no getting through to most of thees folks.

            I actually think that white women will likely need their own movement since the manosphere and white sharia nonsense has completely consumed the Alt Right and what used to be WN.

            So, as it stands now, on the one side you have Muslims and third worlders who want to rape and oppress white women because they consider them immoral whores.

            Meanwhile, on the other side, you have reactionary manosphere types who…want to rape and oppress white women because they consider them immoral whores.

            The left and modern feminism are worse than useless because they will always prioritize the interests of nonwhites over the rights of white women. The Alt Right is what you see in this comment thread, more or less. So, again perhaps white women do need to come up with their own version of white nationalism that will explicitly support their interests.

            This is not as absurd as it sounds. Many first wave feminists were basically white nationalists and spoke proudly and openly about their identity and interests as white women (much to the chagrin of modern feminists, as can be seen here

            Well, off I go to be downvoted and called a cuck/white knight, but the idea of a “third positionist” white nationalist ideology that incorporates certain aspects of liberalism/first wave feminism has been on my mind for years and I think it’s something that could have genuine popular appeal as opposed to say, calling for the legalization of rape.

          • You are a cuck. How about you put that brain to use and think deeply about what will happen if we merely kick out the mudslide and allow women all the freedoms they still have. Think about it.

            If you still think it’s a good idea, well then, your either a faggot who hasn’t fucked girls or dumb as a brick. Either way there’s no need for you.

          • Nah. You’re just a little dough boy who’s bull shit needs to be put in check. We can’t have pussies pushing a feminist agenda.

          • What’s wrong with you. White women do not need a movement. The ones worth anything will side with us because they are aware of the general slutiness of their counterparts.

            Anyway, we do not need women in our movement in any significant number to succeed. No revolution has, and do you honestly believe the voting booth will save us?

          • Lexi, spare me the treats. All I need from you is (letting) me slosh around in that dirty pussy of yours for just a few minutes like I’m digging for the last Doritos. I’d be so good to you, babe, and I’d never leave you…(coughs/whispers under breath) unless you got pregnant.

  • Medieval period: rape=property crime.
    Early Modern Period: rape=crime against the person, with onus on the woman to prove her chastity and the fact that she resisted.
    Now: accusation=guilt.

    You white knights should stop and consider the fact that you are actually to the left of Germaine Greer, who wants to “abolish the concept” of rape.

    • Bullshit. The prosecution bears the burden of proof on each and every element of the crime charged. Rape is no exception.

      If you’re talking about trial by media and/or university bureaucrats, you may have a point, but I really don’t think even that is true. Black football players don’t seem to have any trouble getting a fair hearing when they are accused.

      You are not under attack because you are men, but because you are White men.

      • And Moishe, the old “utmost resistance” standard was absurd. If it is clear that a man is not going to take no for an answer, what is the point of getting beaten bloody when, as you menfolk always point out, a woman cannot possibly overpower a man.

    • You should stop and consider that Germaine Greer is rethinking her prior activism and defending men’s interests. Why are alt-Right men kicking her in the teeth? Is this how boomers who agree with you can expect to be treated in the future?

  • This article is taking what is essentially feminist black legend against the West and hopelessly trying to justify it instead of disputing it. In what Western society was it ever acceptable to rape a woman if she was not sexually chaste? Could a man openly confess to such actions and not be held accountable either publicly or in a court of law? Of course, rape is a hard crime to actually prove, especially prior to the existence of modern forensic evidence. That doesn’t mean society used to view it as acceptable against some women and not others.

    As for spousal abuse, I recall reading about how the 1920s KKK went after wife beaters. Men in the community had “informal” ways of dealing with such abuse long before any so-called “domestic violence” legislation was passed by feminists.

    • I think this kind of informal sorting out of Wife beaters is actually ideal. It may be the only realistic solution for the Wife, who certainly does not want to see her breadwinner tossed in the clink.

      • I don’t think anyone would have a problem dealing with white-knights we just have to make sure that disciplining your wife is not illegal in the future ethno-state.

        • Is discipline your euphemism for wife-beating?

          I have a perfectly good marriage without my husband ever having to “discipline” me.

          I’m done with this.

  • I agree that men these days are often unfairly accused of rape. When a woman accuses a man of rape, it is like accusing someone of being a witch in the 1600’s: they are burned at the steak without a fair trial. That being said, I think it goes a little too far to say that only virgins or married woman can be raped. Instead of trying to decriminalize rape, the alt-right should be focused on pointing out who commits the most rape which is blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and Muslims. Very few white men actually commit rape and we must point that out. The way you are framing it, a nigger should be allowed to rape a white woman, as long as she is not a virgin or married. We cannot take that type of position on rape.

  • Im def. no white knight, and I hate to resort to this argument, but what if someone told you that whatever happens to your sister or gf is fair game if she’s not protected by virgin or wife status. This is getting into white shariah retardation territory

    • It seriously is outrageous for this website to publicly condone raping nonvirgins like this. There is certainly a legitimate debate to be had about how to sort out rape accusations, but this is really just beyond the pale.

      The other thing that is really fucked up about this obnoxious, woman-hating article is its failure to even consider the possibility that this woman is just sincerely trying to rein in a bad situation that she knows she helped create. Women never have good intentions ever. It is only ever for “attention.” This is not good for our people.

      I find all this solicitude about false rape allegations really suspicious. I am told that good men can’t find wives because of hypergamy, I.e. women sleeping around with Alpha chads until their thirties. If that is indeed a problem, how does it help White people to promote incredulity about rape allegations? If chads are hogging the women, would it not be preferable to remove them from the market? How does facilitating their degenerate sleeping around help the situation?

      To the author of this article: You are sowing discord and promoting self-hate for White women. Of course, if we were prone to self-hatred, we would not be here. We are here exactly because we resent the hell out of demands that we hate ourselves. Our femininity is just as central to our identity as your masculinity is to your identity. Eventually, even Melissa Meszaros and Bre Faucheux will get tired of countersignalling their White sisters and tell you to shove it up your ass already.

      Do you want White women to submit to your leadership in this movement or not? If you do, you have to embrace and represent us. Otherwise, we’ll be needing a movement of our own sooner rather than later.

      • By the way, I am not suggesting that man-whores should be removed from the market with false rape allegations. What I am saying is that it is not going to help White people improve our deteriorating culture to completely remove any element of risk in casual sex for men.

      • Despite my high voibal IQ, I am a certified techtard, mostly because it bores me half to death whenever my poor husband tries to teach me something about all this n*****tech. Of course, I don’t know who downvoted my comment. I do know that a downvote is NOT A FUCKING ARGUMENT!

        If you don’t agree, let’s here what you have to say in defense of this spiteful MGtard prick.

        • You’re a typical woman. Your arguments are not rational, not reasonable, and noone here cares what you think. Take your case to Oprah or the View

        • Jesus H Christ
          Boys the white shria thing is beyond retarded. I actually think it’s a jew plot. Now I really love Anglin he is too smart to be serious about it and csme up with that shit in jest.
          I understand you all are frustrated and I do think the young women of today have been jewed into thot behavior, the dumbass retarded ones anyway. So yeah it makes it harder however it’s not rocket surgery, get your shit togeather with a job, or career of somekind, get your ass in shape personal hygiene is also somewhat important.
          Stop feeling sorry for yourself and being whiney little bitches.
          In other words be a WHITE MAN.
          Now go ahead with the white knight, cuck old man boomer name calling. But you know damn well that’s the truth. Hurry the fuck up about it because the white race needs you.

          • I agree, fuck white sharia. We we need is coverture, the law of our ancestors.

            Are you okay with that.

          • I’m not going to assent to a legal fiction that erases my existence.

            I would be more than happy to discuss specific policy questions with you about what rights women should or should not have.

            I suppose you don’t want to have that discussion, because you don’t think a White women should have any rights at all, not even the right to not be murdered by their husbands. You would treat White women worse than even primitive 80-IQ desert tribes.

          • If a man makes his wife fuck him one night because she says “she’s tired” and will not willingly take off his pants, that is not rape. Get over yourself.

          • I think you are right about Anglin. This article and the comments defending it are more egregious and disgraceful than anything I’ve seen from DS, precisely because they’re clearly not joking.


          • I’m not letting you ‘wise elders’ off just because you sign off with a hopeless ‘woe is me’ signal to soften the blowback to your cowardly accusations. You’re just another ‘clean your room’ type that frog-like boomers (Jordan Peterson) think makes them exceptional. All you did was make your bed. That does not change shit. Go collect your social security or watch a sportsball event or whatever it is you geriatric jerkoffs do. We’re too busy cleaning up your mess to give a shit about any of your unsolicited ‘sage’ advice.

          • Typical beta-forming chant of “get da job hurr durr” stopped working about right after it was invented.

    • Well, if your sister dresses like a whore, acts like a whore, gets drunk and suggests herself to a bunch of guys at a frat party, is she not personally responsible if she wakes up in the morning sore and unsure of what happened the night before.

      If you sister gets into an argument with a man, acts brazen and tough, hits the man a few times, is she not responsible when she gets clocked or dropped on her had.

      Women are off their rockers and believe they are entitled to both the princess treatment and the male treatment.

      Not your sister but, hypothetically for the sake of the argument.

  • Rape was never this singular female-centric amorphous phrase feminists have appropriated and fetishized in just the last few years…it used to be several literary definitions involving devastating wartime defeats.

    Now it is just a Trojan horse meant to excuse any and all female behavior depending on her opportunism, while pinning any blame (female choice) on men.

    THIS is why you should never think of women as your equal. Do not discuss politics, feelings or finances with her ever. Just nod. Even if she is a leftist, it matters not because none of her beliefs are actually hers, and they are never consistent but always mutable based on her present opportunities. Do not base your relationships off these goofball standards that half of the alt right seems to have adopted…’matching politics.’ Nobody ever heard of such a thing until recently.

    This ‘lethario’ culture never existed writ large, which has rendered the de facto image of men brainless sex fiends. That never existed until baby boomer hippies had free love. So now women, and overprotective dads, are allowed to make such outrageous statements when a pimple-faced dork in a tux holds the door open for his prom date….like ‘when I was his age’ and ‘men only want one thing,’ when it is actually women who are the empty-headed one-trick ponies built entirely for sex and all of its derivatives.

    Feminism did not just grant undeserved rights to women…it inverted conventional wisdom.

    • You need to write a weekly column for AR on women, Weimar.
      Seriously, contact the mods and see if they have a spot available. A lot of our guys could benefit from hearing your take on women, their current state, and the proper solutions, in essay format.

      • Ha two days in a row guys tell me to write my own blog or OP. The thing is…when I first started here two months ago, I would spend 3-4 straight hours on a comment and it would go unread. But when I ejaculate some garbled mess on my lunch break, it gets dozens of thumbs and replies. I’m really not tech savvy at all, like I’ve been having computer/internet trouble for days, so if any of them gave me the ok…I could type something up rather than go to the great lengths they require to gain permission, which I have zero patience for. Maybe if enough people persuade them, it could get waived for me…

        • You write like how a convo would take place. That plus the content makes it a straightforward and honest read. I personally get sick of the uptight, English major, latte sipping, limp wrist style and If I am in the mood for something al little more nuanced I’ll just bust out some Evola or Schopenhauer.

        • You should write for the “AltWrite.” I usually read your comments in their entirety. Many times during mid-read I forget that I am not reading an actual article. Plus, your pseudonym is brilliant. Richard said he needs to bring evermore talent to PR.
          Best, J

Leave a Reply