Saturday 31 January 2009

Man-Choice in Child Gender Selection

It is well known that men are in charge of everything. However, a good many men are simply unaware of this. For example, most men are ignorant of how changes in their lifestyle or diet can significantly influence the likelihood of having a son or a daughter. Any knowledge that puts power in the hands of men and removes it from women is to be applauded. This especially extends to reproductive knowledge, where women retain undue influence; for this undue influence enhances their power.

Indeed, it is no surprise that the mass use of female contraception is intimately associated with the rise of feminism; and the Anglosphere's collapse into a misandrist matriarchy.

For a man to father a girl, he must bear the following in mind:

For a girl:

Girls tend to be born to older parents.
Girls tend to be born to parents with more children.
A low-salt diet supplemented with potassium produces a daughter.
If you are in a stressful job you are more likely to have a girl.
Men who work in the alcohol industry have more daughters than sons.
If both partners work with more women, they will be more likely to have a daughter.
Slower sex usually results in a girl.
Health practitioners are recommending diets high in calcium for parents-to-be wanting girls.

To father a boy, a man must consider the following facts:

Research reveals that the more easily conception occurs, the greater the likelihood of having a boy.
First babies are often boys.
More boys are born during the first 18 months of marriage.
A diet high in salt and potassium and low on dairy products is likely to produce a son.
Full-on lusty sex produces a boy.
The more sex you have, the greater chance you have of producing a son.
If both partners work with more men, they will be more likely to have a son.
More boys are born to couples who have come into contact with health hazards such as factory fumes containing iron, manganese or nickel.
Scientific evidence shows that tea and coffee drinkers tend to have boys.
A stress-free work environment increases the likelihood of a son.

The source of these wondrous strategems may be found here:,23599,23435583-2,00.html

Wednesday 28 January 2009

Madonna: The Material Anglobitch

In Madonna’s Material Girl video, we see the rampant philosophy of the Anglobitch in action. The painfully plain Madonna struts about while tuxedoed males adorn her with expensive jewellery and other luxury items. Males are overtly viewed as ridiculously gullible stooges and meal tickets. Females, here embodied by Madonna, are, however plain, tacitly seen as deities who by sheer virtue of being born female ‘deserve’ riches, attention and unstinting approval from males.

That this arrant propaganda should be so cheerfully received speaks volumes about Anglo-American culture. Far from being the ‘rebel’ she so often claims to be, Madonna merely enacts a heightened form of existing Anglo-American values.

Paradoxically, the mythopoietic entity Madonna projects has become a parody of the Anglo-American female outlook. This relates to the fact she is herself not Anglo-American at all. Her songs and self-presentation are turgid with Latin bombast. However, as part of her infiltration of the media she has craftily honed a heightened image of Anglobitch values with incisive appeal to Anglo-American females. Indeed, this imago has become a standard behavioural model for young Anglo-American girls, indicative of our culture’s inevitable slide towards gynocracy.

The principal myth projected by Madonna is that Anglo women are intensely sexual beings. In fact, all credible research strongly indicates that Anglo-American women are the most sexually anaesthetised in the world. Yet the Anglo media continually bombards us with a stream of palpable nonsense claiming that women are as sexually preoccupied as men. In Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (2002) Anne Coulter argues that this theme is a ‘liberal myth’ demonstrating liberal detachment from consensus reality.

While there is considerable truth in this, from the standpoint of the Anglobitch thesis the inane projection of Anglo females as hypersexual beings is all part of the Pedestal Syndrome. Because Anglo culture is puritanical and class-bound, sex is a scarce commodity. Anglo women as ‘owners’ of sex are thus imbued with an intrinsic status that explains their arrogance and hypocrisy. A major result of this is the deification of women on pedestals as paragons of virtue, intellect and ability. The tendency to inflate Anglo women’s sexual prowess is part of this process. Indeed, by a process of conceptual inversion, the area where Anglo women are most lacking is the very area where their prowess is most absurdly exaggerated. Madonna’s mythopoietic identity is calculated to maximally exploit this niche.

Material Girl is a term that describes most young Anglo-American females effectively. Of course, as in Madonna’s chipper video, Anglo-American women think the world ‘owes’ them something as a perpetual favour for having been born female in a repressive culture. As Adam Smith wrote, value is determined by scarcity. Anglo women, as ‘owners’ of sex, therefore acquire a sense of existential entitlement that they utterly lack in libertine societies.

However, the Material Girl is also a specific Anglobitch type with particular values. Reared in the post-Madonna era, she grew up surrounded by cultural imagos extolling the virtues of female selfishness. Consequently, she is amongst the most unpleasant Anglobitch types known to observation. The Material Girl is not only especially selfish; she also reaps the benefits of years of ‘emancipation’.

Contemporary Anglo-American teenaged girls are so insufferable because they are recipients of both enormous privilege and staggering advantage. The Material Girl resembles a lifestyle prostitute, for whom prostitution is not merely an aspect of life, but an all-pervasive lifestyle option. Since her whole status hinges on sexual barter for material reward, she is supremely mono-dimensional and utterly bereft of empathy.

Tuesday 20 January 2009

Sin City: Exalting the Anglobitch

The comic-book and movie Sin City are interesting from the standpoint of the Anglobitch thesis. A kind of ‘hyper-real’ depiction of criminal types, women are simultaneously portrayed as angelic victims or gun-toting super-humans. Realism is nowhere in evidence - as in most Anglo-Saxon depictions of women. Instead, females are placed on pedestals where their moral conduct and martial prowess are absurdly inflated and men vilified and devalued.

In Sin City, when men are not depicted as cannibalistic mass murderers, they are sacrificial victims whose lives are wasted preserving stereotypical Anglo-Saxon women. So ingrained are such misandrist assumptions that even the Anglo-Saxon ‘counterculture’ extols them without demur:

An old man dies… A girl lives. Fair trade (Miller, Rodriguez: 2005).

Of particular interest is the Anglo-American counterculture’s preoccupation with portraying women as embodiments of superhuman martial prowess. Examples are legion: comic books, superhero movies and ‘academic’ feminism all have an obsession with terminally empowered women firing outsized guns, overwhelming (male) opponents with obscure martial arts and generally having their historical and contemporary martial prowess inflated out of all proportion to their abilities.

Even the renowned warrior women of history, such as Boudicca and Joan of Arc, had a largely token role. If we look at the greatest Anglo-Saxon warriors – Edward I, Edward III, Edward IV, Henry V, Marlborough, Wellington, Nelson, Washington, Grant and Lee – all were patrician males. None were female. Archaeological research at battlefield sites such as Towton proves beyond question that all combatants were males in their teens, Twenties and Thirties. Only relatively recently, when technology has obviated the obvious need for physical strength, coordination and aggression have women adopted a military role in any numbers. Even so, they are rarely if ever assigned front-line combat roles and remain absolutely debarred from Special Forces because they cannot pass the rigorous physical selection procedures. In sum, only those with a terrible rage against reality itself could maintain that women nurture martial abilities even remotely comparable to those of males. For example, basic differences in leg anatomy meant that women could not complete basic infantry training in the British Army without massive concessionary alterations to the training programme.

Hence the bazooka-toting females of Sin City and other Anglo-Saxon counter-cultural artefacts are fantastic projections with no referent in reality. Even in those few martial areas where women show comparative talent, such as sniping or terrorism (neither considered especially chivalrous, incidentally), the kind of superhuman strength, agility and courage routinely depicted in these mythopoietic fictions is nowhere displayed. So, where do they draw their inspiration?

Like the Golem for European Jewry, these superhuman women tap deep into the myth-creating root of the Anglo-Saxon mass psyche. Anglo-American men are tutored from infancy to place women on pedestals, beyond reproof or rational criticism. However, feminism has released women into the workplace, politics and other areas, rendering the old eidolon invalid.

Endowing women with superhuman competence is an ongoing attempt to modulate the traditional archetype so that it reconciles the old deference with their new authority. Women with exaggerated strength and martial competence represent a spontaneous, organic attempt to reconfigure the 'Pedestal Syndrome' for a new socio-economic reality.

However, because the dual elements involved are so contradictory, the new eidolon is even more absurd than its predecessor. Also, because the new archetype is improperly developed and embedded, its adherents are obsessively insecure about it, defending it irrationally in the face of all objective evidence. Hence if objective facts are raised about women’s non-existent martial record or abilities, a hysterical crescendo of ad hominem criticism and juvenile irrationalism invariably erupts over the critic.

Nevertheless, the ‘superhuman Anglobitch’ archetype is of enormous significance in cultural terms, as it affords a profound insight into the process of mythopoietic formation. Although women toting 500-pound bazookas might seem far-removed from Saint Paul’s turgid epistles, they are both mythic cultural imagos at their earliest creation.

In passing, we must not forget a certain Anglo-American film genre that likewise extols females as supra-physical paragons of competence, virtue and intellect while portraying men as dupes, morons or, at best, cunning monsters. Sigourney Weaver and Jodie Foster are especially prominent in this lame oeuvre, typified by the vastly overrated Silence of the Lambs. These superhuman females defend society from sick, atavistic males bent on its destruction. Of course, the reader who has followed me thus far knows the exact opposite is true: Anglo-American feminists menace society, with males the last bulwark of effective resistance.

A word on the ‘counterculture’: this limping edifice, which sprang to life sometime in the dreary and discredited Sixties, has done nothing but enhance the problems intrinsic to Anglo-American culture. Conventional Anglo ‘Men’s Studies’ are little more than vagina worship. 'Counter-cultural' films, texts and art have merely placed women on even loftier pedestals. This is because the counter-culture never severed its links with the puritanical preoccupations at the core of Anglo-Saxon civilization; never challenged ‘mainstream’ assumptions about society. Rather, it surpassed them: today, the smart money knows its apologists were just shoe-shine boys for the elite all along. Class distinction, repression and counter-democracy have all worsened as a direct result of their lame ministrations.

Only the Anglobitch Thesis truly has the power to transform society as it represents a conscious break with the sterile Puritanism that defines the Anglosphere.

Sunday 18 January 2009

Kondratieff Long Waves and the Decline of Anglo-Feminism

Take a look at this Kondratieff chart, showing long-term economic waves of growth and decline since the late Eighteenth Century. Nikolai Kondratieff, a Soviet economist murdered by Stalin, believed the economy moved in Long Waves of growth and decline corresponding to the four seasons. Did the long economic boom that began after the Second World War start its long fall in the year 2000? Is the West moving into long term economic decline? Our guess is yes – because the world is changing on other fronts, too: feminism is under attack.

Today, there is nowhere feminists can spout their riddles unopposed. Even liberals – long-standing champions of Marxist feminism – now accept that Anglo-Saxon women enjoy privileged status. Feminist writers have to acknowledge the widespread existence of misandry to maintain any measure of credibility.

Could this be because of the financial disruption happening around us?

Men are risk-takers and heroes. As Schopenhauer argued, women take no objective interest in anything because it is only through the agency of some man can they actually change anything. While female ‘social skills’ are effective in the ‘Summer’ period of an economic upswing, as the Kondratieff wave moves into its Autumn and Winter period, men take the reins of power once more. This is because the human male thrives on harshness; and only his creative prowess can kick-start another Long Wave with fresh ideas and inventions.

In the Winter period of an economic down-swing, we are thrust back into Boot Camp Africa 4.5 million years ago – when the hunter’s iron hand and tireless cunning were all that stood between our hominid ancestors and the day of doom. The dark was full of fearful predators, big cats with perfect night-vision; the savannah was littered with kills that had had be scavenged with rough stone tools. To be blunt, that was no arena for ‘people skills’, ‘human resources’ or good, old-fashioned female manipulation. No: that was an age of raw reality when only the male’s individuality, strength and imagination could ensure survival. How effective would a female ‘focus group’ be, when the task was to drive ravenous hyenas from a kill? How useful would a ‘degree’ in Women’s Studies be, when the task was to resist a fearsome predator like dinofelis?

Absolutely none.

When the chips are down - when backs are to the wall and circumstances are desperate - only the male can perform: history has always shown this. Consider the Wright Brothers – the pioneers of powered flight. They were guys with vast, throbbing balls willing to strap themselves to bits of tin and balsa wood, pitting themselves against the sky for the sheer challenge of it. All risk-takers, all trail-blazers, all innovators may be known by this trait: they are MEN. Testosterone is intimately associated with daring and invention: oestrogen is not. Female ‘achievement’ invariably flutters about the pole of sociality – novels, fashion design and bad art... in other words, ephemera.

Matriarchy is a privilege of economic success. It is no surprise that contemporary feminism arose in the ‘Summer’ period of the present economic wave: the lax, liberal Sixties...

But when times are hard, the male’s diamond hard physique strides into history once more - as on that ancient savannah. The feminist themes are thrust aside as real challenges are confronted and overcome.

Rejoice! As the present economic compact crumbles in chaos, Anglo-American feminism must perish also. Expect the Anglo-American matriarchy and its collectivist obsessions to retreat as harsh reality asserts itself.

Thursday 8 January 2009

'Anglobitch' Entered on Urban Dictionary!

The word 'Anglobitch' has found its way onto 'Urban Dictionary'. It seems to have been placed there by a certain 'Chauvin', clearly a man of intellect and breeding. The pithy (and eerily accurate) entry reads thus:


An Anglo-American woman or girl, usually white, with a pronounced sense of personal entitlement. The term usually refers to females under thirty, who have grown up with post-feminist 'rights' along with traditional feminine privileges (exemption from personal responsibility, Draft registration or any kind of criticism).

The Anglobitch usually has a wafer-thin, hypocritical personality, an absurdly narrow world-view and is utterly self-absorbed. She wants equality, but only on her own terms (rights without responsibilities). The Anglobitch has emerged in Anglophone countries because such nations tend to have a repressive, puritanical undercurrent; in consequence, Anglo-American females grow up with an overriding sense of being 'owed' something by the world in general, and men in particular. The Anglobitch is also characterised by offhand racism, homophobia and 'classism' - largely due to the absolute exemption from criticism she enjoys.

Virtually any young female in England, America, Canada, Australia or New Zealand can rightly be called an 'Anglobitch'. The Jury remains out on whether the Anglobitch is the product of Anglo-Saxon culture or some intrinsic personality flaw among Anglo-American females.

An estimable entry indeed; and clear proof that our message is reaching out into the wider society. An Urban Dictionary entry is inarguable proof of cultural permeation; a demonstration that the Anglobitch Thesis is achieving widespread acceptance across the Anglosphere.

The revolution moves forward apace...

Friday 2 January 2009

Midnight Cowboy: the Confounding of Joe Buck

The sordid adventures of Texas cowboy Joe Buck in New York City deflate the popular Anglo myth of the Sixties as an era of sexual liberation. In doing so, the film achieves a counter-mythic status. Midnight Cowboy intimates that any kind of sexual revolution in the Sixties was exclusively an affair of the urban liberal elite, not a mass movement. Because the attitudes of that class are absurdly inflated in the media, young Anglo-American men develop a ridiculously distorted picture of female sexual profligacy: that all women will ‘put out’ for nothing. Midnight Cowboy dissects this myth via the experiences of Joe Buck, gradually stripping away these illusions until only the sterile, selfish reality of the Anglobitch remains. This process might be expressed in the following soliloquy: ‘When I was fourteen, I used to think there was a whole world of women waiting out there. When I was eighteen I was wondering where the orgies were. Now I’m twenty-five I just don’t want to die a virgin.’

Joe Buck arrives in New York from rural Texas fired by stories that the newly liberated women of the metropolis will pay him for his sexual services. He thinks an aged prostitute with a pink poodle is a likely candidate for his affections. However, he is upbraided as a ‘Texas Longhorn’ and instead made to pay this ‘helluva gorgeous chick’ for his pains (Schlesinger, 1969).

In another luckless encounter, a conventional middle-aged woman tells Buck he should ‘be ashamed’ of himself for soliciting her. Only when he permeates the urban liberal class and its idiomatic subculture does he actually manage to fulfil any of his ‘career ambitions’.

It is hard to describe fully what Midnight Cowboy means to us. It serves as a cinematic parable for how Anglo-American men have been betrayed by the liberal subculture. Their hopes of a libertine lifestyle are excited, like those of Joe Buck, by a bombardment of liberal propaganda extolling the ‘liberated’ qualities of the ‘New Woman’.

However, when men seek out these paragons they find instead the same old grasping Anglobitches. They might not be armed with pink poodles, but the old pedestals are still there – and higher than ever. On this sterile reality, their hopes are dashed. Nowhere at the level of mass experience can one find the liberated women feted in the pages of Cosmo: such women only exist in the liberal enclave, as poor Joe Buck found to his cost. Indeed, it is questionable that they exist even there, in that their ‘liberation’ rarely extends beyond the realm of idle rhetoric. ‘Midnight Cowboy’ ultimately questions whether the counterculture really happened at all. When Joe, who embodies querulous Anglo-Saxon manhood, goes seeking this wonder-world of mainstream American women who ‘put out’ for nothing, he finds precisely that – nothing.

This naturally brings us to a burning question that many have asked about the Anglobitch thesis. Are we simple conservatives who reflexively frown on libertine pleasure in the name of some outmoded value system? No, not at all: rather, we question whether the so-called sexual revolution really occurred in Anglo-Americana. Our objection is not moral, but ontological. We do not object to liberalism, we rather question the veracity of liberal claims about post-‘liberation’ Anglo females. Anglobitches still seem to barter sexual favours for personal advantage: nothing has really changed.

Joe Buck is a representative archetype. He started life with the notion that Anglo women are living cornucopias of love, sex and understanding. In Billy Joel’s chipper words:

Tell her about it,
Tell her everything you feel;
Tell her all your crazy dreams
Let her know that you’re for real!

(‘Tell Her About It’)

But Anglo-American males learn very quickly that the Anglobitch is not at all interested in ‘crazy dreams’. Most are interested only in stooges who will furnish them with material wealth. The uneducated and unintelligent are interested only in moronic sadists.

Poor Joe is eventually reduced to selling himself to homosexual men for paltry fees. The media-fed notion that Anglo women are liberated has backfired on him absolutely.

Thus Midnight Cowboy is a perfect explanatory narrative for Anglo-American men. The searing expectation, the crushing disappointment and ultimate humiliation of Joe Buck are universal Stations of the Cross for Anglo manhood.