WOMEN ARE PROPERTY – SPOILS OF VICTORY

Women are in every relevant sense property, spoils of victory, the principal object or at least one of the principal objects, over which conflicts are even fought between men in the first place.

This is only a factual description. Property is what you are willing and able to defend.

Women, on the whole, are not willing or able to defend themselves. They are not self-owners.

If women have some men who are willing and able to defend them, then they are the property of those men. And in a world with men in it, that is the best condition in which they are ever likely to find themselves, for long.

They forget this only during long stretches of time during which repeated victories on the part of some men insure that they do not change hands. But if they do change hands, they accept it and adjust.

Our most recent period of global preeminence was so commanding, and so long-lasting, that even most MEN forgot that women are property. And so we have unshackled them from the authority of fathers, husbands, and kings, with disastrous consequences. The loss of reason and accountability have been total.

In more wise and less fortunate times, women tend to be marginally indifferent to which men are in charge, because throughout history, it has not mattered all that much – to women – which men are in charge. Things carry on after, much as they did before.

But it matters to men, because everything is always on the line, life and legacy. And that is why men must assume sole and exclusive dominion over questions of borders, defense, immigration, and others pertaining to security and in-group/outgroup demarcation. Men have skin in the game; women don’t. (And to these questions can be added others, from other arenas, pertaining to law, property, markets, and so on and so forth, things which may affect women, but which they have historically not directed.)

Women have little grasp of manly things or manly concerns, they have little incentive to acquire a grasp of such matters, and they have not been selected for astuteness in such matters, nor their instincts and predispositions for relevance to such matters. There are simply very few consequences, for women, to screwing these things up. That’s why it was foolish to give them any say in them at all. And if we don’t correct THAT error, sooner or later we’ll simply be killed and replaced by men who will.

But this time, things ARE different, for women. This time, it very much matters which men are in charge. However, women will still follow their hopelessly misguided programming straight into the Mohammedans’ potato sacks if we don’t save ourselves from them, and save them from themselves, by subjugating them once more.

Spoiled, entitled, unreasonable, shrill, demanding, women have squandered all of our recent advantages, and we have let them.

Sensing opportunity, the Barbarians have begun to stir. They are on the move. Some have already arrived.

As this realization slowly dawns, men start to gird themselves once more for battle. Danger and uncertainty are in the air. Dark times lie ahead. Great questions arise to be settled.

The wise women are to be found in the kitchen, preparing their men meals, whether they be sumptuous or familiar, delectable or hearty, sufficient to motivate and inspire them to carry the day, and to risk all, that they may come safe home. Many will not…

Or they are to be found in the bedroom, giving their men a hearty sendoff.

They will not be found on the battlefield. That is our domain. Don’t forget it. Don’t forget the privileges which that buys us. And don’t let women forget it.

ARTWORK: “Le Brenn et sa part de butin” (“Brenn and His Share of the Spoils”, also known as: ” Spoils of the Battle”), by Paul Jamin, 1893.

RESTORING TRADITIONAL NORMS, MORES, AND GENDER ROLES

I just want to reiterate that there is NO individual solution to the dissolution and degeneracy plaguing postmodern life, and specifically as regards gender relations and the sexual marketplace.

A lot of people say, “Want a trad wife? Just be more attractive to women. Work out. Make more money. Etc…” None of those are bad suggestions. All are helpful, even necessary. But they are not sufficient.

The higher up the right hand column you are, in that picture, the more female attention you will get. And if you are high *enough* you may even be able to obtain good terms from a suitably appealing woman. But you will only EVER be in a position to do that by GIVING UP plentiful sex with no strings attached to a variety of even more appealing (at least visually) women. I trust I don’t have to explain why most men will at least be sorely tempted to not make the pro-social choice, given those incentives.

Furthermore, the individual route involves increasing your *relative* appeal, compared to your competitors. The basic problem would remain unchanged, and would STILL remain unchanged if ALL men got more fit, rich, confident, etc… Most of the women would still be competing bitterly for the few at the top and ignoring the rest.

You would still have rampant dysgenia as the women at the top, no longer able (or much less able) to obtain exclusivity, paternal investment, or commitment, from high status men (who can simply have their pick of endless thirsty sluts) forego reproduction entirely. Many others, not necessarily at the top, but not at the bottom either, would forego reproduction out of unrealistic expectations, wishful thinking, and never being willing to “settle” for a more realistic option.

Meanwhile, elite men are (at least potentially) more reproductively successful than they were (in terms of absolute numbers) but by “mating down” less likely to pass on their best traits. And lower status women have greatly increased reproductive opportunities, and through their exercise of the franchise, the ability to socialize the costs of their offspring.

Also, the “individual solution” still leaves the social instability and economic stagnation from large numbers of frustrated but essentially hopeless, lower-status males, permanently shut out from any chance at owning a stake in society or its future, through marriage and reproduction.

All of this is bad, but the situation is not hopeless. I said there is no INDIVIDUAL solution. But that does not imply that we must, per force, REIMPOSE strict, traditional, sexual norms and mores on EVERYONE. The threshold for success is at least somewhat lower than that.

Consider the outlaw biker gang. This is a notably patriarchal social grouping, not overly subject to unrestrained feminine sensibilities. And yet, they don’t have too much difficulty obtaining “bitches” or “old ladies.”

The operative principle is, we’re a group of bad dudes. And because we are a group, and because we’re willing to do bad things, being our bitches has benefits. But those benefits are only available on our terms.

And upon a similar principle, we can construct our own tight-knight subcultures based on traditional virtues, and which can capture the benefits of those virtues, and distribute those benefits to group members, while preserving them for the exclusive enjoyment of those demonstrably willing and able to participate in their production.

The goal should be to provide nucleation points around which a new civilization can coalesce and grow, as it out-competes and replaces the old.

And to the basic template provided by the outlaw bikers, we can add still other conditions. First among these must be, If you leave, at the very most, you get nothing; no alimony, no child support, no division of marital property. If you try to take more than nothing, through the family courts, or whatever – you get less than nothing. There could be a variety of means of constructing those incentives. But one obvious one that suggests itself is scorched Earth plus mutual, informal, community, insurance, to help the man reestablish and rebuild that which must be destroyed to prevent it falling into the hands of bloodsucking parasites. There could be other means, but they may be even less legal, and would have to be explored with caution.