Our Woman Problem

because liberated women still expect to be protected

Yesterday I wrote about the tech lords and how the venture capital / startup culture was a startling and remarkable way of adapting the male warrior culture to the modern age, when, we hope, the Age of World Wars and the need for actual warriors is behind us.

But that made me think about women. I propose that the political and moral movements of the modern age have been bad for women. And instead of adapting the feminine culture of olden times in a way that helps women contribute their particular talents and tendencies to modern society the modern movements, from democracy to socialism to feminism to the welfare state, have all inflicted remarkable harm on women.

Let me say up front, for both men and women, that I believe that the meaning of life, the universe, everything, is grandchildren. That is what I believe after 79 years of life on this Earth. All the instincts, all the philosophies, all the religions, all the politics: they are all noise. If you don’t put children on the ground and your children don’t put grandchildren on the ground for you, what’s the point. In our modern age, all kinds of thinkers and moralists and influencers have proposed that the old ways were cramped and bigoted and unjust, and so they were. In our age, to replace all the horrors of the past, we have featured world wars and political regimes of unequaled ferocity and brutality, don’t you think, Joey von Stalin.

And think of the millions whose lives were extinguished by the conceits and ambitions of the various modern tyrants and improvers, in the various famines and wars and political subjugations: all the people that never got to have children or grandchildren, or wive and thrive, or just have a few years of life in relative peace and tranquillity.

Everyone is piling onto Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes. Here’s my take, from The American Spectator, shocked, shocked that

Women, as far as Fuentes is concerned, are “very simple.”

No, Nick. I think you lost the plot on that one. It is men who are “very simple.” That’s because our internal programming is not much more than be a warrior and get yourself a woman.

Instead, I start from this rather simple idea. It comes from Freud’s famous question: “what do women want?” No, Siegi — that’s short for Sigmund — it’s not what women want, it’s what they expect. And what women expect is: “women expect to be protected.”

Women expect to be protected because unless they are protected they cannot do all the incredibly complicated things they need to do to find a mate, get pregnant, get children on the ground safely, nurse, feed, and mother those children, and prepare the food and the clothes and the home that every family needs — and be protected, all the time, from predatory men. All the complicated things that we associate with religion and society and culture and Tradition are all the age-old adaptations to get children on the ground and get them to maturity, so that the human race can survive another generation.

Not simple at all.

But in our modern age many advanced thinkers decided that, spending their lives buried in these vital tasks, women were exploited by a patriarchy. No, honey. Human society is the result of “women expect to be protected.” There is, of course, a small reticule of truth in the exploitation theory. Life was hard, and everyone had to get with the program or they wouldn’t get to put children on the ground. I have been particularly struck by the fact that, in George Eliot’s Adam Bede, the two housewives — Adam’s mother Lisbeth and the redoubtable Mrs. Poyser — are obsessed with keeping the house clean — and that was before the advent of the germ theory. Do you see the point? George Eliot is telling us that, down the ages, women just had an instinct that prompted them to keep their homes clean in order for people to survive.

So women’s internal programming is much more complicated. But now, experts agree, women can be liberated and lives liberated lives like men. Frankly, I think that’s a lie. Let’s just say that women are chained, by their unconscious instincts, to live lives where they “expect to be ptotected.” Because without protection they cannot be “liberated” to do the 1,001 tasks they need to do in order to put children on the ground, raise them to maturity, and maybe live to see grandchildren.

I like to use the world’s First Feminist, Mary Wollstonecraft, author of A Vindication of the Rights of Women as proof of my theory. Mary was very liberated; she entered sexual relations with a couple of men, got pregnant, and got dumped. It wasn’t until she met William Godwin and married him that she found a man she could trust. And then she died in childbirth bringing a daughter Mary into the world that grew up to write Frankenstein. Do you see the point? Women don’t need to be liberated; they need to be protected. In my warped vision, Frankenstein is a warning that the world is full of male monsters. If anyone, the daughter of Mary Wollstonecraft would have that knowledge.

Now, after the recent elections, we learn that young women vote 80 percent for Democrats. Why would that be? Could it be because Democrats tell young women that they will protect them? With government programs, and DEIs. And also protect them from unwanted pregnancies and children in a liberated world where young women are expected to “put out” with men that today have no obligation to marry the women they have sex wiith.

Now, I believe that, all in good time, women will discover that the whole women’s liberation gig has in fact enslaved women and made them miserable. And that’s to say nothing about SSRIs. In other words, the various protections that human society had developed for women down the ages were not the vile exploitations of an unjust patriarchal society but necessary cultural tropes for women to be women and feel protected, and be protected. I suspect that it will involve a renewal of the idea of female chastity, of the need to prevent men from using women as sexual recreation, of the need for most women to live at home with their children in a neighborhood of other women, and within shouting distance of blood relatives who can help when help is needed.

Honestly, I don’t know what this will look like, or how to get started, or what the religious and cultural and political framework will look like. I do believe that the current woke culture of “safety” and “microaggressions” is a marker of women complaining about life and work in today’s liberated “girlboss” world. Women expect to be protected, even from harsh words, and — imagine this — from men in the women’s bathroom.

Meanwhile, things will get worse before they get better.