data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cecf0/cecf0ce02401ee9b6f380c459ffbeee2f0281d61" alt=""
I apologize for not writing more regularly, but the time has been well-spent on thinking and thus not wasted. I want to move beyond the raw ideas of the Anglobitch Thesis (which are now quite well-known and accepted) to a new position where we can create a new standard of discourse. It is like climbing a ladder to a new level, then throwing the ladder away. Now, let's see if I can make up for lost time...
It is common currency in Male Studies that women in general suffer from a crushing lack of self-awareness. This is why women delude themselves into thinking that their sexual allure is irrelevant to their status. They truly believe that they appear in films or acquire unmerited promotions because of innate ability or talent. Let's be frank, if Angelina Jolie or Cheryl Cole were tubby 55 year olds would they be in films or on TV? The question answers itself.
Of course, this complex pattern of female self-delusion works at many levels. Secretly knowing that their sole bargaining chip in the game of life is sexual allure, women develope multiple layers of self-delusion to disguise its loss or absence. Indeed, feminism itself is merely another manifestation of this, in that it pretends female 'achievement' rests on other factors than sexual power over men (intellect, creativity and so forth). However, a cursory glance at the female faces in the media shows only young, pretty ones, completely refuting all such claims. Significantly, once women reach 28 their sexual status falls rapidly and new survival themes emerge - 'I'm everybody's friend!' 'I'm the Earth Mother!' 'I'm a feminist!' 'I'm making jewelry from coke cans!'
Of course, all these desperate personas are lies and self-delusions. This may be adduced from the fact that young, attractive women NEVER scrabble for such personas, since their sex-appeal to powerful males obviates the need for subterfuge. The deeper question asks itself: WHY are women so self-deluded? The answer lies most probably in brain structure. Let's take a look at the brain, especially a portion of it called the amygdala:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a23bd/a23bd62270befa2b81458d266d5eaff292f3df7e" alt=""
In the female brain, the amygdala - a small part of the limbic system associated with instinctive responses to events - is relatively smaller in relation to the cortex. In the pan-Anglosphere matriarchies, this is seen as beneficial, since the puritanical, denatured Anglo-Saxon nations fear ‘instinct’ – just as they fear virility, erotic prowess and maleness itself. The well-recognised fact that the average male IQ is marginally higher than the female instantly refutes any assumption that a large amydgala impairs intellectual function, however.
In truth, the miniscule female amygdala has various pernicious effects - blunting sexual response, stunting individuality and rendering women more pliant to social manipulation. In sum, it makes women less self-aware than men – and infinitely more prone to self-delusion.
In his classic text The Great Sex Divide, Professor Glenn Wilson cites compelling evidence that females try harder in tests when being observed, while observation makes no difference to male performance. In short, the healthy male is a free, autonomous agent, while the female is forever bound within social expectation. And we see this difference reflected everywhere – all trail-blazers and innovators in every sphere are men – partly because males dominate the outer reaches of any bell curve distribution, but mainly because the huge male amygdala liberates men from conforming to petty convention (this is also what American PUAs call 'alpha' behaviour. If anyone ever asks you, a large amygdala = Alpha).
The female's 'dwarf amygdala' also explains why women are typically small-minded and inexorably drawn to authoritarian figures and institutions, including Anglo-American feminism (it is notable that unmanly men show similar conformist tendencies). There are no female Picassos, Isaac Newtons or Bobby Fischers because the puny female amygdala keeps women chained to mundane convention.
Because women lack autonomous inward-direction, they are prone to take received opinion as immutable fact – in short, they lack true self-awareness. This is most perfectly expressed amongst teenage girls – mere programmed jackasses mindlessly repeating whatever inane fad the electronic media feeds them. Even when females reach nominal ‘adulthood’, their attention shifts to the narcissistic, delusional trash pumped out by the NAMWO media – Cosmo, Soap Operas, celebrity magazines, Sex and the City, and a host of similar materials. These items successfully present fairy tales as reality because women – lacking inward-direction and alienated from instinct – simply cannot ‘measure’ reality. The well-attested medical fact that most women who claim to ejaculate are in fact merely incontinent underlines this tragic tendency - women cannot even test the truth of their own bodies, let alone complex media artifacts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/80e51/80e51a155e9f9e285f2f453110ea6238ece67184" alt=""
Female self-delusion finds particularly amusing expression whenever women see pictures of ageing female 'singers' and 'actresses'. They invariably say things like,
'She's just as beautiful now as she was when she was 18!'
'She's just as sexy as ever!'
Of course, the female concerned is invariably a hideous old hag, living off distant public memories of her youth and beauty. Brigitte Bardot is a perfect example. Were it not for her peerless prime, she would simply never appear in the media - indeed, someone that repulsive would probably be banned from public life, period. However, recent photos of her haggard older self always elicit an 'oh, she's still so beautiful!' chorus from sundry females, in preposterous denial of the hard physical facts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f4708/f4708d923e0a33dba5fd6f28fcfdd1b1ddbf80e5" alt=""