Originally Posted on April 21, 2012 at 8:12 PM as a gift to you from Professor Ashur
(Part 1 of 2)
Whether you are theologically inclined or not, it is still instructive to look at the Bible, read Genesis 3 and see a very early (in theory the earliest) account of female nature. For my non-religious friends, indulge me for a moment (actual text if you want to read it):
My aim is not to spark a religious discussion, but instead to show that religious or not, this is a very old problem for men.
For those of you who are of other faiths or are not religious, I would encourage you to examine it from a purely secular point of view. Whoever wrote what would become one of the most influential religious texts ever sat down and did the following:
1) Very briefly and vaguely described the origin of the universe, the earth, everything on it, and human beings. Barely enough for the most basic wikipedia entry.
2) Once establishing the barest framework from which to continue, immediately went into a detailed discussion about how a woman’s dissatisfaction blew the whole deal to smithereens.
A closer look at the recorded events reveal a trend that should be familiar to us all:
- Things are pretty good.
- A woman gets a whisper in her ear.
- Dissatisfaction ensues.
- Woman acts on said dissatisfaction.
The resultant disaster is predictable, of course. At least to the men who are unfortunately cursed with a horrible mental affliction known as the ability to connect cause with effect. (But hey, it takes a dic to spell predict.)
Clearly, the relentless female drive to improve upon paradise itself has vexed men from the very beginning. At at varying points in history, men, and society at large have had social mechanisms to control and direct this impulse.
But with the destruction of the cultural breakwaters and dams that once contained and directed the female nature to socially beneficial ends, the flood of female impulse wreaks its havoc wherever its blind inertia takes it.
Without this needed understanding of purpose and action, the rudderless female id began to confuse the ends and the means. Instead of of hypergamy serving women and their marriage and security needs, the reverse happened and now women are servants (if not outright slaves) of their own hypergamous impulses, in varying degrees from the college-mistake girl to the amateur harlot (‘amateur’ because pros get paid).
The problem is that a means is a process, so when you make a process the end goal, you are never, ever, ever finished. It’s like asking a clean freak to sweep a dirt floor. How do they know when to stop?
This has lead me to reconsider a basic concept that is held by many in the manosphere: That woman only love alpha males.
We’ll talk about that in the follow-up post. In the mean time, this is close enough to on-topic to be of interest: