Herpes blisters and malodorous discharges are sweeping like a pandemic through the IT departments of America. Spineless cretins who once did without or ordered themselves a broad from abroad out of a catalog are now shuffling out of their cubicles, trading in their WalMart khakis for tight designer jeans, and heading out to the clubs to get laid. Somehow, as if by some kind of satellite brainwashing beacon, the White race’s natural losers have become masters at the art of coaxing pathetic sluts into doing what pathetic sluts do.
While most major social movements and disease epidemics are the product of emergent conditions without a singular causation, this particular stain on America’s honor was actually orchestrated by a single evil mastermind: Roissy. A blogger. This absurd parody of a dishonorable womanizing asshole has accomplished the sociological equivalent of a physicist accidentally opening up a black hole in his lab: he has fused the blossoming field of studying human biodiversity (HBD) with the sleazy subculture of “game”.
To summarize, women are instinctively attracted to dominant men in the same way that men are instinctively attracted to fertile women. Roissy assists men in feigning dominance in a manner analogous to how women feign fertility with cosmetics. He instructs men on how to communicate in an arrogant and dismissive manner. He explains why it’s important to insult women. He also explains how to stand (like Captain Morgan), how to dress, and how to dispose of the human being once you’ve soiled it.
An essential aspect of his worldview is that there are “alpha males” and “beta males”. By his understanding, the alpha males are confident, dominant, and promiscuous while beta males are insecure, submissive, and faithful. He also mentions Omega Males, complete losers. There’s one type of male that Roissy appears to overlook entirely, the type of male who completely changes the “game”: the patriarch.
Roissy’s “alpha male” is content to merely exploit feckless, faithless, and fatherless young women. He’s deliberately barren, unabashedly degenerate, infesting the ruins of traditional society. The patriarch, by contrast, embodies restoration, faithfulness, and fertility while being more dominant than the contemporary alpha parasite could ever pretend to be. Women, even scores of women, submit to him with absolute devotion, in far more ways than mere fornication.
When the restoration comes, the patriarchs will put a stop to the “game” subculture by offering women an alternative which is both instinctively and practically preferable. Our women, our single most important possessions, will be returned to their natural and respected role. The alpha male game geeks will find less and less desirable prey and their lifestyle will be perceived as being every bit as foul as the scabs they pick.
My neck turned to rubber about 2/3 through Lady Rhaine’s rant. The essence of her worldview is that men must give, give and give while the women can do whatever she pleases when she pleases and with whom she pleases. So much for gender equality. At first I was willing to give her a fair trial but upon perusing her blog her philosophy of sex relations consists of nothing more than repackaged female chauvinism.
I love it how men must earn a woman’s respect but nowhere did she say that women must also earn the respect and admiration of men. That’s a given, of course, because women are just so damn special. Equality to women is them making all the rules.
It isn’t any wonder, then, that in these times we have men who act out like George Sodini.
CC,
But judging by your standards, that is not true. The Soviet Union emerged from Russia, the “sacred homeland” of the Russians — ie all the land that, again, according to your standards, was supposedly “necessary” for their survival. Well, if Russians don’t require every last square inch of territory that a Russian ever set foot on, maybe Americans don’t require every last square inch of territory that they once claimed for their own either.
“Buried under every brainwashed feminist attempting to do the man’s work of grappling with the political and philosophical issues is an honest lady yearning to feed babies and do laundry.”
Indeed there is some serious cognitive dissonance going on there, Wikitopian. The Jewish-Marxist propaganda in the modern West on ‘Feminism’ really is *that overwhelming* to cause someone like this character to identify with it, who sticks up for the Großdeutsches Reich (Greater German [Third] Reich), one of the least ‘Feminist’ societies ever–Leni Riefenstal and Hanna Reitsch notwithstanding.
(Well, at least if one views and defines ‘Feminist’ through a Jewish-Lesbian construct–actually since the Deutsches Reich was far better for the lives of average women than contemporary Multi-Kulti AmeriKwa possibly could be, where White women are in constant danger from the non-white alien hordes).
——————-
Mr. Dithers,
After checking out her blog, I am coming to the conclusion that ‘she’ may not even be a female.
I mean, I heard of ‘wimmyn’ having an entitlement complex and all, but I have never seen someone so spiteful and hateful about it all – this thing seems like Hate Incarnate – I have never, ever come across such a bitter and dark brooding soul calling it self a ‘woman’ such as this before.
Not even from a Jewish or Black woman, and that says an awful lot, especially since I am originally from Jew Yawk City myself.
Women can only participate in the sacred hierarchy through their husbands or sons, which is why they can never be happy living a life in which they assert a self-sufficiency that is proper to the masculine, rather than feminine, plane of reality. Thus, any restoration involving the “Revenge of the Patriarchs” would require the reinstatement of true Pater Familias.
Troy Southgate wrote a nice little piece in defense of traditional womanhood recently:
http://www.rosenoire.org/articles/against_femminism.php
*I simply had to post this absolute masterpiece from Robert Lindsay’s site – it is just that damn good.
Female Rule Violates the Laws of Nature
http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/female-rule-violates-the-laws-of-nature/
Ah Robert, a modern-day Aristophanes: That is the female sexual utopia in power. Aristophanes had a better understanding of the female mind than the average husband. …
http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol6no2/DevlinTOQV6N2.pdf
Lady Raine: “Suggesting women shouldn’t receive college education is horrible and shameful of you. Trying to keep them out of college and FORCING them back into the home where we DON’T want to be”
Raine, I was the one suggesting that women marry and have children before college. If it wasn’t clear, I do not oppose college for women, in fact I promote it, but I still believe it’s better for women to have children first. (And men to marry before college as well)
YOU may not want to be at home raising kids, but most women traditionally DO.
Feminism and women’s “rights” are completely dependent upon male behavior, without men maintaining a society that is woman friendly, you “independent women” would have *nothing*.
WE make your independence possible, but I suppose it’s too much to ask from the likes of you for any gratitude. Enjoy it while you can, that era is rapidly coming to a close.
What can I tell you , Silver, I’m just a sneaky, filthy Kraut. Gotta have that Lebensraum back, all of it. I’m willing to bet that wouldn’t taste quite so bad to you when Meds (such as yourself) are given a nice portion of the spoils. Or are you telling me you would turn it down? I doubt you would. Fuck Australia, how’s Florida sound?
Z,
She posted pictures so unless she’s a cross dresser she looks like a woman. Lady Rhaine fancies herself an ice queen and in reading her blog entries she certainly lives up to the definition found in the urban dictionary:
“A frigid bitch who thinks her shit doesn’t stink and ignores men’s advances and usually whines about everything. If you got an ice queen on your arm kick her out the door because you have no chance in hell of slipping the beef to this one.”
Any normal man who comes in contact with her is at risk of becoming a hardcore misogynist or a Roissy type character. Since no man is acceptable to our dear lady of the rain I’ll bet she has an impressive collection of dildos on hand.
“She posted pictures so unless she’s a cross dresser she looks like a woman. Lady Rhaine fancies herself an ice queen and in reading her blog entries she certainly lives up to the definition found in the urban dictionary:” — Mr. Dithers
__
LMFAO 😀
Mr. Dithers,
He he he. Naw, I just meant that I have a speculative suspicion that she is perhaps a hemaphrodite or something… at the very least, she must have got exposed to a ton of testosterone in the womb. Painfully obvious that she is an outlier in her personality for a ‘woman’ – even amongst the most hardcore of lesbian diesel dykes.
She just oozes envy, malice and hate – and I emphatically do not mean this in any kind of ‘pee cee’ way. Super strange for *any kind* of woman to behave in this way. I read she boasts of lighting cars on fire, and saying that she is ‘untouchable’ before the law – LOL (Someone on her blog speculated that she is a tax-evading stripper connected to the mafia – this would be the only way a low-class single mother would be able to pull this off – however, just a guess, since it probably is all made-up). *To even make this stuff up, though, you gotta be pretty sick and evil.
Sorry for my rant, it is just that when I was in the Army I was stationed in one of those rust-belt areas, and dang, there seemed to not be a single female who was under 150-160lbs that did not have this princess/entitlement complex, NO MATTER how plain, average and low class they may have been. So it brought back some bad memories. Overall the men were a pretty cool bunch, however.
I guess it is all a horrible consequence of the loss of the manufacturing base in this country, and the men in those areas not being able to afford and provide for a family. (Thanks Jews for creating these White Ghettos by giving our jobs and our resources to the Indians and Chinese, all so we can have the ‘privilege’ of buying it all back in Wal-Mart. Uh!)
Ladyraine. You are a child abuser. You are teaching your son that he is unimportant. Since you refuse to provide him with the fathering he needs, ’cause you wanna be all girl-power and such, (really, you’re just selfish) he’ll undoubtedly grow up to do exactly what you’ve taught him: Game chicks to git some and then abandon the progeny. After all, as you’ve shown him, fathering is unimportant — children only need mothers. Also, having been deprived of the example of how to be a good man by a good man who is his father, he will no doubt look for examples of masculinity by emulating the gangstas and chavs. Real nice there, wench.
“an honest lady yearning to feed babies and do laundry.”
LOL! Feeding babies, yes. Doing the laundry? Um, no, it’s a necessary, not-fun chore. Kinda like unstopping the toilet is for the fellas.
We’re not bringing this Lady Raine/Roissy sideshow/internet feud here.
Respectful discussion of gender roles and the dissolution of sexual polarity are welcome here, but please stay focused on the subject at hand — the preservation of Western culture and the race that produced it — and avoid corrosive and distracting personal attacks.
God bless you, Barb!
*BTW – I wouldn’t mind doing the laundry for my lady or family. I did an awful lot of it in the Army, especially in the field!
Now I know, and fully appreciate, how my ancestors in the Alps had to live day to day.
barb
It’s awesome to read a model woman posting on OD. God bless you barb. Fixing the toilets and changing the diapers have to get done by somebody after all.
OMG, just read Roissy’s very first article published on his site, back in April 2007, and it is absolutely amazing, and interestingly enough, profoundly true.
It isn’t that long, so I thought to go ahead and copy it in its entirety. It’s that good.
~
Endless Dating « Roissy in DC
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2007/04/09/endless-dating/
~
Wow, huh? Hard to believe this is the same dystopic fellow so many criticize (justifiably) today.
Roissy must definately has a good degree of cognitive dissonance, judging from his later writings.
Let’s just hope he fully comes around to seeing, and appreciating the larger truths, and the bigger picture, of the proper roles of Men and Women in Our beautiful Western Civilization.
Goebbels was right, there are simply different types of men and women, even White ethnics differ. To speak in such broad generalizations is dishonest. It would be ludicrous to judge all women based on irate Jewesses as it would be to judge all men by the behavior of third-world savages.
In many cases the woman who hates the way men behave has only herself to blame because she is seeking out those types of men.
Lady Raine strikes me as a woman who has been burned, perhaps unjustly, and now has an axe to grind against all men. Some of those women can be restored, some cannot. A wise man knows when to walk away.
Women can only participate in the sacred hierarchy through their husbands or sons, which is why they can never be happy living a life in which they assert a self-sufficiency that is proper to the masculine, rather than feminine, plane of reality.
I agree, complementarianism is more rational and productive than egalitarianism. Men and women should not be at odds with one another, and the man should be the head of the household and the family. I do however think some conflict does come into play in some circumstances when a superior woman chooses an inferior male, and thus the male can not achieve the mental and emotional dominance over the female, leading to conflict and sometimes physical/verbal abuse from the male to compensate.
“Fixing the toilets and changing the diapers have to get done by somebody after all.”
Actually, diaper changing is lovely, with a certain mindset.
Yeah, the poo smells, but it’s the poo of your beloved, so that makes it special.
And, when the wiping is done, ah, to gaze upon that sweet baby bum. More beautiful than any Monet.
And comical too:
Toddler who, just beginning to walk and talk, IN PUBLIC, grabs diaper area and pipes up in ringing tones, “STINKS!”
Or, talking on phone to friend. She says: “Gotta go. Joey just ran by and he stinks.” ‘Kay. ‘Nuff said. ‘Bye.
Or the fun of watching Dad carrying on when he’s occasionally asked to change a poo-filled one. Oh, the faces he makes, the pshheewwwey noises, the calls for “More wipes! Quick!” the holding the bundle at arms length as he scurries to the garbage can.
Ah, I’ve enjoyed many an eye-roll at that one.
It’s been a good life.
I hope you were directing that at “Barb” since she’s the one who personally attacked me and my mothering knowing nothing about me.
Barb, I never “used” a man. I never took and discarded a man. I don’t take Child Support and Welfare and I’m not a single mother because it’s “empowering”. I’m a single mother because my son’s real father was an abuser and getting me son away from him and his influence for good was the ONLY intelligent move for both my son and myself.
You have no idea what values I teach my son. He knows that real men work hard, respect their moms and wives, and don’t act like horny teenagers. My parents are still happily married and my father is my greatest hero and I’m very glad that my son has him and my mom (living nearby) to have a REAL example of a “traditional and honorable man”.
You claim that me NOT looking for a “baby daddy” is somehow selfish??? Actually, I feel that bringing strange men around my son and trying to just ‘find one’ who’s good enough and MIGHT be a good “father figure” would be really irresponsible of me.
My son knows only my attention and I won’t uproot and disturb his sense of security by bringing in “mom’s boyfriends” and trying to find a husband. THAT is what I call selfish. Women who would rather not be alone or rather not be a single mother so they just go on a man-hunt to find a new “dad”???
That’s ridiculous. There are far more “cons” to me doing that than there are “pros”. My son has plenty of good male influence. I provide him with a home, food, clothes, an excellent school, a good neighborhood, and good values by myself without the aid of a man. Why would I want to chance messing all that up? And since when are women required to have a “husband” to be a good woman or to be a good mother?
There are TONS of awful 2 parent households out there where the child would VERY MUCH benefit from just ONE good parent instead of TWO bad ones that are fighting and hating on each other all the time. Those kids never have peace. Mine does. He doesn’t have to fear an abuser and he also doesn’t have to fear losing my attention to a “man of the month”.
Barb, your advice is the kind that an uneducated woman with no other options but marriage would say.
Why would I look for a man to have around when I cannot tolerate and never HAVE been able to tolerate a man living in my home? Sleeping over? Having any knowledge of my finances or my bills? How am I required to like/want those things?
I adore men and whomever said I ‘have it out’ for men is really off base. You will never find a single “platonic friend”, guy I have dated, or long term boyfriend who would call me a man-hater and ESPECIALLY not a Feminist.
So because I’m great at being a Machinist and Engineering I should just STOP liking those things because men like them too? Or because I LIKE my space and having my home to myself (and my son) I should just forget that and have some guy move in because that’s why YOU think is “what women should do”?
Please. I wanted a family AND job/career/education. I got both. I did the education early, then had my son at just the right age (23 as I always planned), and will be single and free by the age of 40 when he is a grown man (to travel and work in more “time consuming” career fields).
It has nothing to do with “empowerment” or Feminism because I don’t identify in any way with Feminists who sit in offices with jobs they aren’t skilled for. I had to fight past the smirks and disdainful looks from both women AND men to prove myself in a “man’s job”.
I work with ALL men day in and day out and I also don’t have any female friends (because I hate women and think they’re awful and boring). The mere idea of you calling me selfish, man-hating, and Feminist just shows how little you know about me or my beliefs.
I believe strongly in family being FIRST above all husbands and wives and boyfriends. My son is first. What he wants and needs is first. The rest of my fam is second. Me third. A “man” in my life is an outlier and I really prefer that even in serious relationships a man NOT try to “act as a dad” or get close to my son in that way….I make sure if I’m in a LTR my son understands that he is “mom’s boyfriend” not a new daddy.
Women with attitudes like Barbs are the ones who have a revolving door of “daddies” in their home and their sons grow up to hate and use women. My son already opens door, takes out the trash without being asked, and answers “Yes sir” and “No maam” to adults. His grades are perfect and his attitude is positive.
Clearly, some “women” are pissed that you CAN have a family and a career without abandoning one or the other and also that a man isn’t a necessity to do those things.
I prefer to be by myself and with my son with no distractions. If you find that offensive, then it’s because you’re no secure in your parenting and financial/life skills…..not because of your “beliefs”.
I take care of ALL things around the house except cooking (because I hate doing it and never would). I care for the kids, I do the baths and storytime, I do the cleaning and scrubbing and nurturing…..I also do the discipline, the homework help, the fixing of stuff around the house (my parents even bought me a new tool set for work for Christmas so now I’ve been going crazy fixing all the things that need to be done around the house). I do all the bill paying and am the sole source of income. It’s not really that difficult to balance and women who can’t seem to do so are just lazy and weak.
Even in nature, monogamy and extremely long term relationships don’t really make any sense and there is no such thing as a gender that is “naturally monogamous” because monogamy goes against the nature of BOTH genders. Marriage is something that I think is wonderful and should be taken seriously, but it’s just not something I have any interest in or desire for. Not even when I was a little girl.
And if I’m the kind of woman “you avoid” (as one commenter said) here than that means that you have to “avoid” any woman who is educated and capable of doing both female and male things without being “angry” or “resentful” about it. If you are offended by a woman like me, then you are offended by a woman who believes in working hard both at a job and at home and a woman who trusts in herself enough to know she can manage the household both financially and physically as long as the important “core values” are there for the children and family to follow.
I don’t mind discussing these things, but the ridiculous attack from Barb and a few others that are CLEARLY based on blatant lies you have read elsewhere about me….or are assuming based on NOTHING.
At least get your facts straight first, please. Whatever I’m ‘doing’ in raising my son, I’m doing right: He is phenomenally ahead in grades, goes to a great private school, is positive and ALWAYS happy, fearless, outgoing, friendly, well behaved, energetic, and is frighteningly popular amongst children of ALL AGES.
I do better than most TWO parent households, so maybe YOU should take a cue from ME.
Lady Raine,
Do you not see how an increasing number of women who lead a man-free lifestyle such as yours upset the balance in society and result in men who see themselves as you see them? As misanthropic sperm donors who aren’t safe to have around children. I assert that we’re in the midst of a temporary period of overabundance, one which does indeed empower many women to be fully independent without the assistance of a man.
You are free to do as you wish, but I don’t believe your approach to gender relations or your patently lopsided perspective on tradition is sustainable. Every time there’s a period of abundance, a subset of people assume it’s the end of history, the end of struggle, and that the old ways are altogether obsolete.
Instead of snipping at the people who insulted you, why don’t you explain to us what your own attitude actually is on what men are supposed to do, what women are supposed to do, and whether racial and cultural heritage should be considerations.
Let’s just hope he fully comes around to seeing, and appreciating the larger truths, and the bigger picture, of the proper roles of Men and Women in Our beautiful Western Civilization.
There ARE NO “proper roles”. Men always talk about themselves being the “leaders” and I don’t see it at ANY point in history. The only thing they did differently that women DIDN’T was actually fight in wars.
There have been female Pharaohs, Queens, Prime Ministers, and Presidents since the most Ancient of Civilizations. Those civilizations didn’t “fail” with a woman at the helm.
Women have always been the leaders of the family undeniably (everyone knows the mother is the glue of the family), have always held the key to reproduction and also to sex, have the key to “life” and make a family a family.
Women have ALWAYS been in the lead just as much as men and I don’t understand what imaginary world you guys get these ideas and statements from.
Men may be better at lifting heavy stuff and fighting in wars, but those have nothing to do with “leadership”. Women have always held many high positions as leaders in many cultures and its’ weird how you pretend those things aren’t true.
The “traditions” you speak of were also NOT natural to either men or women. Men and women are NOT different. They have the same brains and same brain functions. They have the same emotions and sexual urges.
Maybe you should study some actual Science, Anthropology, and even the Animal Kingdom so that you understand that “women in the home” was a very fleeing trend in just a few cultures for a short period of time when compared to the history of civilization.
If women were “meant” to stay in those temporary roles….then women would have already wiped themselves out by Darwinian rules and standards. Men would have as well.
The roles you are “wishing for” were never natural to either gender and BOTH genders have always had a desire and natural ability to “lead” depending on the PERSON, not the gender.
I guess you want to believe that all those years of women in charge and all those cultures where women are queen and women are presidents and women are prime ministers and religious leaders are all “imaginary” and unnatural?
Hmmm….even the most powerful and advanced civilization of all time (the Ancient Egyptians) had female Pharaohs at the helm much of the time. Have any of you actually READ or studied any history?
You seem to have a “stuck in 1950 in America” attitude where you think that was the “norm” or was the “original way”. No. It was a passing fad in a few countries and was phased out because it didn’t work, didn’t make anyone happy, and was hurting society.
The only men OR women who’d want to go back to that weird stitch in time is the ones who cannot function independently of a partner. Men who can’t “make money” AND “make a meal” and women who can’t “nurture a baby” AND “be a successful CEO” are the ones who are shrieking for the 1950’s.
Those are times when a man or woman was co-dependent on their partner entirely one way or another and it’s completely unnatural, unhealthy, and downright WEIRD to “need” someone to get by in life.
It’s only the men and women who are afraid to “do for themselves” that are angry about the constant changing roles and new freedoms or lack of freedoms. Normal men and women don’t care what the “new fad” is. A confident woman who just likes being a homemaker will STILL be a homemaker….she has that choice. And a man who still wants to “make all the money” still can do that and find a woman who also wants that.
However, each human is different and trying to FORCE men and women into roles that have ZERO Scientific basis for being the “natural” roles of each gender is just a really antiquated and uneducated attitude to have in general.
I’d rather DIE than stay home and clean around the house waiting for some “hubbie” to come home. It’s my worst nightmare. I’ve never wanted a co-partnership. That’s because like all women, I have a totally different “nature place” than Jane or Sally do.
Forcing women into roles at home always was always will be silly and completely cartoonish in terms of “logic”. Why would a woman pretend to be good at things she isn’t? Or pretend to LIKE things that she doesn’t? (like child rearing, cooking, cleaning, etc).
If those roles were “natural” than all women would LOVE those things and all men would LOVE their “role” too. They didn’t and that’s why they ended.
It was Scientifically and Anthropologically RETARDED at best. Those values were based on silly twisted Christian teachings which is just ONE religion and ONE nice but fictitious novel. Christianity made up those “roles” and obviously there is no science or fact in Christianity or their beliefs/teachings. That’s where the “gender roles” came from and that’s why they never worked. It would be like playing the roles in “Harry Potter” for a few centuries and expecting it to be “natural” and work for everyone.
It was and is just as ludicrous and thank goodness higher education and Science have helped us to base our views on something factual and truthful and not obscure and fictional religious beliefs.
Instead of snipping at the people who insulted you, why don’t you explain to us what your own attitude actually is on what men are supposed to do, what women are supposed to do, and whether racial and cultural heritage should be considerations.
I didn’t snipe at you, I sniped at the ludicrous idea of what you consider a “natural role”. Even in animals the “natural role” varies from species to species in terms of who is in charge, who’s the head of the family, the hunter, the leader, etc.
Why would humans be any different?
I don’t feel men HAVE a specified role because some men are really emotional, sensitive, and not well equipped to be the “sole breadwinner” or the “organizer and leader”. Those men shouldn’t be FORCED to pretend they “naturally suited” for that if they are not.
Same with women. I hate romantic movies and sharing feelings, I love technology, engineering, and Science. I don’t like anything involving domestic housework and love to get my hands dirty with tools and dig in mentally with Programming and Engineering. Why should I have to pretend to NOT like those things naturally? How would ignoring those things that ARE natural to me make me better? Make society better? Make my kid better? It wouldn’t….I’d just be another faker in a world of fakers and liars.
In my opinion the only men I’ve seen who are “pissed” about real Feminism (meaning a “fair shot” not “gimme gimme” type Feminism) are the ones who were used to “getting by” on their financial wealth or status and could ‘land a good woman’ on those things alone.
Now that women don’t need men’s money, help, status, or name….certain men would rather complain about that then just work on having a more desirable character. They are pissed that women have less reasons now to marry and it makes life harder on men. I understand that, but how is that something that WE or WOMEN are at fault for? How does that make it “unnatural” just because it doesn’t benefit YOU or YOUR beliefs? It doesn’t.
Real feminism allowed BOTH genders to feel more comfortable being themselves and NOT being the stereotype. It allowed both men and women to be in whatever role they were best suited for. Not all men are good at “heading the household” and not all women are good at nurturing it and babies (I know tons of women who hate kids, too).
So you honestly think that a woman who HATES kids should marry and have them anyway?? And you think that a man who hates being in charge and doesn’t like making decisions should “head the household” anyhow?
Everything about the traditional roles you speak of was fleeting, based on opinion, and long over. Everyone has different strengths and every gender has different types of strengths. That’s Science. Ever hear of it, sheesh?
Wikitopian and Hunter,
Please ban “Lady’ Raine” at once. She is not here to ‘debate’ with anyone, she is simply here to irritate.
She is an attention-seeker par-excellance, with a lot of personal issues and problems, who will endlessly pollute this site. If you don’t believe me, just go to Roissy’s site and check the vile and pornographic commentary that she regularly left on his site right up till November of last year, months after she was supposedly so ‘offended’ by something she claimed he did to her.
There is an enormous paper trail of her disturbed and hateful writings out there that can easily be found, if necessary.
It isn’t any wonder, then, that in these times we have men who act out like George Sodini.
Everything in this blog was just made completely invalidated by something like that. Oh, so it’s because WOMEN are to blame for a man’s deeply disturbed psyche and plethora of serious and untreated mental illness?
So basically women are evil and a mass-murderer (a male as usual) is just a poor VICTIM of women? Oh, how “Roissy” of you.
*This excerpt was posted before, but it belongs right after the ‘Lady’s’ comments, since it seems as if Robert had her in mind when he wrote it –
Female Rule Violates the Laws of Nature
http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/female-rule-violates-the-laws-of-nature/
Sorry I missed the “Jewish” comments and the “why should men do stuff for women”.
Um, because one thing that IS true in nature and since the beginning of time is that it’s the MANS job to “woo” the woman. She is the holder of sex, the bringer of life, and life would cease to exist without her. She is given the power to deny/accept reproduction and sex from a man.
If it were left up to men, let’s face it….it would be a 24/7 porn show, there would be NO babies who knew who their daddy was, there would be FAR more STD’s and FAR MORE abandoned and unwanted children. Men were never in history the “holders of sexual power” and never will be. It’s not something either men or women can change.
Of course a man should have to work to earn the woman’s attention. You all claim to love tradition, well I still believe in the “no kiss until date number 3” at the MINIMUM. I mean ‘proper dates’ not “come over and bring a dvd” kind of idiocy.
Men are more disposable than women in the Evolutionary and Reproductive way. That is why it’s always been the male who has to “try” for the woman’s affections. That will never change because women will never be disposable in the way that men are.
Second, I am not Jewish. My family is strictly Protestant Lutheran and very much practicing. My parents would seriously die if I brought home a Jew or a Non-German and intended to be “serious” with him.
This is what I mean, though….”entitled jewish princess”??? Um, I come from a Protestant home and worked my way through with Journeyman through becoming a Machinist. I have worked since age 14 and have never ever been “handed” anything in my life (even though my parents were wealthy). Once again….where do you people get these ridiculous and wild stories about me? The enquirer?
“Um, because one thing that IS true in nature and since the beginning of time is that it’s the MANS job to “woo” the woman. She is the holder of sex, the bringer of life, and life would cease to exist without her. She is given the power to deny/accept reproduction and sex from a man.”
Interesting comment coming from a ‘woman’ who demands ‘equality’, and that ‘men and women’ are the same with the ‘same brain’.
How hypocritical of you to stand by nurture when it is to your benefit, and then stand by nature when it suits your egotism as well.
This is an interesting discussion. I’m going to moderate it from now on and remove the sniping.
Raine herself is a complete ideological lolapolooza, btw. She, strangely enough, sticks up for Germany and even the Third Reich, even though, of course as we know, that society was not even remotely Feminist (Leni Riefenstal and Hannah Reich notwithstanding), at least by the Judeo-American definition of the word.
WRONG. German mothers were the MAIN target of the Nazi Propaganda. They were given actual medals of honor for having more “pure babies” and were given free counseling, houses, daycare, maids, and anything else they wanted/needed to do so. German mothers were the targets of all the programs designed to ensure purity and the “traditional family” because German women were respected by German men as being “strong” and being the glue that holds the family together. The Nazi’s knew that you couldn’t win the war or the battle if you didn’t win the moms first.
YOU may not want to be at home raising kids, but most women traditionally DO.
Feminism and women’s “rights” are completely dependent upon male behavior, without men maintaining a society that is woman friendly, you “independent women” would have *nothing*.
WE make your independence possible, but I suppose it’s too much to ask from the likes of you for any gratitude. Enjoy it while you can, that era is rapidly coming to a close.
That’s weird, last I checked women were allowed to go buy a gun and permit too. Looks like we wouldn’t “need” you to hold it down for us.
How ridiculous of you. There are women who protect YOUR ass every day in the Police Department, Fire Department, the Military, Doctors, Nurses, Volunteers, Medics, and Scientists. You honestly believe that all those women were “handed” those positions and don’t deserve them and do NOTHING for you as men? Nice attitude.
Second, I have NEVER been handed anything because of Feminism. Feminists hate me, don’t associate with me, and would never even post at my blog (because they know how I feel about them and that’s why these wild stories the commenters here are posting is so amazing).
My parents were very strict. I had to “provide my own necessities” starting at age 14. I have worked every since. I was required to both have a job and maintain straight “A” my whole life. I did that too. I went to College and completed some of it while still in high school. I went to school for Criminal Law and Psychology. I decided to try my hand at being a Programmer/Machinist because both Law and Psych are too time consuming while raising a child alone.
I busted my ass working alongside old-school men in shops for years with a Journeyman to learn to be a Machinist, then a Programmer, then Tool and Die, then Engineering, etc. No women “like” me for that. No feminist helped me do that. The women in the offices at the shops I work for look at me with hatred and disdain for being an attractive woman who the older shop guys RESPECT because I EARNED my way their instead of sliding into bullshit HR positions in the office like most of THOSE women did.
I don’t agree with women “taking” from a man. Gold digging and expecting unjust amounts of Alimony is disgusting. I don’t even take Child Support (although any good mother/father knows that if they AREN’T the custodial parent, paying is the LEAST they can do to help).
I don’t believe in women being “handed” a position over a man who is better qualified just because she’s a woman. I don’t believe women are superior. (however whomever said that male/female brains are different is wrong. There is no FUNCTIONALITY difference and that includes intellect. That’s very much a false myth.)
As for these commenters that are parroting what they’ve heard the Misogynists or Roissy say about me….well his stories and theirs are based on what they WISH was true about me. What they WISH I was “all about” because then I’d fit into their hateful and mythical stereotypes that all women who are independent HATE men.
I adore men. I spend most of my time at work with men. I spend most of my free time with male friends. I have NEVER been married, never taken child support, never taken alimony,never been on welfare…..never been a “hooker” (like the ridiculous LR haters gossip), have never been in the Mafia (that one is just hilarious), am not Jewish, and was a stripper for a whole 8 months for a second job quite a few years ago (and I’m neither “ashamed” nor “proud” of it. It was a fill in job and it was a lot of fun. Of course I’d do it again because you can’t beat the money, the easy hours, and the ease of that job in itself. I never had a “bad” experience.)
In any case, those stories are interesting for me to read if nothing else….it’s amazing the tales people will spin about your life to discredit you when they’re afraid that someone will actually listen to what you are saying 🙂
For the record, just because I have “male” interests and don’t like some “girly” things doesn’t make me an outlier. Most women don’t identify with the stuff you see on Lifetime and Oxygen and most of us don’t like drippy romance or emotional displays. I am a normal girl and am well liked amongst my male friends, my ex boyfriends, and my male co-workers (many of whom are older chauvinist types) and men in general. I have only had one bad experience with “dating men” or dealing with men that I can recall and that was my son’s father (obviously).
I’ve never been cheated on, disrespected, used, or treated badly by any of my other exes or male friends and family. I have no “beef” with men and think most are really fun, laid back, and nice to have around. But then there’s the pervs and misogynists who are all about themselves and can’t control themselves.
I don’t “hate” men. I “hate” men who lack discipline, self-control, and honor.
“…and were given free counseling, houses, daycare, maids, and anything else they wanted/needed to do so.” @LR
__
Sounds like a Feminist’s ‘wet-dream’!
On steroids.
“…German mothers were the MAIN target of the Nazi Propaganda. They were given actual medals of honor for having more “pure babies” and were given free counseling, houses, daycare, maids, and anything else they wanted/needed to do so. German mothers were the targets of all the programs designed to ensure purity and the “traditional family” because German women were respected by German men as being “strong” and being the glue that holds the family together. The Nazi’s knew that you couldn’t win the war or the battle if you didn’t win the moms first.” @LR
__
Whoops, read the whole paragraph, and damn, this is so true and well said!?!
Absolutely correct that German/ic women have always been respected by their men — have been throughout history, ever since the days of Hermann.
Being of this stock myself, I completely agree that the women in our family fit the descriptions you state above.
Lady Raine,
1.) Science has nothing to say about ethics. It is descriptive, not prescriptive. The methods of science can only answer questions about matters of fact in the natural world. It is illogical to argue that men ought to treat women a certain way because it is “natural.” That’s an example of the naturalistic fallacy.
2.) It is illogical to argue that men ought to treat women as equals because that is what “educated people” do or because feminism is popular in our society.
3.) I possess a thorough knowledge of European history. I can assure you that Western societies are traditionally patriarchal. While it is true there have been female rulers in the West, Queen Elizabeth I or Queen Victoria come to mind, they are notable because they are exceptions to the rule.
4.) There is a clear tension in your argument between your assertion that Western societies have always been egalitarian and that women were slaves a few generations ago.
5.) In the West, men have traditionally been the head of the household, not women. That was true from Greco-Roman Antiquity through the Modern era.
6.) I don’t agree that men and women have the same brains, same range of emotions, or the same behavior patterns. Explain violent crime.
7.) You are equating idle women staying put in the home – a passing phase of mid-twentieth century America – with the larger issue of patriarchy. In the Antebellum era, women labored on the farm and manufactured household items, but the man was still the head of his household and could exercise authority over his wife and children.
8.) Having rejected any concept of a “natural role,” I found it interesting that you rehabilitated the concept to argue that it is the “natural role” of man to woo a woman. It seems to me like this ideal is similarly socially and historically situated: Muslims and East Asians certainly don’t that way.
9.) What is a PUA?
Women are and never were meant to “do” anything FOR you. We are not “meant” to have your babies and cook your dinners. We are not “meant” to have sex to reproduce or only to repopulate the world. If we WERE meant to do that, we’d have been born with lesser brain functions and different brains than the Male.
But you were – as evidenced by your failure to realize it, despite your evident intellect, but because of your selective attention to the pertinent social sciences – and your lack of manhood.
Question for My Lady: how and why did war bands and armies originate (did “God” create them?), and how did stratified societies come into being such that an oddity such as yourself could be (temporarily) tolerated and indulged in her gender-inappropriate inclinations? [A recitation of the ludicrous feminist taking of the exception for the rule, as above, will not serve in response.]
“Let’s just hope he fully comes around to seeing, and appreciating the larger truths, and the bigger picture, of the proper roles of Men and Women in Our beautiful Western Civilization.”
There is no doubt that Roissy could have become a great asset. I don’t hold out much hope though. He has become very degenerate as years has gone by and a lot of his commenters are downright unbearable. I like the idea that they are rebelling but the way they are doing it is nihilistic. It makes me think of the writings of Friar Seraphim Rose and his explanation on the 4 stages of nihilism. They seem to be heading for the last stage; destruction.
PUA: Pick up artist.
I’m glad you guys are responding to her. I can’t read these long winded posts that have that typical whiny know it all woman style. It is unreadable imo.
A PUA is a Pick-Up Artist.
Reality Check,
I’ve been more disappointed with some of the responses to Lady Raine. She seems to take pride in her German racial and cultural heritage. Her comments have been civil and productive. I’m inclined to allow her to argue her perspective. If her comments take a disruptive or abusive turn, they can always be deleted.
I agree with Hunter.
The thing is that even though it’s a bad thing that Feminism has made it so that so many children only have Mothers, in the olden days you had the same situation because of the high Paternal Fatality Rate.
The problem with Feminism is that it’s geared to discourage the belief that Child Bearing and Child Raising are the most important things a Woman can do with her life. Instead trying to replace those two things with the idea that Women should devote themselves to trying to compete with Men at those things Men do best.
Now if the occasional female actually wants to act like a man, I don’t really see a serious problem with it. The problem is that Butch Women so often go over to the dark side, and figuratively spit on Childbearing and Marriage in their Memetic Contributions to society.
Lady Raine lacks the usual Feminist spite against Childbearing, and doesn’t seem to be going out of her way to discourage marriage, so I don’t see what there is to her that’s worthy of any special degree of reproval.
Now it may be that a marriage involving a woman like Lady Raine, who wouldn’t easily submit to her husband, wouldn’t be ideal and could make the man miserable.
But given that she isn’t married, instead being a single mother, that isn’t really a problem.
“I don’t believe in women being ‘handed’ a position over a man who is better qualified just because she’s a woman.”
That’s good. Affirmative Action for Women isn’t fair to Men.
“I don’t believe women are superior. (however whomever said that male/female brains are different is wrong. There is no FUNCTIONALITY difference and that includes intellect. That’s very much a false myth.)”
The differences between a Male and a Female Brain, where both are from the same race, are subtle but nonetheless real.
Certainly there’s nothing a Male Brain can do that a Female Brain couldn’t do, with rare possible exceptions involving complex Mathematics, but there are still some areas of Intelligence where the average Man will outperform the average Woman of the same race.
Although in the same way, there are other areas of intelligence where the average Female will outperform the average Male.
And it is true that some very healthy societies have been headed by a Woman for some part of their history, with no ill effects.
Nonetheless, I still think it is healthier for a society if the average Man has more power than the average Woman.
She didn’t just pop out of nowhere and is being treated like this. She has a history on other sites. That’s where this attitude against her is coming from. Nevertheless, I respect HW and will remain silent from here on out about my disapproval of her.
This might actually lead to an interesting read if nothing else.
Anthony M. Ludovici elucidated my view on this subject very well in a book entitled, “Woman: A Vindication:”
“While trying to escape the influence of all that “tinsel of false sentiment” which in the atmosphere of Democracy and sentimentality has gathered about the subject of Woman in modern England, it has been my endeavour to defend her against certain traditional and well-founded charges, by showing that the very traits in her character which have given rise to these charges form so essential a part of her vital equipment that it would be dangerous to the race to modify or to alter them. Thus, despite the fact that there is much in this book that may possibly strike the reader as unfriendly, if not actually harsh, I am aware of no other work in which so complete and so elaborate a plea (from the standpoint of Life and Life’s needs) has been made in defence of Woman’s whole character, including all that side of it which the wisest of mankind, and the oldest traditions of mankind, have consistently and unanimously deprecated.
Couched in the briefest possible terms, my thesis is practically this, that, whether we contemplate Woman in the rôle of the adulteress, of the heartless step-mother, of the harlot, or of the creature whose duplicity has been the riddle of all ages; or whether we contemplate her as the staunchest of lovers, as the most reliable of allies, as the mother whose noble devotion to her offspring will drive her to any extreme of danger in defence of them, and as the representative of that sex which has given us a Joan of Arc, an Emily Brontë, and an Emily Davison of Derby fame; we are always confronted by a creature whose worst can, on final analysis, be shown to be only the outcome of her best and most vital qualities, turned to evil by mal-adaptation; and whose best is but the normal and effortless expression of her natural endowments.
Seeing, however, that among the mal-adaptations which cause Woman’s best to manifest itself as her worst, I include lack of guidance and control from the quarter of her men-folk, I range myself naturally among the Anti-Feminists, though at the same time I most emphatically disclaim all anti feminine prejudices. Indeed, so far from this being the case, I am a deep and passionate admirer and lover of Woman. In order to love her, however, I do not find it necessary to exalt her to a plane on which all her sturdier, more vital, and more “dangerous” characteristics are whittled down to mere sweetness. Those to whom the love of woman depends upon so gross an idealization of her nature as to cause them to overlook or deny that “wickedness” in her, which is at once her greatest vital strength and her most powerful equipment as the custodian and the promoter of life, will find very little to sustain them in this love throughout the present volume. And, if in this age of “Safety first,” they fancy that it is expedient to rear and to love only those women from whom all “danger” has been removed, they will find that I have endeavoured to demonstrate to them the extreme peril even of this plausible ideal.”
The quote above is an excerpt from the preface of the second edition. You can find the entire book, along with many other works by Ludovici, here:
http://www.anthonymludovici.com/wv_pre.htm
Lady Raine
Second, I am not Jewish. My family is strictly Protestant Lutheran and very much practicing. My parents would seriously die if I brought home a Jew or a Non-German and intended to be “serious” with him.
But do you have jewish ancestry?
Come to think of it arguing with a woman is just as pointless as arguing with a jew. The jewish mentality is feminine. Deceptive, cunning, opportunistic and dishonorable.
Lady raine does a lot of yapping about her own single-mom wonderfulness.
Meanwhile, children may or may not listen to what you SAY, but they certainly see what you DO.
And if raine’s screeds here are any indication at all, if she’s telling the truth at all, then her son can SEE her hatred towards men — of which he is one. How’s that affecting him? None too good, I’ll wager. And raine’s far too busy being defensive of her own screw-up to hope she’ll ever notice and sharrup.
If she really loved her son, she ought to have given him up for adoption to a happily married couple where Dad provides food and masculine love (encouragement) / role model and mom is around to nurture. Failing that, she ought to move in with her own mom and dad so Grandpa (if he’s a good guy, hopefully) can undo some of the damage she’s caused with her male-hatred.
** Oh, and I’m particularly skeptical about her claim that her pre baby-daddy boyfriends were good guys. Women with functional pickers don’t then go let themselves get knocked up by abusive thugs.
Oh, and raine, since you’re so ticked that I pointed out your selfish behavior and poor mothering by denying your son a good man for a dad, you thought you could score points implying I’m uneducated. I have a bachelor’s degree in medical diagnostic imaging. I have an IQ of 130. I am a stay-at-home mom because I know what’s best for children. I’ve had plenty of options, all right. And I wisely leveraged those options to find MYSELF in a happy position, unlike you.
(And WN guys, I do disagree with age 18 for marriage of White women. Nords especially tend to have menarche later — even 17 or 18 is not completely unheard of. So she’s not particularly likely to be physically and mentally mature enough to be a good mom until the 20s.)
I see the rain lady is on a roll again. All I can say is that she is a rarity among women. There’s certainly no harm with her primary interests being in science and technology instead of new recipes, but the vast majority of women have little to no interest in those subjects let alone the aptitude to pursue them. I also work in an occupation associated with machining and engineering (aerospace) and while I’m not a machinist or engineer I’ve had to acquire some knowledge of those fields to work with those members and perform my job satisfactorily.
I’ve visited dozens of machine shops around the country and I think I’ve only seen two women who are actual machinists. I’ve worked with several female engineers over the years and while they were at least minimally competent their abilities and problem solving skills were inferior to the male engineers. Naturally there are exceptions and you might be one of them, but overall women don’t have the same cognitive skills as men. You can continue to shout girl power at the top of your lungs but women collectively or individually cannot will themselves to be CEO’s, four star generals, doctors, engineers, and high ranking politicians. Anyone who tells women that they can is doing them a disservice and setting them up for disappointment and failure.
George Sodini is ultimately responsible for this actions but his murder spree and the motives behind it were almost unprecedented in this country’s history. Like most men George was raised by his mother to believe that if he just had a good job, acted like a gentlemen and deferred to women he would attract the ladies only to find out late in life that was a monstrous lie. As such he was ill-equipped to deal with the extreme Darwinian nature of the modern dating game and his emotions eventually got the best of him. Like it or not the break down of traditional society is creating men like Sodini and there are probably more like him just waiting to explode at any time.
You see world history and the world itself through the prism of feminist ideology. No doubt that women have done great things throughout the history of the West and I’m especially fond of Isabella of Spain. But Isabella and other great women of our race were also very devoted to their husbands and did not reject men, look upon them as unworthy or consider themselves “ice queens”.
But Isabella and other great women of our race were also very devoted to their husbands and did not reject men, look upon them as unworthy or consider themselves “ice queens”.
~
This pretty much says it all, Mr. Dithers. You are so right, never before in the history of the world (or at least of the European world), was this more sadly and pathetically true. Those women from antiquity were a rarity, and, most significantly, came from the aristocracies and nobilities as well.
Now we are experiencing the tragedy of the common-ers, American women with “girrrl power”, who wish to fancy themselves as way, way above their station and status in reality and the real world.
God help US.
Her comments have been civil and productive. I’m inclined to allow her to argue her perspective.
Yet, in a genuinely “civil and productive” correction and instruction of Lady Raine, eight fundamental errors of historical fact, scientific principle, and elementary logic were readily identifiable – recognition of which, amidst the reading of this propagandistic apologia, her own addition to the modern agendas for the “normalization” of perverse behavior, tends to insult one’s intelligence.
And most portentously, it is not enough that masculine women and feminine men, amongst other delinquents, be tolerated in an increasingly untrustworthy un-society. Science, history, and logic must thus be violated, in the attempt to create that contradiction in terms, an utterly cosmopolitan “tribe-less nation,” so that every soul may feel entitled to societal approbation, whatever the ultimate consequences to society.
“Every soul,” that is, except present company.
But before I can be “Trainspotted” with multiple speculative falsehoods about my own circumstance, let me mention, by way of ironic human interest, that I married a “Lady Raine”.
My wife is a former naval officer, professional welder, technical editor, semi-professional martial artist, and radical feminist.
Took me two years of 24/7 re-education to flip her, but now she’s more of a nazi than I am.
Her comments have been civil and productive. I’m inclined to allow her to argue her perspective. — Hunter
Overall true, however NN makes some good points –
Yet, in a genuinely “civil and productive” correction and instruction of Lady Raine, eight fundamental errors of historical fact, scientific principle, and elementary logic were readily identifiable – recognition of which, amidst the reading of this propagandistic apologia, her own addition to the modern agendas for the “normalization” of perverse behavior, tends to insult one’s intelligence. — NeoNietzsche
Most especially the last point you make there, NN.
Such as this gutter comment –
…was a stripper for a whole 8 months for a second job quite a few years ago (and I’m neither “ashamed” nor “proud” of it. It was a fill in job and it was a lot of fun. Of course I’d do it again because you can’t beat the money, the easy hours, and the ease of that job in itself. I never had a “bad” experience.)
Wow. Really, you are no one to give a ‘morality lesson’ to. Strippers are industrial sex workers, no matter how you may trivialize it (i.e. ‘it was ‘harmless ‘fun’ and ‘exercise’ – LOL), and no matter how you try to rationalize or justify it away, it is an integral part of the lucrative (and very shady) escort/lap dance/sex industry.
Ugh, saying that you, a mother who says she wants to set a good example, would do it again–and especially emphasizing the ‘money’ part– makes you out to look like an… um… well, we’ll leave this up to the others individual judgement.
This is not “Roissy-lite” here, nor a “diarrhea-of-the-mouth–let-it-all-hang-out” ‘relationship’ site either. Control your narcissism. Nobody wants to hear about this low class behavior.
No more trashy comments like this Wendy. No more.
This is how the Establishment turned our White American Women into female ‘Golem’.
How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women
http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html