Wokes promote a degenerate society not a liberal society

[Outcast9428]

@ArchibaultNew

England during the middle ages was definitely patriarchal. All societies were at that time, but some patriarchies had a male underclass while others didn't. Female worship didn't really pop up in Anglo societies until the 20th century. Female worship is certainly nauseatingly bad in Britain today. I have heard people from Britain say that feminism is not even remotely opposed in Britain, but historical Britain was definitely not a female worship society.

I do notice how people in the US and Britain are constantly shaming men for going abroad and trying to find better women. The typical line they give is "oh you're going to find a girl from the third world because you can't get any girl in your own country." Either that or people say "c'mon dude, you're young there's always a chance." I always find this hilarious because the premise of both of those seems to be that women in our own countries are some kind of huge prize that we've given up on trying to get. The truth, however, is that 80% of women in our countries now are complete garbage and I have no interest in going for a tattooed, overweight feminist who has slept with 50 guys, talks like a vulgar skank, and can't put down the bottle/bong. I'm not saying most women have all of these traits but admittedly, the vast majority of women here have at least one of the traits I mentioned and quite frankly, I'm looking for a girl who doesn't have any of them and girls like that in the jewnited states are in short supply.

If what you mean by sexual liberalism, you mean that men can go to brothels... Yes, most patriarchal societies allow this. If you mean men can walk around trying to flirt with and seduce any random woman walking around? No, that's not part of patriarchal societies. It might be part of Eastern Europe and Latin America because those societies are basically center-right, liberal conservative societies. Liberal conservative countries tend to have a much smaller male underclass then full blown feminist ones do, and for the male underclass that does exist, their lives are much more bearable. But liberal conservative countries still have a male underclass.

But I wouldn't classify them as full blown patriarchies. For a true, full blown patriarchy, you have to go to a country like Thailand, India, or the Philippines.

I mean, I get it, prostitution definitely makes life better. But as a guy who's gone to strip clubs a lot in his life, I can also tell you that paying a girl and getting a certain amount of intimate time with her isn't really fulfilling either. When you don't have a connection with a girl, when the two of you are not in love with one another, its just not the same. Now you could potentially find that with a prostitute but if its just sex, it won't feel the same. Strip clubs are really fun when you are young, inexperienced, and not really ready to take care of a wife and family yet. But once you've experienced love and what a long term relationship is really like, you realize that a prostitute will only give you a small slice of the happiness that a girlfriend will. Sex, when you love the girl, is on a completely different level. The feeling of warmth you get on the inside when you are holding a girl you love and respect, locking eyes with her, planting kisses all over her body during sex is the most amazing thing you'll ever experience in your life.

Its true that in liberal conservative countries, any guy can go to a brothel and its perfectly fine. And the brothel experience will be better, cheaper, more available, hotter girls. But as far as I'm concerned, any guy who is not married, any guy who doesn't have a girl to love is part of the male underclass. People think I criticize guys like Charlie Sheen, Dan Bilzerian, or Hunter Biden because I'm "jealous." I'm not jealous of them, I pity them. Guys like that are almost as bad off as incels are, but they're too spoiled by privilege and peer pressure to realize what they're missing out on. Then again, maybe its for the best, I don't think they really deserve a wife given the way they behave. They would just cheat on her or treat her badly.

[Lucas88]

Guys thanks for your contribution. Here's a bunch of thoughts on the topic maybe you guys can choose whichever you find the most interesting. To me the key concept is that of "underclass."

Some Background

I read the Rookh Kshatriya articles that Lucas suggested. I agree with Rookh that Anglo's have never had a truly "Traditionalist Society" or even a "Patriarchal Society" if we were to compare it to Roman or Middle Ages French even Italian type of society. I think the Anglo society is a "Puritanical: and low-key "female worship" type of society. Because of the whole "gender segregation" that Rookh talks about. Where young Anglos grow up in public schools and end up running the country have never been around women hence they tend to worship them as opposed to seeing a more realistic portrayal. Hence when they worship Romantic/Idealistic love and then hence when that doesn't meet their standards, especially nowadays there's the whole "red pill" movement is something that most people around the world already know.

I'm going to distinguish between a "Patriarchical Society" and an "Anglo Society"

Thoughts on Anglo Society

The main idea is that Anglos in their societies have a "male underclass" and they are not doing anything to help them.

Anglos tend to bash men and worship women. They worship women for the sole fact that they are women. Meanwhile, they give their men a hard time and their men have to prove themselves. The whole "alpha" and "beta" concept comes to mind. Other societies(Swedish) have similar concepts but not to the extent of Anglo Society where they see their men in more negative terms.

Moreover, Anglos accept a male underclass whereas other people do not. Maybe since the Norman Conquest Anglos never shook off the whole notion that there are "Lords" and "Workers" The Lord is worshiped just because he is Lord and not due to any merit. He didn't earn his lordship but inherited it. In American society we see this more with puritanism where some people are "blessed" and others are "damned" God blessed successful and rich people "a priori" and hence they are successful. If you are unsuccessful that means that you are "damned" and there's nothing you can do about it. This works well with capitalism since the idea is that the poor are poor because they choose their poverty. Hence no money should spend on social programs [/b]

Extra note on other societies
I would like to add that in East Asia like Japan, Korea, and even other Latin American, and Eastern Europe society unlike what they tell you. There's no "male underclass" because if you can't get laid you can go to a hooker at a brothel. Moreover, some women will ask you for money and will hook up with you. Anglo women will not do this for the most part since they are taught that if you have to rely on money to get laid you are a loser. Even in more contemporary times, Anglo SBs shame their Sugar Daddies and are taught to see them as "pay pigs" while women in Eastern Europe do not see them that way. Since it established that men provide for men. While Anglo women think that only losers are meant to provide for women in any way and hence the men who use money should be taken advantage of.

Meanwhile, the Anglo societies don't have that. At least America has both illegal and stigmatized prostitution. Not only is it illegal to go to a brothel. But you are also "shamed" if you were to travel abroad and visit a hooker. You are a "loser" and will remain so. This reminds me of English society where they say "you can't change your class" or in America where your ethnicity is very fixed, meanwhile in Brazil and Spain people have more leeway. Anglo societies tend to be much more "deterministic" hence why people accept things. There's no "revolution" like the French revolution.

A True Patriachical Society
I would say Argentina in the 1990s would be a truly patriarchal society.
-Men can have sexual liberalism but women are more restricted. Most women are traditionalist but only a few minority are the liberal one's. I heard the some Eastern Europe one's are like this.
-Men can go to brothels.
-Men have a traditional wife.

Good analysis. When people talk about Anglo-Saxon society's puritanical legacy most focus simply on the prudishness and awkward attitudes pertaining to sexuality but in reality the problem goes much deeper than that. The problem is Protestant culture itself!

The Protestant ethos of Northern Europe has wreaked so much damage on the collective consciousness of the Anglosphere in various ways:

First, Anglo Protestantism promoted the notion of a clear distinction between the "blessed elect" and "reprobates" as you mentioned in your post. The blessed elect were the wealthy, the successful, the winners in society whose triumph was preordained by god while the reprobates were the poor and the unsuccessful who had been abandoned by Heaven and were destined for perdition. This belief gave rise to the concept of "winners vs. losers" which strongly characterizes Anglo-Saxon thought up to this day as well as the creation of a "male underclass" onto whom the status of losers must be projected. Anglo-Saxon society influenced by this mode of thought always needs some unblessed pariahs to shit on from above and what better demographic that low-status men.

Second, through its over-the-top puritanism, Anglo Protestantism served to intensify the scarcity of sexual access and this would in turn sow the seeds for the extreme commodification of sexuality. With sexual access restricted for men and even unorthodox methods of sexual release such as prostitution often attacked and demonized, not only was an unnatural level of sexual bargaining power given to women but also female beauty and sexual favors came to be perceived as something exotic and even mystical, hence the irrational pedestalization of women throughout the Anglo-Saxon world. Needless to say, the unfortunate result of this is the obnoxious diva mentality of "we are the prize" of many Anglo women as well as their inflated sense of self-worth and unrealistic expectations. It is also the reason why in the Anglosphere there is so much obsession with the likes of strip clubs and other forms of "woman worship". Of course, only "winners" are worthy of the "prize"; the "losers" of the male underclass are only permitted to admire from afar.

Third, Anglo Protestantism's "puritan work ethic" also contributes to this same development. In societies infected with this twisted notion all sources of status are reduced to the economic plane and financial wealth becomes the be-all end-all. Unfortunately with this radical materialism not only is the scope of what it means to be a winner narrowed but also the standards of male competition for females are significantly raised. The financially mediocre male underclass therefore grows and more and more men find themselves partially or wholly sexually disenfranchised. The Anglosphere is a disgusting dystopian beehive of industrial productivity in which only the most eager and conformist worker drones are deemed worthy and everyone else is deemed a loser and a waste of space. Of course, in this kind of cultural climate the majority of women select only for financial wealth and material affluence, hence why in the Anglosphere there are so many do-nothing gold-diggers who only care about money and male utility and even look down on men as "beasts of burden".

Anglo-Saxon society is completely rotten and perverse. I admit that I despise it and see it as totally worthless and infinitely inferior to the more masculine and more soulful Mediterranean and Latin cultures.

I also confess that I dislike most Protestant men. I perceive them as weak and effeminate as well as staunch defenders of a sick and unnatural puritanical culture which only serves to sabotage men and keep us on the plantation. Protestant culture promotes servility and slavishness and lacks virility and masculine power.

Incidentally I think that the reason why so many Protestant men spend so much time railing against "faggots" either in real life or online is to make themselves feel more masculine in the absence of any real masculinity. Also the gay community serves as an even lower underclass on whom they can shit.

[Pixel--Dude]

Lucas88 has a good point. I remember when I was having difficulty with my ex we had a talk about getting back together and when I asked her what it was she liked about me I think the only compliment she could offer was "you're a hard worker." That's it?! Almost a decade together and the most positive thing you can say about me is that I'm always at work? Just goes to show she didn't want a loving partner, instead she just wanted someone who was prepared to work their nuts off in a 9-5 grind every week so she could sit at home smoking dope and flirting with other guys online. I used to think I was punching above my weight as I always perceived her as a pretty girl and a Rocket in the sack, now I realise she's a degenerate waste of space who has respect for nobody yet expects everyone else to bend over backwards like the world owes it to her. Absolutely disgusting. And I see this everywhere in the anglo-sphere. Good dudes being treated like garbage by sub-par women who are nothing but a pretty face and devoid of any transcendental values or decency. These soulless women should be ejected from the planet on a one way ticket to the sun.