Feed on
Posts
Comments

This is why it’s wise to keep women out of vanguard roles in a revolutionary movement:

(Zoomable link)

Perhaps the most important lesson here is that women are a weak point in any political movement, especially a dissident movement. There is something uniformly pathological about the ones who jump to the front lines of ideological battle.

I wasn’t aware of that sordid drama involving (Katie?} McHugh, but the theme of it strikes me as all too familiar. Women are poison pills dropped in the chalice of insurgencies fighting against the status quo.

Underneath all the rationalizations, men fight for beautiful, young women. Men don’t fight for land, or honors, or money, except insofar as those things earn them access to beautiful, young women.

Consciously, men will tell themselves otherwise and pen odes to loftier ideals, but the Darwinian primal impulse is the lure of fertile furrow.

As such, women should inspire, not aspire. Women, particularly young cuties in the bloom of their slender hourglass perfection, are inspirations to men to reach for the brass ring. An insurgency seeking to topple a corrupt establishment is best led by men, compelled by an unspoken and often unacknowledged desire to attract young cuties, intuitively grasping that a victory over the corrupt ruling class means more prime poon for those rebel men.

Women who aspire to leading roles in those insurgencies are suspect operatives, for they are purposefully abdicating their natural place in the cosmic order as inspirations to stronger, integrous men. Placing women at the ideological front lines is courting the disaster of gossipy in-fighting and betrayal; women are powerfully drawn to the glitter of social status, and a revolution in which they play a significant face time part puts them in close proximity to the enemy establishment tempting women with penumbras of reflected status. Women can’t resist the siren song of social elevation, attention whoring, and credentialism, however superficial and unearned. Presented with these irresistible offers, women will backstab allies to get at them.

There is also something to be said for distrusting women who have the same passionate drive as men to achieve in the world of men. Women who aspire to greatness in endeavors that are naturally and historically the domain of men are women who are, essentially, at war with their own femaleness. It would be the same distrustful reaction both men and women have to effeminate men who forsake manly pursuits to succeed in the natural domains of women. Identity crises in either sex provoke distrust in others. We are rightfully suspicious of men or women who choose to defy their sex’s norms and temperaments.

***

Some commenters mentioned that famous quote from 1984 as a counterfactual to the theme of this post.

It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.

Ingsoc/Big Brother *was* the establishment in 1984. The young women were conformism police for the state apparatus. They weren’t amateur spies for a rebellious insurgency.

That’s the lesson which needs serious learning. Women, as a sex, are easily tempted by trinkets and baubles from the Globohomo establishment, so much so that they pose a risk if they are identifiable emissaries for revolutionary movements. Social status and conforming to the dominant culture are everything for women. Betrayal is baked into the distaff cake.

Commenter Greg mentions the “exception” of women who are loyal to cult leaders like Charles Manson (or, more recently, the Nxivm cult in which the dude running it had women recruiters bring in fresh meat for him). Obviously, cults are not the “establishment”.

But cults do something unique which assures loyalty from the women in the ranks: cult leaders isolate their followers from the larger society, sometimes even from civilization. Women caught up in cults have no access to an establishment which could pull them back; for cult members the cult IS the establishment. The world outside is just a purgatory of benighted fools.

By necessity, revolutions which aim to topple a political and cultural foe must interact with the larger establishment in order to win over followers. This interaction is where journo whores ply their weaselly trade, with promises of STARDOM to the weakest links (women and soyboys).

Advertisements

One Response to “Women Are Anathema To Revolutionary Movements”

  1. Terreblanche says:

    Women have played a great role in emergence of national-socialism : “In the decisive elections of 1930, 45 percent of Nazi voters were female.” Read The Privileged Sex from Martin Van Creveld, the most interesting and radical anti-feminist book ever written

    In his Table Talks, Adolf Hitler writes that he wants to end the taboo of single mothers. Nazism was more “feminist” than many democratic countries of the same era. Lothrop Stoddard makes the same observation: https://carlsbad1819.wordpress.com/2017/06/20/lothrop-stoddard-on-nazi-feminism/

    https://archive.org/details/MartinVanCreveldThePrivilegedSex2013

    Like most people at the time, Hitler believed that women who did not have children would eventually become mentally ill. [80] His closest collaborators, including Arthur Rosenberg, Robert Ley, Gregor Strasser, and Gottfried Feder, agreed with him on this point. Women’s main task was motherhood, and they had to be protected from having to work outside of the home.

    How did the Nazis’ views on women’s place in society go down with German women? The answer is, perhaps surprisingly, better and better. From its very inception, the party succeeded in attracting women. Most were matrons who liked its fiery young leader. One, Countess von Reventlov, called Hitler “the coming Messiah.” Others gave him expensive presents. As if to confirm Nietzsche’s famous words, they even competed among themselves to see who could give him the most elaborate whip. One woman, whose name has since been lost to history, produced the first experimental design of the swastika flag. [81] Another woman, Gertrude von Seydlitz, raised the money needed to turn the Nazi newspaper Der Volkischer Beobachter into a daily. Other women financed Hitler’s November 1923 Putsch, After it failed, it was a friend’s wife, Helene Hanfstangel, who prevented Hitler from committing suicide, knocking a gun out of his hand and lecturing him on his duty to live for Germany, During his 13 months in prison he was visited by many women. As Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, during this difficult period it was women who kept the Nazi Party from disintegrating. Indeed, even the paper on which Rudolf Hess took down the Fiihrer’s autobiography was provided by a woman, Winifred Wagner, the famed composer’s daughter in law.

    The Nazis were out to seize power, if not by actual violence then by “the conquest of the streets.” As a result, Nazi women were probably less tied down to the traditional feminine role than in most other societies at the time. They marched, held meetings, raised money, distributed propaganda and faced hecklers. Others sewed uniforms for S.A men, bandaged their wounds and ran soup kitchens for them. In the decisive elections of 1930, 45 percent of Nazi voters were female. The voting pattern later became even more pronounced. Observers of Nazi rallies noted the way women always occupied the front rows. [82] Hitler’s own basic belief was that women were governed by emotions, rather than by intellect, and that they reserved their greatest admiration for the strong. And he knew exactly how to talk to them. They, in turn, cheered him as loudly as anyone, often while weeping uncontrollably.

    If anything, women’s worship of Hitler intensified after 1933. The crowds that followed him wherever he went were made up partly of women. Other women made the pilgrimage to Berchtesgaden to give the Nazi salute or to hold out their children for him to touch. For his birthdays, women used to send him acres of scarves, pillow covers and blankets, all embroidered with swastikas of every size, color and variety. He, in turn, was careful not to disillusion them. Once he rhetorically asked a crowd of women what he had given them, and then answered his own question with “The Man.” [83] It was for their sake that he remained single and kept secret the fact that he had a mistress. Nothing was allowed to disturb the love affair between German women and their Führer. And until the fall of Hitler and the Third Reich, nothing did.

    (…)

    In 1933, proportionally far more German women worked than their American counterparts. [97] At the time Germany, like the rest of the world, was suffering from the Great Depression. One widely adopted solution to the problem of unemployment was dismissing women in double-income families. Austria, Belgium, Britain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United States all either passed similar measures or contemplated them. In Germany, the only such bill that made it into the books was passed not by Adolf Hitler, but by Weimar-era chancellor Heinrich Briining, That law had little effect, and few women lost their jobs. Within a year of the Nazi’s rise to power, attempts to implement it had ended.

    (…)

    Another goal, according the S.S. leader, was to remove some of the stigma that “ridiculous blockheads” had imposed on single mothers in Germany. The association provided the women with temporary shelter at extremely cheap rates. Mothers-to-be spent the last weeks of pregnancy at Lebensborn institutes under medical supervision, then gave birth, recovered and obtained basic training in how to care for a baby.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: