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?

The Masks of Hate: Misandry and the Anglo-American 'Hate Crime' Industry

Stamping out 'Hate Crime' is a prominent political theme across the English-speaking world. Hatred of ethnic or religious groups, homosexuals and even the disabled is now strictly illegal. The following description of Hate Crime is taken from the British Home Office's official website (although analogous homilies can doubtless be found across the Anglosphere):

A hate crime is any criminal offense that is motivated by hostility or prejudice based upon the victim’s:

* disability
* race
* religion or belief
* sexual orientation
* transgender

All hate crime is important. No hate crime is too minor to report to the police. Anyone can be the victim of a hate crime. We all have a racial identity, all have a sexual orientation, all have some sort of beliefs. Anyone of us could be targeted because of some aspect of our identity. Tackling hate crime supports each and every one of us.

Hate crime is different to other forms of crime:

* hate crime targets people because of their identity. It is a form of discrimination that infringes human rights and keeps people from enjoying the full benefits of our society
* research has shown that hate crimes cause greater psychological harm than similar crimes without a motivation of prejudice
* hate crime creates fear in victims, groups and communities and encourages communities to turn on each other

If the Anglobitch Thesis is true (which it is), the Anglosphere must have an inherent, all-pervasive hatred of men that undercuts these lofty pronouncements. And this is exactly what we find. For while Hate Crime is prohibited by each Anglo-American national state, pan-anglosphere misandry is actively promoted by each state against its male citizens.

Examples? We do not have to look far. The Murdochratic media ceaseless vilifies men as outcasts, misfits and sexual deviants while exalting women as paragons of virtue, beauty and intellect. This anti-male propaganda is at least as relentless as the Nazi media campaign against the Jews - but even more insidious, since its agendas are covert and unstated. As Gauleiter Julius Streicher observed: "The steady drip hollows the stone." And, as in the Third Reich, hatred of the outcast group (in this case, men) has been fully normalized since the rise of gender-feminism in the late sixties.

Misandry is also enshrined in Anglo-American law. In its practical application, the law invariably delivers pro-female outcomes, with women usually receiving half the male sentence for the same offense. Moreover, divorce laws are absurdly biased in favor of women, with the male frequently reduced to penury or suicide by the courts' shameless misandry. The fact that many Anglo-American women consciously plan for a 'starter marriage' to fleece some unsuspecting male proves that malicious misandry is rapidly becoming a female lifestyle-choice.

In Anglophone nations with extensive welfare programs such as Britain, the deployment of welfare invariably favors women, despite men contributing the overwhelming bulk of taxes. Over 90% of homeless persons are male. Moreover, the British National Health Service spends vast sums on female-specific health issues like breast cancer. By contrast, male-specific health issues such as suicide receive little recognition, let alone funding. In the United States, males have to register for the draft to be eligible for certain state scholarships. By contrast, women (who already reap the benefits of a female-biased education system) do not. Indeed, draft-registration is still nominally compulsory for all American males, despite them being tacitly viewed as Untermenschen by law, government and the media.

In light of the foregoing discussion, it must be said that males represent the primary victims of 'hate crime' across the Anglosphere. Despite this, all the noble pronouncements about the need to 'eradicate hate' never address the cloying misandry endemic in Anglo-American institutions.

This is a telling omission that strongly confirms the Anglobitch Thesis. While the Anglosphere nations can redress repressive race, class and creed agendas, misandry is too deeply embedded in Anglo-Saxon culture (as a function of its puritanical ethos) to be similarly challenged. Indeed, to do so would effectively disparage the entire conceptual thrust of Anglo culture, which is why we can never trust our governments or other formal institutions to defend male interests.



It is also telling that the only male groups effectively protected by pan-Anglosphere hate-crime laws are gays and transsexuals. This is entirely to be expected: such males simulate the female role which, as we have endlessly observed, is routinely and blindly exalted by Anglo-Saxon culture. When the only way for men to achieve protection from 'hate crime' is to adopt homosexuality (or female genitalia) the true nature of Anglo 'patriarchy' reveals itself. Only women and their mincing mimics can enter that charmed circle; the healthy, potent male never can.

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.