|
Women: A Psychological Sketch
by John Allington
2 April 2005
Women: A Psychological Sketch
by John Allington
Loaded: 5/18/2003
PART ONE
If you haven't already read Arthur Schopenhauer's discussion about
women then you
need to. [Link not available]
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/vnn/showEssay.asp?essayID=1250
It is the best concise analysis you will likely ever find. I will
draw out his discussion a
bit and relate it to practical matters. I will probably be accused
of misogyny for my
comments. So what? We must have children with white women in order
to perpetuate
our genes, which is without question, our most important biological
imperative and
should be our most important personal priority. It is also one of
the most powerful
political statements we can make. There are plenty of good things
about women, most
notably their appearance when young and their skill and patience in
nurturing
children.
All of this however does not preclude the requirement for an honest
assessment of
what exactly we're dealing with. Women compare notes; men usually
don't.
Consequently, men are usually outgunned emotionally, psychologically
and sexually
in their dealings with women. Even after a man has been nearly
financially and
emotionally destroyed by a woman, his stupid ego often prevents him
from
understanding what really happened to him. Women don't really
possess egos in the
male sense and you can learn from this. You need to improve your
understanding of
women in order to protect your resources and allocate your time
efficiently so that
they are effectively used to perpetuate your genes.
Important Conclusions Regarding Women
Women are prone to deception; it is their nature-endowed weapon. As
Schopenhauer
noted, they are so good at detecting deception in others because
they're so good at it
themselves. This deception is not limited to their ability to lie
with a straight face. In
fact, that is just beginning. They deceive us by coloring their
hair, altering their
shape through constrictive clothing and prostheses, and altering
their height and
posture with high-heeled shoes. They use colored contact lenses to
fool us into
thinking they have desirable green or blue eyes. They get cosmetic
surgery to reduce
the size of their noses and apply a multitude of cosmetics to their
faces and skin
designed to fool us into thinking they are younger than they
actually are. They
carefully select clothes which are designed to make them appear
thinner. In addition,
their deception extends to where they live. You have probably
noticed that when a
woman decides to change men, she often changes her physical
location. After creating
social chaos in one area, she'll look for a new, uninformed pool of
men who will find
any story she decides to relay as plausible.
Women are parasites. They expect you to support them. Most have no
intention of
supporting themselves in the long term, regardless of their rhetoric
about being
"independent." In addition, they expect you to be grateful that they
allow you to
support them! The way to deal with this in your own mind is to
understand that they
are incubators for your children. Romanticizing this arrangement, as
many male
European writers have done, misses the point. It also sets you up
for much
disillusionment. The notion of courtly love was created by men, not
by women. The
more cynical women actually mock this notion. To men, courtly love
means chivalry;
to women it means that they are the center of a man's attention and
the recipient of
his resources. If you closely examine female behavior, you will
identify attention
seeking and resource transfer as recurring themes.
Women are social creatures. If raised on a farm or in a rural area,
you can almost bet
that they will leave that area for a city after high school. They
seek a more socially
stimulating environment and this consideration generally supersedes
career
opportunities. They're willing to move to a city even though the
cost of living is
higher, and there's more crime. In many small towns and agricultural
communities,
there are often shortages of eligible females. The female preference
for high-density
herding is one of the reasons why women don't generally oppose
immigration -- they
prefer crowds. The preference among women to live in an urban
environment has its
consequences for our society. The more urban a population, the less
self-reliant it is.
It depends more on government services and it is more disconnected
from nature.
The strength and security that come from a strong male are thus
devalued in an urban
environment. Urban populations are always less free as it takes more
laws to control
the mass of people. You only have to think of places like Singapore
or the coastal
provinces of China to realize this. This also applies to Japan and
the densely populated
areas of Europe. More people = less free. And this is just fine with
most women.
Women are in everything but their youthful appearance and raising
children,
mediocre. Twenty-five hundred years of European history have not
produced one
decent female painter. Nor have those years produced one decent
female philosopher
-- nor one decent female composer. Think about that! But we're told
they are our
equal. Think about the women you work with. They may be hard working,
well-organized, presentable and punctual. But they're not likely
looked to for
innovative ideas or out-of-the-box thinking. They are not the star
performers.
Women squander resources. This is related to their lack of concern
for the future.
Turn your finances over to them and they will likely spend most --
if not all -- of
your money. Young, single women have the lowest savings rate of any
demographic
group. This is related to both squandering and the expectation that
a man will support
them later on in their lives. If they are poor, they buy a bunch of
cheap junk at
Wal-Mart. If they're rich, or have sufficient credit, they will buy
a bunch of
high-priced, unnecessary shoes. Do men yearn to blow their money on
overpriced
Prada shoes, Coach bags or Tumi luggage? If women are educated, they
tend to blow
their money on travel, from which they usually learn nothing. Since
women do not
conserve resources, why should you expect them to be conservative in
other areas
such as culture or politics?
Interestingly, when you compare the nature of the female to the natur
e of the Jew,
you find many similarities. You'll find nihilism, pragmatism,
materialism, mimicry,
narcissism, deception, pretense, opportunism, parasitism, haughty
conceit and
decadence all in abundance. You will find no honor in either group.
This is not to say
that women are like Jews. Rather, Jews are like women. Since Jewish
culture is
matriarchal, you should not be surprised by this.
As Schopenhauer pointed out, women live more fully in the present,
with less
concern for the past or the future. This expresses itself in trivial
ways such as the
cyclical nature of their clothing fashion, hairstyles and makeup
preferences. They're
willing to wear what only a few years ago would have been considered
among all of
them as ridiculous. Their pant-leg and eyebrow widths seem to have
an inverse
relationship as they expand and contract with each passing decade.
Their narrow time
horizon also expresses itself in serious ways such as an almost
total lack of interest in
history (and by extension the lessons that can be drawn from it).
This present-centeredness is probably required for nurturing
children and explains
their superior interpersonal skills. But it plays hell with their
analytical and abstract
thinking skills. You should now be able to comprehend the danger of
giving the vote
to a population that doesn't learn from the past and has little
concern for the future
and how this dilutes the collective ability to make good decisions
in a democracy.
Because they live in the present and they are more herdlike, they
are more easily
manipulated by the government, Hollywood, universities, advertisers,
Oprah and
their friends.
Modern women and men have been stretched to their limits by our
unnatural society.
Women have become more malelike. And men have become more
femalelike. This
androgyny is a sort of a regression to the mean of the gender
behavioral spectrum.
You say: But look how sexy-looking the women of today are, they
don't look more
malelike! Think about that a bit more carefully... We now have young
women trying
so hard to become less feminine (soft and curvy) that they strive to
become lean and
muscular through obsessive working out. This reduces their body fat
percentage and
shrinks their breasts, giving them a less feminine shape. To
compensate for this, they
(with more frequency than is mentioned in the media) have breast
implants installed
into their bodies to deceive us. In southern California, I judge
that a substantial
percentage of young, attractive women have these implants. Think
about it...this is a
sign of a warped society.
In contrast, men have become less aggressive and more passive. They
display less
emotion; they control their anger more. Do you think there were
"anger
management" training courses fifty years ago? Were so many men
confined to
fabric-covered cubicles 50 years ago? Were 5-10 percent of male
children doped up
with Ritalin 50 years ago? In the long run, drugging our male
children and forcing
our men to be docile, conformist drones will ensure an angry
reaction. The (mostly
Jewish) feminists, educators and greedy capitalists will have a lot
to answer for.
It is worthwhile to observe that after "Women's Liberation," females
emphasized
their sexuality more than ever before, which is exactly the opposite
of what the
feminists cited as their objective. Essentially, women are immodest
when
unrestricted. They are the natural corrupters of society because
their sexuality is their
most powerful weapon. When permitted, women will emphasize that
sexuality to
obtain higher status and collect more resources, naturally loosening
public mores in
the process. They will seek neither political nor economic freedom,
as only aesthetic
and sexual freedom relate to their evolutionary survival strategy.
For example, possessing the requisite body type, they will wear hip
hugger pants with
their thong underwear sticking out and tight-fitting blouses to
emphasize their
augmented breasts. They will flock to Florida for spring break,
where they hope to
be captured on film baring their breasts for the next "Girls Gone
Wild" video. You
think all of this is really sexy? Well, of course it is in one way.
So too is a strip joint
filled with drugged-up dancers. In another and much more important
sense, all of this
is just pathetic and desperate attention-seeking -- which of course
provides yet more
insight into the pathologies of unregulated female psychology.
"Women's Liberation" unleashed behavioral patterns that contributed
to declining
completed fertility rates and undermined high-investment parenting strategies. (The
resulting demographic damage may lead to the death of Western
Civilization.) Female
psychology and behavior are considerably more malleable than male
psychology and
behavior. Tighten public morality and women become Victorian prudes.
Loosen
public morality and it's nipple, tongue and clit piercing time! An
anarchistic, secular
Jewish cultural milieu plus malleable female psychology and behavior
equals social
disintegration. It's that simple!
Are you living in the best of times? No. You are living in a
civilization decadent to its
core and on the edge of a steep decline. This type of society,
despite its prosperous
veneer, is a Potemkin village. It cannot sustain itself. It lives
off the hard work and
wealth of previous generations, an energy subsidy and an overvalued
currency. It
does not place as its top priority the rearing of its children. It
borrows money from
the future for consumption in the present. Its ethos will pass
through one of two
possible outcomes: radical change through revolution or a collapse
to a lower level of
complexity.
JOHN ALLINGTON
|