Nothing is more imperious . . . than weakness when it knows it is backed by strength; look at women.
-Napoleon
Via. An interesting short bio of Napoleon’s love(lorn) life:
Although passionately in love with Josephine, the widow of Beneral de Beauharnais whom he married after her husband was guillotined; Napoleon was a reactionary pragmatist regarding women. To solidify his hold on Europe and to establish a French imperial dynasty, he divorced Josephine and married Marie Louise, the Archduchess of Austria.
Napoleon was convinced that marriage should not be an affair of hormones and propinquity, but of acquiring and transmitting property and conceiving and raising children, and that adultery was not a cause for divorce unless the man kept his mistress under the same roof as his wife. However, he declared a wife’s adultery as grounds for divorce–even though he twice forgave Josephine for cuckolding him.
Napoleon is proof that oneitis can cause a man to betray his own principles. As smart and savvy as he was about the nature of woman, Josephine had him by the short n’ curlies. And yet, he kicked Jo to the curb when geopolitical realities demanded it. I have the impression that men of yore indulged their oneitis without letting it paralyze them or distract them from their manly pursuits, such as conquering a continent, which is a stark contrast to today’s thirsty beta orbiter who will allow himself to wither and die on the vine chasing an uninterested girl for years on end.
Intriguingly, Napoleon was perceptive about the effect that living in the anonymous urban pleasuredome has on women’s egos:
A woman, in order to know what is due her and what her power is, must live in Paris for six months.
A man ahead of his time?
As a man in today’s gynocentric society, you can’t ‘put her in her place’ or effectively hold a woman accountable for bad behavior or reckless decisions unless you are her best option during that time. Her hypergamous evaluation of you is contextual, which is why ‘Alpha’ is in turn, often contextual. Your spatiotemporal value of masculine influence must be greater than that of ‘The Village’ of Blue Pill (see Rollos ‘Transitioning’) to effectively discipline and foster compliance in your woman.
Women who don’t need a man for something that they can get elsewhere will be immune to influence by that man because they have the backing of society for the other available options (i.e. State funding or a career vs. a beta provider). The same goes for a plate that doesn’t see you as Chad. You can tell her to fuckoff when shes done wrong and she won’t try to make things right, she’ll just call on the next guy instead and laugh it off with her BFFs over mimosas.
The difference between the above statement of modernity vs. our past ‘patriarchal’ culture is that a woman couldn’t afford to view her man as expendable because society would cast her out for it. She would be slut-shamed, reduced to poverty, or be stigmatized and ridiculed for being a single mother. Those lifestyles were condemned then, whereas now they are glorified and empowering, and even incentivized (divorce courts, military wives/benefits, etc). Hence the conclusion why many women will never be put in their place because 80%+ guys are beta and non-essential in today’s scene, coupled with the increasing decline of societal institutions that curb hypergamy (i.e. religion).
Women won’t respond to your commands or discipline unless you are the best, and more importantly, if you haven’t established a value standard when it comes to her actions in your prescene. This is not about voicing direct criticism of her unattractive behaviors. To her, that is oppressive, emotional abuse bullshit unless you’re Chad. The most pragmatic course of action to take is to shame other women and men (that are lower value than both your SMVs) for behaviors that you find repulsive. Much similar to a beta who doesnt want to be ‘like other guys’ by conforming to her virtue signaling, a woman who is interested in you will take action herself to not act in a manner that turns you off (acting slutty, being late, engaging in SJWism etc.). If you can indirectly influence her this way by making the collective look retarded (as they often are), that will simultaneously foster compliance and make her feeeel like she’s special amongst the crowd in relation to your judgement because it provides her with social validation.
That’s the key; you aren’t validating her directly or making ultimatums and showing beta traits, you are creating a framework for her to be validated within based on your values. You give her the sparkly sandbox to play in that she enjoys so much in her childlike existence while you manspread on the porch and own your shit. In the event that other people try to come into her sandbox and don’t like to play with the cool little plastic shovels and dump trucks that YOU put there, she will tell them to GTFO
Treat ’em mean, keep ’em keen, and even then, never forget AWALT, and it’s just your turn.
LikeLike
“The most pragmatic course of action to take is to shame other women and men (that are lower value than both your SMVs) for behaviors that you find repulsive.”
This works excellently on family, where it is most important not to burn bridges.
LikeLike
I know he also liked his women stinky. He once asked Josephine not to bathe for three days before he came to meet her.
LikeLike
Josephine was also six years older than Napoleon. Mayhaps he divorced her simply because the Wall was taking its toll.
At least Napoleon wasn’t as bad as Maricon when it comes to gerontophilia, but he was definitely a beta overall when it came to women.
LikeLike
Josephine was also six years older than Napoleon.
Yeah, but it was still better than pulling his bone apart.
LikeLike
Nelson had the better luck in Love.
LikeLike
But his card playing suffered thereby.
LikeLike