As a matter of physical fact, there are only two genders: men and women. Men shouldn’t compete in female sports, and they certainly can’t have babies. However, in reality, there is actually an in-between gender that’s always been around, but is now very visible: the androgynous. Most have male genitalia but present physically as indeterminate. Statistics say that 30% of males under 30 are still virgins; it seems likely these are the cohort reported. It’s unclear if these people even want to engage in sex, as differentiated from the incels, the involuntary celibate, that would if they could. It’s unclear if they even masturbate? They don't need sex dolls; if they do have a non-sexual relationship it will be online, increasingly so with an AI.

A lot of people, especially feminists, celebrate androgyny and revel in the plight of incels. They engage in unfettered sex with a legion of partners with no empathy towards those that don’t even know what they’re missing. There is even a militant contingent of women that don’t want men to have sex at all, and if they do, it’s in the most restricted of circumstances. Unfortunately, these people ignore history which shows exactly what happens to falling empires. All the things that require testosterone to function will begin to fail, most likely due to virgins. The West will deteriorate until the virile East defeats them militarily, or even simply walks into a country devoid of men but full of androgyny.

The people concerned with inequality are the losers, but winners are the ones who will pay the price. Wokeness, at least the part that objectively discriminates against Whites, takes inequality out of the simple realm of wealth, talent, and luck, and focuses on unequal power dynamics. This phrase, created by wokers, is defined as anybody and anything that is more successful than them. “Equality,” as defined by them, is a matter of “fairness,” whatever that is. It’s curious that fairness became the ultimate society standard? How did that happen? It roughly began about the time women got the right to vote but really gathered steam as feminism increased. Women wanted to compete in a man’s world, but they couldn’t, so they created a cryptic religion that excuses their failures as a fault of men, who they said had an unfair power advantage.

Of course, that was all rhetoric gobbledygook: life is an unequal power dynamic, and anybody denying that fact is simply trying to switch the power over to themselves. The patriarchy is the perfect example of an unequal power dynamic: every step up the ladder is more powerful than the step before it, and steps near the bottom have no power at all in relation. However, even at the lowest rungs, there is a power differential between the bottom step and the one directly above it. It works for men because. men know that life is completely unfair; it’s enforced on them every day in the male dominance hierarchy. That’s why fairness has to be a female thing that crept into the social zeitgeist while men were too busy elbowing their way up the ladder.

Western society has dramatically changed over the last century, certainly in matters related to physical progress like manufacturing, transportation, science & medicine, but the most fundamental changes are social, specifically the rise of feminism. The adaptation hasn’t been symmetric: men are in large part still expected to pursue their traditional role of provision & protection, but women have assumed a rise in status; they have become the elite half of homo sapiens. This distortion is possible due to the evolutionary pressure that made men want to serve as head of a family so as to propagate their genetic line. However, women have exploited this essence of men to serve their own selfish purposes that appear a lot more like narcissism than as partner in a nuclear family. The results don’t look promising for the future.

The old adage that it’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind but it’s a man’s duty to be consistent was acceptable when the husband was the king, his wife the queen, and their children their subjects. Now that men are no longer held in such esteem with the privileges that come with it, such a dual standard is no longer workable. Unfortunately, a man’s innate desire to serve in his traditional role has not diminished, and men who don’t do so never mature; they are left little more than gown up boys still serving their mommy’s demands. As long as men can so easily be exploited, society will continue to deteriorate. It cannot address women’s sense of entitlement without first addressing men’s sense of obligation. One or the other has to go.

The 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1922, gave women the right to vote, called suffrage, but there’s a call to repeal the Nineteenth bubbling under the surface of the extreme Right-wing. It’s a meme, meaning no one actually believes taking away women’s voting is going to happen, or is even the best possible solution to the West’s deterioration, but it does succinctly serve to specifically identify a cause to society’s woes: feminism and its woke agenda that discriminates against Whites, especially men. For a country that prides itself on trying to provide equal opportunity, it’s ironic that the proposed solution is to take opportunity from one group, white men, to give to the everyone else, primarily women.

Pearl Davis, an influential young female podcaster in the Red Pill space, is “repeal the Nineteenth”’s most vocal advocate. “Women ruin every industry we get into,” she says, and identifies feminism as the major destructive force to marriage & families. She also notes the increasing narcissism of young women and gynocentricity. Right now, Pearl’s message is only allowed because she’s a women; if it came from a man, he would be called a misogynist & canceled, but many men, and a growing proportion of women, increasingly silently agree. Expect “Repeal the Nineteenth” to gain momentum as the downward spiral of interpersonal misery continues. Women voting may not have caused the problems with the West but it’s a very suspicious scapegoat.

Marriage in the West has collapsed. There are probably a lot of things that have contributed to the decline but the primary culprit correlates with the rise of feminism. It’s difficult to discuss feminism because it’s one of those hot-button issues where women have an emotional trigger in their minds of what “feminism” is that’s amorphous and vague and plays into feelings of both victimhood & ambition. There also seems to be waves of an ever-increasing definition of what feminism is, up to what is now referred to as “toxic” feminism, though that too isn’t well defined.

As far as I can determine, here are the waves of feminism:

1st Wave: That's my wife. Doesn't cook, does whatever she wants whether I disagree or not, college degree, works half time in a professional occupation, primary child-rearer, cleans, makes family plans, agreeable. Because of the strong, independent nature of this manifestation, we were able to do things together that would not have been possible for me alone, but we were on the outer-envelope of being able to stay together because I wanted to be the king of last resort.

2nd Wave: Over the next quarter century, the disconnect between what men want and what women provide got wider & wider, resulting in a reduction in marriage & lots of divorces. Neither men nor women met the expectations of what the other brought to the table. Women absolutely refused to subjugate themselves to their husbands.

The 3rd Wave is “toxic” due to the woke mind virus. There is no compatibility between masculine men & toxic feminists. Masculine men can still match with the very few non-feminists women, and Low-T men can match with some feminists, but at least half of women are totally incompatible with men. Culturally, wokeness is finally on the defensive but it has not yet surrendered and can still make a resurgence if the Democrat party, which is the party of women, gets back into control. What happens from there is only speculation but the outcome is guaranteed to be bad. 3rd Wave feminism threatens the end of modern society.

The Left controls the language which gives them a huge advantage when it comes to debating. For example, the word “gender,” which used to be almost interchangeable with “sex,” now has such a subtle meaning that a supreme court justice cannot explain what a “woman” is. It was so bad that biological men were taking advantage of Title IV to play sports on biological women’s sports teams and systematically taking away top awards and scholarships intended for real women. There’s been a lot of pushback from the Trump administration, but if it was left up to Republican women, wokeness would still be in vogue. Twenty years from now, people of the future will be looking back at these times as mental illness. However, that doesn’t mean gender is not an important concept.

The problem with society, the reason for its decline, is the lack of strong gender training. There’s a relatively easy solution: segregated schooling. Not only could the curriculum be focused on testosterone, or not, for optimal learning, but femininity or masculinity could be taught. If a boy was not masculine enough, that’s when he would be given testosterone-enhancing medication, and anti-T for too-masculine females. Masculinity, provide & protect plus stoicism, could be programmed into boys, and femininity, nurture & support plus social cohesion, into girls. These are not sex-related goals, because they can be taught; they are gender-related. That’s what makes setting the correct definition of “gender” so important.

It’s a man’s world; not in the sense that men control it, decidedly not in the West, but because only men can survive it; women simply do not have the skills. For example, women went on strike in Iceland to prove how valuable they were to society, and after a week, nothing had changed so they abandoned their futile demonstration. However, if men had done the same thing, after a week things would start breaking down, the rhythm & serenity of life would disappear, and people would be starving. Even when AI robots arrive, it will be the traditionally female jobs that get replaced; the things men do can’t be done by robots.

In post apocalyptic television shows like “The Walking Dead,” men and women are portrayed as equals but that’s an absurd fantasy. If men quit protecting women, it doesn’t take much imagination to know where that would lead; in a doomsday scenario, women would quickly become the captives and chattel of the most aggressive men; and if anyone thinks robots will protect them, they obviously don’t comprehend the violence capacity of men. Understanding the relative values of women vs. men in the world’s harsh environment doesn’t make me a misogynist; in fact, it makes me, as a man, understanding my responsibility to women if humanity is to continue. That’s what civility is: it’s what civilization is built on; men surrendering their innate superiority to women for the betterment of both.

If society is not frequently discussed, it ceases to exist:

1. Civilization is controlling body chemistry.

2. Trump signals the end of the Fourth Turning.

3. Marrying early may not be fashionable but it’s essential.

4. It takes a clan to raise a family.

5. Women have to be taught to be wives & mothers.

6. Indoctrination creates a society and vice versa.

7. Patrilineal succession offers more security than a matrilineal one.

8. Woke is not possible without vast wealth concentration.

9. Men are made to be the protectors of women but women have to use them.

You may get your news somewhere else but take your advice from me, the Wysest Myn in the Wyrld.

Because of testosterone, men can simply do things that women find difficult, meaning men have a capacity & responsibility that women just don’t have. This has a profound affect on society, even as to its very existence. It’s not that men are superior but more like an umbrella. Imagine a woman is walking outside when it starts raining. She opens her umbrella, which keeps the rain off so that she is unbothered. The umbrella is nothing special but it’s water repellent and dries quickly. An unassuming man is like an umbrella because men are built for the protecting women. A woman without an umbrella risks getting wet, and worse.

Women are not weaker than an umbrella; they are the ones that use the umbrella. Wives use their husbands as umbrellas and men are expecting it, so much so that women take them for granted. But that’s okay because umbrellas are meant to be used; an umbrella that is not used is useless. Some umbrellas are heavier than others, so a woman must select the one she can hold up. Holding up her man is a woman’s responsibility. Unfortunately, many women are not even getting an umbrella, or abandoning their umbrellas, and in the worse cases, claim umbrellas are causing the rain.

The terminal problem with capitalism is wealth concentration. If that isn’t addressed, then only a small handful of people will run the world by buying influence with their vast hoard of imaginary money. They have so much wealth that market forces can be ignored, so they can lose vast amounts of money buying failing newspapers, movie studios, financing political candidates, even paying for violent protests. The other 99% of the population are propagandized that these people either don’t exist or are somehow justified in this distortion of democracy because they have the right to do anything they want with their money, however they may have procured it.

Wokeness is a prime example of wealth overcoming the will of the people. Even at its most powerful, less than half of the public supported DEI, ESG, and other modern forms of reverse discrimination and socialist tyranny, but virtually all institutions were captured: news, entertainment, social media, education, corporations & government oversight. This is because woke billionaires paid for that control and imposed woke on everyone, regardless of what the market was and is. It’s ironic that what finally broke the woke stranglehold was other billionaires who used their vast wealth to push back, regardless of what it cost them because they were above caring about market forces. It’s all about who has the money, democracy has nothing to do with it.