The Anglo-American Manosphere: The First Trans-Generational Conversation Between Men Since Prehistory

Studying the contemporary Manosphere, one cannot help noticing that a lot of young men's ideas about women are mature beyond all expectations. When I was young, adult men never spoke to younger men in a serious way. Older men had nothing meaningful to say, it seemed. The mainstream media filled that communication vacuum with its 'Yeah, Yeah, Yeah'  fairy tales about women being perfect angels offering free sex to everybody: little wonder our formative years were so bruising and difficult, continually struggling with these deluded fantasies.

The cucked horseshit we were raised with

Yes, we went round thinking that our young adult lives would be a dizzy reel of ecstatic trysts and love affairs with giving, nubile goddesses: in short, a living James Bond movie. There were a few 'men's rights' publications like Male View in the UK (for which I wrote a few things), though these were hopelessly calling for Tradcuck counter-revolution and the restoration of pre-Boomer gender-relations. In sum, there simply was no elaborate Red Pill toolkit to discuss gender-relations back in the 70's, 80's or 90's; no conceptual shorthand, if you will. Concepts like The Wall, SMV, the Sexual Marketplace, AWALT, Gynocentrism, the various Pills, MGTOW and the rest had simply not been framed. Even I - yes, I - believed that all women were more or less the same in different countries and cultures; that Anglo-American civilisation was not tainted by residual puritanism; and that everyone over 16 was bouncing around in bed with models and film stars. When life did not match these lofty expectations, we thought it was just 'us'; that everyone else was having a great time, an elaborate fiction sustained by the still-potent mainstream media.

Awakened younger men might laugh: but that is simply what mainstream society told us. And at the time, the mainstream media was our only source of information beyond personal experience. Other than celebrities with wildly unrepresentative lifestyles (extensions of the mainstream media, in other words), older men did not really contribute their experience to our lives. They seemed to be from a different and largely irrelevant world of organised religion and unrewarding hyper-conformity; and consequently shunned and ignored. Fathers could not talk meaningfully to their sons about any serious issue; at best, they offered lame-ass advice that meant something when gender-relations (and society in general) were completely different.

When it happened, the all-conquering Internet immediately obliterated this dysfunctional model. For the first time in centuries - in fact, the first time since prehistory or remote antiquity - older men could communicate directly with younger men, sharing their experience in a clear and unobstructed way. With some caveats, the current state of the Manosphere is a direct reflection - indeed, expression - of this 'communication revolution' across generations. In the Manosphere, the physical boundaries that divide different generations of men no longer exist. Like ancient Macedonia, where anyone could speak man to man with his chief and any chief with his king, the Internet is a true democracy. Doubtless the anonymity of the internet helps in this regard. When young men can't see a doddering old sucker, they can listen to his words without prejudice; when older men can't see some shabby NEET, they are far more likely to talk honestly with him.

And the Manosphere is the direct product of this unprecedented engagement. Out there on YouTube, there are a whole bunch of excellent commentators - VVS, Undead Chronic, The MGTOW Monk or Sandman - and all are young men. For though they face the most misandrist culture in history, no mainstream media exists to gull them into cuckdom: in particular, no coherent youth culture exists. And this curious collision of circumstances has produced men who are infinitely more enlightened than I ever was at their age; and I am now an acknowledged leader of Manosphere thought. In youth, I did not even consider concepts like the Wall, hypergamy, SMV, the Sexual marketplace, misandry, hybristophilia, looks-maxxing, gym-maxxing, sex-negative feminism or all the other issues awakened men now take for granted. Yet these young commentators are mostly 18 to 25 (or younger) and they are fully conversant with all these ideas! Yes, they build their arguments on concepts created and developed by dissident anti-feminists from older generations and modulate them to meet their own needs; but the fact is, these young fellows more or less KNOW what is going on. And they know because they grew up with an exciting, empowering online conversation about the reality of gender relations in the Anglosphere buzzing in their ears; a conversation provided by us. We, by contrast, grew up hearing rock stars, parents and academics telling us that all women are flawless, wonderful angels handing out free sex to everyone. And we only learned Red Pill truth the hard way: through long, hard, bitter experience.

Power to these young fellows; they are surely cutting a lot of crap out of their lives by seeing women for what they really are. Indeed, many older TFLers/MRAs/MGTOWs surely envy their youthful knowledge and insight. Sometimes, though, I worry that these young men have been robbed of their youthful idealism by the Manosphere; they talk and think like divorced guys in their forties and fifties, not youths in their teens and early twenties; and that is hardly natural. But then I watch a MGTOW video about evil Anglobitch feminists like the one below, and know my time building the Manosphere was time well spent:

Mouse on a Pedestal: Jordan Peterson, Anglocuck Supreme

Jordan Peterson: Anglocuck Supreme

Jordan Peterson - a man who teaches the quasi-science of psychology at declasse Canadian universities - is all the rage among tradcon males across the Anglosphere. His books, televised debates and utterances are extolled as 'revolutionary conservatism', a much needed antidote to the slack minded Social Justice Warriors who presently dominate Anglo academic life.

However, like all Anglo cuckservatives, Peterson is just telling men to return to the plantation. He is just Tommy Fleming lite, a pitiful Anglocuck who thinks men should accept traditional duties while women do as they please; a clown living in the 1950s, telling men to 'man up' and join the ranks of castrated cuckdom in the Anglo-American Matrix. The central problem with his position is that the Anglosphere has moved beyond his tradcon values, never to return. Peterson is still hung up on marriage, 'honour' and fidelity in a world where such things are scorned or ridiculed by women and society at large. Indeed, being an 'honourable man' is now a one-way trip to financial rape in the frivorce courts of the Anglosphere. Here is one of my correspondents, Lawrence, on the reality of the situation in contemporary America:

At one point in my corrections officer job, the incarceration of men for child support and alimony arrears got so bad that a group of us prison guards came to the warden, complaining that we were being unethically ordered to guard men who really weren’t a threat and who should have never been sent to jail. Once imprisoned, they usually lost their professional licenses, their driver’s licenses, became unemployable so they just wound up back there again. The warden just shook his head, he knew how corrupt the system is, how the US family courts, media, politicians, universities, feminists and the prison execs all work hand in glove to profit off the US slave economy fueled by all the husbands and fathers tossed into prison. How it creates sick incentives that encourage divorce and profiteering. (This is another reason the US divorce rate is by far the highest all over the world, so much money is made from it). But the warden knew he was powerless to reform it. Just like we were as guards. The vultures of the Anglosphere want their prison slaves, and husbands and fathers are an easy target.

Like I said, every man in the Anglosphere is a target of this machine, but wealthy American and Canadian men are the hardest hit, because the US legal system gives family court judges wide latitude, which really can’t be appealed, to place arbitrarily high demands on the incomes of men who have been wealthy at any point. This is why Robin Williams committed suicide. At one point he was a very wealthy Hollywood A-lister. But after his two divorces, he was no longer pulling in that kind of money. The family courts didn’t care. They said he once made big money, and in the fantasy unicorn filled land of US family courts, that meant he could just click his feet together and make the same money again. So they made Robin pay out the nose for alimony. By this time he was sick with Parkinson’s Disease he couldn’t make anywhere close to that amount of money, and his lawyer was warning him that prison time was likely coming. So he committed suicide. Here’s another famous case, a guy in New York with same sort of situation, once made a lot of money on Wall Street and became upper class, told to pay alimony every year after that at insane high levels, lost his job in recession== then off to prison when it became impossible.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-08-26/jail-becomes-home-for-husband-stuck-with-lifetime-alimony Brendan Fraser has been hit with a similar judgement, tens of millions of dollars in alimony.

Wealthy men across the US, Canada, UK and the Anglosphere generally are hit hard like this. And yes, a lot of them wind up in prison. The incarceration rate in Canada and the UK isn’t quite as bad, but this happens there too because the misandrist structure of the laws and family courts is as bad as in the USA, and the legal systems share the same insane practice of imprisonment after court-ordered impoverishing of a man. I found this out ironically after I expatriated and was working as a Web and database planner, when my previous experience led prison systems in many countries to contract me to help with their intake software and legal briefing documents. This imprisonment of men for marriage or kids (or in these #metoo days, just for “harassment” that in reality is “any interaction with women”) really is an Anglo phenomenon uniquely. Whatever stupid idiosyncrasies the rest of the West has with feminism, they don’t throw men in prison for this.

The very worst case I saw as a prison guard was a surgeon, yes an American surgeon who was one of the most respectable guys I ever met, hard working, worked until 2 a.m. 6 days a week to save people’s lives. With all the work hours, his wife got “lonely” and started sleeping around, eventually having 2 kids that weren’t even his as he found out later. And then she filed for divorce so she could take the surgeon’s money, blow it on cocaine and stupid luxuries for herself without doing any work herself (that’s the real destination where the “child support” money goes) and sleep around with her favorite Chad of the week, all on her hard working surgeon ex-husband’s money. She won an insanely high judgment in a US family court, millions of dollars in child support and “alimony” that the poor surgeon would have to pay. Since by the court’s judgment, “she should be entitled to maintain the same standard of living after the divorce”, even though this greedy gold-digging Anglobitch is the one who filed for the divorce to steal from her hard-working husband who was actually saving people’s lives. 

After a few years of doing this, and losing his house and his nice car, the poor surgeon threw out his back while helping a patient onto an operating table. He had to cut down his hours as a surgeon, and went to the divorce court asking for a reduction in the support demands, and ask that his lazy, spoiled brat bitch ex-wife get a damn job herself. But the court refused using the same delusion filled imputation bullshit they pull on other ex-husbands, claiming he could somehow make millions of extra dollars using his surgical wizard skills somehow. Which he couldn’t do in reality with his injured back, something the family court judge couldn’t or wouldn’t even try to understand. So then now the alimony and child support were demanding 120% of his income. You see, the family court system will never let you off the treadmill once they target you, especially if you earn a lot of money. Eventually he drained his savings and retirement, couldn’t make the payments at all—and he wound up in the prison where I was a corrections officer. 

The corrupt American family court-media-feminist-academia cultural Marxist-big business-prison industrial complex had worked perfectly to ruin this poor man, and what a prize they had. A dedicated, hard working US surgeon, saving lives every day, drained of his money and reduced to poverty by a gold-digging, spoiled greedy bimbo who divorced him due to his very dedication, had kids with other men to force him to pay bullshit “child support” in addition to never-stopping alimony, his assets taken by his gold-digging ex wife and the state to grease their own corruption, the “child support” in actuality supporting the ex wife’s corrupt, hedonistic lifestyle after divorce. And then the poor surgeon himself made a literal slave in a US prison, stripped of his license and made a perpetual debtor, worked to the bone but never allowed to profit from his own efforts or hard work. That really is how it works in the US family court and prison system. That poor surgeon was the worst case we ever saw, made us so mad we were talking about how we were going to “free the Bastille” and start a revolution ourselves to stop all the corruption, Robespierre style. And free all the innocent men, and even some women, who were imprisoned this way, to feed more slaves to the machine.

Because if you’re an American man, particularly a rich, well to do, middle class or upper class man with skills, saved money, assets, wealth and a good job, that’s what you really are. Fresh meat for the Anglosphere family court meat grinder machine. Like Legal Eagle said, you are literally a slave with marriage or child-bearing in the US or the greater Anglosphere, from that day on, the state and officials have full purview over all your assets and unlimited ability to seize them. Legal Eagle saw this from the legal debate and court side, I saw the horrible result from the prison side, where men were sent after all their assets had been stolen by the family courts and their only further “value” was as slaves to the prison-industrial complex. This shit’s real, guys.

And now, in the ugly aftermath of #metto, #timesupand #nameandshamehim, you don’t even have to get married or have a kid in the Anglosphere to become a slave. Any interaction with a women, even something as casual as a glance or an innocent conversation, opens you up to charges of harassment and sexual misconduct. And given that as much as half of young white women in America find even innocent male female interactions to be harassment, you’re in great danger at any moment. Many harassment and misconduct changes now are being assembled by our corrupt legal-prison-industrial complex system to become prosecutable offenses. But even short of that, the witch-burning in social media means that any vague accusation, whether recent or months or years ago, will make you unemployable and a social pariah. You’ll lose your health insurance and ability to earn a living, and then the state will have all kinds of additional ways to brand you a criminal and toss you in jail.

https://kshatriya-anglobitch.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-wardens-tale-why-expatriation-from.html
https://kshatriya-anglobitch.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-wardens-tale-why-expatriation-from_31.html

Peterson tells men 'to be men' - in other words, try to live up to traditional male responsibilities - in a world which despises them, getting nothing but penury and imprisonment in return. Meanwhile, single mothers with four thug-babies live happily on taxpayer handouts across the Anglosphere while Peterson's 'responsible' men foot the bill.

The point is, Anglo conservatives like Peterson have not truly grasped the reality of contemporary gender relations. At heart, they believe we are still living in the pre-feminist era where men are coming home to smiling housewives and discussing the Bible around the kitchen table before a roaring log fire. In truth, the fact that western women are no longer economically dependent on men has entirely obviated those assumptions. With the rise of sperm banks and other post-male reproductive technologies, women don't even need a man to have children. Besides, the Calvinist misandry of the Anglosphere remains unchallenged even while female rights and opportunities advance apace in every sphere - education, the media, reproductive technology and jurisprudence.

This is partly generational; but mainly because Peterson, Tommy Fleming and other 'conservative' Anglocucks are academic fantasists with scant knowledge of contemporary social reality. Boomer academics like him need to leave their post-War ivory towers and do some volunteer work in a hospital or prison to gain some understanding of how the world actually works. Academic Anglocucks like Peterson or Fleming are dangerous because gullible young males listen to their inane opinions, or even base important life-decisions on them. In the 1950s, that was no great problem; in the 21st century, with its #metoo hysteria and no fault divorce-epidemic, such 'advice' should be cursorily dismissed as the rantings of madmen.

Generations, Technology and the Sexual Imbalance: Is there a Biological Foundation to Anglobitch Entitlement?

Does Anglo-American Gyneocentrism have ethnic roots?

One explanation for the gender issues that have beset the west is that Caucasians (especially Anglos) have an innate disposition to 'pedestalize' women and grant them far too much freedom. This argument has floated around the manosphere for some years, especially those regions with a high proportion of non-white commentators. My own obvious answer is that these suicidal tendencies are fostered more by Anglo-American culture than genetics (though culture might be another expression of ethnic biology, of course). But aside from the usual cultural factors such as secular puritanism, residual misandry and malleable Common Law, are there any demographic/biological factors specific to Caucasians which might play some role in them promoting and accepting Anglobitch perfidy?

One thing that is notable about white women in general, and Anglo-American women in particular, is that they age very badly. This is partly to do with widespread obesity and a self-destructive 'sun and sex' lifestyle; but that is not the whole answer. Whatever charms Anglo women display last only from puberty to 26, while females of other races mature better and more evenly across the lifespan. East Asian women can be hot up to 40 or beyond but this is very rare among whites, especially Anglo whites, who typically look haggard by 30. Such an intense imbalance leads to a 'beauty shortage' in Anglo societies, with female beauty being incredibly rare. This imbalance inevitably leads to insane female entitlement during those prime years and contributes to the rampant woman worship which defines the Anglosphere relative to other cultures. The Dark Triad of female personality disorders - histrionic, narcissistic and borderline - runs rampant for exactly the same reason.

Since a young female with a normal body mass index is 'beautiful' in the arid Anglo-American context, she is essentially free to act as a goddess during her prime decade; baby murder, thug chasing, no-fault Divorce, misandrist feminism and the rest are simply warped expressions of this deranged power. And all their efforts to stop Anglo-American men contacting foreign women - VAWA and invented trafficking hysteria - are designed to preserve it.

But why has this female tendency worsened so much in recent years? And why has it been allowed to? Is there a biological dynamic underpinning this? Changing demography probably plays a significant role. Because people live longer in modern times, five generations now coexist in the same moment. Since older females are unattractive to most males, there is a huge surfeit of thirsty men from all five generations lusting over one generation of women (women under 26, if that). This is why some young Anglo-American girls can make seven figure salaries displaying their body parts online. More, the whole technological thrust of modern society allows these women to exploit their sexual power over all sexually disenfranchised men, whom they can contact in an instant. A traditional prostitute was limited by proximity to a relatively small circle of males; not so the modern Anglofoid, whose charms are only a screen-tap away.

Another demographic issue that Relampago Furioso has often touched upon is the issue of 'Power Distance' in Anglo-American societies. The Anglosphere is a potent bloc that still bestows considerable status on white Anglo-Saxons in a global context. Anglo media, culture and institutions are still the primary global export, in ideological terms. The obvious international power of say, Victorian Britain or post-War America must have wrought some heightening effect on female hypergamy in those nations; after all, the hypergamy bar is necessarily raised when a country has great wealth and power relative to the rest of the world. In this view, the Anglo female's hostility to almost all men is in fact an insane extension of her natural hypergamous instincts: almost no male or his offspring is good enough for a female raised on and surrounded by imperial pageantry. Britain and America also have much lower social mobility rates than other industrial societies, together with much wider wealth and power divisions. This too must exert a strong impact on female hypergamy, with a much larger proportion of males being dismissed as potential mates by virtually all women than in more egalitarian countries. So again, there might be a biological foundation to the Anglobitch phenomenon, albeit arising from the Anglo West's distinct socio-economic values.

One thing that seems apparent to me is that Caucasians are generally more individualised than other ethnic groups. In East Asian countries, the nail that sticks up is hammered down; in the West, it is coated in gold. This unchecked individualism is of course strongest in the Anglo-Saxon West, where almost everyone sees themselves as a 'brand' and billionaire celebrity in waiting while normal aspirations are scorned for cloudy visions of ideal love and self-aggrandisement. Obviously, Anglobitch selfishness exemplifies this agenda as does poor mothering, lifestyle abortions, no fault divorce and offhand hatred of men. The obvious sense that Anglo women are more 'fucked up' than other women - even non Anglo white women - seems to partly derive from this innate and unregulated individualism.

The Selfish, Fucked-up Anglofoid: A Unique Creature?

Lastly, are Caucasian  - and especially Anglo men - innately more disposed to be cucks and suckers than men of other races? Perhaps the West's 'beauty shortage' and the relatively brief flowering of Caucasian women has wrought some deep psychological effect on them, now embedded in their culture or biology at a primordial - even unshakeable - level. Ultimately, Caucasian men have allowed their females to wreck society with complete impunity and it would be churlish to blame women exclusively for this; since men are stronger and smarter than women, they are ultimately responsible. Despite the truth of my message, only a tiny handful of the most enlightened Caucasian men pay heed to it: the vast majority remain blue-pilled cucks and White Knights listening to saccharine Beatles records. What will it take to rouse them? Are they even capable of being roused?

Why won't Caucasian males fight the evil that threatens them?

This is a free-wheeling thought piece designed to explore a few floating concepts. Whether the distinctive non-cultural factors listed here have permanently altered Anglo women at a behavioural level, or merely artificially inflate universal female tendencies, is difficult to say. What is very clear is that they contribute at least something to the misandrist, evil tendencies so prevalent among Anglo-American females.

Why do only ethnics resist Anglo Misandry?

Same Shit, Different Shovel: Shemale Spokespeople and the New Gender Caste System

In the contemporary Anglosphere, a cultural bloc in its death throes, the underlying caste system has become painfully apparent over the past four or five years. In a puritanical society with a reflexive revulsion of the male sex, women are at the top and heterosexual men at the bottom. In between are various types of pseudo-female, who are now the official spokespeople for masculinity:

The Pan-Anglosphere Caste System

Rulers: White, Anglo-American Women

Sub-Rulers: Non-Anglo Women

Administrators and Apologists: Gay and Transsexual 'Men'

Slaves: Cucks / White Knights

Outcasts: Heterosexual Men

There it is, in five lines: a neat summation of the contemporary Anglosphere. The whole culture exists to serve white, Anglo-American women who are viewed as faultless deities and the existential benchmark to which all all others must aspire. In the Anglosphere, only female sexuality matters: straight males are tacitly viewed as destructive interlopers and their sexuality vilified. Female wants and requirements transcend all other considerations; in sum, society exists to serve them.

This gyneocentric agenda is absolutely dominant in the lamestream Anglo-American media, where straight men are routinely depicted as criminals, abusers or dangerous incels. Outside of professional sports, the heterosexual male viewpoint has been largely banished from the media. Gone are the days of Walter Kronkite: newsreaders, talk-show hosts and even weather reporters are now typically female, usually heavily sexualized and indoctrinated by sex-negative misandrist feminism.

So total is this gyneocentric fixation that the new spokespeople for 'men' are either castrated, whining Anglocucks or the new breed of transsexual 'hyper-cucks'. Authentic heterosexual men are ostracised from public discourse in the Anglo-American world: of course, this is why the manosphere has expanded to fill the gap. This was never more obvious than in the wake of the Alek Minassian massacre, where 'lamestream' media discussion was dominated by absurd cucks such as Mack Limoureux and David Futrelle, deluded Boomer women and lesbian deviants (like the fabled 'Alana' who supposedly founded the incel movement in 1993). The few 'males' consulted were transsexuals who 'ascended' to surrogate female status in the Anglosphere's gender-caste system.

Fortunately, the gulf between the rulers (Anglo women) and the sub-rulers (non-Anglo women) is widening into a hostile schism:

Clouded by Accusations of Anti-Semitism, the Third Women's March loses Ground 

Women across the U.S. are preparing to head to Washington, D.C., for the third annual Women’s March on Saturday, braving forecasts of bad weather and a location change due to the government shutdown. But these are the least of the problems bedeviling the march, as sponsors including the Democratic National Committee, the NAACP and the Human Rights Campaign are withdrawing their support. Ugly accusations of anti-Semitism appeared first in the online publication Tablet and then in the New York Times, and they have only been exacerbated by the refusal of Women’s March co-president Tamika Mallory to distance herself from the anti-Semitic statements of the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan. On the television show The View on Monday, Mallory pointedly declined to renounce Farrakhan, although in a subsequent appearance on the podcast “The Breakfast Club,” she spoke out against anti-Semitism. Calls for Mallory to step down are being heard, and a Change.org petition demanding that she do exactly that has nearly 4,000 signatures. 

Forbes, 17-01-2019

An expatriate American poster called Lawrence first described the post-colonial influence on Anglo feminism in his brilliant and oft-quoted 2018 essay:

Still, I think there’s something else at work in the Anglosphere which has to do with Anglosphere history. Most countries in the Anglosphere were settled by invading British colonists who pushed out the natives and took slaves. That’s the history of North America in essence. But this all changed in a nasty and bloody way for the Anglosphere that was very different from Latin America, where there wasn’t the history of open and hateful group conflict like there was in America’s civil war in later history. It just seems like the lines are more blurred in Latin American countries. So North America, in particular, has had this nasty history of rival ethnic and racial groups, displacing the natives and fighting bloody wars against each other, and never came to an understanding about it. And then cultural Marxism came, whipping up and playing on these conflicts as a wedge against the West, and it found its most fertile ground in the Anglosphere. The malicious Anglo feminists of US divorce courts and #metoo seem to borrow a lot of that group warfare language, and maybe that combined with the Puritanism has made the Anglo strain very ugly and hostile.

True enough, but while the colonial heritage might fuel misandrist white Anglo feminism, it is also a dangerous weapon for white feminists to utilise. Since deep ethno-cultural divisions undercut all levels of Anglo society, not even the dominant female caste can escape its destabilising influence.