I am back from my trip and back to my favorite topic, gender war.
How men and women hate each other's guts, despise each other, and are at each other's throats.
A process that had begun 150 years ago and had reached its climax actually 100 years ago.
We are on the crest of a wave that is beginning to be two centuries old, but men are hitting back now.
Men are not taking this lying down, they are fighting back.
Women emancipated themselves from the onerous yoke of domesticity. Men treated women as domestic slaves. They regarded women as clay things, dolls. That was the best case. They killed women for a variety of transgressions. They subjugated women, they humiliated women. Women then fought back, and now men are taking the initiative with a counter-attack.
This begins to resemble the war in Ukraine, only on a much, much bigger scale.
What men are saying now are women. You are too independent.
I am terrified, says the typical men. I am terrified that you will no longer tolerate my abuse and my infantilism. I am afraid that you will decline to serve me as you have hitherto over millennia, at least since the agricultural revolution.
I know that on the first opportunity you will abandon me, and I will lose you. That's what the typical men think nowadays.
Typical men do not trust women. They don't regard them as loyal. They never did, actually.
Men today say to women, you are too well-educated. I feel inferior compared to you. I feel inadequate. I feel that I am being outcompetent in many workplaces.
Men say to women, you sleep around with strangers and friends alike. It makes me feel like a statistic, a number, a mere conquest, objectified, not special, insecure and unsafe.
In short, what men are telling women is, you are too much like the men of your. You had become men. Men are telling women you had become men and we don't like it. It's as if the male population had doubled within 150 years, and the competition had skyrocketed.
Competition for power, competition for education, competition for positions, competition for social ranking, competition for sex. Everything now, men find themselves outnumbered, outgunned, out-educated, driven down the social ladder.
The future is female. Matriarchy is on the horizon, displacing rapidly and abruptly patriarchy.
Men don't like it. Ask any men. Never mind the age. Never mind the level of education. Never mind the socioeconomic status. Ask any men anywhere in the world, and they will tell you women went too far.
Men have this sense.
Now, western men are educated to lie, to prevaricate, to pretend and to fake. Western men are taught and indoctrinated to be politically correct.
And so they don't dare to say what men in the east and the south openly proclaim and promulgate.
Women have gone too far.
Too far, not in terms of rights. There are very few men nowadays who would contest women's rights.
Very few men would say men should have more rights than women. Women have gone too far, not in terms of equal pay, for example, or equal wages. Actually, they still have a long way to go. The US Soccer Federation has just equalized the pay of men, losing men and winning women on the teams. And that took 30 years. There's a battle of 30 years to accomplish this utterly, this utter no-brainer.
Women should earn as much as men for equal jobs.
So very few people are disputing, men or women, are disputing that men should have equal rights or equal pay.
But women have gone too far.
Men are right all over the world, regardless of level of education and irredition and exposure to gender studies. Men have a point. Women have gone too far. Women have gone too far in terms of militancy.
They have become militant. Women began, especially in the 1980s and 1990s, began to regard the relationship between the genders as a zero-sum game. If women win, men lose. If men win, of course, women tend to lose.
Men are the enemy, the adversary, the competitor, never the collaborator.
So this increasing wave of militancy, leveraging issues such as sexual abuse and rape, unequal pay in the workplace, properly tackling discrepancies in the power structure, intersectionality.
The causes were just and right and proper.
But the aggressiveness and the militancy were not.
Women started to be reactant, defiant, in your face. This is psychopathic behavior. Women have adopted psychopathic men as their role models.
It's as if women had been enslaved and then they had been emancipated and then they said, well, I'm going to behave exactly like the cruel master of the plantation. I'm going to be as violent, as militant, as fundamentalist, as cruel, as disruptive as the list of men, the most bullying, narcissistic, grandiose, in your face, defiant, reckless psychopath. I'm going to be like that.
These are the role models of women since the 1990s, the third and fourth wave of feminism.
So in terms of aggression, sublimated aggression, passive aggression and outright aggression, women have gone way too far.
There was also a usurpation of masculine traits, behaviors, norms and roles. This is called the stalled revolution. I'll discuss it in a few minutes.
Women had come to identify themselves more and more in masculine terms. This is very evident in studies over the last 40 years. Women had become men, actually, for all intents and purposes.
And so by doing so, women had invaded the psychosocial turf, the territory of men, not in order to obtain equity and equality, but in order to challenge and supplant and replace and substitute for men. It was an outright declaration of hostilities, not to say war.
It was Kazu's belly.
And so men, this mobilized men, this created a backlash, which is now manifesting.
The usurpation of masculinity led to the evolution of another version of masculinity, toxic masculinity.
Ironically, toxic masculinity characterizes both men and women today.
And then there was the raunch culture, gratuitous, empowering promiscuity, indiscriminate sex everywhere, everywhere and with everyone individually and in groups as a form of slut pride, a form of self-empowerment, a form of no shame and no guilt, positive sex, sex positivity.
The raunch culture, as Ariel Levy and others, a feminist, by the way, had observed, actually helped men to objectify women even further. Women had internalized the objectifying gaze of men and had become sex dolls. Women had transitioned from being sexual to being sexy.
Class media, advertising industry, the fashion industry were all modeled in order to encourage foster buttress and engender and catalyze the raunch culture.
But the raunch culture made men feel very unsafe and insecure because when men started to consider relationships, committed long-term relationships, they became very worried about the internalization of raunch culture by potential intimate partners.
No one wants to marry a promiscuous woman. No one wants to be in a cohabitation or a committed relationship with a woman whose ideal of sex is to be used, abused and trashed by men.
So men felt unsafe. They also felt that they are losing their uniqueness and specialty because, as I said before, they became just a number.
And again, women started to compete in terms of body counts, number of acts, nationalities of various sexual partners. One might stand, became badges of honor.
Men felt that these kind of women are not relationship material and men were right.
Studies show clearly that promiscuous women tend to divorce three to five times more, in some cases 10 times more, tend to cheat three times more and tend to not feel commitment in relationships, to be disgruntled, to be unhappy in committed relationships. So men were right.
But promiscuity had become the standard behavior of women. If you are not promiscuous, you're prudish, something is wrong with you, go see a therapist.
So this depleted the pull of available intimate partners and men felt that they're competing for an ever shrinking number of boundaries, self-respecting women.
On the other hand, many men reveled in the newfangled promiscuity of women. And I will discuss it a bit later.
Men lost the incentive to commit and to invest in a relationship. Those men who are interested mostly in sex had no longer an incentive to formalize and structure their sexuality.
Men now are heating back at all these developments. Domestic violence laws have been repealed in Russia. It is now legal for a husband to beat his wife for the first time in decades.
Women in Afghanistan are confined to home under a male guardian. They're no longer allowed to attend school. They have to cover their faces on television.
This is a reversal of 20 or 30 years of Afghan history.
In the United States, abortion rights are being repealed all over in numerous states. And the Supreme Court is about to repeal Roe versus Wade.
The 1970s decision, which had granted abortion rights to all women, women are about to lose their right to their own bodies in the United States.
That's a backlash. That's a backlash.
All these developments all over the world are indications that men are organizing and creating ideologies, conservative ideologies that seek to unroll, to roll back women's accomplishments, women's rights and all the achievements of the four feminist waves in the past 150 years.
I will not be shocked to see additional developments driving women back to the 1950s. I will not be shocked at all, all over the world.
And then there is the aforementioned toxic masculinity.
In men, the expression is organizations within a toxic ambience, a toxic environment called the monosphere.
Men are organizing themselves. MGTOW, men going their own way, insults, involuntary syllabus, dating coaches. In all these spaces, men are organizing themselves to reject women.
These are misogynistic spaces. The hatred is palpable. The distrust, the contempt.
And this rejection is an organized form of rejection with an ideological clout. It's not just a series of coordinated individual acts. It's a philosophy of life. It's the belief that women cannot and should not be trusted, that they are predatory, that they are out there to get men and their property, that they should be avoided at all costs, that marriage is not about subjugating women, it's about subjugating men.
And that the institutions of the state and the law are on women's side, disproportionately, unfairly and unjustly. Women are manipulating the law and the organs of the state and various social institutions because they hold privileged positions, for example, in teaching, in the courtrooms. Women are a majority of judges and women are a majority of teachers.
And so women are leveraging their newfound political and social power to disenfranchise men, perhaps eventually to punish them for millennia of mistreatment.
There is a war there. Women are angry at men. They don't trust men. They disdain men. They think men are immature, unwilling to invest and to commit liars, deceivers, players. Women feel that they're being played.
So women are avoiding men or treating men as men used to treat women as objects of sexual gratification or kind of glorified pets or playthings. Women talk about men the way men used to talk about women in the 19th century. Henry Gibson came up with a series of theater plays describing the predicament of women at the time and the way men regarded them.
Women today regard men exactly the same way.
There has been an inversion of the power matrix and women are not making good use of this newfound power. Rather than elevating men to their level, increasing men empathy, compassion, affection and so on, what women are doing, they are using this power to punish men, to penalize them and to take over.
It's a hostile takeover. It's not a merger. It's not an acquisition. It's hostile takeover.
So red pillers, incels, Miktols and so on, these groups of men, ever expanding groups of men, presumably there are a few million of them already, all over the world by the way, they radicalize, they escalate, they sound like fundamentalists and their hatred of women is palpable. It's not going to end well.
And women are now beginning to go their own way. Women are beginning to reciprocate by coming up with mirrors of male toxic masculinity.
The stalled revolution, it's a term used in sociology and psychology. The stalled revolution, stalled, S-T-A-L-L-E-D. The stalled revolution means that when it comes to sexual mores, marriage, relationships and family, men remain stuck in a Victorian England mindset.
While women have progressed into a feminist 21st century, women are still, men are still Victorian. They still accept purity, if not virginity from their women. They still demand loyalty and they still never mind how they protest in public, but privately, they still think it's the woman's chore to deal with children and the home.
Men are Victorian. Women are nowhere to be seen. They're out of sight because they've moved into the 21st century. They are 150 years ahead of men.
Men have a lot of catching up to do, but not only are they not catching up, as I've described earlier, men are regressing. Men are trying to unroll, roll back women's accomplishments and subject them, subject women to the new patriarchy.
The new patriarchy has a liberal progressive face. These are men who would tell you that they believe in equity and equality for women. They are the biggest families, but under the guise behind the scenes, these men are terrified and they seek to resubmit.
They want women to resubmit and confronted with this abyss, women face a stark choice. Either they give up on men altogether and go it alone while assuming masculine traits and roles and engaging in casual sex, or they can regress and they can subject themselves to male dominance and objectification.
Roch culture is actually exactly such a regression. Proud sluts, they mold themselves, they render themselves, they make themselves the object of the male gaze. Men dictate, men tell women how to be sluts. Men inform women what clothes to wear and how to behave and these women conform. Women who are proud sluts, women in the Ronch culture, they're not empowered, they're slavish. They cater to the stereotypes and fantasies, that was rabid fantasies of men.
And so these women have regressed and they have accepted male objectification and dominance in the Ronch culture and in supposedly intimate relationships.
These are the two choices. Either you live alone and you have casual sex to satisfy your needs or you give up, you give in and you surrender and you become, exactly like in Victorian England, a men's object. There is no other alternative.
There are numerous attempts to cohabit, to have committed relationships, to get married. They don't work. These venues don't work. Divorce rates are about 40 to 50 percent in first marriages, 70 percent in second marriages, 90 percent in third marriages. Fewer people cohabit today or are in intimate relationships or in committed relationships than ever before. Substantially fewer. 31 percent of people are lifelong singles, about 50 percent of the total adult population are actually singles. They're in pseudo relationships or long distance relationships, all kinds of bullshit substitutes for a real committed intimate invested relationship. There's no such thing anymore.
This option, relationships, is dead. Marriage rates have fallen 50 percent, that's five zero percent since 1990. Dating is down 65 percent. Even sex is down 25 percent. The genders are disengaging. There's atomization. Men and women start to live all alone with their Netflix and cats or dogs, depending on your sex. If women don't capitulate and revert to the traditional female roles, the traditional gender roles and norms, to the erstwhile old sexual scripts and social scripts, if they don't go back there, if they don't regress 150 years, they're going to lose men. They're going to remain men-less.
Now, many women would tell you, that's not such a big loss actually. You can always pick up a man and have sex with him. They're always available to have sex. If the issue is sex, a woman can have sex every single day with another man. That's hardly the issue.
Intimacy, companionship, love, romance, long-term planning, children, family, they're dead in the water. Men don't have anything more to offer. Women are independent. Financially, women can make children all by their own, without a man. Women can have sex to their hearts content. Just swipe in the right direction.
Some men have become redundant and obsolete. They're fighting back the only way they know how. Through the institutions of the state, trying to coerce women back into a role that is long dead.
As things stand now, most men are merely taking advantage of women's newfangled sex positivity. They have casual sex with women and then they walk away from casual sex, from a one-night stand, largely unscathed. Women are paying the price of this male sexual opportunism in terms of heartbreak, bad sex, childlessness, loneliness and career or financial damage. It's a war. The only weapons that men have are relationships and sex.
They become abusive in relationships and they withhold sex or impose sex on women. These are the only two weapons in the arsenal of the male, of the typical modern male. They are making profligate use of these weapons. It is a war. It's a war that men seem to be losing everywhere except the bedroom, except the living room.
When it comes to intimacy, relationships and sex, men are inflicting heavy damages on women. Women have careers. Women have professions. Women have power. Women have education. Women have money. Women don't have love. Women don't have relationships. Women don't have intimacy. Women are lonely. Women get only bed sex, bed exploitative sex.
This is women's punishment for being upbeat and for going too far. In this sense, men are winning big time.
Even as they make strides in the real world, when it comes to intimate relationships, women are more abused and disempowered than ever before.
Men just joyfully roam around humping dozens of throw away disposable women in the promiscuous Disneyland of postmodernity.
This inversion of gender roles and the gender wars are only one element in a world that's gone awry. In a reality that's become surreal. It's a crazy, crazy, mad world out there.
The world is topsy-turvy, upside down. This is not a transition period. It is a period of utter disintegration and upheaval. Everything is falling apart. It's not a question of rebuilding. There's no will to rebuild because there's no will to engage anymore. There's no will to engage in the workplace. There's no will to engage men and women. There's no will to engage, to create families or anything for that matter. People are tired. People of all ages are exhausted and they're exhausted by other people, so they want to avoid people.
Social media is a way of being asocial legitimately. Take, for example, a recent piece of news.
Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift are the most recent recipients of honorary doctorates from prestigious universities. These two intellectual giants were preceded by lightweights like Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill and Nelson Mandela.
Need I say more about the state of the world today?.