Are White People a Matriarchy?
Feminists often condemn the lack of male vulnerability. It means men don’t want to face feelings of sadness, shame, helplessness, anger, embarrassment, disappointment, or frustration. But what if this phenomenon is rather a feature of a matriarchy? The patriarchal alternative means to convert mens’ negative emotions into positive aggression.
Besides, how can women teach boys to be vulnerable again if boys’ mothers beat it out of them in the first place? Anyone who dares to speak to men about this emotional topic will find out that it’s primarily mothers who raise Western (white) boys to be men, not the fathers. At least not in our time. If anything, a father is the only adult in a boy’s life who ever stood up to the mother’s matriarchal abuse.
For men, the problem is that a matriarchal society forbids men from freely expressing their energy, their dominance, their hate, anger, and violence, nor does a matriarchy permit men’s desire for hierarchy and inequality. There shall be no male striving. Yet, feminists openly blame some mythical “patriarchy” to cover up the crimes committed against men and boys by the matriarchy.
My guess is that the West became a matriarchy with the introduction of the cult of British Queen Elizabeth I, a cult which tried to submit the men of the world to the rule of one woman, though we cannot ignore the Mary cult embedded within Christianity either.
The way I see it, in a matriarchy, mothers first crush boys’ spirits with restrictive types of abuse, and then feminist academics blame all men when these boys turn out to be domesticated adults. I also think this two-step act is deliberate, i.e., two slaps in the face of men.
In her book, 90 Seconds to a Life You Love, Joan Rosenberg describes the behaviors of people with low confidence. According to her, low-confident people:
disdain unpleasant feelings;
doubt most things they say or do;
are hesitant to take risks;
often feel anxious;
tend to worry about being a burden to others;
worry about what others think of them;
believe they have to do everything independently;
hate asking for help;
etc.
It only took me two glances at the list to realize that these are—indeed—not the behaviors of confident, masculine men, nor of boys raised by a patriarchy. No! These are the behaviors of boys domesticated by a matriarchy that beats boys into submission. These are the behaviors of slaves, of boys raised by their mothers to be their mothers’ servants.
Low-confident men, per Rosenberg, “make other people’s needs and feelings more important than their own” because they are made servants to the matriarchy. The idea that men aren’t emotionally expressive “to keep from feeling vulnerable” may have something to do with the matriarchal society that doesn’t care about weeping men anyway. A matriarchy wants quiet servants.
Western civilization has domesticated its males. Today, this domestication is feminism’s next argument for replacing white men with ‘wilder’ immigrant men from Africa, who are “more in touch with their masculinity” and less “emotionally reticent”. In other words, women of the West have ruined their men only to end up begging for the return of true masculinity.
When Joan Rosenberg writes that low-confident men “don’t want to show signs of vulnerability because they might be perceived as weak”, it may be because they were beaten for it by the matriarchy. These men “diminish their hard work and accomplishments” and “devalue appropriate recognition of success and achievements”(!) because the matriarchy decided it didn’t care.
Indeed, we have diminished white men’s historical accomplishments to the point of demanding their complete rewrite and erasure. White accomplishment is equated to racism and spat on by a world of ungrateful ingrates.
It’s time to restore the patriarchy. We need not look at African primitives to rediscover white masculinity. We need only look to Plato’s Republic, to Sparta, to the Germanics, and the Anglo-Saxons, to the Romans and the Vikings. We have plenty of source material to work with.
The low-confidence epidemic was never caused by any mythical patriarchy but by a lack of one. In response, we must realize that boys aren’t safe with their mothers. The longer boys stay under mother’s wing, the less manly they turn out.
Our ancestors have always understood this. Our patriarchal ancestors knew that boys needed to be removed from their mothers at a certain age, namely to make sure they would become men. The Spartans removed boys from their mothers at age 8. These boys were then required to spend 13 years away from their families learning how to be warriors.
Other ancestral cultures at least made sure to introduce initiation rites for boys ages 12-18. In South Africa, today, for example, there is a Kommando Korps outfit that keeps boys away from their mothers for a few weeks while training them to be guerilla warriors. These initiation rights help the boys channel their negative emotions toward action instead of tears.
And that’s the whole point of a patriarchy: A patriarch turns boys’ tears into action.
A basic plan for rebuilding the patriarchy then begins with:
initiation rites for white boys ages 8-16;
cultivating white male hierarchies, new militarism;
emphasizing inequality, promoting aggression;
upending the matriarchy.