The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRaches' Political Proems
The Female of the Species
The Dangerous Sex.
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Judge This Book by Its Cover

The Female of the Species, by Rudyard Kipling

When the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster, who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When Nag the basking cobra hears the careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and avoid it if he can.
But his mate makes no such motion where she camps beside the trail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws.
’Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man’s timid heart is bursting with the things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him isn’t his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husband, each confirms the other’s tale—
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man, a bear in most relations—worm and savage otherwise,—
Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise.
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.

Fear, or foolishness, impels him, ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger!  Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue—to the scandal of The Sex!

But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same;
And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.

She who faces Death by torture for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity—must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions—not in these her honour dwells.
She the Other Law we live by, is that Law and nothing else.

She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the Mistress of the Mate!
And when Babe and Man are lacking and she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron), her equipment is the same.

She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

Unprovoked and awful charges—even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish—like the Jesuit with the squaw!

So it comes that Man the coward, when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council, dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience, he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of Abstract justice—which no woman understands.

And Man knows it!  Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern—shall enthral but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him and Her instincts never fail,
That the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male.

Sources

Originally written in 1911.  Reprinted hereby from The Years Between (London, 1919).  A copy with the cover; a clearer scan of the text.

The Dangerous Sex

This poem was, of course, a favorite of Professor Oliver’s.  I have no doubt that Nietzsche, too, would have loved it; by his lights, I think it would have been a moment of an Englishman escaping cultural mediocrity!

Kipling clearly wrote the above words to urge against women’s suffrage.  But the poem is a double-edged sword—and Kipling here recognized an essential truth, an ancient truth,[1]Observe that whereas ancient gods were fearsome warriors, many of the most terrifying rôles were reserved for divine women:  Nemesis—and the Erinyes, the literal Furies.  Tyche, oft called the Empress of the World, whose fickle whims set and reset the destinies of men and of nations.  Eris.  This list could be much extended…  Even the goddess of wisdom was combined with the goddess of war—and made an untouchable virgin, whom even the gods could not intimately approach; Athena Pallas embodies in philosophy and in the affairs of men what Artemis, the Huntress, personifies in Man’s contact with Nature.  And even the erotic Aphrodite loved war—both in the myth of her tryst with the god of war, and in her blessings of her warlike mortal son.

All of these goddesses were worshipped in a society so extremely patriarchal, its relations between the sexes are unimaginable to those worldview has been turned upside-down and inside-out by many centuries of Christianity.
that has been buried beneath modern ideas.  Neither “the weaker sex”, nor peaceful angels (!), women in their inner natures are gloriously undomesticated and undomesticable.

Women are the dangerous sex.  The natural fanatics.  As religionists—“the religious sex”, as Professor Oliver fondly said.  The instinctive sex, with a nature “more natural than that of man”, as Nietzsche observed.  The furious sex:  Wiser men of wiser times perceived the Furies as female.  In personal affairs, the extremists of love and hate.  In politics—the natural radicals.

There is thus in womankind a source of power.  Contrary to the mythology of some quarters of the far right, the Jews did not invent feminism:  The modern ideology that we now call feminism was substantially invented by degenerate Aryan men in alliance with degenerate Aryan women.  But organized Jewry seized upon it,[2]Cf. the insight at The Antichrist 24. for they recognized that an organized, countercultural women’s movement had the power to burn traditional society to the ground.  Against this, conservatives and traditionalists have perennially tried to put the genie back in the bottle.  Now, look to the results!

Perhaps if Ludovici’s incisive antifeminist works had been heeded, some workable semblance of traditional rôles and relations between the sexes could have been restored as recently as seventy years ago.  Now, such a prospect is as hopeless as it was in Germany in the 1920s to roll back all that had passed since the revolutions of 1848.[3]06e1abae1321f4cf9243102a83f3df2e1ff60ce6c222835d8854a9063b18d159

At this late date, already in a New Dark Age, there is nothing left to conserve.  Cultural traditions have been so thoroughly annihilated, those alive today cannot imagine what a “traditional” lifestyle really meant—and even those who claim to recognize this tend to fall into the trap of equal and opposite errors.  The “inner experience”, the Weltanschauung of past cultural traditions no longer exists; and those alive today have no organic connection to it.  The clock cannot be turned back by even a paltry hundred years—let alone by millennia, as I myself quite frankly would prefer.

The answer is a new radicalism:  A new way inspired by the best of the past, and most of all by classical antiquity, to build a better future.  Only thus may the lies of modernity be torn out root and branch.

And such an historic enterprise needs the uncompromising, pitiless Law of the convictions of the dread and deadly Female of the Species. ®


Notes

[1] Observe that whereas ancient gods were fearsome warriors, many of the most terrifying rôles were reserved for divine women:  Nemesis—and the Erinyes, the literal Furies.  Tyche, oft called the Empress of the World, whose fickle whims set and reset the destinies of men and of nations.  Eris.  This list could be much extended…  Even the goddess of wisdom was combined with the goddess of war—and made an untouchable virgin, whom even the gods could not intimately approach; Athena Pallas embodies in philosophy and in the affairs of men what Artemis, the Huntress, personifies in Man’s contact with Nature.  And even the erotic Aphrodite loved war—both in the myth of her tryst with the god of war, and in her blessings of her warlike mortal son.

All of these goddesses were worshipped in a society so extremely patriarchal, its relations between the sexes are unimaginable to those worldview has been turned upside-down and inside-out by many centuries of Christianity.

[2] Cf. the insight at The Antichrist 24.

[3] 06e1abae1321f4cf9243102a83f3df2e1ff60ce6c222835d8854a9063b18d159

 
Hide 48 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anonymous[234] • Disclaimer says:

    And, yet, despite the divinity ascribed to these various warrior gods/goddesses..pagans were thoroughly thrashed militarily time and time again by the people who claim to worship a god-man that was tortured and strung up by a bunch of pagans at the egging on of Jews. That military record is pretty straightforward, for instance (speaking of Germans).

    Alessandro Barbero adds that the most likely inspiration for the mass execution of Verden was the Bible. Exasperated by the continual rebellions, Charlemagne wanted to act like a true king of Israel. The Amalekites had dared raise their hand to betray God’s people, and it was therefore right that every last one of them should be exterminated. Jericho was taken and all those inside had to be put to the sword, including men, women, old people, and children, even the oxen, sheep, and donkeys, so that no trace would be left of them. After defeating the Moabites, David, with whom Charles liked to compare himself, had the prisoners stretch out on the ground, and two out of three were killed.
    https://www.medievalists.net/2014/02/was-charlemagne-a-mass-murderer/

    I mean, that’s gotta hurt…calling on your pagan gods again and again and getting heads lopped off by the thousands by guys who claim to worship a god who couldn’t save his own son from a bunch of pagans doesn’t really make for a good narrative for convincing people that your war gods have any worth. Tough to argue with success.

    • LOL: Stan d Mute
    • Troll: Raches
    • Replies: @sher singh
    , @Raches
  2. Yevardian says:

    Reall, the entirety of the West’s degeneration was pithily summed up in a single line of Kipling’s ‘Tommy’:

    “Yes, making mock of the uniforms that guard you while you sleep.”

    “If” and “Follow Me Home” are great too.

    Are you familiar with Orwell’s extended essay on Kipling? He was quite incisive in describing how very few poets were as divorced from the general national character of their culture as Kipling was. Of course, he came from that special caste of “blimps”, the empire-builders, who were never more than a tiny percentage of the UK’s population.

    It seems that practically all of Orwell’s essays have been completely forgotten, a great shame, as they’re by far the better part of his work. And of course, its a cliche to say it, but the ‘lifelong socialist’ Eric Blair comes across as quite conservative nowadays.

    I do wonder how he would have reacted had he lived to hear Enoch Powell’s (a serious literary figure and philologist himself, which is usually forgotten) “Rivers of Blood” speech.

    It has been stunning to see some commenters so detached from reality as to believe you are woman yourself, I have no idea how that conclusion was drawn.

    Going back to the commonsense message of Kipling’s poem, it’s interesting to note that the only (semi? still?) accepted mainstream figure I can think of that wrote explicitly describing this Weltanschauung, has been Camille Paglia. I suppose being both a woman, a lesbian (of course) and espousal of sexual degeneracy (which, in her defense, she has always honestly described as exactly that, even noting it as a universal symptom preceding [though she does not go as far as to claim it as a direct symptom] civilisational decline) gave her some deal of protection.

    Of course, when she agreed to conduct an interview with that notorious fraud, charlatan and ideal shabbas goy, Mr Peterson, it was dissapointing, though I suppose almost no academic can resist great publicity… and dare I say it, especially a woman?

    • LOL: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
    , @BlackFlag
  3. sher singh says:

    [This type of religious evangelism is off-topic here, unless I see something that I want to answer; and Twitter embeds and lots of graphical memes slow down the page load for everyone.  Therefore, kindly understand that I will more-tag this.  —Raches. ®]

    [MORE]

  4. sher singh says:
    @Anonymous

    [MORE]

    ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  5. sher singh says:

    ਤਾਂ ਸੀਸ ਕੇਸ ਰਖ ਸਿਪਾਹੀ ਕਰਨੇ । ਕਟਿ ਸ਼ਾਸ਼ਤ੍ਰ ਬੰਧਵਾਇ ਸਿੰਘ ਨਾਮ ਧਰਨੇ ।
    [And the Guru remarked], Adorning [unshorn] hair on your head, you shall be warriors, fastening weapons to your waist, and adopting Singh [Tiger] in your name.

    ਮਾਤਾ ਕਾਲੀ ਦਾ ਬਾਣਾ ਨੀਲਾ ਪਹਿਰਾਵਣਾ ।
    [You shall] wear the blue dress of Mata Kali [The Dark Goddess]

    ਕਰਨਾ ਜੁਧ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਰਕਾਂ ਦੇ ਮਾਰਿ ਹਟਾਵਣਾ ।293।
    Conducting war with the Turks you will kill and stop [their tyranny].

    Bansāvalināmā, page 151, verse 292-293

    ਮਾਤਾ ਕਾਲੀ ਦਾ ਕਾਲਾ ਬਾਣਾ ਸਿੰਘਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਦਿਵਾਇਆ ।
    The dark Bana [uniform] of Mata Kaali [Devi] was given to the Singhs.

    ‘ਸਿੰਘ’ ਮਾਤਾ ਦਾ ਬਾਹਨ, ਸੋ ਪੰਥ ਨਾਮ ਹੈ ਠਹਿਰਾਇਆ । ੪੨੯ ।
    The Lion [Singh] is the vehicle of the Mata [because Chandi rides a lion], due to this the Panth received the name of Singh.

    [MORE]


    ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ

  6. Raches says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    I love how you essentially admit that Christians are a bunch of Judaized nutjobs who preach Jewish hate and mass-murder people, while quoting robotically from the Jewish horror-novels which the Jews and Christians call “holy Scriptures” (!).

    Are you even aware that some Jews allegorically identify Germans (and I suspect, all Aryans) with Amalek?

    Charlemagne wanted to act like a true king of Israel. The Amalekites had dared raise their hand to betray God’s people, and it was therefore right that every last one of them should be exterminated. Jericho was taken and all those inside had to be put to the sword, including men, women, old people, and children, even the oxen, sheep, and donkeys, so that no trace would be left of them.

    Well said!  Christianity is a death-cult:  Judaism reformulated on the structure of a Zoroastrian dualism, laced with a decadent nihilism that is not present in Judaism, and practiced by Gentiles.

    You so neatly made my case for me, I decided to let your off-topic comment through.

    I myself quote the same Biblical passages when I want to show the true character of the Jewish people—their racial soul, as reflected in their own myths and the god they created in their image—or when I want to damn Christianity, which usually only preaches strength when it needs the strength to destroy civilization.

    For a neat illustration of the flipside of Christianity, its Sklavenmoral weakness, compare the October 6 conclusion by Andrew Anglin, an exemplary Christian.  Mr. Anglin preaches the terrifically great strength of beating up women; but when the wrath of Achilles is really needed, he says to relax and have Faith:

    There is nothing that does more to bring my spirit calm than reminding myself that God is in control, that justice will be served, and that the people who did this to our country are going to be made to pay for that.

    Translation:  Feel good.  Imaginary Daddy is big and strong.  Imaginary Daddy will take care of us.  Let us close our eyes, and play make-believe like children in a nursury.

    No wonder in the instant essay, I proclaim that defeating powerful enemies, winning culture wars, and building a new civilization is a job that needs women’s natural, instinctive fanaticism.  Not only are men compromisers:  Christianity has infantilized, domesticated, and castrated men like Anglin, so they have no balls anymore. ®

  7. Raches says: • Website
    @Yevardian

    The perspicacity showed by this comment is remarkable.  The reply will be a little essay—forthcoming.

    ——————————

    A general aside to my thoughtful commentators (the others I do not consider):

    One of many reasons why I have never used social media is that, much though I like technology, I do not let technology take over my life; and I enjoy the semi-disconnected (in some ways, almost off-grid) lifestyle.  In my relatively few online engagements hereto, I have come and gone unpredictably as a cat.

    I do want to keep my little corner of The Unz Review running smoothly; and as an extensive commentator myself, I know how it feels to put thought and effort into a comment, then wait for it to show up publicly.  This is not so much an apology as my way of being forthright, and thanking you for your patience as I am adjust and experiment to find myself a better workflow which cultivates the quality of discussion that I want to see, which I most appreciate.  I think that the commentators who most “get” me will understand my “never did social media” perspective, much as I understand theirs from my own experience here. ®

  8. Anonymous[218] • Disclaimer says:
    @sher singh

    [More-tagging because it’s off-topic, but I do really want for people to see this.  Please expand to read some gruesome stuff being praised by this Christian, the tamest part of which is the frank admission that “Massacres of civilians were common.”  Some of the death-by-torture described in the following was inflicted by Europeans on Europeans who refused to worship a Jewish god—part of that “converting by the sword”, i.e. Christian jihad, as stated above the fold.  That a Christian is recounting all of this to advocate how wonderful Christianity is pretty much just makes my argument for me.   —Raches. ®]

    OK, but those “gay Christians” smashed the pagans of Europe in every region. I know the Christians say they spread the religion through love and all that, but serious historians know there was a hell of a lot of fighting and converting by the sword. Charlemagne wasn’t the only king that derived authority from fighting and converting of pagans.

    [MORE]

    AsIn 1230, a few knights established their first stronghold, called Bird’s Song, in the canopy of a giant oak tree. There they survived Prussian attacks and waited for reinforcement.

    Soon, they conquered their first Prussian tribe. Its leader, Pipin, converted to Christianity, but later continued to resist the invaders. He was treated to an old Germanic punishment, mentioned in Tacitus’s Germania. The knights split his belly, spiked his entrails to a tree and flogged him. He apparently ran around it, wrapping his guts around the tree.

    Pragmatic and efficient, the Crusaders understood the rules of psychological warfare. Being outnumbered, they had to scare their opponents to death. For example, during First Crusade, one of it’s leaders, a Frank called Beomund, would roast the bodies of Turks in their camp fires, the intention being to make Turks hiding nearby think that the Franks are cannibals. Massacres of civilians were common. In his chronicle of the First Crusade, Fulcher from Chartres mentions that the Crusaders captured a camp full of women, but did them no harm… other than pierce all their bellies with their spears.
    https://culture.pl/en/article/death-plunder-propaganda-polands-first-english-tourists

    So while these memes are funny – the historical record is that pagans got their collective asses kicked in hard by “cucked” and often-outnumbered Christians. That goes for places like South America also. Like I said, success is hard to argue against.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  9. sher singh says:

    [This type of religious evangelism is off-topic here, unless I see something that I want to answer; and Twitter embeds and lots of graphical memes slow down the page load for everyone. Therefore, kindly understand that I will more-tag this. —Raches. ®]

    Evangelism? Posting about Chandi Di Var or Ballad of War Goddess in post about War Goddess..

    Woman is Shakti, (divine power or Sword). Goddess demands blood,

    Cultures where women marry & sleep around randomly are anti-Woman, weak men are anti-woman.

    ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ

    [MORE]

    • Thanks: Raches
  10. sher singh says:

    Translation: Feel good. Imaginary Daddy is big and strong. Imaginary Daddy will take care of us. Let us close our eyes, and play make-believe like children in a nursury.

    No wonder in the instant essay, I proclaim that defeating powerful enemies, winning culture wars, and building a new civilization is a job that needs women’s natural, instinctive fanaticism. Not only are men compromisers: Christianity has infantilized, domesticated, and castrated men like Anglin, so they have no balls anymore.

    This simple, also Jai Sati Ma||

    ਸ਼ਸਤ੍ਰ ਕੇਸ ਬਿਨ ਪਾਉ ਲਖਹੁ ਨਰ । ਕੇਸ ਧਰੇ ਤਬਿ ਆਧੋ ਲਖਿ ਉਰ ।।੮।।
    Those men who do not have Kesh [unshorn hair] or Shastars [weapons], do not recognize those men as full men. Those who have Kesh [unshorn hair], recognize those as half-men.

    ਕੇਸ ਸ਼ਸਤ੍ਰ ਜਬਿ ਦੋਨਹੁਂ ਧਾਰੇ । ਤਬਿ ਨਰੁ ਰੂਪ ਹੋਤਿ ਹੈ ਸਾਰੇ ।
    Those who have adorned themselves with Kesh [unshorn hair] and Shastar [weapons], those men have attained their full form.”

    [MORE]


    ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ

  11. BlackFlag says:
    @Yevardian

    The other day I was thinking that Raches might be Camille Paglia.
    1) Some commenters thought Raches was female (I don’t know why).
    2) Unz said something about “if you are who I think you are.”
    3) The content he writes about.

    But I doubt Paglia is good with Math.

    Feel free to delete this comment.

  12. @BlackFlag

    Well, if Raches next post exalts Athenian boy-love then you’ll know for sure it’s Camille Paglia.

    More on topic, I have found that indeed women are more insistent in their belief than men, on average. Perhaps unsurprisingly to those not addled by modernism, men and women actually benefit from sharing their relative strengths and weaknesses.

    • Replies: @Raches
  13. Anonymous[133] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    You can feel free to assume I’m a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim or a Buddhist – doesn’t matter (I value my anonymity like you do). I’m just talking history here. Note that the torture with the entrails described is the same one pagan Germans used to use (which is why it mentions Tacitus’ “Germania”).

    And I don’t understand why this is considered off topic when you mentioned and praised war gods in your post.

    But you are missing my point.

    My point is that those pagans (the ones who actually believed in their gods and made sacrifices to appeal to them for good crops and victories in battle) could not have missed the fact that their gods were MIA. And that the followers of this new god were kicking the crap out of them practically everywhere. With massacres? Of course – we both know that only Christians who buy their own propaganda believe all of Europe converted peacefully. Even well after conversion, Christians had a penchant for massacring each other in sectarian wars. So, yeah, not fuzzy, soft guys.

    So, how would the situation look from a real pagan’s perspective? Their own warrior gods are even weaker than this god-who-was-too-weak-to-stop-his-son-from-getting-tortured-by-pagans since they couldn’t deliver victories – doesn’t sound like those gods were the strong horse to bet on. Like I said, tough to argue against success.

    And yes, I know some Jews consider Germans to be Amelekites, but it doesn’t stop there:
    “We see this happening today. Iran is willing to destroy their economy, they are willing to destroy their own country, just to convince the other Arab nations to attack Israel. Erdogan is the same way. His economy is crashing but he doesn’t care. Hamas is clearly this way. They want the IDF to attack, as long as it means bad for Israel. Anyone who acts this way today is from the seed of Amalek.”
    “The commandment isn’t to conquer Amalek. It is to wipe him out from the world because as long as there is a memory of Amalek in the world, the Moshiach (Messiah) cannot come.”
    https://www.israel365news.com/112275/amalek-today-rabbis/

    • Replies: @niceland
  14. JimDandy says:
    @BlackFlag

    Camille Paglia has written a scathing critique of Taylor Swift, referring to the singer as an “obnoxious Nazi Barbie” whose “twinkly persona is such a scary flashback to the fascist blondes who ruled the social scene during my youth”.

    • LOL: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
  15. @BlackFlag

    Raches is probably male but has the effeminized collegiate writing style of someone from the humanities.

    Intelligent and creative but sporadic in thought and prone to intellectual vanity through unnecessary classical references. Strong disconnect between political goals and strategy.

    Bashing Christianity shows a lack of strategic thinking. Trump is the most pro-Western president we have had in decades and secular Whites overwhelmingly voted in Biden.

    In fact if not for Evangelicals we would have Clinton who wanted to bring in 200k Syrians on day one.

    So no I really don’t get the Christianity bashing. We have two religions (liberalism and Christianity) and there isn’t time for some anti-liberal pagan movement. That possibility ended with WW2 so get over it. There is only time for one last fight against the left and that alliance has to include Christians. There is no other way.

    • Replies: @Raches
    , @Pop Warner
  16. niceland says:
    @Anonymous

    I don’t think Pagans loosing battles to Christians is relevant or the article.

    Did you not notice the title – The Female of the Species

    Did you notice this part:

    But organized Jewry seized upon it,[2] for they recognized that an organized, countercultural women’s movement had the power to burn traditional society to the ground. Against this, conservatives and traditionalists have perennially tried to put the genie back in the bottle. Now, look to the results!

    Does it look like the Christians are winning now? Perhaps he is indicating both conservatives and traditionalists have been doing it wrong, and new approach is needed?

    Browsing this website a bit, on and off for few years I have noticed animosity towards women in the comment section. Since my knowledge of American politics is very limited and I presume the gang here is primarily the ‘alt-right’ – I don’t know if this phenomena is limited to only the fringes of the right or conservatives in general.

    Either way, it doesn’t look like winning strategy in any movement or political struggle today. And talking about winning strategies for conservatives or traditionalists I remember Mr. Unz commenting about this, and brief search came up with this comment:
    https://www.unz.com/article/tucker-carlson-doubles-down-on-replacement-explicitly-mentions-white-replacement-and-targets-the-adls-hypocrisy/?showcomments#comment-4593231

    So what to do when you don’t like feminism but you realize you need the womenfolk on your side? I wonder why Mr. Raches is pointing out how the Greeks and other cultures thought about their females, frequently worshiping them as warrior goddesses?!

    • Thanks: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
    , @Anonymous
  17. Raches says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    She repudiated that; and I think she was sincere, since her argument was basically rational, not the usual leftist virtue-signalling.

    So, she is one step closer to my position!  Baby steps…  Yes, I have my work cut out for me here.  —Oh, you have no idea of the efforts that I have expended in real life, to try to bring leftists around to my way of thinking.  And I think that Camille is probably not actually that far away—not beneath the surface; not where it counts.  Yes, I know that she would cordially hate me for saying so. ®

  18. Raches says: • Website
    @JimDandy

    Yes, BlackFlag officially won the Internet.

    Food for thought:

    I despise Trump, and I argued against him vehemently in 2016.  (Much less so in 2020, for various reasons.)

    Because I am so friendly with leftists, in 2016, I had a leftist literally cry in my arms when Trump won the election.  As she sobbed, I rocked her gently, stroked her hair, and reassured her that much to my dismay, Trump was not Hitler, and she had nothing to worry about.  She didn’t believe me.  Neither did Trump voters.

    Now, Camille Paglia was enthusiastic about Trump in 2016; I don’t know about 2020.  In early 2016, at least, she scandalized the left by condemning Hillary in scathing terms, and praising Trump.  I will provide quotes in a much longer comment that I began about this yesterday, which I will complete sometime later.

    I am open-minded.  If anyone can Make Trump Great Again, it is Camille.  She can be very persuasive.  I think she could convince me that Trump is great. ®

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  19. Raches says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    You evidently did not even read the poem.

    Man, a bear in most relations—worm and savage otherwise,—
    Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise.
    Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
    To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.

    Stereotypical male fallacies:

    Strong disconnect between political goals and strategy.

    Bashing Christianity shows a lack of strategic thinking.

    […]

    So no I really don’t get the Christianity bashing. We have two religions (liberalism and Christianity) and there isn’t time for some anti-liberal pagan movement. That possibility ended with WW2 so get over it. There is only time for one last fight against the left and that alliance has to include Christians. There is no other way.

    “Liberalism and Christianity” are not two religions:  They are warring sects of the same faith, which are only nowadays perceived as differently as Protestantism and Catholicism were perceived in the Seventeenth Century.  I explained this to you before, in the very longest of long comments that I made at The Unz Review before I got my blog.  Whether or not you agree with what I said thereby, it does not behoove to ignore it while you insult me.

    You have obviously misidentified both my goals and my strategy.

    Whatever else they may be, my goals are explicitly anti-Christian.  Fundamentally and unavoidably.  And I do not accept a world ruled by Christians in any substantial way.  Against that in itself, I will fight to the death.

    By the by, I have remarked similarly before:  When you do your democratic head-counting, you make a catastrophic strategic error by failing to consider the people who are alienated by Christianity.  No doubt, a large number of leftist whites have been driven to the left because Christianity dominates the right, and drives them away.  “The Christian Right”, and anything associated with it, is totally unacceptable to many people—very reasonably so!  If they lack the independence of thought to escape your secular left/Christian right dichotomy, or they lack the strength of will to live at the fringes (which are “fringe” largely for this type of reason), they wind up on the left by default.

    This is non-negotiable to me.  Amidst all of the changes in my position over the course of my life, on these two issues I have never wavered since a quite young age:  I instinctively despise blacks, and I abhor Christianity.  But I would be more amenable to negotiating even with blacks (as, e.g., Rockwell did) than with Christians.  Christianity is my enemy, as much as racial Jewry—maybe moreso, inasmuch as it is the first and greatest Jewish controlled-opposition movement.

    My strategy is not a “fight against the left”.  That is your simplemindedness—and observe how the left perennially beats you bloody.  Feel free to ignore all that I say, and keep losing.  “The left” has been strategically advancing since the late Eighteenth Century, consistently and with very few temporary reversals.  In America, it has so thoroughly dominated the right for the past century that you have no idea what life was like in the 1920s; for example, did you even know 1920s Americans were scandalized that the Soviets made married women work outside the home, because they considered it cruel to the women?  If you want to comfort yourself with the illusion that you know “strategy” and I don’t, then you are, of course, entitled to keep losing, as you assuredly will.

    My strategy is to break out of the nice little political boxes in which we are all imprisoned, destroy the whole left-right dichotomy, and build something better.  In contexts relevant to myself, I sometimes use the terms “left” and “right” in a colloquial sense, pragmatically, as a shorthand—for language has a purpose of communication; and sometimes, I need a convenient way to get my point across to people who think in those terms.  But I myself do not think in those terms.

    There is only time for zero last fights against “the left”.  Newsflash:  The War that really mattered was decisively lost in 1945.  When I identify the present as already being in a New Dark Age, I am seeing this in historical terms that are inaccessible to the vast majority of people—evidently including you.

    And this last chance to defeat the left type of battle-cry is a cliché of the American right, which has been repeated by them so many times that it is no longer even funny.  It always ends in defeat and retreat, until the next urgent “last fight”.  This is why you have reached the point that there are nowadays serious arguments over whether or not a man can get pregnant.  Your type of “thinking”—your so-called “strategy” is to blame for this.

    To have even the slightest chance of prevailing for my goals will require extreme strength of will, new philosophic thinking as revolutionary as The Genealogy of Morals, and a radical strategy as new and original as Hitler’s was in the 1920s—when he identified as his enemies both “die Rotfront und Reaktion” (as sung in the Horst-Wessel-Lied), both left and right.  And yes:  It will require the fanaticism of the Female of the Species.

    She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
    Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
    He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
    Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

    ——————————

    White America is demographically so far gone, as an accomplished fact, that I snipped out that part and ignored it.  My response:  It is justice.  As I have said many times in various places, the Americans chose this path—now, they must dree their weird.  Excepting my considerable sympathy for some individual Americans who do not deserve this, I do take some satisfaction in watching the rest of them dissolve themselves.  What I actually care about is that in their frenzy of Christian righteousness to invade Europe in the “Good War” against Evil Hitler, the Americans destroyed Europe, they destroyed Western civilization, and they probably foredoomed the whole Aryan race ineluctably to extinction.

    To insinuate that my mythopoetic review of ancient gods and goddesses, and my analysis of the archetypes that they represent, somehow implies a “pagan movement” misses the point so badly that I will not waste time explaining.  I will, however, note that “pagan” is a slur derived from a Roman Christian insult.  Most people do not know this.  I factor the usage of that word into my judgment of people’s knowledge and/or motives.

    ——————————

    In one of my earliest substantial comments here, I explicitly said, “I am [] not a white nationalist, an alt-righter, a ‘movement’ follower, or whatever else people may imagine me to be.”  That was condescension.  With respect instead, I have also declared repeatedly that I am not a National Socialist.  I said somewhere else (which I cannot find at the moment—probably several comments) that I am fully independent.  And in my “Hello, world!” post that opened this blog, I effectually repudiated all modern ideas.

    I said so much about what I am not, to free myself up to say and to be what I am.  Those who try to place me in a neat little pigeonhole, or on one side or the other of some perceived line, have missed the point altogether. ®

    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
    , @John Johnson
  20. Raches says: • Website
    @niceland

    You hit the nail on the head in most of your comment.

    I partly agree, partly disagree with Mr. Unz’s comment that you linked.  Apropos this topic, he is definitely right that the American Right has a losing strategy.  His critique thereof is incisive.  They have spent so long losing, they will keep on losing—and they will keep fooling themselves about it.  However, I think that he severely underestimates the race replacement issue.  It is not relevant to America, in my opinion, because demographic replacement of whites there is, in substance, already an accomplished fact in the sense that even a total immigration moratorium would now be insufficient to save American whites in the long term; Building The Wall, etc. is tantamount to the proverbial locking of the barn door after the horses are long gone.  Too little, too late!  But it is relevant to Europe, including Iceland—more than relevant:  The major issue.

    Ancient Greece was actually a patriarchal society; but that word should not be misunderstood.  Please see the “Equal and Opposite Errors” section of my “Christianity is Misogyny” article.  I have a theory that masculine societies, i.e. societies under the political and cultural leadership of healthy men, perforce must have balanced pantheons of both gods and goddesses; Christianity is spiritually effeminate.  See also my remarks of October 6 about traditional Japanese warrior-culture, which was centered around worship of a national goddess.  The Greeks likewise did not worship their women; but they worshipped goddesses personifying feminine characteristics, together with their gods personifying masculine characteristics; and I do think that both sexes were much happier, in a society wherein the relations between the sexes were so different from those today, people cannot even imagine the “inner experience” of how those people lived.

    In the West (and all societies too badly infected by the degeneration therefrom), at this late date, the Christian Weltanschauung has so destroyed men that they will be lucky if women save them. ®

  21. Yevardian says:
    @BlackFlag

    How curious. I’ve only ever seen these yellow comment bars bestowed by our benevolent overlord himself. Hm?

    • Replies: @Raches
  22. Raches says: • Website
    @Yevardian

    Q.v.  Tyche blessed that comment with triple-7s in the comment ID (look at the fragment in the URL); and it comment had so much excellence, I wanted to frame it—done.

    Terse comment in lieu of the short thing that I wanted to write to you in lieu of the long thing that I wanted to write to you about Camille, because I have conspiracy theorists conspiratorially conspiring to distract me with arrant nonsense—I blame the CIA. ®

  23. Tom Verso says:

    Raches writes:

    “Observe that whereas ancient gods were fearsome warriors, many of the most terrifying roles were reserved for divine women:

    Then s/he proceeds to make the case with a list of ancient Greek deities; summarizing:

    “All of these goddesses were worshipped in a society so extremely patriarchal…”

    Which raises the whole profound issue of what exactly is the relationship between mythology, religion, political indoctrination, etc. and the day-to-day life of the people whom the ideology is supposed to represent.

    In the matter of ancient Greece for example, there is a profound disconnect between myth and material economic reality.

    The great classical scholar and world historian Arnold J Toynbee observes:

    “Between the years 725 and 325 BC, the society of which these numerous city states were all members was confronted with the problem of the pressure of population upon the means of subsistence— means which the Hellenic peoples at that time were apparently obtaining almost entirely by raising a varied agricultural produce in their home territories for home consumption.

    Further,
    “When the crisis came, different states contended with it in different ways.
    Corinth and Chalcis,’ disposed of their surplus population by
    seizing and colonizing agricultural territories overseas – in Sicily, Southern Italy, Thrace, and elsewhere …

    “Sparta satisfied the land-hunger of her citizens not by colonizing overseas territories outside the previous geographical limits of the Hellenic World but by attacking and conquering her nearest Greek neighbors in Messina

    “Athena reacted to the population problem in a different way again …discovered an original solution of her own by specializing her agricultural production for export, starting manufactures also for export, and then developing her political institutions as to give a fair share of political power to the new classes
    (see: A Study of History vol 1 p24-25)

    The point being, Greece was a very heterosexual society as evidence by the population explosion and the day-to-day life of the Greeks during this period was dominated by the survival demands and the way to deal with them.

    However, the mythology such as “terrifying roles were reserved for divine women … etc. …” , tells us little about the material political economic characteristics of the society.

    This is not to imply that myth is not an important meaningful and necessary topic of historical analysis. In the history of literature my favorite work and character is Medea. But, I cannot connect the play to people in the material historic record.

    I wonder what thousands of years from now, how historians will make the connection between Star Wars and the day-to-day life of the American’s economic and political behavior.

    • Replies: @Raches
  24. @Raches

    This is non-negotiable to me. Amidst all of the changes in my position over the course of my life, on these two issues I have never wavered since a quite young age: I instinctively despise blacks, and I abhor Christianity. But I would be more amenable to negotiating even with blacks (as, e.g., Rockwell did) than with Christians. Christianity is my enemy, as much as racial Jewry—maybe moreso, inasmuch as it is the first and greatest Jewish controlled-opposition movement.

    I grew up an a community where Christianity was the dominant religion, and the Christians believed in their religion and acted upon their beliefs. There were also lots of blacks and a few Jews. This is also the town where Leo Frank was executed, and looking at a list of the supposed plotters, I recognized quite a few of the surnames among the old crowd growing up, though I didn’t know a thing about Leo Frank at the time.

    I don’t consider myself a Christian, and I don’t really care for organized religion, though I don’t deny that there are positive aspects. In a nutshell, I don’t deny God or gods, but I also don’t claim to know their wills or wants, or that they even exist. I’m only hopeful for something better.

    I have long believed that Christianity is not a good religion for Europeans, because it does tie them to a religion, holy land, and people that are alien to them, and makes them vulnerable to attack and manipulation. The Jew-friendly nature of modern Christianity (it always goes only one way) and the Israel fetish may destroy Christianity. At the very least, it is discrediting much about the religion.

    After saying all of that, I realize that it was Christians of another era (that I got a small look at the very tail end of through some very old people when I was very young myself) who did uphold order, civilization, and segregation against the blacks that you instinctually abhor, and who also thumbed their noses at world Jewry and gave Leo Frank exactly what he deserved. Their grandsons and great-geandsons are very different creatures, as is their version of Christianity.

    • Replies: @Raches
  25. AaronB says:

    The modern ideology that we now call feminism was substantially invented by degenerate Aryan men in alliance with degenerate Aryan women. But organized Jewry seized upon it

    Feminism is an inevitable product of a hyper-masculine society, which prizes only male qualities, and reserves no admiration for genuine femininity.

    Women naturally want to be respected by society – if society only respects male qualities, women will try and become men. Unbalanced hyper-masculine societies will inevitably produce feminism.

    The West in the modern period, can be described as a society that adopted extreme, unbalanced masculinity. Even today, the West does not admire anything genuinely feminine.

    But extreme masculinity in the end is brittle – as all excessive”strength” is actually weakness: an unyielding tree breaks in the wind – and is humanly unsatisfying, and one big reason the West is dying today.

    In East Asia, femininity was always admired and considered equal to masculinity (yin yang philosophy), and men themselves were expected to incorporate femininity into their character and behavior – and this is true today.

    I have always laughed at how today, the hard, muscular, tough Western man gets less respect from women, than the soft, gentle, more feminine Asian man – having spent much time in Asia, I can compare 🙂

    The ancient Spartans – the most hyper-masculine of the ancient Greeks – were notorious for being dominated by their women 😉 The softer, more feminine Athenians, had no such reputation.

    But then in Japan, China, and Korea, Zen and Taoism are the main religion/philosophy, and these are explicitly feminine.

    The Tao Teh Ching says “know the male, but stick to the female” in your comportment through life – know how to deploy masculine hardness when necessary, but most of the time be soft, gentle, amenable.

    And the Japanese and Chinese have always taken this to heart – the regular atmosphere in Japan has always been relatively feminine. Pico Iyer called Japan the “Empire of Smiles”.

    In addition, the hyper-masculine man can more easily be manipulated by women, as all women have known, because he imagines feminine approval validates his masculinity. He needs it. The balanced man in touch with his femininity, has no such need for female validation.

    That’s why a hyper-masculine society, will be more swayable by feminism.

    • Troll: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
    , @Joe Paluka
  26. Raches says: • Website
    @Tom Verso

    Interesting remarks.

    Thanks for pointing to Hecate.  I thought of her when drawing that little footnote sketch of a much bigger idea; but for what was intended to be a very short list, but I thought she was too obvious:  It seems that witchcraft is always and everywhere associated with women, including (infamously) in the Christian world.  I do not wish for the omission inadvertently to offend Hecate, whom I most piously revere; thus, I am glad to mention her now.

    Aside, one of these days, I will post something about Toynbee that will probably shock people.

    However, the mythology such as “terrifying roles were reserved for divine women … etc. …” , tells us little about the material political economic characteristics of the society.

    This is not to imply that myth is not an important meaningful and necessary topic of historical analysis. In the history of literature my favorite work and character is Medea. But, I cannot connect the play to people in the material historic record.

    Although the overall context can never lose its relevance, I am thereby seeking not so much “the material political economic characteristics of the society”, as the inner experience that cannot be seen from such characteristics.  The psychological experience.

    I take as self-evident that men create gods in their own images—or perhaps more precisely, as images projected through the subjective lenses of how they perceive the world.  Although there are various theories for how deities originally developed, and various levels of evidence (or total lack thereof) for such theories (or sometimes, pseudohistorical fantasies), there must be a primary, or perhaps even exclusive subjective, psychological factor for determining the form that gods take—most of all, for determining which natural forces are perceived as “male”, and which as “female”.  That is a socially constructed gender!

    Why is the Sun male to some, and female to others?  Taken alone, perhaps that could be an historical accident; and when I consider the Sun purely in the abstract, I could argue both ways about whether it should be represented or ruled by a god, or by a goddess.  But when a pattern is shown that matches a certain outlook, I think that it can be revealing as sketched in my footnote.

    This is something that I have never read anywhere, although I would be surprised if nobody had ever thought on similar lines—just my own thoughts on the matter, which I should probably reserve more of for future posts.  Of course, it is philosophical rather than scientific. ®

    • Replies: @Tom Verso
  27. Raches says: • Website
    @AaronB

    You talk like a queer or a tranny, you twist and invert the truth like a Jew, you persistently preach the virtue of weakness, and you must have some deep-seated insecurities if you are so highly motivated to attempt impotently evangelizing your nonsense to an audience where any readers who would anyway stay with my blog will wish that I would just ban you.

    You are insulting to women.  You are a misogynist:  The slimy, underhanded type of misogynist who represents a sick parody of femininity.  If I believed your definition of the “genuinely feminine”, then I would frankly agree with Andrew Anglin that women need to be slapped and beaten.  Fortunately, you are wrong.  Even Kipling could explain some of this to you; see above!  For the rest, see Nietzsche.

    And you are also horrifically racist against Asians—I mean racist in a bad way, the really uninformed bigot of the left who wantonly misappropriates from others to conform them to his own sick worldview.  You preach the worst Asian stereotypes of, quote-unquote, the “more feminine Asian man”.  Your total knowledge of Asian cultures and Asian peoples obviously comes from hippie groups of gaijin and gwailo.

    I like to let you humiliate yourself—and to show everyone an illustrative example:  This is what Nietzsche was talking about, when he wrote of the Sklavenmoral. ®

    • Thanks: AaronB
    • Replies: @AaronB
  28. Tom Verso says:
    @Raches

    You write:

    “… one of these days, I will post something about Toynbee that will probably shock people.

    I cannot wait to read such.
    I am the only person I know who reads Toynbee – his original work – not the summaries and journalistic commentaries.

    • Replies: @Tony massey
  29. AaronB says:
    @Raches

    Thank you for your kind compliments sir 🙂

    I have always felt your “type” needs my services most. Like all people who worship “power”, you are overcompensating for a crushing feeling of weakness – but are, underneath it all, a good person. You just don’t see very deeply – and it is my task to introduce nuance, depth, and complexity 🙂

    You remind me of Daniel Chieh, a commenter on Karlin’s blog. He wasn’t a Nazi, but he also worshipped force and brutality to mask inner weakness, but was really a good person.

    I had many fine exchanges with him 🙂

    All the best, Raches.

  30. Raches says: • Website
    @OilcanFloyd

    I understand whence you come.  I have a considerable sympathy for your Southern antecedents, and their society that was slowly broken and stripped away from them piece by piece, from multiple directions.

    My view of Christianity and Christians is more nuanced than a mechanistic blanket condemnation.  Of course, I do not hate every European for a period of over a thousand years!  There have been Christians who built good societies; I argue that that was despite Christianity—that Christianity was what always dragged them down, and slowly poisoned their good culture from the inside out:

    https://www.unz.com/proems/christianity-is-misogyny/#christian-cultural-schizophrenia

    I have made some comments on similar lines, and will address this further on my blog.

    The Jew-friendly nature of modern Christianity (it always goes only one way) and the Israel fetish may destroy Christianity. At the very least, it is discrediting much about the religion.

    It is Christianity returning to its roots—as it always logically must:  In some aspects the Christianity of collapse of the Roman Empire in the West, and in some aspects the Jewish Christianity of the Second Century. ®

  31. Anonymous[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @niceland

    Well, I would certainly agree that my post is not specifically about the main thrust of the article, but rather a tangential one about what was mentioned in the concluding notes about warrior gods/goddesses.

    And you are right, Christianity is in major decline at the moment. I guess the question is; is this terminal or just a phase – I don’t know, it’s proven itself to lift itself up before. One can look at the way it took over the Roman Empire from a weak minority position to even the later successes of the Rus in throwing off the Tatar yoke from around their necks. So I guess the question is about the long run. The recent reports coming out of France about hundreds of thousands of kids molested by Catholic Church officials can’t help in this regard.

    However, keep this is mind – I could have easily bested Ali in the ring when he was 60 and had Parkinson’s. But that wouldn’t have won me any titles. For that I would have needed to best him at his prime…hardly a chance.

    Paganism had its chance at a title fight and lost again and again and basically disappeared in Europe as a real religion. It needed to win against Christianity then, when it counted. With an ailing and declining Christianity, can paganism revive itself as a serious contender? No clue, but doubtful.

    And you can’t say the Christians cheated by massacring pagans. The pagans weren’t shy of committing massacres; a very good example is Queen Boudicca’s revolt against the Romans in Britain – massacres and burning all around.

    And I fully agree with you that the alt-right seems way over-the-top hostile to women. There was a documentary about this not too long ago how Lauren Southern was driven out of right-wing circles because of this.

    Yeah, any revival movement will need plenty of anti-feminist (at least against the second and third wave) women.

    • LOL: sher singh
  32. JimDandy says:
    @Raches

    Everyone has a valve! Mine is simply more developed. I am trying to open a passage which you have succeeded in blocking. It may be permanently closed for all I know.

  33. @John Johnson

    So no I really don’t get the Christianity bashing. We have two religions (liberalism and Christianity) and there isn’t time for some anti-liberal pagan movement. That possibility ended with WW2 so get over it.

    I hate to break it to you, but Christianity is fading fast in the West. If not for immigration from Christian nations in Africa and Latin America it would be in an even more reduced state. To put it on equal footing as the various state-backed cults (Floyd, trannies, climate, etc) is charitable at best. The most fundamentalist Protestants in the US are utterly devoted to the state of Israel, a state which – according to the Gospels – houses the descendants of those who killed Christ. And fundamentalist Catholics are a tiny sect constantly under threat of suppression by the Pope and the bishops. Handwaving an alternative to the neoliberal creationism practiced by our elite because it isn’t the dying alternative you cling to is not just flippant and shortsighted, it’s downright hypocritical.

    • Agree: Raches
  34. EH says: • Website

    I think a great deal of the “woman problem” comes from women seeking social status, which they find most singularly attractive in men, so wrongly think attaining such social status will make them more attractive to men, whereas in actuality it is no more effective than men getting breast implants to become more attractive to women.

    The problem of over-ambitious women is unique to the Western branch of the Aryan peoples, though, and goes back thousands of years. As I commented on another site:

    The severe Woman Problem of the branch of the Aryans that later went to Western Europe was noted as far back as Herodotus in the 5th c. B.C.

    The Normans that invaded England, were in part descended from the Alans, who moved into France ~400 A.D. (All the place and personal names with “Alan” are referring to this tribe. “Alan” is the same word as “Aryan”, and “Iranian”.) But the Ossetians call their country “Alania”, and the historical and genetic record backs them up.

    The immediate ancestors of the Alans and Ossetians were the Sarmatians or Sauromatians (it’s unclear if they were quite the same), a part of the Scythian peoples:

    Herodotus (4.110–117) recounts that the Sauromatians arose from marriages of a group of Amazons and young Scythian men. In his account, some Amazons were captured in battle by Greeks in Pontus (northern Turkey) near the river Thermodon, and the captives were loaded into three boats. They overcame their captors while at sea, but were not able sailors. The boats were blown north to the Maeotian Lake (the Sea of Azov) onto the shore of Scythia near the cliff region (today’s southeastern Crimea). After encountering the Scythians and learning the Scythian language, the Amazons agreed to marry Scythian men, but only on the condition that they move away from the Scythia and not be required to follow the customs of Scythian women. According to Herodotus, the descendants of this band settled toward the northeast beyond the Tanais (Don) river and became the Sauromatians. His account explains the origins of their language as an “impure” form of Scythian. He credits the unusual social freedoms of Sauromatae women, including participation in warfare, as an inheritance from their Amazon ancestors. Later writers refer to the “woman-ruled Sarmatae” (γυναικοκρατούμενοι).[Periplus of Pseudo-Scylax, c. 330 B.C.]

    There’s quite a bit more from ancient sources on them, including their relation to the legendary Amazons and the possible basis for that story here.

    We have to be even more firm in our re-assertion of control of our women than other nations have found sufficient.

  35. @AaronB

    “I have always laughed at how today, the hard, muscular, tough Western man gets less respect from women, than the soft, gentle, more feminine Asian man – having spent much time in Asia, I can compare”

    What women don’t respect the hard, muscular, tough Western man? White women? Asian women? Feminists? What is your idea of a hard, muscular, tough Western man anyway? I don’t see many around any more and most of the actors that played them are dead. Today’s soft Western man doesn’t seem to get much respect from any women either. As for the soft, gentle, more feminine Asian man you describe, they are always complaining that they are ignored by Hollywood and are the last to be picked in Western dating websites. If they are popular in Asia, it’s because they’re the only game in town.

    Why do you put smiley faces in your text? Are you gay or just very happy?

  36. @Tom Verso

    I’m more than intrigued.
    I worship the guy. I stumbled upon dc somervell and that really changed the way i thought about history. And many other things.
    His book, his last i believe, the biosphere, was shocking to me.
    Toynbee was an other worldly prophet.
    To me, anyway.
    Never heard a bad word about him. I’ve tried to read everything i could find he wrote.
    I’ve found 3 Toynbee tiles. Hope to someday lay one somewhere. Prolly on the Appalachian trail.
    Do tell. Please.
    Still, whatever it could be he was a pretty good thinker it seems. I guess we all make mistakes.
    I think war, in a way, destroyed the man’s life. He prolly felt ashamed to be alive after so many he knew lost theirs in the great one.
    O well.
    Can’t have heroes anymore i suppose. Fuck me.
    And what the fuck i am surrounded by fucking Christians of the absolute worst variety(death seems to make them stronger as they lust for it) and nigger loving cucks and have been my wholefucking life. And I’ve never been either and what did that get me?
    I say you’re right. I’m sure you usually are.
    Put the most fanatical goddamn woman White people can find to defend them and let the men do what they’re told since they ain’t doing what they’re supposed to be.
    I’ll sign up. Which bitch do i call, sir?

    • Replies: @Tom Verso
  37. Tom Verso says:
    @Tony massey

    Thank for your comment.

    I am happy to hear from others who read Toynbee. There are very few of us these days.

    He was very popular before about 1960. The March 17, 1947 issue of TIME Magazine had his picture on the cover.

    Then he disappeared from both popular and academic writing.

    You say:
    “Never heard a bad word about him”

    Actually Jewish writers were very negative about him, and I think the reason he ‘disappeared’ from historical writings is because they have so much influence in academia and mass media press.

    What is their problem?

    In his book “A Study of History” he posits that there are some communities today that are remnants of the the extinct Syriac Civilization.

    For example he writes:

    “I ascertained the present existence of what appeared to me to extant relics of a civilization that was extinct. [For example:] the Monophysite Christians of Armenia, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Abyssinia and the Nestorian Christians of Kurdistan and Malabar, as well as the Jews and the Parsees – seem to me to be relics of an otherwise extinct Syriac Civilization.

    “These extant communities I have labelled ‘fossils’…”

    Jews felt that the word fossils was a pejorative and a negative about them.

    Toynbee:
    My word ‘fossil’ has been so hotly attacked by Jewish critics ...[indeed]… all the criticisms of my use of the word have come from Jews.

    “I know of no Parsse, Nestorian, Monophysite, etc. objectors to the word.”
    (see A Study of History vol 12 pp. 292-300)

    Even though nobody else in the scholarly world interpreted the word ‘fossils’ as a pejorative, just because the Jews had a problem; Toynbee writes near 10 small print pages placating their concerns.

    Nevertheless, they managed to remove him from scholarly discourse.

  38. Well I’ll be. Did not know. I only sought out his writing and, honestly, i have never known anyone else that would say they have at least an interest in history ever heard of him.

    [MORE]

    Had it not been for somervell i don’t think i would have ever heard of him either. I bet I’ve bought the somervell books more than a half dozen times as gifts and no one i ever bought them for has ever bothered to read them.
    It’s been a long time ago but i remember reading some of his letters that i think his daughters released.
    He seemed like a really sad guy.happy with his wife happy with his kids and work but not a happy guy.
    It really is strange to me that his book the biosphere isn’t in the canon of enviro lit.
    I always wondered what his bit was during the big one?
    Wow those joos are some serious bastards huh? When they disappear ya your gone gone.
    Why didn’t they just do that to Jesus? Christians must be useful to them or something.
    Dirty birds huh. Wow just like that. Poof. He’s gone. I just nave to the tribe i suppose.
    Aren’t they just human? I mean they aren’t like gods are they?
    You’re welcome for the reply I’m glad to know why i know so little about a guy i totally revere. I swear I’m placing a Toynbee tile somewhere on the appy trail. Prolly on the road to Damascus(TN side of course) because i always got a big kick trekking “on the road to Damascus”.
    I think Toynbee would approve. Maybe some hiker will see it and wonder who that is and…then start hating joos huh. One can only hope.
    I’ll be damn. Fucking joos everytime. Every damn time. Damn.
    Are they fucking gods?

  39. @Raches

    You evidently did not even read the poem.

    No I sure did not.

    I come to Unz for viewpoints that are kept out of the mainstream.

    I do not come here for the poetic musings of a British Freemason (globalist) who if alive today and could see clown world would undoubtedly say boy I was sure wrong about everything.

    The same British Freemason that used his connections to get his son sent off to the front even though he failed the eye exam. He didn’t last two weeks.

    So no I don’t really care about meanderings of a British globalist who sacrificed his own to son to his delusions.

    “Liberalism and Christianity” are not two religions: They are warring sects of the same faith, which are only nowadays perceived as differently as Protestantism and Catholicism were perceived in the Seventeenth Century. I explained this to you before

    That is merely your opinion and not some list of facts for you to explain.

    My opinion is that they are competing religions with one very big difference which is the place of White people.

    Within Christianity you can be of any race and have an equal level of moral potential.
    This is not the case within liberalism.

    To the liberal the White man is the cause of all the world’s problems. White men are assumed to be racist and immoral unless proven otherwise. Even if they work hard to be perceived a “good White” they still are expected to be submissive and second place to women and minorities. When I ran into liberal circles I still had liberals trying to undermine me for being too unequal. You can draw liberal ire for simply presenting too many ideas or showing original thought. Being too rational will also quickly lead to group exclusion.

    Now compare that to Christianity where I can go to any local church and get a pat on the back for showing up. If I contribute more than others that doesn’t make me too unequal but in fact a good member of the community.

    Liberalism is inherently anti-White. Christianity is not.

    There are unfortunately Christian churches that have adopted liberalism to some degree but those churches can be avoided. But more importantly no one is forced to go to church. Liberalism is part of the culture. For certain sectors of the economy you have to pretend to hold basic liberal beliefs. I’ve worked jobs where I had to bite my tongue and try and stay in the background less I am judged as too unequal. My friends have all had the same experience.

    I’ll discuss political aims and strategy in another post.

    • Replies: @Raches
  40. Raches says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    Within Christianity you can be of any race and have an equal level of moral potential.

    That says it all—and it is the origin of liberalism.

    You evidently did not even read the poem.

    No I sure did not.

    […]

    I’ll discuss political aims and strategy in another post.

    The purpose of a comments section is to comment on the article.  Even on the occasions when I have attacked Andrew Anglin in comments on his articles, I made sure to read the article, and to make some substantial and intelligent about it (neatly integrated with what I had already wanted to say).  When I went too far off-topic, I got heavily more-tagged by the moderator—the first time that had ever happened to me here; and n.b. that insofar as I am aware, Mr. Anglin does not moderate comments on his own articles.

    I think that’s a good way to handle off-topic comments by people who not only fail to read the article, but brag that they don’t. ®

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  41. @Raches

    Within Christianity you can be of any race and have an equal level of moral potential.

    That says it all—and it is the origin of liberalism.

    Equal moral potential pre-dates Christianity. The Greeks had their own concept and that was hundreds of years before Christ. Equality is not some unique idea created by Christians.

    When I went too far off-topic, I got heavily more-tagged by the moderator—the first time that had ever happened to me here; and n.b. that insofar as I am aware, Mr. Anglin does not moderate comments on his own articles.

    I think that’s a good way to handle off-topic comments by people who not only fail to read the article, but brag that they don’t

    Anglin would never bore us with a Kipling poem.

    [MORE]

    Anyways I went and read it and it provided zero insight into the female half of the species. It was also non-sensical in that it depicts all females as having the same nature which is false. Yes you are more likely to be physically attacked by the female for some species such as black bears but not true for other species like boar. In any case it really doesn’t tell us anything about human women. We really shouldn’t conduct analysis of women or other mammals through 20th century poetry.

    This section is historically inaccurate:

    When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
    They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws.
    ’Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
    For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

    Iroquois torture involved both genders but there is nothing to indicate that the women were worse than the men. My guess is that he read a single case of Jesuit survivor that described a cruel female.

    What would happen is that a tribe would capture enemy combatants and would encourage the entire village including women and children to torture them. But in battle it was always men that did the warring.

    Torture throughout history has been overwhelmingly performed by men. I see no reason to believe that women are worse in this regard.

    But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
    Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same;
    And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
    The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.

    So you mock Christianity and yet provide us with a poem that cites the Eden creation as a reason for women being deadlier. Got it.

    Overall I thought it was a lousy poem and not at all convincing or amusing. I thought White Man’s Burden was leagues better as genius satire.

  42. [Edited to elide the type of trash-talking gutter-language that is inappropriate to use here, and that I generally seek to discourage.  I won’t even bother trying with the earlier comment that you left in my queue.  And yes, comments are generally moderated here—not only yours, snowflake. —Raches. ®]

    Almost as much fun as commenting on Steve Sailer’s boomerific posts. I love having my thoughts “moderated”.

    Good times!

    As a Boomer, you will escape the consequences of your generation’s stupidity. Just like your retarded parents who hated the Nazi because the Jew told them to hate.

    You are all COWARDS. Your entire generation. And your parents. COWARDLY BITCHES.

    Enjoy the fruits of your c—sucking cowardice.

    At least one Gen-X “odd” plagued renegade sees you.

    • LOL: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  43. @Stan d Mute

    I’m not going to “out” you Chris.

    But I am laughing.

    • Replies: @Raches
  44. Raches says: • Website
    @Stan d Mute

    Just out of curiosity, who is “Chris”?

    I do not deny being “Chris”.  Per my well-known policy, I neither admit nor deny such allegations.  But I am sincerely curious.  It’s just so hard to keep track of this stuff; for I have billions of sockpuppets, including the Rothschilds and the whole Mossad—and even a famous psychiatrist of refined tastes.  I forget which one is named “Chris”.  Perhaps I may have misplaced this one, or the clothes dryer did as it so oft, so lamentably does to socks.  Please assist.  I need your help finding “Chris” (Christopher? Christina?), so that I can file him or her alphabetically somewhere near “Camille”. ®

  45. Schuetze says:

    Kipling was a Freemason, like Rhodes, Milner, Balfour, Rothschild and all the other “Round Table” members. The trail of out current transhumanistic plandemic leads straight back to these genocidal maniacs.

    [MORE]

    One aspect of the female characteristic that Kipling misses, deliberately or not, is “fickleness”. Kipling writes “She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties“. No, she is not. She is a fickle being, and her convictions are transitory, and easily manipulated. This fickleness, combined with fear, is what is being used to subjugate the entire planet. This fickleness is what facilitates the cognitive dissonance of “my body my right” simultaneous to vaccination mandates.

    Raches writes “the Jews did not invent feminism“. This is self evident. The question is who “invented” modern feminism, or more correctly the first wave feminism of the “womens emancipation” movement. I would say that this was the work of the Freemasons, likely the very same Scottish Rite lodges that Kipling belonged to. That later on, when the second wave feminism of the Boomers was under the complete control of the jews running the Frankfurt school, and their cultural marxists stooges, does not really detract from the assertion that it was Feminism, under the influence of the Rothschilds illuminati controlled masonic lodges, that caused the rise of Feminist dialectic and the destruction of western civilization.

    • Troll: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
  46. Raches says: • Website
    @Schuetze

    Kipling was a Freemason, like Rhodes, Milner, Balfour, Rothschild and all the other “Round Table” members.  The trail of out current transhumanistic plandemic leads straight back to these genocidal maniacs.

    Stop doing to literary critique what you do to war history and art interpretation.

    [“Schuetze” comment, September 13, 2021 at 12:03 pm GMT]

    Lee deliberately kept the south fighting in order to bleed it dry and cause maximum fatalities.  His masonic brothers did exactly the same thing in WWI and WWII.

    [“Schuetze” comment, September 13, 2021 at 6:44 pm GMT]

    Just look at this famous painting of Appomatix and check out that masonic hand shake.  The entire painting is chock full of Masonic symbolism that the profane cannot and will not recognize.

    It is perfectly clear that Americans cannot deal with reality and haven’t done so for over a century.

    I note this as someone who thinks that Mr. Unz underestimates the impact of secret societies:  Maybe he has been deterred from researching this by lunatics who take a long-after-the-fact Ferris painting¹ of a scene with a simple handshake as PROOF that Robert E. Lee deliberately got his soldiers killed as part of a Masonic conspiracy, and who enter discussion of a Kipling poem by connecting Kipling to the “plandemic”.

    I will take your opinions “under advisement”.  To be clear, that is a slightly more polite version of the rejection that girls gave you when you were a teenager:  “Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites, / Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw / And the victim writhes in anguish…”  Evo. Psych. 101:  Women know best how to reject!  If you want, I can be less polite. ®

    ——————————
    1. Which you did not bother to attribute; you linked to an image floating around on Pinterest, which I copied for the above quote.  I hereby attribute it to Jean Leon Gerome Ferris (America, 1863–1930), not to be confused with the artist after whom his artist father named him, who became one of his influences, Jean-Léon Gérôme (France, 1824–1904).  Note the dates.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  47. Schuetze says:
    @Raches

    Clearly if my comment concerning Lee was so offensive to you the proper place to have dealt with it was on that thread, not here in this thread about “the female of the species”. You also completely failed to address my comment above that was very on-thread.

    I have received your message loud and clear. I will not waste any effort commenting on your threads in the future. Tschüss.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Raches Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV