In a healthy society, relative success in finding a girl for marriage is directly dependent on a man’s possession of character traits that are conducive to building and promoting civilization – e.g., conscientiousness, reliability, hard work, and intelligence. The twist here, and the source of the primary shock experienced while getting red-pilled about women, is that these are not the qualities that women find arousing. On the contrary, they are rather off-putting to them, and men for whom they are their main personality assets are seen as boring by women.
That is true. The manosphere/game crowd are essentially correct from a descriptive standpoint. Where they fail – and fails miserably – is when they start prescribing.
Therefore, from time immemorial, it was seen as imperative to refuse women the freedom in choosing their mates, or at least to minimize it as much as possible. This is because the qualities in men that women find charming and arousing are inherently destructive to civilization.
True. And, therefore, female empowerment is also “inherently destructive to civilization” – as the last 100 years of history have so amply demonstrated.
What is more, any constellation that allows freedom of mate choice for women is bound to distract a man from his primary, civilization-building vocation by forcing him to devote a certain amount of his energy and time to finding a woman, and then, if he succeeds at keeping her bound to him by constantly evincing the character traits that are attractive to her. In other words, under the conditions of women’s liberation, finding and keeping a mate for a man becomes a separate endeavour in itself, uncoupled from his success at his primary vocation. And it was exactly this scenario that traditional moral codes had tried to prevent.
According to the gamesters, finding mates (as in plural) is the core element of a man’s life. Not for reproduction – but for “poolside” hedonism.
In modern western society, most white men are now forced to squander their energy and time to find and maintain a woman. With women’s liberation, men are no longer able to concentrate fully on learning and professing their vocation, be it science, a craft, or an art. Getting married doesn’t eliminate or even reduce this strain either. With lax no-fault divorce laws, men who want to keep their marriage from falling apart have to constantly maintain their charm and alpha attitude, in other words, constantly remain exciting to their women.
And the gamesters think this is right and proper. Every thought, action, word, and behavior of men need to be ever-so-carefully calibrated to appeal to ditzy female airheads. That is the “manosphere!”
Building and maintaining the greatest civilization in human history is an onerous task. White men are busy building spaceships, unraveling the mysteries of human nature, sequencing genomes, etc. Such activities require utmost concentration, efficient usage of valuable time and energy, and full dedication. Inevitably this necessitates long working hours and often sleep deprivation, which is, among other things, known to negatively affect testosterone levels. Keeping a woman bound to him, while at the same time making a contribution to civilization therefore becomes a huge burden on the white man under modern circumstances. His energy should not be squandered on finding and keeping a woman if our great civilization is to sustain itself.
All true. Yet the gamesters revel in this reality, telling us not to be serious, lest we “get no poosy.”
Therefore, it is of utmost importance that western society is re-arranged in such a way that a decent white man can find a suitable woman and keep her in marriage with minimum effort and without the need to be constantly exciting for her, the latter quality being entirely dependent on womens’ attraction to civilization-destroying traits in men (narcissism, Machiavellianism, sociopathy). That potential effort is better spent on civilization-building activities.
The gamesters celebrate and revere these “dark triad” traits (see more on this gamester hypocrisy below).
Coherent, useful, and corroborated with robust empirical evidence though it may be, the manosphere does not have the potential to save our civilization. After all, since the end goal of game is the seduction of women, its essence inevitably involves satisfying their sexual instincts.
Exactly, and that is what I have long said is one fundamental paradox about the “manosphere” – it is allegedly about men’s interests, and yet the advice given is for men to modulate their every word, action, and behavioral nuance to satisfy women’s hypergamous instincts. Included in this obsession with satisfying women is the gamesters’ promotion of dark triad psychopathic traits (a positive! It’s attractive to women!), while, at the same time, the same gamesters hypocritically bemoan the loss of our “high trust society.” Self-awareness must not be an “alpha male” trait.
However, the pillar of all higher civilizations from time immemorial has not been satisfying women’s sexual instincts but dismissing them, since, as mentioned above, the character traits that arouse women are inherently civilization-destroying.
Or, more simply: women are inherently civilization-destroying.
Indeed, the New Patriarchy would not just rein in liberated women but alpha males as well. After all, alpha males are the primary beneficiaries of sexual liberation. It is feral, liberated females who exalt alpha male traits, to the long-term detriment of individuals, families, and civilization. But alpha males traits are more important in primitive, warlike societies than modern civilizations. Alpha traits alone do not create civilizations, and in fact they frequently destroy them. Civilization is primarily created by beta males, and the purpose of the New Patriarchy is to enable such men to concentrate on their civilization-building activities, without the burden of worrying about finding and keeping a mate.
Of course, the “game” crowd will answer this essay with “well that’s all well and good, but what should men do right now – before we restore the patriarchy?”
Perhaps one needs to distinguish “game” as a temporary tactic from “game” as a strategic worldview. In today’s age, a bit of “game” may be necessary (which is one reason our civilization is crumbling) but the attitude of “men who care about race and civilization – they get no poosy” and that we should all just “sit poolside” while all around us crumbles – that needs to be rejected. The long-term strategy is patriarchy (which is NOT the same as “White Sharia” nonsense).