The Empty Vessel

The Empty Vessel

“Thou shalt know;
Self Chosen are the woes that fall on men (italics mine)
How wretched, for they see not good so near,
Nor harken to its voice - few only know
The pathway of deliverance from ill.”
- Pythagoras


I was out with my ex we were in a bar drinking.

That Snickers advert with Mr T came on the bar TV. For a joke I told my girlfriend that Mr T was actually dead and that that the adverts were all computer generated with an impersonator doing the voice over of our recently deceased childhood icon. I remember her looking at the TV in the bar dumb struck and asking ‘really?’, I affirmed this. A friend we were out with who understood the joke backed this up when she asked him, he told her that there had been a TV broadcast of his state funeral in the USA, she ate all of it.

I look back and think you have to be pretty empty headed to believe that one. I mean jokes may get you for a while before you realise, thats because theres some part of your mind that just won’t swallow it.

It is a sad fact that as men we have to deal with a severely neotenous intellect if our sexual preference is for women. Lately I have been constantly thinking about how empty women seem. I became aware as I grew up that sex is not everywhere and happening all the time, only its simulacrum was: advertising, pornography, TV etc. The commodity itself though Is heavily regulated. Especially if you’re like me.

An intellectual.

I have no doubt that many leaden members of the fairer sex only really see me as a sort of jester like figure who also conveniently doubles up as an encyclopaedia (Ala Esther Vilar), they mistake a person making a joke for the joke itself. Like most men who go through this process of realisation I wonder why are women like this? How far back does this behaviour go?

The prevailing political and social climate creates a situation where social evolution is seen as ‘oppression’ by half the population. What is apparent to anyone with a working brain is that women are no more oppressed by men than they are oppressed by gravity. Woman now seeks to reassess the reality of our social evolution. But fails to make an objective appraisal here is why.

In ancient societies The King was actually a sacrificial King. In order to please the gods and ensure a plentiful harvest the King was slaughtered and parts of him were spread throughout his former Kingdom. His temporary opulence was a respectful acknowledgement of the sacrifice he was to make. From this we can glean that masculinity and sacrifice go hand in hand. All men knew that a price had to be paid for prestige, they all knew that getting what you want comes at a price. Alongside this men wanted to create a better world. Why? Because they looked to the women and children that they loved and wished to ameliorate their suffering and misery. These two factors are what drive any man to succeed. The more he ameliorated misery and suffering the lesser his altruistic sacrifice had to be. Through this was born male individuality; the drive to exceed and gain distinguishing from others came from within men. In order to understand it they had to develop insight into their nature. Intellectuality is born from a need to penetrate the depths of human nature. Civilisation resulted from high numbers of men being viewed as distinguished individuals who could plan, marshall, and construct new eras if we acquiesced to their leadership.

Civilisation itself is a series of interlocking social contracts that mediate interactions between men and women. Relationships between men and women have to be mediated in order for both parties to work together. Social Malaise, that day in day out feeling, is the result of this contractual binding of both parties. Neither men or women really like it; but it had its benefits, mainly economic prosperity and our assertion over the severity of nature. The desire for insight led men to become the driving force of civilisation. Women, understandably, wanted in and offered exclusive reproductive rights in exchange for access to resources. Eventually they appointed themselves as ‘resource managers’ while reaping the benefits of civilisation...comfort.

Men are tooled for endeavor and individuality. Women are tooled for comfort and the successful birth of healthy offspring. Ultimately the primitive nature of these behaviours will always be with us in some form. As a species we have not climbed so high. Modern society is still watching the shadows of our primitive past being cast upon the walls of our material existence by the fire of our possible future. The social contracts born from our very evolution are still needed to create boundaries and harmony between the sexes. They can be revised but if broken only bad things will happen.

The fairer sex have all the attributes of beings used to comfort (which they deem as ‘resource management’). They live, think, and act as a collective. This collective carries added advantages. The fairer sex give lip service rather than deeds, take comfort from innovation rather than innovate themselves, they are forgiven rather than held to account.

Men create progress women enjoy the comfort that progress creates. Now that women have reached the levels of comfort they have always desired they seek to break the primordial contracts that both men and women have benefitted from. The victimhood meta narrative of male oppression is a pseudo cerebral construct designed to give exemption and justification to erroneous female ‘thinking’. These alleged ideologies have turned into an increasingly unstable echo chamber that is violently shaking apart all the cognitive tools that lifted our species from the swamp of prehistory. This slow process is the result of the erosion of the social contracts between the sexes, as comfort for women increased their need for restraint diminished. The seeking of comfort that women have enacted for millennia has turned them into a gestalt hive intelligence. Because women now have this comfort (on a societal level) they feel that men no longer have anything to trade, thus exposing their own mercantile view of men.

If all forms of progress froze now. If man never enters outer space and colonizes the galaxy, if we stop formulating drugs that will cure future diseases, the fairer sex will not be to concerned. They have reached the levels of comfort they always wanted, the comfort that was the entire basis of their co opting through social contracts. Their project now becomes one of dominion. How does this phase express itself?

The female hive is women creating a sex saturated environment designed to keep men thinking with their penises. I have often heard women say; “Men are only interested in one thing”. This is the usual half truth of the female hive. A more accurate way of putting things would be: “As far as women are concerned men are only interested in one thing”. Women control sex and access to it: therefore it is to their advantage if culture is saturated with its simulacrum. As long as you are a sleepwalking sex addict it means women are in charge. The female hive wants men to only be interested in one thing , as this ensures the female hive is in control. Regardless of their gender this obsession with comfort and lack of intellectual curiosity creates dull witted lemmings that only show interest in constantly duplicating their wealth. The female hive demands comfort as to the hive mind without comfort any person is only facing ever increasing levels of danger. The hive thinks; “ If I Am comfortable, I am not facing any danger.” How wrong. Too much comfort is dangerous as it makes both men and women lazy. To lazy to realise that they are degenerating slowly as they lack the desire for a knowledge of the manifestations of natural law within their lives.

The female hive has strangled culture. Others ages created artists like Leonardo Da Vinci, Rubens, Picasso, and Modigliani. What do we have now. Bizarre ‘postmodernists’ creating ‘art’ from menstrual blood, or dancing on butter in high heels. There is no new music, no sense of linear progression or reaction. Just the same old maudlin Piano covers of old songs written by men but sung by women that gain popularity through being aired on TV adverts. This is what annoys me most about the female hive: It uses deconstructionism to police creativity, I wonder if women seek to make their uterus’ the sole proprietor of all innate human creativity? We all slowly drown in an Ocean of mediocrity because the comfort of the hive demands that we never recreate society as it has reached the comfort that the hive has always wanted to have. Technological innovations are now based on ‘connectivity’ (such as social media) rather than a thirst for knowledge. So instead of continuing to improve life no real progress is made. Instead, we only improve the agency of the female hive while slowly backsliding into the conflicts of the past (the cold war against Russia).

The female Hive lacks the power to innovate through risk taking. This coupled with the deconstructing of sexual dimorphism leads to a situation where the female hive thinks it empowers itself by encroaching upon male territory. Deconstructing sexual dimorphism leads women to covet the plumage of the male, they no longer understand it as something that seeks to attract their reproductive favor. They see the plumage as something that is kept from them through men cultivating an invisible hierarchy of privilege.

Female intelligence can only be brought to light when seen relative to a man’s. Women being able to cope with the pressures that a man copes with is confirmation that women are human. Why would women not be capable of doing things that men can do. It is not an achievement. The fact that it is seen as an achievement is nothing other than a clear demonstration that women can only emulate what a man innovates. The full title is not ‘the first woman X’ it is ‘the first women to X since Man innovated X.’ Women can only appropriate what a man has created, they cannot innovate because their thinking is unilateral to the Female hive that is theirs and as a consequence this precludes their ability to use lateral thinking to full effect. Women moving into male areas is not an act of creation. Much in the same way that me putting a jigsaw of the Mona Lisa together does not make me the painter of the original.

As a culuture we are left with the distant thunder of what we see as an impending collapse because social contacts have broken down so badly. Rather than something that will be caused by men I think that the 'collapse' is not going to be stopped by men. What I think is happening is that men will not help to re establish the methods of living that served to enslave them within the female hive. The system that we all lived under is based upon cycles of boom and bust. Men are simply no longer going to be the force that ritualistically resurrects society from bust back to boom (as the sacrificial King did, albeit superstitiously). In this case government and women have to create ways that no longer rely upon male productivity. They will become increasingly desperate as they see that men were the base unit that brought about the cyclical rebirth of society. Economic seasons will never experience spring or summer again unless men are brought back into the franchise, they will only do this if they are treated fairly and equally. So, while I doubt that these reformations will ever happen, the burden of guilt cannot be placed upon men any longer. It is now up to government and women to show us their toil and ingenuity. If they are unable to do this then real power simply coalesces, gradually, back to men. It is their world that collapses not ours.

The reason why my Ex bought into my little joke so wholeheartedly is because she was projecting the methods of the female hive onto me. Men see this process as a form of gullibility. Women see it as the building of a united front that will get them what they want. One of the hardest parts of my red pill was accepting how empty women are, That they are largely unconscious creatures that crave security. The highest manifestation of which for them is material comfort.

Some women are NAWALTS. They took the red pill and saw how unimaginative and attracted to power most women are. Rather than face men in open competition they took the secure and comfortable option; they spent most of their lives turning women against men, It was far easier to do this than establish themselves honestly within the naturally competitive workings of civilisation. Again, what we see here is the thinking and method of an empty vessel that seeks personal comfort through manipulation (did you hear me! MANipulation). These women like to call themselves ‘feminists’ but this is an act of obfuscation. It is clear that they hold women in contempt while seeing men as the ‘enemy’. This act is no more feminine than a lumber jack beard measuring competition, instead both men and women would be wise to see these women for what they are…..misanthropes. Pure and simple.

The desires of many women are coerced into submission by the female hive. This is the basis of innate female psychosis. Women have needs as individuals which have to be sacrificed in order to present a united front to men. The fact that women think that men cannot discern that they compete amongst themselves goes to show how neotenous they can be. If a woman goes against the female hive she is often viciously castigated by the female hive, and is shamed for breaking with the phalanx philosophy of female social strategy. The Hive is woman's desire for resources failing to impose limitations on its grandiose imaginings and forcing all social apparatus to act out its own collective fantasy. But further underneath this I wonder if we are witnessing an unconscious social cull of women by women! The golden uterus only has any value if it is scarce. Women's business is access to sex and deep down they know that there are more than enough of themselves to fulfill this function many times over. They know that raising the bar in terms of the unrealistic expectations they place on men can only last for so long as this tactic is only ever simulative of scarcity.

Some women ape men and try to take over male roles to prove their validity and worth, but most believe what they hear pouring out of mass media. A small percentage wish that they could go back in time to some sort of golden age, but I see no woman confronting their own nature with the assistance of a man they love in the here and now. Hypergamy and neoteny are realities when dealing with women. What needs to be stated is that these phenomena exist as a spectrum, in so far as they manifest to a greater or lesser extent in women. Men also have their more ‘negative’ qualities: without social contracts to bind humans into real relationships we are left with a culture that is consuming itself.

As men all we can do is look out for ourselves and each other as we watch this phase of evolution unfold.