Vicarious submissiveness

Human Stupidity (he sends me a lot of stuff) recently sent me an article that deals with the frequent incompatibility between feminism, which asserts equality between the sexes, and human sexuality, which often favors inequality between the sexes. The Psychology Today article tells us:

Twice as many women as men report trouble getting turned on. Health professionals report that low desire is the most common sexual complaint they hear from women. Though several factors specific to the design of the female brain contribute to this problem, there is one important psychological factor that may be unique to modern democracies. This factor is one of the unmentionables of sexual science, but since our book is filled with unmentionables, we’ll whisper it here:

Gender equality inhibits arousal…

The majority of women have submission fantasies. From classic romance The Flame and The Flower to classic erotica The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty to Twilight BDSM fan fiction, submission themes are immensely popular in cross-cultural female erotica. The fact of the matter is that most heterosexual women are wired to find sexual submission arousing–and so are most female mammals…

Almost every quality of dominant males triggers arousal in the female brain: dominant scents, dominant gaits, deep voices, height, displays of wealth. Romance heroes are almost always high status alpha males—billionaires, barons, surgeons, sheriffs. Avon Books and Ellora’s Cave feature no heroes who are kindergarten teachers, accountants, or plumbers. Even though there’s been a trend away from the conspicuously rapey bodice-rippers of the seventies and eighties, women still want strong, dominant men.

“I think this is one of the problems we’re having in romance in general right now: our heroes have gotten a little too PC. We’re portraying men the way feminist ideals say they should be—respectful and consensus-building,” muses erotic romance (EroRom) author Angela Knight. “Yet women like bad boys. I suspect that’s because our inner cavewoman knows Doormat Man would become Sabertooth Tiger Lunch in short order. In fact, this may be one reason why EroRom is gaining popularity so fast–writers feel free to write dominant heroes with more of an edge.”

How many times have we wondered why liberals, who claim to support women’s rights, are so fond of Muslims and Africans? Both groups are well-known for their rape-cultures. For example, here and here. The facts are out there, and they’re not difficult to find – and yet a vast majority of the liberal establishment supports massive immigration from Muslim and African lands. No matter how many times we remind them that such immigration is bad for women’s rights (and gay rights), they pay no heed, their only response being yet more shrill cries of “racist!”

I believe that both liberal men and women are submissive. On a subconscious level, they actually WANT those rapes to occur. Just as so many women prefer a “bad-boy” over one who will treat them as ladies, so too do liberals prefer the bad-boy cultures of Islam and Africa. This is their way of living out their submissive fantasies – except that they don’t usually want the rapes to happen to them, or to their own daughters. Instead, they want them to happen to other people’s daughters. In this way, they can live out their fantasies in relative safety.

If we want to sway public opinion, and drive home the dangers of mass immigration from African and Muslim lands, we must learn to appeal to the emotional, subconscious, side of our audience. Reasoned arguments will have little effect, any more so than reasoned arguments will prevent a woman from preferring a bad-boy over a gentleman.  What they say and what they really want are two entirely different things. Like the old adage goes, “when she says ‘no’, she means ‘yes.'” When liberals say “No” to rape, what they really mean is “Yes.” We need to treat liberals as women, even the ones who are biologically men. Women respect assertiveness and force. In recent history, pro-white groups have displayed little of each. While the suit-and-tie pro-white activists may appeal to some, I don’t think their effect will be a large one. There’s something to be said of tattoos and belligerence – or better yet, act as the Muslims: Good cop, bad cop.

About jewamongyou

I am a paleolibertarian Jew who is also a race-realist. My opinions are often out of the mainstream and often considered "odd" but are they incorrect? Feel free to set me right if you believe so!
This entry was posted in Africa and blacks, crime and violence, feminism and men's issues, immigration/ Hispanics, Muslims, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Vicarious submissiveness

  1. canspeccy says:

    Twice as many women as men report trouble getting turned on.

    Because they’re on the pill, obviously.

    Prevent a women from coming into heat and she’s not going to experience the irresistible impulse that leads to both sexual satisfaction and the perpetuation of the race.

    Muslims, of course, and Africans too, are not so daft as to neuter their women.

  2. Muslims in Denmark force sharia zones – MRCTV.mp4
    Maybe the Sharia is a good solution so Muslims will behave. It works in their home countries

    • jewamongyou says:

      Since you can’t always distinguish between Muslims and non-Muslims, the only way to implement Sharia is to force it upon everybody who lives in certain areas. This means even native Dutch will be subject to it. If Muslims can’t behave, then Western governments have a duty to keep them out, not let them in and then allow them to establish their own systems.

  3. I lost some major comment here because I was asked to log into wordpress. Well. . agai

    I don’t think people want to be raped and thus support Black and Muslim immigration.

    I think it is just total blindess and hate. And political correctness that must censure and hide misbehavior and crime by these poor suppressed minorities, like the Trayvon Martin scam.

  4. countenance says:

    The white ethnonationalist movement(s) in the United States has a real dearth of alpha male leaders or potential leaders. And that’s why our movement has so much trouble attracting women.

    • worx92 says:

      That’s simply not true. They complain there are no women to meet, but they don’t try to meet them. Neckbeards on their computers.

  5. Mike says:

    From my experience, it simply isn’t true that women want to be dominated by men and that they prefer aggressive men. Most men who attempt to dominate women and act aggressive quickly find their appeal drop very fast, and the easy going, relaxed, smiling and socially cued men seem to do best in clubs and bars that I visit, and for myself I found that’s how I do best as a personal experiment after buying into and implementing the idea that women like dominant men and having it fail on me completely.

    Yet the idea that women do like dominant men seems to be gaining more and more traction in the modern world, but its been around for some time so its not entirely new either. It’s pretty mainstream these days. What I actually think is happening in the West is twofold 1) The West in general is suffering a crisis of self-confidence and a classic response to that is of course overcompensation. The overcompensation is taking the form of an obsessions with fantasies of dominance and strength which is a classic kind of overcompensation for nervous and insecure individuals.People in the West in general are not raised to “be themselves” fearlessly but are pushed to be fake and to be “actors” in a sense in order to achieve social success. The generally fake, over the top “acting” quality of Americans that seems so shallow and superficial compared to people in older, more self-confident cultures, where people often have a centered, authentic, grave quality to them that comes from not trying to fake themselves is striking. 2) I think the West has developed an intellectual tradition that is fascinated with the primitive and the primordial, and every so often there is an outbreak of interest in these kinds of things as the safety, routine, and regimentation of modern life comes to seem unbearably stifling and people feel a strong need to break out. The break out takes the form of a preoccupation with the primitive. I am personally sympathetic to this second thing but regret that some of the forms this break out takes is an infantile infatuation with “dominance”.

    Women are no less affected by these cultural currents than men, and both groups are beginning to manifest this obsession with the primitive.

    • Stealth says:

      I’m not sure that all or even most young women truly enjoy the company of “alpha males,” although a lot of them certainly do. Don’t get me wrong, most girls in their teens and early twenties do pursue alpha males, but I believe this results from social pressure as much as anything else. The alpha males are the bosses, mostly because of physical prowess. As women tend to be more conformist and hierarchy-minded than men, the alpha is the practical choice.

      It’s a kind of instinctive alliance building during the most instinct driven time of our lives. It’s a hard-wired strategy for getting protection from powerful men.

      • Mike says:

        I hear you, but there is so much variability as to render these kinds of generalizations, however strong the appeal to our desire to make sense of female attraction, almost useless. The bars I frequent the women like thin, un-muscular artistic men, and you often see the large, muscular alpha types hanging in the shadows with looks of dejection on their faces, frustrated at being passed over in favor of manifestly less “alpha” men.

        Of course, in other bars, the situation is reversed. The point is our generalizations about female choice are generally self-serving and far from the universally valid “laws” we claim they are. A moments reflection should make this clear. Even for men what women we like is often mediated by personality traits that supposedly play little role in male preferences.

        And then of course different countries have vastly different male ideals. In Asia the male ideal is that of the effete, almost epicene, male – the American alpha male type would be a joke there. In some European countries like Spain and France, a far more feminine and refined type of man is preferred, and the American alpha type would be almost as undesirable as in Asia.

        Really, the notion of the alpha with all its pseudo-scientific trappings and supposed basis in Darwinian theory is far from the kind of timeless, universal aspect of the female psyche it’s proponents claim for it, and is much more a very late 20th century early 21st century manifestation of the dysfunction and insecurity of American society.

        Since it clearly isn’t an accurate map of the female psyche, the question becomes why it has come to have such a hold of the American – and only the American – psyche.

      • Stealth says:

        Maybe it’s a regional thing, but I’ve never seen the kind of variability in young women’s taste in men that you describe. I’ve seen many artistic smart girls forgo weak-boded artistic men for big, dumb country boys and (shudder) the blackest of black alpha males. This also applies to well-groomed, educated women with lucrative careers.

        Skinny guys can get some play if they’re very good looking, however. That exempts them from the requirement of having big muscles. But, the best looking girls prefer muscular bulk above all else.

        My scale for rating female attractiveness:

        1. Perfectly beautiful women – available to rich guys and muscular alpha males

        2. Imperfectly beautiful women – available to rich guys, alphas, and very good looking non-alphas

        3. Plain but presentable women – available to rich guys, alphas, and all presentable non-alphas. (Many of these women resent their men because they think they can, or want to do, better)

        4. Non-presentable women – anyone who pays them attention

      • Mike says:

        Lol, I suppose experiences differ. What can one say? I’ve read and considered the theories, and can only go on what I’ve experienced. My conclusions are very different than yours. I would suggest that all of us – myself included – base our theories on a considerable dollop of self-interest – none of us are as objective as we like to imagine, in our most private moments, we are :)

        I live in NYC, but have partied across Europe and Asia. Have you traveled? Where have you been? Many of the firm conclusions I see bandied about suffer from a debilitating parochialism that render them almost useless as generalizations. This is a problem in serious research as well – most research papers are done on American college students, an absurdly limited and parochial subset of humans that render highly questionable any conclusions drawn from such research. This is an increasingly recognized problem in the social sciences. Some social scientists claim that this renders null and void nearly ALL social science research, an extreme conclusion, but one I am highly sympathetic to as SO much of what is generated by the American social science mill clashes with my own experience.

        One thing I’d like to add – you say women have hard-wired instincts for certain kinds of men, but consider this; has there every been a period in time when female mate choice seriously influenced which men had sex? In primeval times, the strongest, toughest dude just took the woman he wanted; no female choice factored into it. In historical times, in every civilization we know of, parents had the largest influence in who got which girl, so again female choice had little role to play. When did evolution have a chance to create preferences in women? Yet clearly women do have preferences. A puzzle, a mystery.

        Another thing I’d like to point out is the unsophisticated concept of the “instincts” which seems to rule the modern mind. Instincts are all very well, but we clearly evolved this gigantic cranium for some reason or other. The rational mind, which everyone these days loves to discount, clearly evolved for a reason and a huge amount of human behavior is strategic and undoubtedly motivated by purely rational and not instinctual considerations. The idea that female mate choice – or male mate choice – is entirely driven by “instincts” does not bear close scrutiny.

        Personally, I strongly suspect that female mate choice played historically a very weak role in which men had sex meaning that females never developed very strong preferences, leaving a huge amount of space for purely strategic considerations to influence female behavior when it comes to sex, which would explain the observations of poets and philosophers across millenia that females mate choice follows no observable, rational pattern but seems, to the untotured male eye, ruled by caprice, whim, and whimsey. In fact women themselves don’t now what they are doing in the absence of any strong instincts. The modern scientific attempt to find “laws” for female behavior is a quixotic quest doomed to failure.

      • Stealth says:

        Traveled? You could say that. I’m from the Deep South, but I’ve vacationed pretty extensively, including to places outside of the US. Let’s just say I’ve had to endure my share of twelve hour flights. I’ve never been to Europe, though. Maybe I’ll get there one day. I’ve always thought Switzerland would be much more lovely than Yosemite.

        Suffice it to say that I believe female attraction to be pretty complicated. I also believe that women do like a man they can look up to. Other than that, I just like to drink beer.

      • Mike says:

        I second you on the drinking of beer :) You sound pretty chilled out so I’m reasonably sure you’re doing fine, but I would leave you with the thought that thinking about whether people – men, women – look up to you is hot a healthy place to be. A more grounded place is to just be yourself and not take people or life so seriously. Anyways, peace.

      • goodspeed says:

        Just going to mentoin that parents did not choose who their daughter married other than in the upper classes. The poor and middle-class were a lot freer in that regard.

      • goodspeed says:

        Im talking about Anglo-Saxons btw, but I think it applies to most other cultures too.

  6. sebastianprinsloo says:

    I dont think one can generalise getting turned on. The women mentioned in the article are obviously American women, who, thank God, are beyond the ambit of my experience. Studies show that when women are ovulating they prefer more masculine men. The rest of the time they prefer a baseball bat to kill them.

  7. Generalizing: Women like confident, capable, and strong men. This is no secret. Women like a man that will take care of her and their children. Women also like a ‘daddy’ figure, who will treat them like a ‘sweet thing’, no matter how old they are. They also prefer a man to ‘take charge’ in the bedroom. Rape? Not so much…White males need to start becoming more aggressive in protecting their interests in the business arena, in the political arena, in local affairs, in their neighborhoods, and in their homes. White men need to start telling ‘minorities’ to stay away from their neighborhoods, their jobs, their schools, their clubs, and their families. White men need to stop apologizing and backing down from emboldened ‘multiculturalists’ and anti-Whites, who are bullies and will stop if stood up to. White men need to tell their wives that THEY are the leaders in the home. White males should not allow their daughters to date people outside of their race, to ‘hook up’, to stay out late, or to date anyone their father hasn’t given approval to. When White males start advocating for White interests, they’ll increase White women’s libidos accordingly. There are a handful of ‘feminists’ and other sundry weirdoes that get a lot of attention in the media because of outrageous behavior, i.e., like ‘slut walks’. The majority of women would love to have what their grandmothers had. White women should be home making babies…and having ‘careers’ AFTER the kids grow up. White men should not allow their wives the materialistic narcissism that drives families into a financial mess, for things they don’t need. White men should not allow their wives to watch most television, nor any of their children. Oprah, daytime tv, ‘celebrity’ magazines, $500 purses, etc. should be banned from the home entirely. There should be a repeal of the 19th Amendment as well. It would solve a lot of problems in our current dystopia.

    • worx92 says:

      Good post. I agree. This business of material consumption like a disease is so rampant.
      You hear people say women had it bad long ago, but they didn’t…they had far less stress than women do today, trying to work a career, and raise children, trying to compete for with looks, status, you name it…
      I think it’s progressives who want to advance the “beta male” types.
      You see young women who are trying to act like celebrities and don’t appreciate the better things in life. On the other hand, the males are just looking for the next best thing to come along, with a beer in their hand.

  8. Rob says:

    I’ve been meaning to write about women for a while – indeed, I have been regularly on another forum.

    It always amazes me how liberals will deny that there are innate behavioural differences between the sexes that might account for the observed disparities between men and women in our society – but surely, at the very least they must concede that there is an asymmetry in sexual preferences. Of course, many do, and feminists will pride themselves on this fact – but it’s rarely mentioned how these asymmetries might manifest on a societal level.

    The problem in essence is this: Women are attracted to men of high social status. The reason for the income disparity between married couples – the fact that men still remain, on average, the bread-winners of the family – is due to the simple fact that women are selecting men for their status. The female equivalent of the gentleman is a rare thing; successful women are not willing to provide for unsuccessful men – unless he has some other redeeming (dominant) qualities; they tend to ‘marry up’. In my experience, strong, independent feminist types are the worst offenders. This is the hypocrisy of feminism; through their sexual preferences they act to perpetuate the very disparities they purport to be fighting against.

    • jewamongyou says:

      Well said. I’ve written about the racial equivalent to this phenomenon in the past. The same women who deny meaningful racial differences will go out of their way to date black men. In other words, the same race they say “doesn’t exist” is actually very important to them.

      • Stealth says:

        Where I live, about two thirds of white females who date black males are women that white men don’t want. I pity them – deeply. They’re almost always either unattractive, unintelligent, or both. On top of that, most of them suffered through turbulent home lives as children. These are women who don’t have many options, and I’m sure they think they’re doing the best they can. Ghetto black guys are happy to have them. Among blacks, dating any white woman is apparently considered status-enhancing.

        The remaining third are acceptable looking white women from decent family backgrounds. Usually, young women who fall into this category are quirky or crazy and also tend to go through lesbian phases. These chicks really irritate me.

        This is in the South, of course, a place where there are still social consequences for going against the grain in such a way. A college acquaintance of my sister’s (a girl from Oregon) told her that back home, white girls chased black boys for the simple fact that there weren’t that many of them.

        Are black/white pairings widely accepted in places like Portland?

      • worx92 says:

        Oh yes, exactly…these liberals do this with many things. Race doesn’t exist, except when they want to facilitate Affirmative Action. Race doesn’t exist, except when they want a job, entrance to a college, buying a home, or any other preferential treatment.

    • SFG says:

      I think it was CH who said masculine men prefer feminine women, whereas feminine men prefer masculine women; however, both masculine and feminine women prefer masculine men. Not sure if there’s anything to that though.

      • worx92 says:

        If you try to figure out what kind of soup everyone likes, it becomes pretty difficult.
        I see a lot of men on here who think they have women figured out.
        But everyone is a bit different, as we humans are complicated, and I bet men are just as complicated as women.
        So saying women want this or that, no one interviewed me…

  9. jewamongyou says:

    Re: Stealth,

    In the Portland area, you can’t walk for 10 minutes without encountering a BM/WF couple. There are a few WM/BF couples around too. These mudsharks come in all shapes and sizes.

    • Stealth says:

      Isn’t it strange how many black people you seem to see in these places that are supposedly less than ten percent black? A lot of cities in Canada are the same way.

    • worx92 says:

      These people don’t get how they are disturbing genetics. They think they are being “savvy” when in reality they will produce less intelligent offspring.

      • SFG says:

        Actually, from what I recall outbreeding tends to give you a slightly higher IQ than the average of both parent populations due to bad recessive genes being cancelled out and so on. (Sailer even talked about it at one point.) The problem is that the black average is so low.

        I *do* wonder if it has something to do with the efflorescence of Ashkenazi Jewish culture in the past few centuries, though. The half-Asian kids coming out of the upper middle class in the next 20 years might be a group to watch.

  10. SFG says:

    Oh, and just for everyone’s amusement: quite a few declared feminists are submissive in bed. And yes, this is from personal experience. ;)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s