The lies you have been told

For those of you who are subscribed to Kurgan TV, you will be more aware of the historical lies, astronomical lies, religious lies, and origins of humanity lies than most, but in general I tend to keep the sociological lies to a less direct regiment of exposure, and mostly on this blog.

The reality is that to demonstrate the absolute nonsense you have been fed since childhood is difficult enough even when you have solid evidence and factual, objective information to prove your points (see The Face on Mars, Systema, Reclaiming the Catholic Church), whether they relate to human history, the physical abilities humans have they don’t use (short range telepathy, seeing auras, etc) but can be learnt in a few minutes if someone shows you how, or the religious usurpation of Catholicism by active Satanists.

Jim As Aristotle demonstrated millennia ago, most people can’t change their mind even when faced with absolute facts in front of them. How much more difficult then to demonstrate to you the absolute incompleteness of your most cherished ideologies, or, worse their abysmal errors.

Errors that ruin your life. The lives of your loved ones, or that even determine if you end up having loved ones at all!

And yet, what else am I going to do other than try and help you see?

I will tag these kind of posts from today on with the label “social lies”, so if you are interested you can search these series of posts using the search me function. It’s a vast set of topics, and each topic is itself near-infinite, so don’t expect to get all your life’s issues answered at once.

Let us begin then.

The most important and fundamental aspect of life is the family. Regardless of your opinion about it, this is an objectively indisputable fact, since it’s the most successful way to propagate the species with the largest amount of safety, happiness and order than humans have yet devised. This remains true despite damaged fake philosophers like Stefan Molineux or whoever had a crappy family experience. Again, do keep in mind that these posts are generic and apply as true for the vast majority of people and are not a springboard for you to try to argue for your “very special situation indeed”. Also, in 99.999% of cases, even when you really think it is, it really isn’t that special. The concepts here apply to pretty much everyone, to one degree or other. Your ability or inability to grasp that truth is irrelevant to the facts, so try to keep that in mind, and consider these posts more like a discussion of things like gravity and the sun rising in the East. No one cares about your “very special” belief in gravity not existing and the Earth being flat. Least of all me.

And after that little philosophical interlude, let’s get back to the point: Family.

Family is (and can only be) defined as one man and one woman, coming together in a union, usually described as a marriage, for the purpose of creating and raising children.

Of course, this idealised situation is not what actually happens to everyone, some never marry, some never have children, many divorce, many end up with blended families and so on, but again, that’s not the point. This is not about you specifically (or me) unless and until you apply the lesson/knowledge to it, as it applies to your specific circumstances.

As to why you should heed my advice, that’s up to you. I am merely sharing what I have learnt after some decades of reflection on my own experiences which range from being a loyal boyfriend to a twice divorced man (the second of which quite a nasty one that also involved my first daughter), to a man that gave up entirely on long term relationship for a time, to now married in Church with three more children with my wife and a step-daughter from her side too. Some will think that a man that has had such a “varied” experience of relationships (or spectacularly chaotic on the scale of train derailments) is no one you should take any advice from. Perhaps. But then again, some of the best teachers are men who have made all the mistakes and learn from them enough to teach others how to avoid them.

I’m certainly no saint, but even Saul/Paul was a murderer of Christians and then became a martyr for Christ. So, sometimes, the guys who make the most and biggest mistakes can indeed be the ones to learn from. And it applies to many things. In this case, the specific lessons are with respect to the relations between men and women. I do think I have learnt enough on this to share some important considerations. And, as with anything important, whether it is painting, martial arts, or marriage, it is a topic you can, and should, always continue to learn from. There is never a final “mastery”. Only a relative one, which, ultimately, is relative to your life only, not anyone else’s, since everyone is unique.

Even so, some broad concepts apply pretty globally regardless of your special uniqueness.

Since the basis of the family unit in the Christian world begins with one man and one woman, it is this specific relationship that I want to begin to address, since all subsequent relationships related to it, the ones with your children, relatives and even friends either hinge on this one or are influenced by it.

My insights, as I said are pretty global, but best applied to the Western standard and specifically the Christian standard, which therefore is really the Catholic standard, since that is the origin if Christianity. If you are still stuck on Protestantism being some kind of alternative, it’s unlikely you will be able to benefit at all from this post, but you never know. I will be referring to the anglo-saxon/teutonic Protestant approach to marital relationships quite a bit, mostly because they are where the errors that destroy lie and grow and were seeded.

If you get stuck on the idea that Protestantism is “just as valid” (or even better) than Catholicism, or that it is anything other than the perversion and secularisation of Christianity, then, you are unlikely to be able to grasp the benefits of this post. But as I said, I hope you persevere anyway, as sometimes the oddest thing will show you a profound truth.

The best model for the relationship between a man and a woman is to be found in the Bible of course. And this is something I recognised (to my nuclear level of shock at the time) long before I was baptised and became a Catholic.

The relationship is pretty succinctly and simply explained in Ephesians, but the teaching is profound.

In essence, the man is to protect, lead sacrifice himself for and cherish his wife. And the woman is to nurture, love, submit and cherish her husband. That word, cherish, is pivotal.

Within that context, the submission of the wife is not some surrender to the animalistic sexual urges or other dictates of a despotic husband to be obeyed like a prisoner might obey a prison guard. And within that context of cherishing, the leadership of the husband is not some exercise in ego-driven authority and imposition of will.

In the explanation of how a Christian (hence Catholic) husband leads a non-Catholic wife to salvation, the lesson given in Ephesians is one of patient and gentle leadership. And for a Catholic wife to lead a non-Catholic husband the lesson given is one of gentle submission tempered with nurturing love. The key, always, is love. To treat the other, with and from, a position of love. If you lead someone with love, force, tyranny, autocracy, really aren’t going to happen. And if you show a man the truth by genuine submission to him in love while retaining your faith and integrity as a Catholic woman, there can’t be any resentment, passive aggression or withholding of your heart. In such conditions then, relationships can and do flourish.

The first, and most valid objection people have is, invariably: “Ah yes, but even if *I* do my part he/she is in no way guaranteed to do his/hers, and what then? I’d get massively hurt/crushed.”

And so, on that basis, fear wins.

In today’s world, the reality is that NEITHER the man, nor the woman is at all equipped to act in those ways. For most people, learning those ways of being, in the current reality surrounding us is something akin to a man learning the ancient art of cabinet making with secret compartments as in the furniture if old kings, by trial and error and with no prior knowledge. In short, no matter how careful you are, you’re likely to make mistakes. And if you’re the impatient type, like me, some if them will be spectacularly large.

So what to do?

The weak, the beaten, the faithless, the lost, the deceived, the arrogant, the lazy, and the wilfully ignorant, will —-in all likelihood—- become human flotsam of one type or another.

Wrecked marriages, broken families, blended ones like mine, childless lives, lonely lives, with enough damage to go round to make the path for future generations even harder and more confused and lost.

And yet, even so, and perhaps more so now, given the fast approaching dystopian reality we are all increasingly facing, the prospect of learning to be a cabinet maker able to build all the secret compartments, is starting to have more appeal than ever before.

If that is the case, then I suggest to you that the quickest and most comprehensive way to understand and succeed at creating a lasting marriage is to study and learn Catholicism.

I know, I know, all you Protties and Orthobros and agnostics are rolling your eyes now and thinking “here he goes again with his zealotry!”

But the thing is, regardless of your religion, or religious beliefs, if the model works and produces good results, why not use it?

If juggling 4 wives at a time gave good results, I would have taken it up, despite my not in any way subscribing to Islam. But the reality is that in my experimenting phase, I found that having a relationship with more than one woman at a time —-openly, not subterfugeously—- is not a situation that is sustainable in the long term, and certainly not once children are a possibility/reality. The best system, really is the Catholic one, and I learnt this to be the case, if only intellectually at first, before I became any kind if Catholic.

And even then, intellectual understanding is a far cry from experiential understanding.

Nevertheless, let me try to explain, as best I can, given the constraints of time, language and whatever IQ gap may exist between us, what I mean by the Catholic system of male-female, and hence husband-wife relationship.

The first enemy of it is the language. You have been taught that submission from a woman to man is bad, even when chosen. You have also been taught that word, submission only has negative connotations.

Similarly, the demonic spectre of feminism and supposed “equality” between the sexes is a constant toxic poison that permeates every aspect of life on Earth today. You really only need to use your eyes and a basic level of observation to note that men and women are not equal, and never will be. Even the physical structures of the male and female brain are different. The hormonal differences and physical differences are extreme and so are their corresponding effects in the psyche and emotions. And yet, somehow, everyone, to some extent or other, has been infected with this nonsensical idea if equality.

It is toxic and a lie precisely because it causes misery instead if peace. Above all, misery primarily for women. It results in fooling both women and men, into treating women as a kind if second class “man”. A physically less capable man, that has his emotions in a barely held together semblance of normality but in truth is a rollercoaster from day to day and certainly month to month, and who is subjugate to a level of solipsism that in normal men would be seen as either narcissistic, or at least self-absorbed. In addition to this, while supposedly “equal” this fake and lesser “man” gets preferential treatment in an almost endless number of ways. You can’t resolve difference by duking it out and shaking hands afterwards, they have almost no concept of the term honour, other than only paying the most passing of lip service to it, and generally will use whatever excuse works best for their privileged position to avoid responsibility for any number if bad situations that were caused primarily by their own poor decisions.

And presented in that light, it’s no wonder the average man, may find trying to deal with these “women” who have bought into the feminist lies, too much of a chore, and hence decide either to become human husks, focusing on computer games or becoming the equivalent of a modern monk but without the wisdom, dedication or faith, only the celibacy. And involuntary at that. Or, they become man-whores, using women for sexual gratification and entertainment; a different and more immersive kind if gaming, with more stakes in real life, and probably quite a bit more addictive, but ultimately, just another way to kill time and your chances of continuing your line.

But are women just these “equal but not” lesser men? No. No they are not. And if you can but get rid of that absurd, evil, and demonically instigated lie, and begin to see the truth, then, somewhat of a miracle happens. Not unlike seeing a long lost Atlantis and discovering it was always just below the surface of your favourite off-shore scuba diving spot.

So, what is a woman? What is her purpose? Her function, her place in the Universe and here on Earth? And what are the challenges and dangers she faces in being and fulfilling her true potential and abilities as a woman? What are the impediments? Let’s try and answer these things in turn and as simply, yet profoundly, as possible. The barriers to womanhood are especially important to note for a man, and consider them.

What is the purpose of a woman?

At its most fundamental, it is to make, feed, and nurture children until they are old enough to fend for themselves. As the child grows, the introduction of the male, the husband, becomes more important and hence requiring of more involvement. Which is not to say that the male presence should be absent in the first year or so of life, but in truth, the amount of biologically relevant input a man has in the first months of a baby’s life are almost inconsequential when compared to the woman’s. He, of course can be helpful to the woman in many other ways, helping her rest more and taking on more of the daily tasks that need doing, be it around the house, outside of it, or taking care of the baby in ways that are available to him.

Nevertheless, the primary person in a baby’s life is the mother. Even at a basic survival level, a baby literally feeds from the mother. This, whether you bought into feminism or not, is the primary, in fact, existential purpose of a woman at an undeniable, absolute, biological level. Once you truly understand that, and are able to do some logic, and consider some of the consequences of this inescapable reality, then many of the “second class man” attributes that would get an actual man probably clubbed to death by his peers not too long ago in the human past, suddenly begin to be understood not only, as not being evil or insane, but actually even as positive and needed aspects for the fulfilling of her purpose.

Let us consider some of these things now.

How the “flaws” of modern female life are really required positives of real female life.

Let us re-examine the faults of the “second class man” in this light.

Weak – Yes in terms if physical attributes women simply can’t compete with men. We are faster, stronger, able to take more physical damage as well as deliver more of it and so on. But as long as proper allowances are made for this by both men and women, it is not a really important difference. Bigger men are stronger than smaller men or children too, and it is simply accepted and known and allowances for it are made.

Emotionally Unstable – in general terms, and for very real physiological reasons, women’s emotions are stronger, more volatile and more subject to alteration faster, than male emotions. Their different physical brain structure, and completely opposite and powerful hormonal differences and related big fluctuations of those same hormones —-not only on a monthly basis, but even daily, and more so if she is not taking the toxic artificial hormones so many take to prevent pregnancy—- all serve to make her own internal states be far less controllable by her than a man’s.

But why should that be so? Because for most of two million years or so, emotions, being faster than abstract thought, have been the primary survival tool for women. A powerful emotion that makes her scream for help at the most innocuous of bugs, brings the stomping man in a hurry. It doesn’t matter if it was a harmless bug. Better safe than sorry, and the guy with the club can deal with it. Her biology is geared to reproduction, so when she is ovulating she will want to reproduce with the most viable genetic male present. And for two million years, that was the guy most able with a club who other men looked up to. Because even if he had the choice of females, the small tribe he belonged to required a certain level of loyalty that is thought if as science fiction now. Even if he did screw around, he would still almost invariably take care of feeding his children and their mother/s. Not so now thanks to feminism. Hey, the state can look after you. And maybe their wages get docked for maintenance, but you know… so long, girlie! I got me another baby mama I wanna impregnate this week. So in the context of the biology it makes sense. In the context of modern survival, not as much, but you can’t rewire two million years of wetware in barely one hundred years of modernity. So, the correct approach here is for the man to remain calm and over time, gently lead her to realise her anxieties are unfounded. Of course, if even after gentle and constant demonstration of your ability to rise to the occasion, not have sex with her sister, best friend, or random strangers, she can’t modify her behaviour to become more attuned with reality instead of her biologically driven imperatives, then, you may wish to seek solace elsewhere after all. After all, if you can restrain yourself and your hormones from bashing in the skull of every disrespectful, rude asshole you meet daily, that would have been a certain duel to the death in feudal Japan, she can learn to not freak out at every little thing that life throws at us. Even so, as a man, it is important you make allowances for her biology. And yes, the reality is you’re basically choosing to hitch your future to what is to some extent, a schizophrenic mental patient, but, them’s the apples you have. You can make apple pie, apple crumble, apple jam, apple juice, maybe apple schnapps and so on, but you can’t make tequila out of it.

Her solipsism – Yes, it is true that narcissism in general is on the rise anyway, and women are certainly prone to a version of this (as men are to another version of it, which is ultimately the same thing but present differently) but a woman’s solipsism is intrinsic, and natural and also a function of biology. The reason for this, is, again, simple. If twenty women survive and one man, he can still have a chance of repopulating the Earth. But if only one woman survives and twenty men, the human race is essentially doomed. In purely biological terms, or the continuation of the species, female humans are more valuable than males. Add to that that they are also far more essential for the survival of babies for the first few years of life, and the concept that a woman’s life is generally worth more than that of a man is obvious. Biologically, men are far more expendable. The literal survival of humanity has depended on this fact for countless millennia. Hence men are wired to be far more able and willing to self-sacrifice for the good of the tribe than women ever can be. When the SHTF, a woman will tend to look after herself first, children second, (sometimes this order can also be reversed, in the best of women) and husband a distant third. In the modern world, once again, her biological imperative, so useful and necessary for millennia, has now been weaponised against herself and against familial harmony.

Self-serving hypocrisy/lack of honour – in light of the above, you can see how the concept of death before dishonour, your word being your bond, and shame for treating others by a measure you refuse to apply to yourself all make sense in the biological context of being a woman, and why such concepts are instead fundamental to a functioning society… governed by men.

The essential survival pressure of men is objective reality. Bad weather, other men from a rival tribe, natural disasters, wild animals and so on. In such conditions men learn to co-operate with other men regardless of rheir emotions or personal feelings and everyone knows their place and the pecking order, because NOT doing so puts the whole tribe in danger and as such is likley to see you clubbed to death by your own male tribe members before rival tribes can do it.

But the survival pressure for women is essentially: other women. They threaten her ability to snag the top club-wielder of the entire cave system and as such, ensuring the best chance for her and her offspring. So women develop sneaky, false friendship, type attitudes, especially towards other women. By complimenting a rival, a woman, unconsciously or not, aims to lower the guard of her opponent, so that she might sneak her man from under her. Or her food. Or her position in the tribe. The very concept of honour, justice and fairness is completely steam-rollered by the idea that she needs to survive and feed her children if her DNA is to continue to exist.

While among men, without honour, justice and fairness, at least to a degree that leaves women light-years behind, is an imperative precisely because an ordered and functioning, co-operative society can’t exist without it. And who creates that civilisation, requiring of discipline, self-sacrifice, dedication, and a focus on future-planning, including everything from hot water and indoor plumbing, to antigravity spaceships and the conquering of the galaxy, are men.

Men. Not women.

So. Does this mean women are less important for the functioning or existence of humanity when compared to men? No.

Obviously not. And if you do think that, you’re obviously probably a flat-Earther, pagan LARPer that hasn’t gotten any sex with willing partners, and are embittered enough by it to be able to miss the logic described briefly above. Not to mention all the other vital aspects that I have not even mentioned for their obviousness, such as for example the breast-feeding women do, which is a necessary and natural aspect of child-rearing.

Much of the biological imperatives of women may seem outdated or no longer necessary in the modern world, but objectively speaking, while some truth can be attributed to this, it must be recognised that:

• That same biological imperative is literally the reason you personally exist. And me. And every other living human being. In short, it has served us well.

• It isn’t going to change anytime soon. While women should make every effort to develop their sense of logic, balance, fairness and emotional stability, the reality is that presently, wetware takes a much longer timeline to adjust than does technology.

• Our “masters of the Universe” present state of affairs is mostly delusional. Our technological victory over nature is fragile and temporary, and can collapse almost instantly. Let widespread economic collapse, a little war and the inability to keep electric power stations running, coupled with a loss of internet access, and we’ll revert back to cave-times social dynamics in a heartbeat.

• Perhaps most important of all, it must be recognised that a woman’s biological imperatives have been intentionally, consciously, and maliciously, turned against her. The very things that defined her usefulness as a co-creator of the human race, have been contextualised in the modern world to exhibit as mostly net negatives in the context of women being “another kind of man”.

But so what, right? In view of the above, what is the answer? What, should you, as a man, make of it all? How is the weaponising of women’s biology against themselves (and you) your problem, responsibility, or fault? And aside from all that, what should be your course of action? What, and how, should you behave to restore balance, harmony, happiness, and a secure future for humanity?

That post, is also going to be a long one, and will be posted as time permits in the next day or two.

PS: typos and “autocorrects” probably persist. This post has been done over a couple of days in between many tasks and not been reviewed for such errors. Feel free to post comments or drop me a mail with required corrections and I will eventually get to it.

[ X ]

This entry was posted in Social Commentary. RSS 2.0 feed.