Women: A Psychological Sketch

by John Allington

2 April 2005

Women: A Psychological Sketch
by John Allington
Loaded: 5/18/2003


If you haven't already read Arthur Schopenhauer's discussion about women then you need to. [Link not available]


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.


Back to VNN Main Page