With feminism going strong all over the Western world, I have been wondering what the end game of the modern strong and empowered woman is. Sure, we have been joking about not-so-cool wine aunts and cat ladies but this topic is quite serious. Women in the Western world used to enjoy the fattest gravy train imaginable. Once the oppressive white man had invented diapers, washing machines, microwave ovens, and vacuum cleaners, women had an absolutely pampered life. There surely were exceptions but for a few decades, when there was material abundance in the West and one income was sufficient to fund a family of four, vacations, education, and one or two cars, it is not at all an exaggeration to say that those women lived at worst in a golden cage. Even this metaphor is way off as what was outside of that cage, i.e. mind-numbing work at BigCorp, is nothing people do because they are just so into it.
I have childhood memories of my mother meeting up with other mothers in the area. They spent many afternoons visiting each other, drinking coffee and eating cake. The kids were dumped somewhere in a corner, given a few toys, and told to entertain themselves. It was basically a continuation of high school or college for the women. I do not intend to mock this at all, because those chattering women maintained the social fabric of the village, and there was a palpable community spirit, with people helping each other out or doing favors for each other. A friend of my mother, for instance, did not care about the apple trees that grew in her garden, apart from how they looked, so we got dozens, if not hundreds of pounds of apples for free every year. Normally, there were so many that we had to temporarily store them outside the house. Some apples we ate, others my mother used for baking cakes, turned them into marmalade, or dried them — and she gave away a lot of it to her friends. Looking back, it was a really nice environment that was only possible because of an overabundance of housewives who had too much time on their hands.
It only took a few decades to completely destroy local communities. While my mothers still has close social ties to many other old women in the village, the same is not true for the current generation of women as they almost always work. Back in the days, men whose wives had to work were spoken of with disdain, i.e. they were considered poor providers as their wives “had to” work. It was fine if some woman had a part-time job where it was clear that it was more of a hobby. This did not affect one’s social standing in the community. Today, though, almost all married women seem to have to work to make ends meet. It is almost unheard of for a married woman to stay at home, at least among the indigenous population. The picture is obviously much different in the welfare aristocracy, but those people normally have views of community building that are perhaps not always the most constructive. Also, those people can normally only be found in cities, with some exceptions.
In the past, women had a lot of children, and grandchildren. This led to some rather large family gatherings. My mother recently told me, with some unease, about a burial of an acquaintance where there were only three attendees: the surviving wife, the only son, and his girlfriend. This narrowing of family trees becomes most apparent at such social events. There is simply a big difference between a woman having three or four children, and the same number of grandchildren per child, and family with only one child who may or may not want to continue his or her bloodline, and if they do, they may even think that one kid is enough.
Today’s women are fucked on a level they seem completely oblivious to. We put women in large numbers into professions where they cannot effectively compete with men, yet companies have to employ them anyway in order to get their ESG bucks. The same is true for hiring minorities, but this would lead to a bit of a detour. The problem with taking a job you are unqualified for is that it almost invariably leads to frustration and burnout. You may have come across women talking about “imposter syndrome”, i.e. the feeling that they are not qualified for their job even though they supposedly are qualified for it. I think that this concept is total bullshit. I have found that people have a pretty good idea of how good a job they do, and if you think you suck at something, most likely it is because you really do suck at it.
Jobs come with a certain social status. Historically, society viewed white-collar work as being of a higher status as any kind of physical labor. Bizarrely, this is still a common view, even though there are nowadays countless absolutely brain-dead office jobs that offer neither job security nor any potential for advancement. They are also not even paid particularly well. Still, if Cindy gets her Bachelor’s in b.s. and joins BigCorp as a “social media analyst”, she immediately thinks that she is above any guy who does not work in an office, even if he makes more money than she does. We ignore that her job likely only exists because BlackRock told the CEO of BigCorp that if he does not increase the percentage of women on staff, he will get ousted. It does not matter why she has her job, though.
The number of eligible bachelors for Cindy is small. She cannot quite make heads nor tails of it, but she is not too bothered because she can get dicked down anytime she wants. She only has to got to a club or swipe around in some dating apps. This warps her view on men, thinking that while those guys were all just for fun, any guy she would commit to has to combine the best aspects of any dude who ever put his dick in her. This futile search for her dream husband will continue until she is well into her 30s. Of course, this does not affect all women but the number of childless, never-married women is skyrocketing.
A related issue is that a lot of women have serious problems with managing their personal finances. This means that they basically spend whatever they make and never really manage to reach any level of financial security. Before they know it, those women will be in their mid-30s, not only without any suitor in sight, but also living in a shoebox apartment or, worse, still sharing an apartment with their supposed besties. A bunch of sluts in their early 20s sharing an apartment to reduce their rental expenses may have some appeal but the older women get, the worse their situation becomes. In Berlin, for instance, you find women in their 40s who share an apartment, not because they all love partying together and shaking their tits in clubs but because they need to. This is a really horrible predicament to be in. At that age, there is not much of a social life to look forward to. In a saner society, such women would watch their grandchildren play, not dull their senses with a bottle of wine while binging on some lame TV show.
There is zero upside for women who do not get hitched. While single guys are often really happy being all by themselves, the same is just not the case with women as they value social interactions much more. Yet, social interactions are a means to an end. There is always an element of sexual competition, either because those women want to size themselves up or because they think that having many friends will allow them to meet many potentially suitable men. However, no guy gives a fuck about banging some 40-year old roastie with an alcohol problem. The future that awaits single older women is one where cats, red wine, and SSRIs feature prominently. Probably only the most deluded women do not realize that they are well and truly fucked if they are still single at 35. At that point, they have another fifty (!) years of misery to look forward to. Their former friends who managed to get a guy to commit and have children with will avoid them. In contrast, the women who do not avoid them will be just as miserable, which will likely only make them feel more depressed about their life.
There is no upside for those women. If anything, 35 is probably a pretty good age for them to kill themselves. After decades of utter misery, they will face what they always were so afraid of, i.e. dying alone. Their social circle will shrink more and more. At some point, their sisterly life in a shared apartment will also come to an end as it will just be too intolerable for them. There is not so much left afterwards. All of this could have been avoided by embracing family life. There are currently signs of a shift in the mindset among zoomers, so we will have to see how their life trajectory unfolds. However, I do not think that the vast majority of women who are currently in their early 30s and still single will be able to turn their life around anymore. Ladies, I hope your wasted 20s were worth it.
There was a twitter thread a while back on the Taylor Swift generation of young women – single, childless, living large on male-to-female wealth transfer courtesy of Big Daddy State, and no plans to change any of it. It concluded with something like “these nimrods will drag the US to the left for the next sixty years.” At that I had to laugh. Barring divine intervention, I doubt we’re still here in sixty months.
Aaron,
“It only took a few decades to completely destroy local communities.”
1. How do you teach and pass on traditional values to kids in a world that has become so degenerate and progressive? Would there be a difference between installing traditional values in kids in a small rural/towns, suburban areas compared to the city life?
“I do not intend to mock this at all, because those chattering women maintained the social fabric of the village, and there was a palpable community spirit, with people helping each other out or doing favors for each other.”
2. It’s nice to experience this golden era, not quite golden as the 50s but at least the last five minutes of it (figuratively).
3. Any hope that the Amish Community will continue to thrive in a world that is filled with degeneracy and where society is trying to erase the existence of God? They have been doing things right since the beginning.
4. The type of music grandam would have been dancing to at her high school prom or at her wedding. Have you heard of Billy Vaughn? Apparently, he was popular in Germany.
Correction on number 4. I meant “grandma” not grandam
1) It is not possible to build a close-knit community in a city. It is only possible in an environment where there is a lot of stability. Think of villages where some families have been living for hundreds of years. While maintaining the chain of cultural transmission is long and difficult, destroying it is really easy. It just takes one generation. In terms of high culture, it took only one generation to kneecap music and the arts, and local communities were ravaged by financial engineering due to women being forced into work. By the way, already in the 1950s or 1960s there was enough social engineering going on to destroy a long culture of intra-generational knowledge exchange. For instance, my grandmother was a truly excellent cook, but because my mother disagreed with her approach, she did not learn how to cook from her. While we never discussed this, I am quite certain this was due to the government-pushed anti-fat propaganda that was all the rage back then. To this day, a lot of women tell you that fat was unhealthy and that you should not eat butter.
2) I could not agree more.
3) The Amish have been growing steadily. I have even come across claims, but not entirely serious ones, that if the current trajectory is maintained, all of the US will be Amish in a few hundred years.
4) I do not think that my grandparents listened to any popular music at all. My grandfather could play folk music, though. He knew how to play the accordion and the French harp. When I was a kid, social cohesion was already so diminished that I did not pick this up. I remember that I got a French harp as a kid as a gift but there was no longer the custom of sitting together and playing folk music so it only collected dust.
“It is only possible in an environment where there is a lot of stability.”
1. Utah has been doing fairly well. The Mormon influence is still there but it isn’t as strong as previous years. I’ve talked to locals and they have all said that its still a great place to raise kids. It’s a lot more stable there than it is here in California.
“To this day, a lot of women tell you that fat was unhealthy and that you should not eat butter.
2. I had to unlearn a lot of what I have learned about nutrition and relearn all over again. There’s no shortage of campaigns that are still pushing veganism, reducing one’s intake of beef etc. Nowadays, I consume raw goat milk, raw grass-fed butter, grass fed beef, and organs as well. I’ve also cut down on vegetables, but I still maintain a moderate consumption of fruits.
3. What are your thoughts on Amish courtship where teens are supposed to self-restraint which means a strict “NO-touching” no holding hands or hugging and just getting to know each other. This self-restraint is intended to avoid sexual temptation. I believe that wooing a woman back in the days was somewhat similar. I believe the goal was to refrain from ungodly behaviour and to encourage a deeper bond between both parties that goes beyond physical attraction.
Why are you cutting down on vegetables?
I am all for self-restraint when choosing your spouse. Young women should keep their legs together as a default, but young men can be forgiven for sowing their wild oats, simply because men do not wreck their pair-bonding ability by plowing a bunch of sluts. Furthermore, there are good practical reasons for why teenage boys should gain sexual experience. The main one is that they otherwise may find it too difficult to resist the first woman who spreads her legs for them. There are plenty such stories. Instead, fly to Amsterdam, Las Vegas, or Thailand with your teenage son and let him go wild. It’s one of the best investments in his development you can make.
From the literature I’ve been reading is that vegetables are not high nutrients dense food compared to meat. There’s also no nutritional deficiencies if you only consume meat, organs, raw milk, fruits, and opt out of vegetables. I have no health issues if I consume vegetables unlike other people who might be oxalate sensitive or be sensitive to its natural defense chemicals which would alter their microbiome in their digestive system. Also, from a constipation perspective, vegetables do not seem aid in bowl movements. Rather, a high diet in seeds oils, highly processed foods, and refine carbs/sugars causes constipation. I’ve also read about the blue zones diet and longevity and it seems that this had been debunked. I’ve experimented with not eating vegetables for two weeks and see how my body reacted. From the experiment, I noticed that I had better energy levels, I was less hungry, and I had no constipation issues. Another thing that is different from US and Europe is that a lot of the vegetables are sprayed with glyphosate which is a known carcinogen. Glyphosate has also been found in organic vegetables, but in small quantities. There’s also herbicide and pesticides that can affect one’s health.
I still consume vegetables but not as much. But if vegetables isnt affecting you health and youre thriving then there’s no need to eliminate them.
I used to have bowel issues as a kid,and when I look back on it now in hindsight,I feel it was because of (or at least highly correlated with) my unwillingness to eat my veggies at the time. My parents did try to force me to eat more healthy,but they failed. Unfortunately,they never figured out that the problem was the fact that they never made the effort to learn how to cook the veggies deliciously. The fact that healthy and delicious eating do not have to be mutually exclusive was something I had to learn a little later in life.
An interestingly anecdote I want to mention; I’m supposed to be lactose intolerant. If I drink milk or a chocolate drink by itself without anything else,I get bowel issues. But if I drink those after having consumed some veggies/fiber previously,I do just fine. bowels go smoothly later.
All that being said,I did grow up fine just eating my meat,rice,and eggs. Vegans hate to acknowledge this fact,but you DO get a ton of nutritional benefits just from animal products. A strict vegan needs to supplement religiously if they want to be able to keep living their lifestyle long term. Even then,a hell of a lot of them that I meet fit the “skinny,weak,and underweight” profile.
Aaron,
“For instance, my grandmother was a truly excellent cook, but because my mother disagreed with her approach, she did not learn how to cook from her.”
1. Do you have any cooking recipes from your grandmother? If so, have you been able to replicate her cooking style?
My grandmother did not use a cookbook. I assume she was taught by her mother. Among others, she made the best oven-baked chicken I ever ate, and her home-made sauerkraut was incredible. Her cooking was not fancy at all. She just used basic ingredients, and more or less everything came from her own garden, including the chickens; the potatoes, too. I recall that she was not at all afraid to use butter or fat, and she even made gravy from scratch, something hardly any modern housewife would be able to do. Partly, the flavor of her food was probably due to her oven, i.e. an old cast-iron one, which she fired with coal and wood. I don’t think you could even buy those new anymore nowadays.
@Maou
You don’t have to eat veggies to be healthy, and your body can thrive without veggies. As for constipation, many things can cause it. Parasites can also affect your bowl movements. For the lactose, try drinking raw goat milk. I’m also lactose intolerant. If I consume raw cows milk I get digestive issues. However, when I drink raw goat milk I have no issues at all that because cows milk contains more lactose than goat.
My sister went down this path. She was arguably a 9 in her early 20s and had a huge number of marriage proposals from well-to-do men.
She then spent her mid-20s pursuing a nonsensical “music therapy” career whilst being subsidized by my parents and never made more than $30k USD per year. She absolutely could not afford to live her big city lifestyle without help from our parents. Due to the acute stress of failing in both her career and not committing to a stable man, she began stress eating and is now nearly 300 pounds in her early thirties, up from 130 pounds in her early twenties. Her life is a complete trainwreck.
The wall might be harder to hit with all of the simps out there, but it’s certainly very real.
I think the theme of this article is close to your last one “ Wasting Time is Female Status Signaling”. Basically, women screw over other women to improve their position.
Upper class women always had a pampered life as they had a bunch of maids doing housework. However “Once the oppressive white man had invented diapers, washing machines, microwave ovens, and vacuum cleaners” (from the article) middle class women also had an absolutely pampered life.
So what do upper class women do? Well upper class women were at the forefront of feminism. The consequence of which we see in this article: middle class women now don’t have a fulfilling life anymore.
This is a good point. I had not made this connection myself, but feminism as an upper-class project can certainly be interpreted as an example of intrasexual female competition. I think Edward Dutton makes a related point somewhere, but after I watched a few more of his videos, I concluded that he is more of a mid-wit, with some baffling low-IQ takes at times, so I did not bother get his book on feminism.
It took me 20 years to get, but my main theory about a feminism these days is that it’s just a mating strategy designed to sabotage other women.
Similar to what we talked about in the other thread. Basically, women try to take attractive, feminine women and convince them to become undateable, unmarriageable sluts. Feminism is the same thing, just on a larger scale.
If wonder if you take the upper class women – how many of them get truly screwed by the dynamic laid out in the article.
Middle class women have a horrible life in the corporate world because they won’t make it. But if you are upper class, is it the same, or do upper class women enjoy their corporate life because their dad either gives them enough money to have their own bs company or secures them a cushy BS job within a company?
How may upper class women end up childless and miserable due to feminism?
I don’t know the answer to these questions.
According to recent data, US upper-class women have the highest number of children:
https://qz.com/1125805/the-reason-the-richest-women-in-the-us-are-the-ones-having-the-most-kids
The difference is not staggering, i.e. a few percent more of them have at least three children, but it nonetheless statistically significant. This particular study is about families earning either less or more than $500k. The approach is a bit odd. I wonder if there was no further separation into income ranges below $500k in order to hide that the poor still out-breed the rich. Of course, the middle class gets fucked yet again as they have to work and struggle to raise children due to time and fiscal constraints.
Looking back at some of the women coming from wealthy families I met at university, a typical pattern is that they work for a few years and then basically disappear from the Internet. I have seen some truly odd biographies, like them getting jobs for which they lacked all qualifications for or gigs where it is not even clear how you can get them without connections, think about jobs at elite real-estate firms, auction houses, or “think tanks”, charities, etc. Jobs someone else would have to work himself up over a decade or two they got just like that. A woman I know got a job as a fund raiser, but not the kind where you call up alumni but instead organize fancy dinners for the Patrick Bateman class. I have also witnessed a career progression from art school to internships in banking to getting a job at a venture-capital firm, and five years later they are partners at a private equity firm. It is what it is, but what is worse is when those women then post crap about the “glass ceiling” on LinkedIn or give career advice to other women on “how to make it”, conveniently ignoring that they would not be where they are without their family money and connections.
Some also worked in investment banking or consulting for a while, but I think this applies more to women who came from high-achieving upper-middle class families where both parents are doctors. The women who really come from money are normally a lot less ambitious and hard-working, and don’t bother with jobs that require long hours. These women also got a massive leg up but at least there is plausible deniability that they got in because of their academic track record, albeit this has to be taken with a grain of salt, too. One women from this class told me that at her private high school, the teachers told them what would be on the final exams, e.g. by reminding them to revise a certain function in mathematics because — hint, hint — it might be really important in the exam. In Latin, they had an exercise book with texts, and they just so happened to skip one of them. Imagine the surprise when this was the one they were examined on!
By the way, daddy paying for setting up an entire company is what you see with the sons of the wealthy. Someone who is merely well off may have his daddy bankroll a web-development agency, but the 1%ers have other options. This got Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, or Evan Spiegel started. If family money does not suffice, then people in their circles may chip in. This reminds me of an interview with some pompous start-up founder who was talking about the tough beginnings of his company, where they had to “beg” friends and family for money because VCs were not interested and banks did not want to lend them any money. They ended up with several millions of dollars, which allowed them to “bootstrap” their start-up.
Thanks for the detailed reply
Hi Aaron, first thing first, l am a 30 years old male living in Indonesia (South East Asia). I had been reading your blog since 2016, altough I never comment in your blog.
I really appreciate your writings since they are logically written and based on evidence.
I have a question, eventough this is probably accurate that the 35 year old woman will live a complete f*cked up live for 50 years later, will the same f*cked up situation apply to a man?
Thanks for your answer. I am just thinking about what will be happen in my life, since I am currently 30 years old but I have a well paid job as a senior manager in the biggest government bank in my country, a nice car, and good appartment. Now I am taking a master degree at decent UK University (Group of Eight).
I did not want to commit to any woman in my 20s since I can not get the woman that I wanted to commit to since I am not goodlooking. So I was never in any relationship with girl in my college and high school days.
I dont know, but I think it was really hard to still focus on the goal while learning about seduction etc.
Thanks for your comment. Men are normally fine with being alone, women generally are not. You will be fine, too. It seems that you have your life sorted out, seeing that it is basically impossible to get fired from a government job. If you do not want to settle down with a woman, just keep doing what you are doing.
You should post more often 🙂 Same goes for all the other silent lurkers. You’ll get more out of this blog that way.