Comments on: The Tyranny of Suffrage

By: Valkea

Valkea — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:06:52 +0000

Feminism is a paradoxical ideology, which creates negative self-increasing spirals. Women try acquire male partners, who are higher in status, capability, IQ etc., and they are drawn to such men. The more equal men and women become, the more off-putting and obnoxious men become to women, hence it increases feminists hatred of men and radicalism, which increases their political demands of equality. Etc.

By: Dipitty Do

Dipitty Do — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 00:44:24 +0000

“Women are more conformist than men because they feel on average higher psychological pain when disagreeing with the social group.”

Spot on. Speaking as a woman, even when doing things that I know 100% are right, I feel tremendous emotional distress if doing so has any negative impacts on my social group. This is when it is absolutely necessary to have the support of someone not so sensitive.

By: Prognosticator

Prognosticator — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 08:20:33 +0000

I too look at grave sites often, lots of old rural folks in my area. So groups of us all look at the oldest grave stones, and have a talk about them afterwards. These gravestones tend to be of children under the age of 8 years and younger, mostly younger. It was not uncommon for women before suffrage to have 8 or more children if they survived. Husbands in the marriage records back before suffrage tended to have not one, but two or three wives, all in succession as the prior wives died of childbirth complications. The human condition itself contributed to the great pile of bones under the suffrage movement, that’s given us the rapid rise of feminism today. I see it in negative and positive forces, the negative like you mentioned the world wars, who’s families did they not touch here reading this? All of you I bet. Then the positive of technological progress in medicine, then the misuse of those technologies on an entire culture and population, a negative. All these forces contributed to the condition of feminism and the floundering, apologetic main streamed Patriarchy of today.

Prostitutes, many feminists most unknowingly worship the prostitute, the whore, some folk tales say it’s one side of the triple goddess, from a logical perspective you could say it’s one side of the dark triad of the feminine psych. I’ve had a Lesbian friend show me there written work on the worship of the prostitute. Weird stuff mate.

I’ve read in articles on the web that women still own 60% of wealth, the cause mainly placed at life expectancy, though I believe the divorce laws and the last 150 years of inheritance would also creep into those statistics.

Perhaps the main aspect to take away from this, in the cycle of civilisation, the human condition provides the kindling bones for the precognitive progressive thoughts to manifest, that brings on the peak of gluttony, hedonism, literally the betrayal we see before our very eyes.

By: Ballista74

Ballista74 — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 05:14:58 +0000

While I haven’t had a chance to develop this point on my blog anywhere, it’s notable that modern feminism (circa 1960 or so) is an outgrowth of traditionalism or traditional feminism, which the OP chronicles. While traditional feminism is about 500 years old (or so), it gained a substantial amount of power in the Industrial Revolution ( https://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/the-idol-of-the-proverbs-31-woman/ ) and solidified itself in the ways the OP indicates. This way of thought led to the false idea that women are weak creatures that need providing and protecting for – note the point in that post that women were always providers in the family until their production was moved into the factories.

That said, modern feminism presents an outgrowth of this traditionalism, reacting to the “Female Infantilization” component of trad feminism (the deceptive idea that women are weak and stupid, as children, who can not take responsibility for their own actions) – to that wrong end, the modern feminists have a point. The problem is they sought to leverage their power to take the rights represented by entering the work place and the like, but not undertake the full responsibilities thereof. To that end, you won’t find women volunteering to be front line soldiers or mine workers or the like, among other things that are still the case. You’ll still find rape culture, most notably “Yes means Yes” of late.

To that end, the modern feminist movement consists of bored housewives, tomboys, and true hardcore misandrists (women who basically want to hurt men as sport), and represents a disagreement among women as to the best way to subjugate and control men. (Traditionalism is largely based on fostering the deception that men rule families and governments, while women rule the men. In that sense, patriarchy exists, but is under the control of matriarchy) Naturally, the socialist/communist bloc took what they did as an opportunity to institute the government as true husband ( https://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2014/08/14/how-to-destroy-marriage/ ), AMOGing the one in the flesh. This would have the goal of destroying the family, a noted barrier to the communist agenda.

Again, there’s much more that could be developed out on that, but thought I’d offer it as reinforcement to some of the OP along with the point made in the comment above with the gracious linking to my posts.

By: Reed Perry

Reed Perry — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 03:48:46 +0000

Yes. The work of Toynbee and Huntington, etc, inspired me to investigate the conditions under which suffrage was granted. There are many working parts, but an ascendant civilization seems to inevitably go overboard in war, resulting in backfire and bizarre social policies used to justify their superiority complex. Still much more that needs to be researched and written.

By: First Bayes

First Bayes — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 03:35:05 +0000

Most of the problems caused by acceding women more political power had already been observed during the collapse of multiple world civilizations, including but not being limited to Greece, the Abbassid Caliphate, the ottoman Turks, Victorian England most recently, and so on. But apart from historians, or bloggers with a history-fetish, this intellectual insight has been inaccessible for the vast majority of the human population. This time, however, every step of the collapse is being documented from multiple viewpoints in the cloud. I think the persistence of social memory due to modern technology, and its effects on societal evolution, are interesting avenues of exploration for NRx

By: jay

jay — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 03:15:06 +0000

And for those who may not know:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/20/the-return-of-patriarchy/

As modern feminism contracepts itself out of existence. This will occur. However traditional feminism predicated on the moral superiority of women will remain:
https://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/defining-tradcon-feminism-part-1-theory/

https://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/defining-tradcon-feminism-part-2-principles/

https://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2014/03/14/traditional-marriage-and-sex-roles-in-1954-look-like-feminist-marriage-and-sex-roles-today/

By: Valkea

Valkea — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 01:24:48 +0000

Sex differences in general intelligence:

http://www.sciencevsfeminism.com/myth-of-equality/sex-differences-general-intelligence/

By: J Katz

J Katz — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 20:21:50 +0000

I don’t think he was putting women at fault, but he was implying that women have it easy in modern society, while men are suffering. I was merely attempting to point out that it’s not that simple. The psychological effects of feminism and modern society on the female psyche are just as devastating for women as they are for men in many cases.

I am very well acquainted with the facts of human biodiversity. I am an ex-feminist and I do support patriarchy, so you are preaching to the choir there.

As for your assertion of what I’m assuming you are referring to as a Jewish plot for world domination – why not take a look at who is actually openly plotting to overthrow your civilization? I know you think Muslims are too stupid to do what you think those tricky Jews have been doing – but maybe if you opened your eyes you would see that your women are being openly gang raped and taken not by Jewish men, but Muslim and black men who sadly seem to be some of the only people left in the West who still retain some sort of warped sense of patriarchy. Not to mention – many of your fellow whites seem to care very little for white women and instead prefer to act on their exotic Asian fantasies. Your focus on Jews as subversive is blinding you to the very tangible threats coming from all directions and other hostile minorities. And are not secular Jewish men and women equally affected by this subversive culture in which we live? You think they are secretly going home and laughing about feminism while they retain some sort of traditional culture? I suppose you could say the Orthodox do this but they are openly patriarchal and anti-feminist and not to mention very much hated by the vast majority of secular Jews. And what about the content of this article, were these suffragettes merely flaccid pawns in a Jewish feminist conspiracy? None of these women were Jewish. They were mostly Northern European leftists. Do you feel that Gentiles have no will of their own but are only able to do as their Jewish masters say? If a Jew tells a gentile to jump – does he ask him how high? It’s possible that you should stop blaming others for your civilizational collapse and perhaps look more closely into the issue. I’m not even suggesting that others are completey innocent – but by placing all of the faults on outsiders you are denying that your own community lack any sort of agency. Luke Ford explains this better than I am able to here:

http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=62897

By: Valkea

Valkea — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 19:38:55 +0000

Women are more conformist than men because they feel on average higher psychological pain when disagreeing with the social group. Women are more likely than men to obey and respect authorities. Women take on average less risks than men and are in ways that are relevant e.g to the therapeutic state and social security more security oriented. Women are more likely to feel compassion and empathy to the convicted criminal, guilty party, person to be punished etc., and more likely to feel their pain, so they are less likely than men to punish, and their punishments tend to be milder. Men are more likely than women to feel satisfaction when punishing justly. These reasons make women less able than men to uphold social order and justice. Men have considerably more high IQ persons than women, but also more low IQ persons. Women tend to pack more around the middle IQ. Thus women are ideal for the high status managers of bureaucracies to displace as many men as possible; not high IQ independent thinkers, but high enough IQ to perform tasks reliably; more conformists and loyal to the authorities and bosses, less likely to challenge hierarchies or status of high status managers, less likely to compete with them; more satisfied with what they are given or allowed by high status managers (salaries, statuses, privileges, etc.); they have less conduct disorders or “disorders”; they can be used as a sexual turf or harem by high status managers; etc. Thus the leaders of large bureaucracies are likely to support leftist equality between the sexes, quotas for women, women empowerment, privileges for women, rights for women, special support for women, women and feminist studies in universities, feminism generally, feministic propaganda in media, etc.

… Equality is needed to maximize inequality. E.g. Stalin could not have raised him to false god status without equality. When all the small hierarchies and small inequalities of local groups had been eliminated, everybody could be attached to one big and high megahierarchy of the communist state, under which shelter all kinds of vivid inequalities, privileges, special treatments, exclusive rights, dominations, arbitraty powers, etc. prospered. Exactly in liberal societies, where liberals (“conservatives” + liberals) speak constantly about equality and promote equality, inequality has increased radically, and power and money has concentrated to the coalition of large private and public bureaucracies and big international banks.