|
Female Psychology Part I: Reflecting on Schopenhauer's Views
by John Allington
23 January 2004
Preface
If you haven't already read Arthur Schopenhauer's famous essay on women, then I recommend you do so here: http://www.heretical.com/miscella/onwomen.html.
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. This
is the charge leveled against anyone attempting an honest analysis of female behavior, motives and
capabilities. No one claims women hate men when they point out that we can't bear children. But
these same women are usually not open to learning that this ability to bear children comes with a
cost. Anyway, we must have children with our women in order to perpetuate our genes. This means
we had better dispense with the romantic mythology and get down to understanding the creature that is woman.
I shouldn't have to point out that there are plenty of good things about women, notably their
appearance when young and their skill and patience in nurturing children. But none of this
precludes the requirement for an honest assessment of what exactly we're dealing with. Women
constantly compare notes about men whereas men usually don't discuss women with each other -- beyond
the obvious exchanges on female physical appearance. Consequently, men are usually outgunned
emotionally, psychologically and sexually in their dealings with women. We constantly hear about
the cad "who didn't call the next day" but the truth is that it is women who, more often than men,
end relationships. More importantly, even after men have been nearly destroyed both financially
and emotionally by women, our stupid egos often prevent us from understanding what really happened
and why. Women don't really possess egos in the male sense and we can learn from this. Instead,
their corresponding personality vice is self-absorption. We need to improve our understanding of
women in order to protect our resources and allocate our time efficiently so that they are better
put to use in enabling us to perpetuate our genes.
Important Conclusions Regarding Women
Women are prone to deception; it is their nature-endowed weapon. Schopenhauer called this
'dissimulation.' They must possess this ability as a counter to superior male physical strength.
As Schopenhauer noted, the reason women are so good at detecting deception in others is because
they're so good at it themselves. Think about this for a minute and let it sink in. But this
deception is not limited to their ability to lie with a straight face and usually without guilt.
In fact, this is just the beginning. They deceive us by coloring their hair, altering their shape
through constrictive clothing, and altering their height and posture by wearing high-heeled shoes.
They use colored contact lenses to fool us into believing they have desirable blue or green 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 designed to make them appear thinner. They even attempt to deceive
us by moving when they have created social chaos in one area. You have probably noticed that when
a woman decides to change men, she often moves so that any story she decides to relay regarding
her past is plausible to the new men with whom she establishes relationships.
Women are consumers. This is of course necessary because they require supplementary resources
during their child-bearing years. They however maintain this entitlement mentality throughout
their lives as biological imperative morphs into habit. This collective sense of entitlement is
the supporting backbone for the modern social-democratic welfare state and one of the big reasons
why the state continues to grow in size and mission. Thus, contrary to their rhetoric, most women
expect you to support them as they have no intention of supporting themselves in the long run.
True, most are capable of supporting themselves at a modest level, but they aspire to much finer
things! Interestingly, they expect us to be grateful that they allow us to support them and most
of us will cheerfully oblige. The way to deal with all of this is to understand that they are the
incubators of our children. Romanticizing this arrangement, as many male European writers have
done, distracts us from what is actually going on. It also sets us up for profound
disillusionment. The notion of courtly love was created by male writers and poets, not by females.
In fact, the more cynical women actually mock this notion. To men, courtly love means chivalry; to
women it means that they are the center of your attention and the recipient of your resources. If
a reciprocal system existed, wouldn't you like it too? In summary, if you closely examine female
behavior, you will identify attention seeking and resource transfer as frequently recurring
themes.
Women are social creatures. If raised in a rural area, they will usually leave that area for a
city after high school. They seek a more socially stimulating environment, money and a higher
probability of finding a wealthy, high-status male. This has recently been underscored by extreme
shortages of young women in the rural areas of Eastern Europe as the women have left for urban
money centers in the west. But what about those female family values we hear so much about? Yes,
exactly. The men stay behind to care for aging parents while the local women leave to find better
mates.
This migration of women also highlights their preference for high-density herding and is one of
the reasons why women don't generally oppose immigration. You've probably noticed that they
usually prefer crowds. This preference among women to live in urban environments 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 such an environment. Urban populations are
always less free as they require more laws to maintain order. You only have to think of places
like the population centers of East Asia and Northern Europe to realize this. More people = less
free. And this is just fine with most women.
Women are, in everything but their youthful appearance and raising children, mediocre. This is
their biological destiny. Twenty-five hundred years of European history have not produced a single
genius female painter, philosopher or composer. Think about that for a minute and please don't
counter with "what about Clara Schuman or Ayn Rand?" as you will only prove my point. Geniuses,
by definition, surmount obstacles to create. Obstacles didn't impede female genius, nature did.
Why? Women have not been selected for intellectual genius. Instead, they have been selected for
fertility. But our Jewish-dominated media and academy tell us they are our equals! Well, the
media and academy lie about this like they lie about so much else. 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 nor are they the star performers. Even in something as trivial as
comedy, the few females who excel are usually minority lesbians who make jokes about their deviant
sexual practices.
Women squander resources. This is related to their lack of concern for the future. Turn your
finances over to them and they will usually spend most -- if not all -- of your money. Young, single
women have the lowest savings rate of any demographic group. They spend virtually all of their
money as they simultaneously whine about the irresponsibility of men in their age group. This low
savings rate is also related to the expectation that a man will support them later on in their
lives. If they are poor, they will 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 and Tumi luggage -- status purchases that
will be out of fashion in a year or two? If women are educated, they tend to blow their money on
travel, but will usually learn nothing from it. Ask a young woman about her exotic travel and she
will discuss the food she consumed. Ask a middle aged woman about her exotic travel and she will
tell you about the hotels she stayed in. Neither woman will be particularly interested in the
culture, art, architecture, geography or topography of the place she visited. Should this be
surprising? After all, how many of our greatest explorers were women? Exactly, and no accident
either. Getting back to the main point: 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 nature of the Jew, you will find
many similarities. Shared qualities include nihilism, pragmatism, materialism, mimicry,
narcissism, deception, pretense, opportunism, parasitism, haughty conceit and decadence. You will
find no celebration of honor within either group. In fact, you will notice a remarkable decline in
the importance of honor whenever and wherever women and Jews dominate the culture. Now, all of
this is not to say that women are like Jews. Rather, Jews are like women. Since Jewish culture is
matriarchal and matrilineal, you should not be surprised to learn that their mode of existence
mirrors and amplifies a number of core female survival strategies. However, there are important
differences as well. For our society, our white women are essential for our survival while Jews
and their socio-political imperatives threaten the health of that very same society at many
different levels.
As Schopenhauer pointed out, women live more fully in the present, with little 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 earlier would have been laughed at as ridiculous. But if the gay male fashion designers
tell them it's chic, they'll wear it! Their pant leg and eyebrow widths seem to have an inverse
relationship as they expand and contract with each passing decade. But their narrow time horizon
also expresses itself in important ways as well, 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 their vital role in nurturing children and
explains their superior interpersonal skills. But it plays hell with their analytical and
abstract thinking skills because it denies them an important reference frame for their ideas:
time. 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 retards the
collective ability to make good decisions in a democracy. Because they live in the present and
are more herdlike, they are more easily manipulated by governments, Hollywood, universities,
advertisers, Oprah and their friends.
Modern women and men have been stretched to our limits because our social systems have changed
much more rapidly than our biology. We are biologically nearly identical to the humans who
inhabited Europe ten thousand years ago. Yet both women and men have assumed roles and behavioral
patterns far removed from their evolutionary norms. This accelerating androgyny expresses itself
as a sort of a regression to the mean of the gender behavioral spectrum. It isn't obvious at
first. You say: But look how sexy-looking the women of today are, they don't look more
male-like! Think about it a bit more carefully... We now have young women trying hard to
de-emphasize their normal feminine body style (soft and curvy) to pursue a lean and muscular
(masculine) ideal 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 in yet
another demonstration of their unapologetic enthusiasm for deception. In southern California, I
judge that a substantial percentage of young, attractive women have these implants. Now, does the
scenario I have just outlined strike my reader as healthy?
In contrast, men have become less aggressive and more passive. They display less emotion and
control their anger more. Were there "anger management" training courses fifty years ago? Why
not? What's changed? Have men changed or has our society become more feminine? Were tens of
millions of men confined to fabric-covered cubicles 50 years ago? Were five to ten percent of male
children drugged with Ritalin 50 years ago? Masculinity has in fact been pathologized in America.
In the long run, drugging male children and forcing men to become docile, conforming drones will
probably result in some sort of angry reaction. The (mostly Jewish) feminists, educators and
greedy capitalists have a lot to answer for.
It is worthwhile to note that with the Women's Liberation movement, females emphasized their
sexuality more than ever before, which is exactly the opposite of what the feminists told us was
their goal. Does this make sense? Yes it does. You see, women are essentially immodest when
unrestricted. Women in their reproductive years are the natural moral corrupters of society
because their sexuality is their most powerful weapon. When permitted, these women will emphasize
that sexuality to obtain higher status and collect more resources, naturally loosening public
mores in the process. Think about everything from abortion rights to lesbian chic. Who favors
these things -- men? No. Women dress more provocatively than ever before and are more sexually
promiscuous than ever before. Women, who claim to champion family values, have voluntarily
lowered their fertility rates to below replacement levels and have aborted about 40 million
fetuses in the United States since Roe vs. Wade. No, that number was not a typo and in case you
are interested, about 25 million of those fetuses were white. All of these behaviors -- from
lesbian chic to 40 million abortions -- coincide almost perfectly with women's liberation and are
directly linked outcomes. In addition, it is obvious to the most casual observer that most women
seek neither political nor economic freedom. Instead, they seek only aesthetic and sexual freedom
because only these types of freedoms relate to their evolutionary survival strategy. Libertarian
observers have called this "trading away expensive freedoms in exchange for cheap freedoms" but
never follow through to explore who advocates this exchange and why. Alas, libertarians have weak
powers of discernment because they are egalitarians and operate from (an ironic) Marxian premise
that we are all equal except that some of us just work a bit harder than others (and should get
the all-important tax cut because we do).
But hey, aren't you living in the best of times? I mean, you have an SUV and a big house, right?
The economy keeps humming along and your stocks are worth more so things must be "all good,"
right? No, wrong! We are living in a civilization decadent to its core and on the edge of a
steep decline. Our 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
(acquired through the military intimidation of OPEC nations) and a (still) overvalued currency.
It does not place as its top priority the rearing of its children. It makes up for its below
replacement fertility rate by importing an underclass from Latin America. It borrows money from
future generations for consumption in the present. Does this sound like a sustainable formula for
stability? Our present ethos will probably pass through one of two possible outcomes: radical
change through revolution or a collapse to a lower level of complexity. But this collapse or
revolution is likely many decades away.
As discussed above, 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 as maintained by the European
derived peoples. But there is some hope. Feminine psychology and behavior are much more flexible
than masculine psychology and behavior. (We can get the girls to act more like boys without
drugging them but the converse isn't true). Tighten public morality and women will become
Victorian prudes. Loosen public morality and it's cool for women to tattoo and pierce themselves
in a quest for the stripper-chic look. Indeed, a near anarchistic, secular Jewish cultural milieu
(called Bourgeois Bohemian by Jew David Brooks) plus flexible female psychology and behavioral
patterns has delivered socio-cultural entropy to Joe Sixpack in flyover country. Now it's time
for Joe Sixpack to waken up and begin to fight back against all those aligned against him. His
fight begins with an understanding of what he is up against.
JOHN ALLINGTON
|