First, let me congratulate you on creating a new human being! It is the greatest of our joys!
I can understand why you are pondering these issues at this time. Parenting is not easy and ideally we want to do everything we can to do the job right.
I love being a mum. 52 years ago, I gave birth and in the intervening period we moved heaven and earth for our son. That included a vast array of learning curves, a list of priorities where he was at the top and we parents were last.
Looking back on it all now... it didn't matter what gender we were. We both gave our energy, willing to provide for him and we made sure that we had a lot of fun along the way!
I am very concerned right now that gender confusion may be (partly probably) caused by oestrogens in the water supply and plastics which are upsetting the normal balance of nature. The men are being feminised and the women are alienated by that.
I don't think enough attention is being paid to this hidden environmental threat.
You promised you wouldn’t reply but here you are, replying. Please stick to your promises.
You’re delusional if you think men and women are the same strength. I’m speaking about the rule, not the exceptions, which you’re doing. I said that physical strength doesn’t make men superior, but it is still nevertheless reality and creates a responsibility that should be respected.
Please read my words properly and stop pulling stuff out of your arse.
i concur. this gender confusion is not comfortable for anyone. methinks, likely you are right about chemical contamination. ....and a 'gender industry' has made it's self.
I believe that hormones in our water/food supply is a big deal, along with synthetic meds and pesticides. Years ago I did IVF, and the doc told me 50% of men in New Zealand are low count or infertile. That's quite an imbalance in a small country.
This is something I've railed about for 20 yrs. I've coached a lot of young men on strength training & yes, steroids. I was very confused to see the low T numbers from men in their 20's until I figured out the endocrine disruptors, xenoestrogens, from many chemical sources. SSRI's are another serious issue as these, along with birth control etc, are going straight into the water treatment plants which can't remove them so anyone drinking tap water is ingesting these. Our tap water is poison.
Women are also 'alienated' by men who see themselves as the only strong gender who has to be in charge of everyone and look after the 'weaker sex' ie give them no power in society at all. Imagine what sexist views his child will grow up with from him.
There are weedy men and big women so they vary & being physically bigger or mire musckey does not equal being 'better'. You seem unable to stop stereotyping women as less than men. Men woukd not be strong enough to carry a babyish their bodies fir 9 months, give birth for for many painful hours when many cry for mummy if they get a cold.
Okay, so you believe that men aren’t stronger than women. In which case, you have no issue with women being beaten up by men in UFC and women in the frontlines of the military or in the mines underground.
I do not know what 'UFC' is but women throughout history have worked in the same jobs as men. Also they do the work that men do while pregnant, menstruating etc & while having to be tge main carer often fir family when they get home from work. Surveys show that in society women who work full time often have to do most or almost household chores also when they finish work including caring for children. Having testosterone does not create ideal members of society- the opposite very often. Most crimes are committed by men - you boasted that most crimes are solved by men but men must be stupid/lazy then because most crimes go unsolved. Archaeology shows earliest civilisations often co prised of women hunting, farming and carrying out heavy work routinely - while being maintained carer for children. Testosterone is what causes men to feel so superior to women - so you are clearly full of it.
Thank you for this. I live in a blue state and one of our county commissioners stated to press that men wearing dresses is no different than women wearing pants. In all too many cases, I cannot tell men from women as a lot of people are transitioning and it is so sad to see. I think we have normalized insanity. I appreciate the book recommendation.
Please feel free to be “offensive” at any time. You simply write the truth, which is never popular. The people who make me the most nervous at this point are the ones who are popular. I’m good not being popular currently and I’m glad that you are as well. Congratulations on your new little one.
We’ve brought Aerosmith’s Dude Looks Like A Lady to life in parts of Colorado, that’s for sure. I would actually be more comfortable in the Victorian age.
When women had to dress in corsets and heavy petticoats and not allowed to train in many professions such as medicine etc? Wealthier women were expected to read, look pretty, do embroidery etc No NHS, no unions much & women not expected to be educated even but men were....Research not just look at Downton Abbey
I kinda have to laugh, though, as my father was a VP for Capitol Records and one would assume I am not easily shocked...yet I am on a regular basis. I am just not cool enough for the kinds of nuts I see now.
back in the days of olden, men were men and women were women - for the most part. Now it is kind of a mental situation. Just confusion all around and certainly uncomfortable for me.
I understand your viewpoint but I think that maybe you are taking it a bit too far.
Do you think women should not be allowed to vote, period, end of story?
What about employment? Should a woman not be allowed to work outside of the household if she so wishes and her partner is onboard with that?
There is also the financial issue and the fact most families nowadays simply can't afford to only have one breadwinner. What are your thoughts on that?
With regards to motherhood, what about women that for whatever reason can't have children?
What about women that choose to not have them for whatever reason on their own accord? Is that a legitimate decision for a woman to make in your mind or does it make her less of a woman?
This is not an attack, just trying to understand what you actually mean by "patriarchy".
I agree 100% that the transgender agenda is a disguise to an underlying Transhumanist agenda.
More specifically, it is what is known as disembodiment which is the Transhumanist idea of the ultimate utopia, which to them is eternal 'life'...in the cyberspace/metaverse.
'Do you think women should not be allowed to vote, period, end of story?'
I don't think anybody should be allowed to vote. I don't believe in Democracy.
'What about employment? Should a woman should not be allowed to work outside the household if she so wishes and her partner is onboard with that?'
I answered that in the piece.
'There is also the financial issue and the fact most families nowadays simply can't afford to only have one breadwinner. What are your thoughts on that?'
Rachel Wilson, in her book I cited, explained why the introduction of the Federal Reserve led to the increased tax base by throwing women into the workforce, thereby reducing incomes across the board due to increased competition and making it far more difficult for the men to be the sole providers. I recommend her book.
'With regards to motherhood, what about women that for whatever reason can't have children?'
This is an exception and not the rule. My piece looks at the rule. The system is now set up to encourage and even reward women not to have children, with the aim of making it the rule.
'What about women that choose to not have them for whatever reason on their own accord? Is that a legitimate decision for a woman to make in your mind or does it make her less of a woman?'
Your comprehension skills rival that of a toddler, if that’s what you think. Why are you even commenting, if you’re so offended? You have offered no actual discussion other than hurt feelings and insults and a hatred for men.
I am not sure you and I understand the word “equal” in the same way.
To me, equal can be different but of comparable value. For example two very different paintings might win a joint first prize in an art competition. They are of equal value, but not the same.
Maybe one is bigger than the other though. Should it get more prize money because there is more canvas & paint involved? I don’t think so. Similarly I disagree with your Wimbledon prize money argument about women being unfairly given a comparable amount of prize money to men. It’s not about the number of sets, or how fast you hit the ball. It’s about the skill to win the game, whether it be a men’s game or a women’s game.
I admit I find this type of article hard. I’m a woman and a mother, and I also work. Being a mother is my #1 responsibility but paying the bills is part of that. I resent that I have to work, but I am good at what I do and I am well paid for it. I would be very angry if I were told I couldn’t do it. I want my daughter in particular to see it is possible to earn good money and be a mother. I want her to have the choices I did.
I have an IQ of around 135-145 and so most men (most anyone actually) seem rather slow to me. Accepting men as being uniquely suited to work when I consider the majority to be a little on the dim side is not really going to fly.
Letting my husband have my vote is equally risible. He can listen to me, or not. He is his own man. I will listen to him, and if he has good points, I’ll take them on board. But if we had listened to him, we would all have been Covid vaccinated to go on holiday. Sometimes the “head of the household” can be utterly stupid & short sighted. Thank god we do not live in a patriarchy.
Instead, he’s the only one who is fretting about turbo cancer and the children & I are fine. I’m sad he couldn’t see the value in waiting it out for the sake of a ski trip.
I'm a man with an IQ of 112. I'll tell you the story of how I could lower it to safe levels.
Around age eight, I took the IQ test the fascists pushed on me, for the first time. I did my best to throttle down but I could only lower to a dangerous 117 score. This was disappointing to me, because I knew my life would get more complicated then, as people would demand more than I was willing to produce. Adults looked at me weirdly before, and it only got worse after that, and the violence from the morlocks intensified.
I promised myself to lower it down to 105 if I could. Two years later, I was invited to another round of formulaic fascism, and I could kept my radiactivity down all the way to 107. I was caught cheating, and things got worse again. That's when they upped the psychiatric "medication." A few years later, I think I was sixteen, it was the last time I subjected myself to that inhuman ritual. I did the Goldilocks strategy, and managed to land a safe 112, right in the midwit level of the Province of avoidant personality disorder, in the country of Utter Acedia, that exists beyond the mountain range known as C-PTSD and is the origin of Attitude river and its infamous waters contaminated of lead and mercury compounds, which descends to a valley where the city of Yournotthebossofme stands, and then it goes to die in the Phlegmatic Sea.
I was told by a psychologist that his opinion was that I could do anything in College, but that I would probably fail because I had to solve trauma first. He recommended to not take things too seriously in life, in order to decrease pain. I disregarded his wise admonition, and I spent my twenties doing my time in the depression roller coaster. Mea culpa, but antidepressants did not help at all. They compounded my inner turmoil. I should have known better but, alas, I'm not a genius. I only play a fool on the internet.
I took once an online test, just to satisfy the curiosity of a "friend", who told me to do my best. The website claimed 160, which embarrassed me, and after a couple more attempts I managed to get 180 something. It was a very stupid website and totally unreliable, but we had a nice evening in the library that afternoon. I lost track of her after that. I often lose track of people.
I can confirm from many years of scrutiny of the dismal mental life of most people I've come across, that most men (I include females in the collective noun men) are unreliable and viscous in their general processing of information.
Although they have better attitude than I do. That saves them. I'm a defender of normies. I depend on normies. Long life the normies, that's why I'm an antivaxer.
I opine that lack of intelligence should not be a problem for a happy, prosperous and reasonably safe life, should the public institutions not stand in the way of normal human affairs, such as love, rearing children, food production, traveling, sharing of information, or commerce. But we have lived through decades of ideological tyranny by impious cultists. The results speak for themselves.
The common man needs emotional stability. The superior man needs excitement, risk, innovation, deep exchanges, a glimpse at the sublime beauty, consulting the divine authority, accessing the superior wisdom and experiencing the primordial love. The common man just needs one or two jobs and a predictable currency. The superior man lives an optimal life by practicing commensalism with the common man, and realizes that innovation and radical ideas and political practices are very harmful to the common man's life. Faith is necessary for conviviality.
It's self-destructive to abuse and poison the people of normal intelligence. It's a pain to become a reliable leader of men, one who uses his ken to vivify fellow humans and to guarantee the material satisfaction and emotional nourishment of his inferiors. But most intelligent people are psychopaths, and the other 20% are scared of power, so they choose to not lead. It's too risky and too boring. Art is better than administering the realm. And that's why the world is run by ideologues and sociopaths and borderline charlatans: the best people do not care about the fate of humanity.
Thence, all get what they deserve.
And Hell would be an improvement for some.
This is probably the main psychological difference in the political practice of the middle ages when compared to the political practice of the modern era: it used to be that the best people were stimulated to dedicate their life to others, but in the last five hundred years or so, the best people are told to focus on themselves. The trend seems to be changing. We are at the end of an era of deep stupidity and unjust violence. We are so fortunate!
About your husband fretting about turbo cancer, suggest him to use turpentine and to not worry. And stop doing stupid things like trusting the Military or watching the News. Live your life and love your family. That's the best advice for him, I think.
As for you, please stop voting. Please! Just say no to vote. It's a habit you can overcome. I believe in you and your girl power. I don't really believe in you, I'm just being facetious. Do what you will.
Truth is all your political options at this moment run against your interests. The State is openly at war with the Nation. The people have not realized yet because the kitten videos are so cute. I'll give you a cheat code for free: whenever you read a propaganda term like "patriarchy," there are only three options about the intention of the person who uses the term: a provocator, a manipulator or a confused person.
1. Provocators are intent on helping people find the main course on a given topic. Or at least, makes some money off their neuroses.
2. Manipulators lead people deep into the forest, to kill them and skin them to make drums and bags and boots that they later sell in the market to unsuspecting customers. Also, illegal organ trafficking, but let's not go there.
3. Confused people are confused. I avoid them, and I recommend avoiding them. They are very likely stoopid, and they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience, as St. Mark already warned in the past.
There are so many things to do that are so much better than politics and economics.
It's a great epoch to reevaluate everything, and gut every sacred cow that inhabits our minds.
Stereotyping of women by 'Jerm for a brain' again. He is a good old fashioned sexist, chest beating bag of testosterone. Ie the type destroying the planet for millenia with war, insatiable lust for more profit...But Patriarchy will save us all he says...Misogyny of men competing with women in women's sports etc and more mysogyny to say only men are allowed any power in the world .
But it's not men who compete with women in women's sports due to misogyny, rather it's that men are cowards and fail to tell the truth to sports women and to defend their rights, and women are too stupid to oppose totalitarian abuse from inordinate scumbags.
The males who tell the truth about the economy and war are lovers of women.
You've been banned for being a vile, man-hating, blue-haired feminist who offers no value and just spits venom because your own life is miserable and you feel the need to project your hatred and insecurities onto others. The final straw was attacking my wife. Agenda 2030 appreciates people like you. The rest of us don't.
On health..... that they are always trying to destroy.....
"When illness is blamed on bacteria, so-called "viruses" and genes, not only are enormous profits generated for the pharmaceutical industry selling their antibiotics, antivirals, vaccines and the myriad of other related drugs, but it also protects the other hand of the same industry that sells herbicides, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, preservatives, etc... as it obscures one of the fundamental causes of illness...our nutrient-deficient and poison laden foods."
As an old-school feminist, who has been completely changed critically-thinking-wise because of Covid, I pretty much agree with everything you’re saying. However, as to nature, I see that female animals are just as powerful. Sometimes they’re the killer sometimes they’re the only protector.
Is it reasonable to assert that all male animals are consistently the most dominant…?
Which is also probably why you're so angry and bitter. Get yourself a decent, strong man with whom you can have great sex so that you can stop being so toxic and maybe you'll find yourself writing fewer bitchy comments on Substack.
The reality though is that the framing of the patriarchy as the oppressive evil misogynistic entity is based on exclusively anti white male sentiment so it's race not gender that's the starting point
This is a great, thought provoking article Jerm, and some very important points raised, thank you.
Encyclopaedia Brittanica: 'Patriarchy, hypothetical social system in which the father or a male elder has absolute authority over the family group; by extension, one or more men (as in a council) exert absolute authority over the community as a whole. Building on the theories of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin, many 19th-century scholars sought to form a theory of unilinear cultural evolution. This hypothesis, now discredited, suggested that human social organization “evolved” through a series of stages: animalistic sexual promiscuity was followed by matriarchy, which was in turn followed by patriarchy.'
My initial response to 'Patriarchy is critical to the survival of men, women and civilisation as a whole', is that no one category of people is automatically entitled to any position of authority over anyone.' The globalist cult is patriarchal and warring at source, despite adoration of female icons such as Isis/Gaia/Cybele, and forces upon us Darwinism as a pseudo-religion to help them take control.
There will always be bad apples. I'm not a 'feminist' but I wouldn't consent to anyone automatically having absolute authority over me and my family. Both male and female contributions are essential to arrive at healthy outcomes for a family, and to have one overridden by the other because of an established socio-political doctrine of male authority would hugely impede this.
The moment I became a mother, the centre of my world reoriented itself to my child, and only then did my real education begin. It can oft
I do agree with the subtitle, 'Egalitarianism and the feminisation of men are destructive to everybody' - they are artificial constructs, imposed by those subverting the laws of nature and God for their own power seeking.
Men and women do have different strengths and weaknesses. Irrespective of sex, we also are all attracted to, passionate about, different things in addition to our roles as mothers & fathers. We all make varying contributions to family/society according to eg level of ability, or selfishness, Humanity does need men and women to be true to their fundamental natural characteristics.
A society well-educated in truth, with the complementary wisdom of both men and women equally guiding it, from family to elected council, would be a healthier society.
I would suggest focusing on the subject matter rather than the title and byline. Otherwise, I'll just write titles and bylines and not write anything further. 😎
The reality is that men do have defacto authority over women, whether or not women consent. Why? Because of the power differential. It's also how God create the family unit. However, it does not mean that such authority includes abuse and oppression, which I've made quite clear the article. Male lions usually have defacto authority over other predators in a game park, for example, but you don't see them randomly killing female lions and other predators. There is a natural order that exists.
I found your subtitle a good summary of the article's content, so oriented my comment around it for clarity.
Maybe lions aren't the right model for human society. Yes, men are physically stronger than women, and this is a kind of power. But this type of power can only be exerted by using dominating behaviour, threat, fear, coercion, force, submission.
This doesn't seem to be the order God intended when he gave us reason, free will, and complementary characteristics.
There are other types of power, such as those that derive from wisdom, love, truth, goodness, that don't need either man or woman to have automatic authority, or exert force for compliance, but would create a more evolved humanity if we founded educated, collaborative socio-political structures on them, where the ideas of both men and women have equal consideration.
The bad power you speak of doesn’t get exerted on women for, overwhelmingly, the most part. I explicitly state that in my article. Men choose not to and, instead, exert love and respect. Have you actually read my article?
Yes, of course, I’ve read your article. I have a different view to yours about patriarchy being the solution for the problems we’re facing.
I think this is a healthy debate to have on our very different ideals for how a society could best be structured.
In an ideal world, men and women would show each other love and respect - and this is a fundamental starting point for both yours and my ideal structure.
But patriarchy places male authority over women, and as men and women often have very different insights into how best to do things, the views of both must be given equal consideration to gain the healthiest outcome.
Yes, I agree that it's very healthy. Where we differ is that I argue for the preservation of patriarchy rather than its dismantling. Patriarchy is not an idea that is imposed by anybody; it simply is. Like natural order. It haas always existed in humans and other mammals as the rule. The problem is that cultural Marxist and communist ideals, combined with postmodernism and wokeness, have turned into the enemy, which is why masculinity is now viewed as 'toxic'.
If you had ever studied history you woukd know that oatruarchybhas not akways been the 'natural order & many ancient ci inactions show matriarchy and furthermore the latter were very peaceful which patriarchy never will be. Your masculinity is toxic but not all.
Blind faith is how the entire fake pandemic worked. Were you jabbed? And did you get a PCR test? Did you believe the government and scientists when they told you there was a deadly virus?
It doesn't matter what name we use - God, Creator, etc - it's a universal truth that a creative energy creates all things. A force for creation, not for destruction. Man is made unique, is given the power of reason, to create ideas, new knowledge. I don't need to follow a religion to know this, creation and reason itself are evidence enough.
97% of on-site work related deaths are male. So more equality SHOULD bring our death rate down and get closer to parity with females but oh wait it’s a pseudo equality we are having.
I see male genital mutilation at birth is still fine too.
Crazy times.
I think you are right to look at generalisation as specifics don’t tell the story.
There isn't a problem with specifics either. It just depends on what your messaging is. What happens is that, whenever you try be 'inclusive', you end up going nowhere because you will always get whataboutism: "Yes, but what about" and so on. It's a way to dismantle any conversation.
Your positioning women as having no agency in matters as serious as their own children is the most anti-female sentiment. If they can get dressed and choose make up then surely they can bring themselves to make objections Re the contents of their own womb. Takes two genders I’m afraid.
Feminists love doing that. They preach about women being as powerful as men but then play the victim card and reduce women to useless entities who can't think and act for themselves.
That's why I banned her. She attacked my wife using the above feminist rhetoric. She's a bitter individual who is consumed by hatred.
Maybe it's just me, but lately I feel there's a trend reaction to controversial issues which lacks historical context. The given sides of these issues are mostly black or white, right or left. We are horrified and disgusted by what appears to be the obvious by-product of something and so revert to a previous vein of thought. Zionism is a good example: horrified by what most of us deem is genocide, up bubbles a Hitler-was-misunderstood-holocaust-diminishing narrative. Nope. Not buying it.
Feminism is another one: disgusted by the militant transgenders, a longing for the good ol' days seems natural but not so fast on the Feminism-is-of-the-devil, please. There are as many kinds of feminism as there are church denominations. Things aren't black and white.
I've not heard of the book recommended here, but to temper the anti-feminist vibe I offer a recommendation of my own: "God's Word to Women" by Katherine Bushnell. The link offers a short blurb but the reviews offer a bit more: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/356376.God_s_Word_to_Women
First, let me congratulate you on creating a new human being! It is the greatest of our joys!
I can understand why you are pondering these issues at this time. Parenting is not easy and ideally we want to do everything we can to do the job right.
I love being a mum. 52 years ago, I gave birth and in the intervening period we moved heaven and earth for our son. That included a vast array of learning curves, a list of priorities where he was at the top and we parents were last.
Looking back on it all now... it didn't matter what gender we were. We both gave our energy, willing to provide for him and we made sure that we had a lot of fun along the way!
I am very concerned right now that gender confusion may be (partly probably) caused by oestrogens in the water supply and plastics which are upsetting the normal balance of nature. The men are being feminised and the women are alienated by that.
I don't think enough attention is being paid to this hidden environmental threat.
This is an excellent point. I will look into it. If you have suggestions, send them my way.
https://www.ehn.org/frogs-feminized-but-atrazines-effects-on-people-uncertain-2645947317.html
https://www.water-for-health.co.uk/blogs/blog/sorry-did-you-just-say-there-are-hormones-in-my-tap-water
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3222987/
Just to get you started! It is a vast subject and the effect on humans is poorly addressed.
I remember when Alex Jones was ridiculed for this frog story. Looks like he was right!
Yeah... so was the scientist who discovered the problem:
https://www.ted.com/talks/tyrone_hayes_endocrine_disruption_environmental_justice_and_the_ivory_tower?subtitle=en
This is why we drink 🍻🍻🍻
I literally covered all of that in my article. 😂
You promised you wouldn’t reply but here you are, replying. Please stick to your promises.
You’re delusional if you think men and women are the same strength. I’m speaking about the rule, not the exceptions, which you’re doing. I said that physical strength doesn’t make men superior, but it is still nevertheless reality and creates a responsibility that should be respected.
Please read my words properly and stop pulling stuff out of your arse.
?? I think you may be responding to a different comment, perhaps?
Yes that’s true. Wrong comment. Apologies.
i concur. this gender confusion is not comfortable for anyone. methinks, likely you are right about chemical contamination. ....and a 'gender industry' has made it's self.
I believe that hormones in our water/food supply is a big deal, along with synthetic meds and pesticides. Years ago I did IVF, and the doc told me 50% of men in New Zealand are low count or infertile. That's quite an imbalance in a small country.
This is something I've railed about for 20 yrs. I've coached a lot of young men on strength training & yes, steroids. I was very confused to see the low T numbers from men in their 20's until I figured out the endocrine disruptors, xenoestrogens, from many chemical sources. SSRI's are another serious issue as these, along with birth control etc, are going straight into the water treatment plants which can't remove them so anyone drinking tap water is ingesting these. Our tap water is poison.
Women are also 'alienated' by men who see themselves as the only strong gender who has to be in charge of everyone and look after the 'weaker sex' ie give them no power in society at all. Imagine what sexist views his child will grow up with from him.
Men are stronger than women. Sorry if you find that offensive.
There are weedy men and big women so they vary & being physically bigger or mire musckey does not equal being 'better'. You seem unable to stop stereotyping women as less than men. Men woukd not be strong enough to carry a babyish their bodies fir 9 months, give birth for for many painful hours when many cry for mummy if they get a cold.
Okay, so you believe that men aren’t stronger than women. In which case, you have no issue with women being beaten up by men in UFC and women in the frontlines of the military or in the mines underground.
I do not know what 'UFC' is but women throughout history have worked in the same jobs as men. Also they do the work that men do while pregnant, menstruating etc & while having to be tge main carer often fir family when they get home from work. Surveys show that in society women who work full time often have to do most or almost household chores also when they finish work including caring for children. Having testosterone does not create ideal members of society- the opposite very often. Most crimes are committed by men - you boasted that most crimes are solved by men but men must be stupid/lazy then because most crimes go unsolved. Archaeology shows earliest civilisations often co prised of women hunting, farming and carrying out heavy work routinely - while being maintained carer for children. Testosterone is what causes men to feel so superior to women - so you are clearly full of it.
Thank you for this. I live in a blue state and one of our county commissioners stated to press that men wearing dresses is no different than women wearing pants. In all too many cases, I cannot tell men from women as a lot of people are transitioning and it is so sad to see. I think we have normalized insanity. I appreciate the book recommendation.
It's a great pleasure! The problem is that many will find this piece offensive and not bother thinking critically about what's going on.
Please feel free to be “offensive” at any time. You simply write the truth, which is never popular. The people who make me the most nervous at this point are the ones who are popular. I’m good not being popular currently and I’m glad that you are as well. Congratulations on your new little one.
Pants on women was the first step to dresses on men.
yeah, all that power we finally acquired wearing the pants. woo hoo
and then the men have to start wearing the dresses.... some kind of very sad bullshit for sure
I live in Northern Virginia, Elizabeth. I certainly do not wish to see this display any time soon.
Oh gosh.... men wearing dresses. well, perhaps some of the dowdy ones from Dress Barn, or some outlet store
I respectfully reserve my right to wear a kaftan.
Do it!!
We’ve brought Aerosmith’s Dude Looks Like A Lady to life in parts of Colorado, that’s for sure. I would actually be more comfortable in the Victorian age.
When women had to dress in corsets and heavy petticoats and not allowed to train in many professions such as medicine etc? Wealthier women were expected to read, look pretty, do embroidery etc No NHS, no unions much & women not expected to be educated even but men were....Research not just look at Downton Abbey
I live in Northern Virginia, Elizabeth. I certainly do not wish to see this display any time soon.
Oh gosh.... men wearing dresses. well, perhaps some of the dowdy ones from Dress Barn, or some outlet store
I kinda have to laugh, though, as my father was a VP for Capitol Records and one would assume I am not easily shocked...yet I am on a regular basis. I am just not cool enough for the kinds of nuts I see now.
back in the days of olden, men were men and women were women - for the most part. Now it is kind of a mental situation. Just confusion all around and certainly uncomfortable for me.
I understand your viewpoint but I think that maybe you are taking it a bit too far.
Do you think women should not be allowed to vote, period, end of story?
What about employment? Should a woman not be allowed to work outside of the household if she so wishes and her partner is onboard with that?
There is also the financial issue and the fact most families nowadays simply can't afford to only have one breadwinner. What are your thoughts on that?
With regards to motherhood, what about women that for whatever reason can't have children?
What about women that choose to not have them for whatever reason on their own accord? Is that a legitimate decision for a woman to make in your mind or does it make her less of a woman?
This is not an attack, just trying to understand what you actually mean by "patriarchy".
I agree 100% that the transgender agenda is a disguise to an underlying Transhumanist agenda.
More specifically, it is what is known as disembodiment which is the Transhumanist idea of the ultimate utopia, which to them is eternal 'life'...in the cyberspace/metaverse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLXdoqXbC6k
'Do you think women should not be allowed to vote, period, end of story?'
I don't think anybody should be allowed to vote. I don't believe in Democracy.
'What about employment? Should a woman should not be allowed to work outside the household if she so wishes and her partner is onboard with that?'
I answered that in the piece.
'There is also the financial issue and the fact most families nowadays simply can't afford to only have one breadwinner. What are your thoughts on that?'
Rachel Wilson, in her book I cited, explained why the introduction of the Federal Reserve led to the increased tax base by throwing women into the workforce, thereby reducing incomes across the board due to increased competition and making it far more difficult for the men to be the sole providers. I recommend her book.
'With regards to motherhood, what about women that for whatever reason can't have children?'
This is an exception and not the rule. My piece looks at the rule. The system is now set up to encourage and even reward women not to have children, with the aim of making it the rule.
'What about women that choose to not have them for whatever reason on their own accord? Is that a legitimate decision for a woman to make in your mind or does it make her less of a woman?'
Again, not the rule.
"I don't think anybody should be allowed to vote. I don't believe in Democracy"
Interesting. What do you believe in instead?
I do agree that voting with the present state of things is completely pointless in most jurisdictions.
Democracy is mob rule based on the most popular billboard. Companies don’t allow staff to vote for a new CEO every 4 years for good reason.
Plus, when did it become a good idea to let the peasant class decide on the future of the entire country?
But equally, we have just seen an example of what happens when you let “experts” decide on a course of action.
Who polices the “experts”?
Again, I don't disagree but what do you propose as an alternative to Democracy? Elimination of government altogether?
Replace it with something like this:
https://jermwarfare.com/conversations/what-is-anarchy
I’m not an anarchist. I’m more of an absolute monarchist as per the work of Hans-Herman Hoppe.
Yikes. Ok.
We'll definitely agree to disagree on that one then.
Thanks for your time.
He believes he should be king of the planet it seems..
Your comprehension skills rival that of a toddler, if that’s what you think. Why are you even commenting, if you’re so offended? You have offered no actual discussion other than hurt feelings and insults and a hatred for men.
I do not hate men I just have no respect for the anachronism that want to force women to be a certain way designed by men.
Homosexuals with a lifetime 1000 sexual partners are your kind of men
good questions. what about the men that identify as women, perhaps they should also be disallowed to vote haha hahaha
I am not sure you and I understand the word “equal” in the same way.
To me, equal can be different but of comparable value. For example two very different paintings might win a joint first prize in an art competition. They are of equal value, but not the same.
Maybe one is bigger than the other though. Should it get more prize money because there is more canvas & paint involved? I don’t think so. Similarly I disagree with your Wimbledon prize money argument about women being unfairly given a comparable amount of prize money to men. It’s not about the number of sets, or how fast you hit the ball. It’s about the skill to win the game, whether it be a men’s game or a women’s game.
I admit I find this type of article hard. I’m a woman and a mother, and I also work. Being a mother is my #1 responsibility but paying the bills is part of that. I resent that I have to work, but I am good at what I do and I am well paid for it. I would be very angry if I were told I couldn’t do it. I want my daughter in particular to see it is possible to earn good money and be a mother. I want her to have the choices I did.
I have an IQ of around 135-145 and so most men (most anyone actually) seem rather slow to me. Accepting men as being uniquely suited to work when I consider the majority to be a little on the dim side is not really going to fly.
Letting my husband have my vote is equally risible. He can listen to me, or not. He is his own man. I will listen to him, and if he has good points, I’ll take them on board. But if we had listened to him, we would all have been Covid vaccinated to go on holiday. Sometimes the “head of the household” can be utterly stupid & short sighted. Thank god we do not live in a patriarchy.
Instead, he’s the only one who is fretting about turbo cancer and the children & I are fine. I’m sad he couldn’t see the value in waiting it out for the sake of a ski trip.
I'm a man with an IQ of 112. I'll tell you the story of how I could lower it to safe levels.
Around age eight, I took the IQ test the fascists pushed on me, for the first time. I did my best to throttle down but I could only lower to a dangerous 117 score. This was disappointing to me, because I knew my life would get more complicated then, as people would demand more than I was willing to produce. Adults looked at me weirdly before, and it only got worse after that, and the violence from the morlocks intensified.
I promised myself to lower it down to 105 if I could. Two years later, I was invited to another round of formulaic fascism, and I could kept my radiactivity down all the way to 107. I was caught cheating, and things got worse again. That's when they upped the psychiatric "medication." A few years later, I think I was sixteen, it was the last time I subjected myself to that inhuman ritual. I did the Goldilocks strategy, and managed to land a safe 112, right in the midwit level of the Province of avoidant personality disorder, in the country of Utter Acedia, that exists beyond the mountain range known as C-PTSD and is the origin of Attitude river and its infamous waters contaminated of lead and mercury compounds, which descends to a valley where the city of Yournotthebossofme stands, and then it goes to die in the Phlegmatic Sea.
I was told by a psychologist that his opinion was that I could do anything in College, but that I would probably fail because I had to solve trauma first. He recommended to not take things too seriously in life, in order to decrease pain. I disregarded his wise admonition, and I spent my twenties doing my time in the depression roller coaster. Mea culpa, but antidepressants did not help at all. They compounded my inner turmoil. I should have known better but, alas, I'm not a genius. I only play a fool on the internet.
I took once an online test, just to satisfy the curiosity of a "friend", who told me to do my best. The website claimed 160, which embarrassed me, and after a couple more attempts I managed to get 180 something. It was a very stupid website and totally unreliable, but we had a nice evening in the library that afternoon. I lost track of her after that. I often lose track of people.
I can confirm from many years of scrutiny of the dismal mental life of most people I've come across, that most men (I include females in the collective noun men) are unreliable and viscous in their general processing of information.
Although they have better attitude than I do. That saves them. I'm a defender of normies. I depend on normies. Long life the normies, that's why I'm an antivaxer.
I opine that lack of intelligence should not be a problem for a happy, prosperous and reasonably safe life, should the public institutions not stand in the way of normal human affairs, such as love, rearing children, food production, traveling, sharing of information, or commerce. But we have lived through decades of ideological tyranny by impious cultists. The results speak for themselves.
The common man needs emotional stability. The superior man needs excitement, risk, innovation, deep exchanges, a glimpse at the sublime beauty, consulting the divine authority, accessing the superior wisdom and experiencing the primordial love. The common man just needs one or two jobs and a predictable currency. The superior man lives an optimal life by practicing commensalism with the common man, and realizes that innovation and radical ideas and political practices are very harmful to the common man's life. Faith is necessary for conviviality.
It's self-destructive to abuse and poison the people of normal intelligence. It's a pain to become a reliable leader of men, one who uses his ken to vivify fellow humans and to guarantee the material satisfaction and emotional nourishment of his inferiors. But most intelligent people are psychopaths, and the other 20% are scared of power, so they choose to not lead. It's too risky and too boring. Art is better than administering the realm. And that's why the world is run by ideologues and sociopaths and borderline charlatans: the best people do not care about the fate of humanity.
Thence, all get what they deserve.
And Hell would be an improvement for some.
This is probably the main psychological difference in the political practice of the middle ages when compared to the political practice of the modern era: it used to be that the best people were stimulated to dedicate their life to others, but in the last five hundred years or so, the best people are told to focus on themselves. The trend seems to be changing. We are at the end of an era of deep stupidity and unjust violence. We are so fortunate!
About your husband fretting about turbo cancer, suggest him to use turpentine and to not worry. And stop doing stupid things like trusting the Military or watching the News. Live your life and love your family. That's the best advice for him, I think.
As for you, please stop voting. Please! Just say no to vote. It's a habit you can overcome. I believe in you and your girl power. I don't really believe in you, I'm just being facetious. Do what you will.
Truth is all your political options at this moment run against your interests. The State is openly at war with the Nation. The people have not realized yet because the kitten videos are so cute. I'll give you a cheat code for free: whenever you read a propaganda term like "patriarchy," there are only three options about the intention of the person who uses the term: a provocator, a manipulator or a confused person.
1. Provocators are intent on helping people find the main course on a given topic. Or at least, makes some money off their neuroses.
2. Manipulators lead people deep into the forest, to kill them and skin them to make drums and bags and boots that they later sell in the market to unsuspecting customers. Also, illegal organ trafficking, but let's not go there.
3. Confused people are confused. I avoid them, and I recommend avoiding them. They are very likely stoopid, and they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience, as St. Mark already warned in the past.
There are so many things to do that are so much better than politics and economics.
It's a great epoch to reevaluate everything, and gut every sacred cow that inhabits our minds.
What a load of pretentious twaddle.
Are you feeling alone? You could try finding a person who would spank you so that you feel at home, comfortable, secure, like when you were a lass.
I'm with you cobber.👍🇦🇺🍻
Let the market decide how much money the men's and women's Wimbledon winners deserve.
1) there’s more to life than IQ - kindness counts for a LOT
2) he has good genes & I wanted good looking and athletic kids (and I got them)
3 it’s hard finding an eligible man of comparable IQ that you’re also physically attracted to - compromises must be made
Your IQ rating has slipped to 110 for marrying a dill like that.👍🇦🇺
Stereotyping of women by 'Jerm for a brain' again. He is a good old fashioned sexist, chest beating bag of testosterone. Ie the type destroying the planet for millenia with war, insatiable lust for more profit...But Patriarchy will save us all he says...Misogyny of men competing with women in women's sports etc and more mysogyny to say only men are allowed any power in the world .
Sure, okay, but what about my bad points?
Neve O secretly adores you mate but you know that.😄👍🇦🇺
Testosterone makes even the most revolting specimens think they are 'God's gift' to women 'Roc' & Jerm
ROFL
Homosexuals are 100%responsible for men competing in women's sports
But it's not men who compete with women in women's sports due to misogyny, rather it's that men are cowards and fail to tell the truth to sports women and to defend their rights, and women are too stupid to oppose totalitarian abuse from inordinate scumbags.
The males who tell the truth about the economy and war are lovers of women.
If Jeremy is misogynistic your opinion doesn't rate but you seem like a nice sheila. All the best.😄👍🇦🇺
I'm such a misogynist that my wife chose to start a family with me. Bro, I'm doing something wrong.
You've been banned for being a vile, man-hating, blue-haired feminist who offers no value and just spits venom because your own life is miserable and you feel the need to project your hatred and insecurities onto others. The final straw was attacking my wife. Agenda 2030 appreciates people like you. The rest of us don't.
It's all in the delivery mate.👍🇦🇺
Congratulations on the birth of your son. May he have a happy and healthy life!
The wife & I have just been to the cinema to see that film, Suffragette.
Two hours of a woman's struggle... full of tears, aggression, sadness, anger and frustration.
Anyway, after she finally managed to park the car in the cinema car park, we rushed in and caught the credits.
Chillax girls, it's called a joke. 🤣
On health..... that they are always trying to destroy.....
"When illness is blamed on bacteria, so-called "viruses" and genes, not only are enormous profits generated for the pharmaceutical industry selling their antibiotics, antivirals, vaccines and the myriad of other related drugs, but it also protects the other hand of the same industry that sells herbicides, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, preservatives, etc... as it obscures one of the fundamental causes of illness...our nutrient-deficient and poison laden foods."
- T.C. Fry, Founder of Life Science Institute
https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/ebola
As an old-school feminist, who has been completely changed critically-thinking-wise because of Covid, I pretty much agree with everything you’re saying. However, as to nature, I see that female animals are just as powerful. Sometimes they’re the killer sometimes they’re the only protector.
Is it reasonable to assert that all male animals are consistently the most dominant…?
In mammals, it’s more often the case, yes. Perhaps not reptiles or birds. 🤣
If you are referring to me, my 'critical thinking' is as top notch as ever & grovelling to machismo is not admirable.
Which is also probably why you're so angry and bitter. Get yourself a decent, strong man with whom you can have great sex so that you can stop being so toxic and maybe you'll find yourself writing fewer bitchy comments on Substack.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/20/the-return-of-patriarchy/
Is a good read
From Foreign Policy, no less!
https://www.fisheaters.com/garbagegeneration.html
This ebook has some good points too
He features in the "Demographic Winter" movie, which is on Youtube I think
Roman men in power were homosexual paedophiles openly - is that what you and 'Jetm fir a brain' aspire to with your mysogyny?
My ex-husband tried to force me to work full-time. I refused. My position as stay at home mom (Idid work minimal p/t hours) was not respected by him.
Christ is the Head, man under him as head of household, woman as helpmate
The reality though is that the framing of the patriarchy as the oppressive evil misogynistic entity is based on exclusively anti white male sentiment so it's race not gender that's the starting point
This is a great, thought provoking article Jerm, and some very important points raised, thank you.
Encyclopaedia Brittanica: 'Patriarchy, hypothetical social system in which the father or a male elder has absolute authority over the family group; by extension, one or more men (as in a council) exert absolute authority over the community as a whole. Building on the theories of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin, many 19th-century scholars sought to form a theory of unilinear cultural evolution. This hypothesis, now discredited, suggested that human social organization “evolved” through a series of stages: animalistic sexual promiscuity was followed by matriarchy, which was in turn followed by patriarchy.'
My initial response to 'Patriarchy is critical to the survival of men, women and civilisation as a whole', is that no one category of people is automatically entitled to any position of authority over anyone.' The globalist cult is patriarchal and warring at source, despite adoration of female icons such as Isis/Gaia/Cybele, and forces upon us Darwinism as a pseudo-religion to help them take control.
There will always be bad apples. I'm not a 'feminist' but I wouldn't consent to anyone automatically having absolute authority over me and my family. Both male and female contributions are essential to arrive at healthy outcomes for a family, and to have one overridden by the other because of an established socio-political doctrine of male authority would hugely impede this.
The moment I became a mother, the centre of my world reoriented itself to my child, and only then did my real education begin. It can oft
I do agree with the subtitle, 'Egalitarianism and the feminisation of men are destructive to everybody' - they are artificial constructs, imposed by those subverting the laws of nature and God for their own power seeking.
Men and women do have different strengths and weaknesses. Irrespective of sex, we also are all attracted to, passionate about, different things in addition to our roles as mothers & fathers. We all make varying contributions to family/society according to eg level of ability, or selfishness, Humanity does need men and women to be true to their fundamental natural characteristics.
A society well-educated in truth, with the complementary wisdom of both men and women equally guiding it, from family to elected council, would be a healthier society.
I would suggest focusing on the subject matter rather than the title and byline. Otherwise, I'll just write titles and bylines and not write anything further. 😎
The reality is that men do have defacto authority over women, whether or not women consent. Why? Because of the power differential. It's also how God create the family unit. However, it does not mean that such authority includes abuse and oppression, which I've made quite clear the article. Male lions usually have defacto authority over other predators in a game park, for example, but you don't see them randomly killing female lions and other predators. There is a natural order that exists.
I found your subtitle a good summary of the article's content, so oriented my comment around it for clarity.
Maybe lions aren't the right model for human society. Yes, men are physically stronger than women, and this is a kind of power. But this type of power can only be exerted by using dominating behaviour, threat, fear, coercion, force, submission.
This doesn't seem to be the order God intended when he gave us reason, free will, and complementary characteristics.
There are other types of power, such as those that derive from wisdom, love, truth, goodness, that don't need either man or woman to have automatic authority, or exert force for compliance, but would create a more evolved humanity if we founded educated, collaborative socio-political structures on them, where the ideas of both men and women have equal consideration.
The bad power you speak of doesn’t get exerted on women for, overwhelmingly, the most part. I explicitly state that in my article. Men choose not to and, instead, exert love and respect. Have you actually read my article?
Yes, of course, I’ve read your article. I have a different view to yours about patriarchy being the solution for the problems we’re facing.
I think this is a healthy debate to have on our very different ideals for how a society could best be structured.
In an ideal world, men and women would show each other love and respect - and this is a fundamental starting point for both yours and my ideal structure.
But patriarchy places male authority over women, and as men and women often have very different insights into how best to do things, the views of both must be given equal consideration to gain the healthiest outcome.
Yes, I agree that it's very healthy. Where we differ is that I argue for the preservation of patriarchy rather than its dismantling. Patriarchy is not an idea that is imposed by anybody; it simply is. Like natural order. It haas always existed in humans and other mammals as the rule. The problem is that cultural Marxist and communist ideals, combined with postmodernism and wokeness, have turned into the enemy, which is why masculinity is now viewed as 'toxic'.
OK, thanks Jerm, I guess we'll have to disagree about patriarchy being the way forward for humanity then!
If you had ever studied history you woukd know that oatruarchybhas not akways been the 'natural order & many ancient ci inactions show matriarchy and furthermore the latter were very peaceful which patriarchy never will be. Your masculinity is toxic but not all.
There's zero evidence of a god
Religion is not about evidence.
Blind faith so. I'll pass on that one
Blind faith is how the entire fake pandemic worked. Were you jabbed? And did you get a PCR test? Did you believe the government and scientists when they told you there was a deadly virus?
It doesn't matter what name we use - God, Creator, etc - it's a universal truth that a creative energy creates all things. A force for creation, not for destruction. Man is made unique, is given the power of reason, to create ideas, new knowledge. I don't need to follow a religion to know this, creation and reason itself are evidence enough.
Men only have a natural authority through physical force, or the threat of it. From where else would this authority stem?
We know what direction we're going in. Can you not give us that one at least?!
97% of on-site work related deaths are male. So more equality SHOULD bring our death rate down and get closer to parity with females but oh wait it’s a pseudo equality we are having.
I see male genital mutilation at birth is still fine too.
Crazy times.
I think you are right to look at generalisation as specifics don’t tell the story.
There isn't a problem with specifics either. It just depends on what your messaging is. What happens is that, whenever you try be 'inclusive', you end up going nowhere because you will always get whataboutism: "Yes, but what about" and so on. It's a way to dismantle any conversation.
Agreed. Btw, your regenerative farming vid rocked. Off grid homesteading over here and long time in the game. Loved it.
Also thanks for all you were doing early in the scamdemic.
Legendary. I just wrote angry hip hop
'Make genital mutilation' invented by, carried out by guess who? Testosterone
containers...
Male
Your positioning women as having no agency in matters as serious as their own children is the most anti-female sentiment. If they can get dressed and choose make up then surely they can bring themselves to make objections Re the contents of their own womb. Takes two genders I’m afraid.
Feminists love doing that. They preach about women being as powerful as men but then play the victim card and reduce women to useless entities who can't think and act for themselves.
That's why I banned her. She attacked my wife using the above feminist rhetoric. She's a bitter individual who is consumed by hatred.
thank you for the big ol' dose of common sense. dave
Maybe it's just me, but lately I feel there's a trend reaction to controversial issues which lacks historical context. The given sides of these issues are mostly black or white, right or left. We are horrified and disgusted by what appears to be the obvious by-product of something and so revert to a previous vein of thought. Zionism is a good example: horrified by what most of us deem is genocide, up bubbles a Hitler-was-misunderstood-holocaust-diminishing narrative. Nope. Not buying it.
Feminism is another one: disgusted by the militant transgenders, a longing for the good ol' days seems natural but not so fast on the Feminism-is-of-the-devil, please. There are as many kinds of feminism as there are church denominations. Things aren't black and white.
I've not heard of the book recommended here, but to temper the anti-feminist vibe I offer a recommendation of my own: "God's Word to Women" by Katherine Bushnell. The link offers a short blurb but the reviews offer a bit more: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/356376.God_s_Word_to_Women