WOMEN & THE DEATH OF FEMININITY

Hardened men make for attractive men, for toughness is a trait that men and women alike covet in their fellow-man; almost everybody respects a tough man even when they dislike him. At the same time, hardened women make for some utterly repulsive beings that do not inspire the same kind of response in their peers, for it is the endurance of prolonged pain that is at the heart of the masculinisation process.
Those who undergo pain become tougher and with toughness comes a certain masculine component, the more damaged and pain afflicted a person becomes, the more they harden and the tougher they become, this hardening is a natural response to ineptitude and disappointment, it is the catalyst for self-improvement where one’s survival is contingent on such improvement and thus forth the harder a person becomes, the more masculine the sum of their spirit becomes. This would even go so far to explain why in the psychological sense women have a propensity to value the ruggedness that experience brings in men, whilst men rather prefer the inexperience of women, for such a woman is free of the contamination of bitterness and cynicism that experience would wrought upon her, effectively spoiling the inherent fragility of her femininity.
In essence the more worn and experienced a woman becomes, the less feminine she becomes, whilst a more battle-scarred and experienced man becomes more masculine in the process. It is thus I must make an observation: it does indeed appear that men become more masculine with time and sufficient hardship, whilst antithetically, women, less feminine. It is in my estimation that men do not just prefer younger women for their more nubile bodies, but additionally, for their more feminine disposition. This perhaps also goes some way in explaining the feminine obsession with maturity, for a mature woman is one of less desirability than an immature one, whilst an immature man is of markedly less desirability than a mature one. What’s good for one is not good for the other and thus it is the nature of gender and by extension, biology itself to impose double standards upon the sexes.
This leads to my next point of estimation, I do believe that the fundamental reason the societies of the world have always tried so hard to protect and provide for their women in a manner of care that is all but absent in nature to their respective men is due to something of a matter of instinct which seeks to preserve the spiritual femininity of women, with an inherent understanding that the failure to protect women from the world and its evil would lead to the masculinisation of their disposition and thus rather tragically, the irrevocable loss of their femininity, for not enough new girls can be born and protected sufficiently from their older counterparts to replace the entire female demographic with women of femininity. It would seem that societies on some fundamental level have realised, perhaps not always in a way that they are conscious and eloquent enough to articulate, that femininity in and of itself carries a certain intrinsic value that is necessary for the sustenance and self-preservation of a society, and it is this value that is to be protected and sustained. These societies realised that subjecting women to the same kind of pressures that men are subject to would cause them to lose their femininity along the way, and such women would better benefit society by retaining their femininity rather than sacrificing it out of necessity in the emulation of man. For if society should forfeit femininity, demanding women fend for and coarsen themselves with the ugliness of survival, the very society reliant upon those who would maintain it would feel the tremors of emancipation as the feminine spirit is forcefully eviscerated from the societal psyche, leaving nothing but a collection of beings who strive to be manlike in its wake.
Without the counterbalance of gentle and demure femininity to complement the assertiveness of traditional masculinity, any affected society would foster detached apathy through competition within its citizenry rather than inclusive empathy through community.
Femininity is not just a gift to women, free of the shackles of responsibility that define manhood and the accompanying economic struggle that brings, but likewise a gift to men also, who would confide in and find emotional solace within the spirit of their lovers femininity, expressing momentary vulnerability to the softest of souls in a way that only a man in agape with a woman would dare. A woman who feels safe enough and looked after enough is feminine in the most natural and charming way, momentarily carefree as she “lets her guard down”, she is a happy woman, a sweet woman, a kind woman and perhaps most importantly to our humble species, an attractive woman. Rarely do women get to experience this type of innocence anymore as the forces of feminism masculinise them into perverse hybrids, women composed of the worst that femininity and all her flaws has to offer whilst likewise borrowing the very worst that masculinity has to offer, educated to never let their guard down “in the face of oppression”, be this evangel preached directly through activism or indirectly via the harshness of the workplace and the economic machine that it serves, today’s women face emancipation from femininity, like their fellow-men do from masculinity, sold a narrative that their inherent disposition is incompatible with the gender identity that the prevailing ideology would demand of and subscribe to them.
Just how can the feminine continue to exist within the modern world when it is psychologically beaten out of women on a day-to-day basis? How can women be kind, caring and sensitive when they must work in the world of business, a masculinising albeit sociopathic world of margins, deadlines, quotas, targets, bottom lines and politics? You see the workplace itself undermines the cultivation of femininity, the hardened woman is but a feeble caricature of the ideal man, should she be stripped of her femininity via the hallways of heartbreak, the glass table of the boardroom or perhaps an amalgamation of both, such a woman is a walking emanation of all the ugliest that masculinity has to offer and with none of its perks, for she learns the ugliest of masculinity along a pilgrimage for personal conquest rather than learn it in whole in the way that only a boy who seeks to become a man can. She does not learn the nuances of masculinity, its duty, its honour, it’s burden or it’s inherently biological need to protect and provide and thus forth and so such a woman imposes herself ruthlessly and demandingly, without thought nor care for those she imprints her apathy on, belittling the men she hates along the way with vapid deep-seated hatred, corrupting fellow women in her wake, imploring that they too sacrifice their femininity under the guise of “motherly advice” in the promotion that her younger counterparts become like that which she has become, a caricature of a man, a woman who emulates the worst of masculinity without embodying any of its finer or more nobler traits.
Such a woman is a parasite, wondering what value she can take from those around her rather than what value she can add, she is psychologically unlovable to the desires of man and yet some remnant of femininity remains, she craves to be loved despite the impossibility such a task proves to be. It’s hard to love a monster and men do not love monsters like women do, they loathe them, even fear them and in the most extreme of circumstances, they kill them. You see masculinisation affects women differently than it does men, within men it fosters growth and actualisation, within women it fosters contempt, dissonance and discontent, corrupting the very souls of who they are, stripping them of any desirability beyond the flesh, which too, will eventually fade with age.
Is there anything less feminine in the world than a ball-busting cynical parasite devoid of the charms and femininity that men the world over have come to admire and cherish in women for eons and eons? No, no there is not, and it is the crucifixion of femininity being perpetuated as an affront to masculinity within modern ideology, feminism containing the largest amount of estrogenic blood on its hands, that is unilaterally killing feminine spirituality in favour that we sacrifice it on the altar of corporatism in an effort to “equalise” the feminine with the masculine. What this really means it to condemn the true and natural feminine spirit as weak, to redefine it with masculine ideals, reinforce those ideals and then imprint those ideals onto society’s men and women until they believe this perverse form of femininity is “true femininity”, calling for the worship of this one brand of ideologically sanctioned femininity which remains to be nothing more than a corrupt bastardisation of the femininity that comes naturally to women who are free of Anglo social engineering efforts. What feminism has failed to realise is that although it has benefited many women superficially, it has done so at the cost of that which makes them truly women, that which makes them valuable to men beyond their bodies, the overlooked spiritual sense, the beauty that can be derived from their natural femininity. You see feminism spoils femininity in the name of equality, then the imbeciles who cause the damage are so incredibly ignorant (or incredibly intelligent, I cannot but tell the difference) as they seem to be at such a loss to understand just why men and women, but markedly women, are unhappier than they’ve ever been before.
I do think perhaps one of the most abhorrent things in the modern female psyche is that of scorn. Scorn is something I consider to be a truly fascinating state of being, you see scorn is a particular feminine flavour of revenge, it is effectively revenge on steroids with a feminine twist. Scorn is where the death of femininity within the soul of a woman rebirths itself vengefully in a manner of heightened sociopathy, such a woman bears the physical hallmarks of the feminine form, but to her very soul is ravaged by the most detestable, despicable and deplorable facets of both the masculine and the feminine. A scornful woman who derives her current state of being from the defining moment which initiated the destruction of her spirit’s femininity is a woman that is emulating the traits of man, straying from the path of womanhood and crossing into the realm of manhood, albeit such a woman will never truly be a man for she will lack the logic of a man, the appearance of man as well as the burden and societal expectation of a man, and so thus at best her bitterness leads to this type of quasi woman, a caricature of a man, embodying but the worst traits of both the masculine and the feminine, leaving us with what can only be described as a hollow, hybrid monstrosity that is neither man nor woman in the truest sense of the word irregardless of its physical anatomy.
You see unlike men who can become better, stronger and more attractive men by growing through their pain and thus amplifying their inherent masculine energy, women do not become better women with pain, they become more manlike, and thus they are stripped of that which makes them attractive to men to begin with. See what is good for man, at least in this instance, is not good for woman. When women become “hardened” it, rather poetically, and quite ironically in its majesty, strips them of the very thing that makes them attractive beyond the realm of the physical to men in the first place, it emancipates them from their femininity, and to ensure a man truly loves a woman, and simply doesn’t just view such a woman as a disposable fuck puppet at best or a blathering idiot at worst, she must capture his interest psychologically and emotionally, not just physically, because many women can capture the eye of a man, but only a woman of some real feminine energy and depth can capture the heart and thus devotion of a man. You see femininity, like masculinity, must be cultivated, although rather unlike masculinity it mustn’t be taught through pain, but through love.
Puppy love is the exception: it is the one love that can be educational to men. Puppy love is the inevitable experience in which naivety prevails, boys become men, and they learn first-hand through the misery of heartbreak and the cacophonous confusion of the indecisive female mind that the unilateral worship and adoration of the feminine form, the willingness to be captivated in the beauty of the feminine form, be it from the sound of her voice, to the touch of the skin, or the smell of her sweat, is nothing but a futile and suicide-inducing endeavour. Men learn for themselves in their quest for masculinity that they must not worship women, but rather, that they must lead them. Women do not go on a quest for femininity; they are born with it, and oft sacrifice it short-sightedly for power within the depths of delusion that makes up modern groupthink, only to realise in old age once their beauty has faded that they traded in their greatest intangible asset long ago.

12 COMMENTS

  1. ‘What feminism has failed to realise is that although it has benefited many women superficially, it has done so at the cost of that which makes them truly women, that which makes them valuable to men beyond their bodies, the overlooked spiritual sense, the beauty that can be derived from their natural femininity’
    Every time I read/hear the notion that women are only valuable to guys for their bodies, it always got me thinking “No, that can’t be right…” but I couldn’t put my finger on what exactly they provided that was so valuable. Your post explains this missing factor wonderfully, thank you.
    1. Its soo true.. just look at how hardened some women are.
      i remember the styles of the 1980s, when, IMO, was the last time women had actually ‘pretty’ styles.–now, they are tattooing all over, even in masculine places such as the forearm and neck.
      Ever since the 90s, it became rare to see young women in anything but pants, and if she happened to wear a skirt, it had to be short!!
      i actually feel sorry for young women 18-35 today unless they get into a special group if they want to be married–since when they ‘shackup’ he gets EVERYTHING and she get NOTHING or nothing much to hang on to
  2. Your posts are work of art indeed! 
    Take your time but keep em coming!
    Appreciate your contribution to TRP and you became my favorite no doubt!
    Keep it up Big Homie!!
  3. It’s always quite difficult to think of a reply to your posts because they are so comprehensive. Just know that your writing affects real men’s lives in positive ways. Never have I had such abundance with women since I adopted a praxeology most congruent with the real World. Your writing has formed part of my character.
    Chaps, encourage all your women by rewarding feminine behaviours and punishing non-feminine.
  4. Your observation about women becoming more masculine as they experience hardships sounds fine to me (paragraph 3). The part I disagree with is that this would make a women less desirable. I don’t think it would matter as long as hadn’t changed physically having an effect on her fertility.
    The only thing I could think of that would support them being less desirable would be that males would now see her as having lost some maternal instincts. Any thoughts?
    1. since your name is TYLER.. i assume you are in your 20s and havent seen many real 2 parent non divorced families\
      many of these guys weren’t looking for mommy since they worked hard all day and she was protected
    2. Well, it’s not unreasonable that a woman being hardened would reduce her fertility, it would be a reasonable hypothesis to test scientifically.
    3. Yes less desirable than a feminine chick any time any day, of course one has to be in a position where he has the option to chose.
  5. Thank you. I agree on virtually every point. You nailed it.
    You cover the subject with finesse and thoroughness. I also argue along the same lines but with less eloquence. I’ve been posting the same thoughts in simpler terms for almost seven years at http://wwnh.wordpress.com.
    A. Guy Maligned
  6. What a great article, it makes so much sense and you write in such a fluent, coherent way that it was a pleasure to read. It’s such a shame that women have forsaken their natural femininity to try to mimic men. The kind of loving, feminine woman you describe is exactly what I like and I’m gonna take a wild guess and say that’s what most men go for too!
  7. As the saying goes: “No man can be a prophet in his own land.” Anglo-Saxon culture is unique among Europeans in the way it marginalizes women. That marginalization culminated in a British law that woman could not own or inherit any property (and that was not Dark Ages, that was 18th and 19th century). That law was unique, as women were allowed to hold property all across Europe.
    As a result English and American feminists internalized that inferiority: in their quest to prove themselves equal individual they strived to show they can be as manly as the men themselves. American Feminists just like the entire Anglo-Saxon culture perceive femininity as something inferior.
    That is not so in my own culture. Norse and Slavic women were always extremely tough, forged in the reality of unforgivingly hostile climate and almost constant warfare, in which they had no choice but to actively partake. None of that required giving up on being a woman. Household maintenance and child rearing was always as critical to survival as good swordsmanship, most often even more critical (Napoleon himself said that wars are won with logistics, not firepower, as most soldiers in any conflict die from hunger and disease, not from fighting).
    The article is as wrong as it is well written. It is rooted in British and American belief that women are inferior by default and the only equality a woman can attain is through becoming a man.

LEAVE A REPLY