Captain's Blog
19.03.2022., subota
Masculinity - Its Present Stage of Development and Maturation
Link to the same article on Stormfront There was a time when patriarchy reigned and when the position of men, marriage, family was insured by the social order they existed and lived in. Then changes came: industrialization, sexual revolution, cultural Marxism, liberalism, progressivism, postmodernism, feminism and it's three waves, legal transformations, and I'm probably forgetting other factors... The position of men and masculinity, as of marriage and family, became compromised because the social order and infrastructure didn't support the dominant position of men and of traditional marriage and family anymore, on the contrary. These various changes created immense challenges to masculinity, which found itself in a void without the frames of reference and support that previously existed. In that confusion, men often reacted in various, sometimes dysfunctional ways. One of those was the reversion to the male-predator (which I explained in the "Morality/Patriarchy" article in my Blog - scroll down), which is not true human masculinity but animal masculinity. So all kinds of pick-up artistry, previously called "womanizing", flourished and are still flourishing, but more men who believed in it are starting to realize that it is not the solution and is a dead end that will not make them happy and realized. Another reaction, not totally dysfunctional but incomplete, was the "Red Pill": the realization by men that women are not the angelic creatures worth of worship, boys were made to believe they are, by the preexistant and now obsolete culture and social order, female identities which were actually dependent on the patriarchal order. When that order collapsed, women also reverted to their animal nature as there were no higher values conveyed by patriarchy anymore framing women inside those values. The scaffolds of socially reinforced patriarchy disappeared for women too, and they too reverted to animality and superficial reactivity, which was also potentiated by various feminist anti-men, anti-patriarchy ideas. This devolution of women is presently potentiated by technology, particularly the Social Media which exacerbate female hypergamy and make 80-90% of women chase the 20-10% top (often superficially) attractive men. A new dynamics was created which destimulates any deeper human values and orients more and more the population towards the superficial and the animal. Then there was the emergence of MGTOW... One must realize that in common women's perception, there are two kinds of men: the 20-10% they chase, and the rest, and obviously all 80-90 % of women cannot insure commitment and marriage with the top attractive men, but they try, and mathematically are in majority bound to fail (which produces the myth of all men being bad, when in fact "bad men" are mostly restricted to the population of the top physically attractive men, who have now unprecedented options and enormous sexual choice, and a number of them reverted to animality for that reason too - they are in a way a product of women's choices). Such situation created vast promiscuity options for the top attractive men, but Social Media also potentiated promiscuity among women, who were inebriated and brain fried by the superficiality of all the attention they got from simpletons, lost all healthy life frames of reference and engaged in increased superficiality and promiscuity with the top men, who would not commit to them, resulting in failure and bitterness for these women. Then those women marry some naive simp provider whom they don't love, often having children from sexual encounters with the more attractive men, and after some time divorce, and since the divorce laws heavily favor women in most Western countries, the men who are the victims of that whole situation turn to MGTOW. Incels are a variation of the same thing: products of the new social dynamics that lacks the framework to efficiently and durably integrate the majority of men into stable marriage and family, like it was the case before. To sum it up, masculinity is facing the enormous challenges of various socioeconomic, cultural and technological changes, and the situation is rather gloomy and worsening... So, is all lost? Is it a total catastrophe? ------------------------------------------- There is a way of looking at the situation that gives a glimmer of hope, and even more than that. One can look at it from the angle of evolution. Masculinity relied so far on external social scaffolding but those scaffolds collapsed. Necessity creates the pressure and the opportunity for masculinity to rise to new levels of self awareness, self reliance and self activation, and also transform society into a new form of Patriarchy, a Neo-Patriarchy based on a new completely self aware self realized masculinity. Masculinity faces challenges and after a period of unsurprising confusion, stumbling, vagaries and various incomplete or even dysfunctional reactions, there are encouraging signs that the right ideas are starting to coalesce and crystallize, ever so timidly for now. Since I wrote my misguidedly deleted topic on Morality and Patriarchy on SF (!), and reposted it on my blog I started to observe what is going on in the manosphere on YouTube and elsewhere, and I noticed that in the last year or so new ideas are slowly emerging and being expressed in those circles. Still lots of Red Pill and MGTOW, but some men who were advocating pick-up artistry and promiscuity on YouTube, are starting to change and drift away from it. This is not yet the awareness and expression of the need for establishing Neo-Patriarchy (the fear of YouTube Woke censorship, demonetization and de-platforming also plays a role), but I noticed that there are more and more authors who are starting to advocate not only a return to any masculinity, but an aware masculinity, that is responsible for creating the correct relationship between Men and Women - a truly human and humanizing masculinity taking leadership. A lot of those men still have one foot in Red Pill and pick-up artistry, but the other is moving towards the next phase of masculine evolution, the full true self aware, responsible human leadership type of masculinity. The World they knew collapsed for many men and they got disappointed by women who are not the angels they thought, but they now start to realize that sulking will not get them anywhere, and a predatory masculinity neither. They are starting to realize that women will be what true human responsible masculinity will shape them into, because by nature women need true Men's leadership - a leadership that is "spiritual" in the sense that spirituality is self aware, self activated life, instead of a reactive "animal " life - and that's what humanity actually is: the evolution towards that kind of self aware self responsible life. Almost on a side note I would like to expand a little on what I call "boyish love" for women, the kind of love that worships and idealizes women. This is not just immaturity, as one might think. There is a deep evolutionary root in that attitude. Some say that men fall in love more readily than women, who are more calculating because their survival and the survival of their children depended on it, because men have the "luxury" to do so. But that's not it. Evolutionarily, there is a clear advantage for the human species if men are ready to fully invest themselves in their women and children, if they are ready to "love" in a way that implies self sacrifice in the protection of women and children. This is a neotenic trait that has big evolutionary advantages for the species. It is not just about protection, such men are also capable of great deeds, turn mountains and bring the Moon for a woman they love. The development of humanity actually depends on that masculine trait. It gives men ideals and the energy to perform great acts. However, previously existing patriarchy kept that trait in infancy, so to speak, which was not helped by a culture misrepresenting women. From this instinctual need to create and give, men must now move to the level of self aware responsibility and leadership, which is true Manhood. From instinctual "boyish love" to true responsible mature Manhood. This is what is actually going on: a process of maturation. After a period of being hurt by changes, men are starting to realize that the only way forward is to take full responsibility and leadership again, but this time on another level of human awareness instead of relying on instinctuality and social scaffolds. Link to the same article on Stormfront -------------------------------------------------- In the same Stormfront topic I added: When I was a High School kid, my father shared an instructive story with me, like he used to. He said that a younger colleague of his was about to get married. He already had the house but it was empty, and he was boasting how he would buy all the best and most expensive furniture and equipment for his wife. My father said: No, no, no, that's not how you do it, you don't give everything to your wife from the beginning. You start modestly, and then you both work to improve your situation. You have to both contribute to progressively build your life together and work on your common life project and gradually improve. Apparently his colleague took his advice to heart. That story really stuck into my mind, and later, when I was thinking about the subject of marriage, I noticed how some people (particularly women) mentioned "growing apart and becoming different persons" as a reason for their divorce. You know why that happened? Because their life was not a common life project they both worked to constantly improve. Each one had their own separate project. Again, the example of my parents was very instructive. Those two people never "grew apart", because they grew together. Everything one of them learned in life, they shared it, discussed it (also with their children), and constituted a "war chest" of common experience used for building a better life together. "Growing apart" is only possible if marriage is not a permanently improving life project both spouses work together for. And it is your duty as a Man to think about those things, and organize common life in such a way. You also have to choose a woman who is capable and inclined to work on such a common life project. ------------------------------------------------- Then a member responded this: Men and women typically have different interests. In the past, and in some places today, it was not uncommon for a man to spend his spare time hunting and fishing with his buddies, and for a woman to spend her spare time persuing ladies' interests such as knitting, crocheting, and needlepoint. This was never considered an impediment to a successful marriage; on the contrary, it was expected and considered completely normal. Men and women are, by nature, different and, as a consequence, have different interests. The primary common interest of husband and wife is their children; beyond that, their interests typically diverge. When we are children, boys and girls typically like to play with different toys. This divergence of interest does not all of a sudden vanish when we become adults. Our enemies have been spending decades convincing people that men and women are fundamentally the same, and that a successful relationship is based on common interests. This is nothing but propaganda calculated to drive men and women apart. Men and women share a common interest in their children and in preserving their race, but, otherwise, it is perfectly normal and healthy for them to pursue their own separate interests. We must not allow our enemies to define our essential nature or set the terms for our relationships. To which I replied: Of course, and this was not the point. It is not about interests, but about the project of common life building. But it is also true that some patterns of behavior that worked in the past inside a specific social structure that will never come back will not suffice anymore, also because among other things, the life contents of the human species have moved past hunting and crocheting to a much larger set of life potentialities, and while men and women are obviously not the same, communication and exchange between the two polarities is essential. And communication is key. Not the nonsense the left would like to convince men communication should be for them, namely to share their weaknesses and vulnerabilities and similar idiotic emasculating stuff, which is definitely not something a man should do, but a communication integrating the male and the female into a whole, while both keep their respective properties. For a Man, it means leadership and thinking things over, and constantly keeping contact and exchange between that role and the role played by the woman, so that they can both work productively together. The times when a man could just go fishing, while the woman stays home and chats with the other girls about cooking and stuff is over. (It doesn't mean that a man can't go fishing and women should not exchange recipes, and for the sake of good cuisine, I definitely encourage that... ) For wise families, it was actually never like that, but it "worked" in certain socioeconomic contexts of the past, in some cases and communities. Those fixed patterns are not adaptable though, and fantasizing about a return to them is an error. Whatever is not adaptable dies - law of evolution. I was talking about the aware masculinity, but there also must be a conscious couple and an aware interaction between the spouses, not reliance on some static patterns that might have "worked" in more primitive settings, but were not adaptable enough. Awareness and an aware couple as action and work together is the solution, although aware masculinity has the responsibility to establish all that, because leadership is the duty of masculinity. And while a Man must obviously do all that for his couple and family, Men in general must transform society into a new Patriarchy, significantly more evolved that the static ossified forms of patriarchy from the past. Because yes... leadership means to lead. It is dynamic, not resting on some static stuff or reminisce about "good ole times". And for efficient and self correcting leadership, the feedback of communication is key. |
- 13:10 - Comments (1) - Print - #
Way to Biological Degeneracy?
|
First take a look at these three videos: 19 Yr Old Girl Reacts To Women 'Monkey Branching' BEWARE! There's 3 Sides To Every Woman Women Are Terrified That Men Will Realize THIS My comment: Another interesting thing is how a number of women, despite being calculating etc. make the wrong choices and consistently chase men who will not stick with them, while ignoring or using the good boys. So the "myth" of bad men may come from the choices many women consistently do, concentrating on the top attractive men and using the rest, but being ultimately rejected by the top men who have a lot of options. Funny thing though, narcissist men (falsely) appear to display the most ostentatiously the masculine qualities women search, and then if a woman gets with such a man, she will get burned. Apparently, the calculations many women do, often lead to failure. That tendency seems increased these days because social media potentiate hypergamy, but also makes 80-90% of women chase the 20-10% top attractive men, which potentiates the chances for failure for women, who then settle for the "unattractive" good boys, and then divorce easily because the divorce laws in most Western countries so heavily favor women. Interestingly, the more a man develops his masculinity, the less he is inclined to fall in love with a woman, because he sees women as they are, not those angels worthy of worship, but just cute little instinctual animals. The exception being if such a man meets a woman who is really an individualized human being, but even then, he will not feel the kind of love boys feel, but will establish a mature life union with the woman, but even then by never relinquishing his masculinity position of "King" and Patriarch. There might be an evolutionary reason for boyish love for women though, and it's not just about the "luxury" men have to do it. A species is more successful when a number of men are like that, because their tendency to invest themselves in an ideal makes them protect women and children and do great things in self sacrifice. Very masculine men can do it too, but only out of individualized awareness, not so much out of biological programming to "love" and lose themselves in that love. But the thing is that men were far more protected by marriage laws in the past than they are now, so they could have that boyish neotenic attitude, but in the present times it doesn't work anymore and "success" with women goes through heightened animal masculinity, which could even lead to biological degeneracy. We already have increased animalization in the cultural sphere, but that could lead to negative partner selection leading to the loss of biological programming for higher idealistic motives in men and a progressive biological dehumanization of the species, particularly of the White race, because that same process seems to have happened with the Black race, and in the present cultural context, the White race faces the same danger. If we want to save our race, we must reestablish patriarchal social structures, as they protect men who have that ability to be more than just animal males, but at the same time teach those men to be more masculine in a truly human, aware, individualized way - to become real Patriarchs. A patriarchal culture also teaches women to be more than their animal programming and become true individualized human beings with higher motives and ideals. BTW. a real Patriarch Man actually doesn't want to sleep with a woman just because she is attractive. His physical desire is dependent on the establishment of a higher spiritual relationship with a woman, but not like you probably think, because you probably think "emotions", which is not what spirituality is. Spirituality is about life: aware conscious life - self-activated aware life, instead of reactive instinctual life. This is a higher level of life, an individualized, self aware, self activated life, not an automatic instinctual life anymore. This is what it means to be a realized individual, a realized human. But is this just about individuals? For each individual yes, but what generates individuals is not just their personal journey. Culture, the collective software is extremely important - critical in the production of certain types of individuals in socially significant numbers. Culture is important, not just as an issue of conformity, but much more importantly in the way it can help or impede the development of a full mature individuality, an aware, individual self activated life, which is what "spirituality" really is. It is a mistake to ignore the political, because culture is highly political, and the reduction of society to individuals is the greatest error of our times. Culture is not transforming itself only through software "updates", but these days those are not "updates" but bugs, and there must be a way to get rid culture of these bugs and make new correct software changes, and this is the domain of politics in relation to culture. Of course this doesn't solve everything on the individual level, but is not only important but necessary. To avoid it means to not be completely consistent and not to push the logic of cultural "software" to its logical conclusion that this is an eminently political issue. Who cares if you "don't like it" (or are you afraid of it?), it is not honest to dismiss the obvious need for politics. |