The following case encapsulates perfectly the current state of gender-relations in the Anglosphere. A narcissistic, grasping British woman opted for death rather than live beyond the age of fifty as ‘poor’, ‘ugly’ and ‘old’. Stating things in the simplest terms, her pussy pass had expired and she could not endure existence without it:
Woman’s Right to Die Upheld
A 50-year-old woman who fears that the passing of her youth and beauty means the end of everything that “sparkles” in life has been granted permission to die by the court of protection. In a highly unusual judgment published this week, King’s College Hospital NHS Trust has been told that the unnamed woman has the capacity to make up her own mind and is entitled to refuse the life-saving kidney dialysis treatment she requires.
The decision includes a detailed account of the lifestyle of C, as the woman is known, describing her as “impulsive”, “self-centred”, heavy drinking and four times married. But the judge, Mr Justice MacDonald, explained that the principle was the same for any patient. “The right to refuse treatment extends to declining treatment that would, if administered, save the life of the patient,” he said in his court of protection decision.
MacDonald continued: “C is a person to whom the epithet ‘conventional’ will never be applied … C has led a life characterised by impulsive and self-centred decision-making without guilt or regret. [She] has had four marriages and a number of affairs and has, it is said, spent the money of her husbands and lovers recklessly before moving on when things got difficult or the money ran out.
“She has, by their account, been an entirely reluctant and at times completely indifferent mother to her three caring daughters. Her consumption of alcohol has been excessive and, at times, out of control … In particular, it is clear that during her life C has placed a significant premium on youth and beauty and on living a life that, in C’s words, ‘sparkles’.”
Having been diagnosed with breast cancer, she had taken an overdose with alcohol. She did not die but caused herself such extensive kidney damage that she required dialysis – which she now refused to undergo.
The judge added: “My decision that C has capacity to decide whether or not to accept dialysis does not, and should not prevent her treating doctors from continuing to seek to engage with C in an effort to persuade her of the benefits of receiving life-saving treatment in accordance with their duty to C as their patient.
MacDonald analysed evidence from psychiatrists and medics, and from one of the woman’s daughters. One daughter told him that her mother’s life had “to all appearances” been fairly glamorous. She said her mother did not want to be “poor”, “ugly” or “old”.
“She has said the most important thing for her is her sparkly lifestyle,” said the daughter. “She kept saying she doesn’t want to live without her sparkle and she thinks she has lost her sparkle.”
The UK Guardian 2015-12-30
The case is interesting on a number of counts. Firstly, despite the feminist rhetoric about ‘strong, independent women’ there are still plenty of females whose dependence on men is so absolute that they would rather die than relinquish their sexual leverage over the male sex. As always, post-feminist women are perfectly happy to defend traditional gender roles and lifestyles when they support their own innate tendencies to hypergamy and material exploitation.
Moreover, their sexual leverage remains considerable. We are endlessly told by tradcon MRAs, PUAs and MGTOWs that women hit ‘the wall’ in their early thirties and become instantly invisible to men thereafter. In this case, however, the woman retained sufficient sexual power to continue fleecing lovers and husbands well into her late thirties and forties. Only with fifty and late middle age on the horizon did she finally opt for suicide. Up to that time – and even after having three children – she was perfectly capable of attracting a string of seemingly affluent males to sustain her ‘sparkling’ lifestyle.
So much for the vaunted ‘wall’. In reality, attractive women are quite capable of exploiting their sexual power over men long after thirty. Beauty treatments mean they can retain their looks and superficial charm well into middle age. Several psycho-sexual factors exclusive to the Anglosphere augment this agenda. The Anglo-American nations contain a relatively high proportion of obese young women with poor personal hygiene, artificially boosting the SMV of attractive older women. In Scandinavia, South America or Eastern Europe attractive older women are effectively suppressed by the relatively high levels of sexual competition from slim, comely girls. Further, the fact that most young Anglo-American females have internalised feminist values further boosts the SMV of attractive older women who possess more appealing ‘feminine’ attitudes. Simply put, most young Anglo-Saxon females are now too misandrist, hostile and frigid to sustain long-term heterosexual relationships of any kind.
Above all else, the case justifies the smart, self-aware man’s fear of attractive Anglo-American women. These husbands and lovers supporting her ‘sparkling’ lifestyle were discarded as so much trash when their money ran out. The woman was also an appalling mother to her three children – hardly to be wondered at, given her psychopathic narcissism. In sum, the sensible man has nothing to lose and everything to gain by avoiding attractive women raised in the Anglosphere. The only thing of worth they have to offer – sex – can be handily acquired from prostitutes or foreign women. As for the chimera of ‘love’, it is entirely obvious that Anglo women love only themselves; and the man who cannot see this has signed his own death warrant.