Saturday 2 December 2023

A Dangerous Time to be a Woman

 From the spiritual point of view this is a dangerous time to be a woman. That might seem an odd thing to say since women have more power and freedom today than ever before, but that is just the point.  There is more power and freedom to reject God and the order of creation, and there is political and cultural support for doing so. A woman in the modern world must have a finely tuned spiritual sensibility to go against the prevailing winds. Plus an awareness of her natural tendencies towards vanity and entitlement. That doesn't mean reversion to traditional behaviour because there was always some truth and necessity in the idea of female emancipation and empowerment in the 19th century. To deny that would be to deny reality. All human beings were moving towards a greater awareness of self. Nonetheless, the truth that prompted the original ideas behind feminism do not justify its capitulation to forces of egotism, resentment, spiritual greed, pride and ignorance which is what has happened.

It should be obvious to an unbiased mind that contemporary trends in feminist ideology have led to the validation of female pathologies and the rebranding as positive virtues of such things as hatred of men, excessive self-assertion, extreme emotionalism, aggressive argumentativeness, narcissism (I'm worth it) and other familiar examples of what can reasonably be described as toxic femininity. The traditional and true feminine virtues such as kindness, humility, gentleness, ability to sacrifice, all summed up in the figure of the Blessed Virgin Mary, are derided as weak and submissive, concocted as ideals by men to keep women in check. At the same time, women are led into areas of life in which they have to suppress their natural femininity and develop more masculine traits which just separate them from their true selves and paths of spiritual fulfilment. You get what an acquaintance of mine once called the female cockerel. And yet, it has to be said, properly oriented women would not succumb to this. Those who do succumb do so because they are indulging an aspect of their fallen nature. A test has been given them and they have not proved equal to the temptations of egotism.

I know someone who has strong elements of what we now call borderline and narcissistic personality disorders and who, unsurprisingly, is a radical feminist because her radical feminism justifies and validates her psychological disorders. This may be thought an extreme example, but I wonder how many other times this scenario plays out in the minds of modern Western women who have been given the opportunity to sin in a way that has not been open to them before. I am reminded of Jesus's saying that it is harder for the rich to get into heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. Riches is not just about money. It is also about power. Women have more of both these days and are correspondingly more at risk of spiritual loss.

This may not only be the fault of women though it must be said that it is mostly their fault because of female egotism and let's not pretend otherwise in the name of a misconceived sense of chivalry. Nevertheless, men have been weak and abandoned their natural responsibilities and duties. They have fallen for the temptation of wanting to be thought fair and progressive. So, in effect, both sexes have repeated the sin of the Garden of Eden, and the spiritual consequences are similar with increased separation from God the most significant.

I suspect that the degree to which a woman is or is not a feminist in the 21st century sense indicates the degree to which she is or is not in tune with the spirit of Christ. It's not the only measure but it is an important one. This doesn't mean that the ways of the past did not need to evolve. The development of consciousness means that the roles of the sexes did need to change at about the time they began to do so, but framing the discourse in terms of equality was a grave error. It should have required each sex seeking out its spiritual archetype and then conforming the soul to that. Women were meant to manifest greater personal autonomy but they were not meant to imitate men, still less seek to usurp their roles which increasingly they have and one of the consequences of that is the feminisation of institutions.

The feminisation of any institution always leads to its ineffectiveness as it first weakens and then eventually destroys the mission of that institution. This can be seen most obviously today in the fields of the university and the media. But it is also happening in science and religion which are both much diminished in our time as feelings replace facts and consensus trumps truth with hierarchical distinction broken down to egalitarian mediocrity.

The accusation of misogyny is often used to disarm and paint black those who simply point out the disorders of females while doing the same thing for men is fine. Those who uphold the traditional Christian (or just traditional) view of the roles of the two sexes are similarly dismissed. It's yet another weaponised word (racism, sexism etc) which is trotted out to shut down argument and score points without being required to demonstrate truth. All radical political movements seek to capture and control language and it is important in any fightback not to be bound by or respect the linguistic conventions of the new ideology which only exist to force the argument into certain predetermined channels.

It's also important not to fall for softer versions of the ideology which is a temptation as one might think these are not so bad as what else is on offer. I have noticed several books published recently by people describing themselves as ex-feminists or rational feminists who don't hate men and who wish to reclaim the territory that has been captured by the extreme version. One might feel relieved that sanity is reasserting itself but when you investigate these you find it is the same thing as before, just presented slightly differently. Often it is the sexual revolution that is rejected but that is only because it has advantaged men and disadvantaged women which may be true but it is a different question to that of the fundamentally misconceived basis of feminism itself.

Feminism can be regarded as a test for women. For both sexes but mostly for women. It is one that the great majority of them are failing. It is rather like giving someone a lot of money or power and seeing what they do with it, how they react to it. That is why I say this is a spiritually dangerous time to be a woman. You have been given what you want or what your ego wants. Of course, the other side of this is that those women who see through this worldly temptation will make considerable spiritual progress. As for men, they have to reject the spiritual sin of feminism while acknowledging that men and women both represent a fundamental aspect of God's creation though their roles are not the same, should not be confused (though there is overlap) and must be understood if harmony is to reign. The wise and the foolish understand this. The merely clever, of whom there are many these days, do not. Modern education has a lot to answer for.


Buff said...

Our ancestors did not allow women to vote or hold office for good reason, the consensus being that it would lead to disaster. Hence, our current Clown World. That women should have agency over their sexuality has proved equally destructive to society expressed in the lack of marriages, plummeting birthrates, skyrocketing divorce rates (70% initiated by women), and a normalized slut culture (onlyfans, etc). Society worked when fathers had this control, only relinquishing it to a worthy man who would marry his daughter. (((Feminism))) argued that women should have all these things and could wield them responsibly. They had their chance to prove it, and they have failed miserably. So yes, a return to traditional roles and responsibilities will happen. The only question is by who will insist on it, Western men or their migrant replacements?

The "original ideas behind feminism" were Jewish, pushed by Jews. They understand the female psyche well, and weaponized it against the West.

As you alluded to, the West is not suffering from too much “misogyny”, but not enough, misogyny being merely, as you correctly stated, simply pattern recognition, which, in all its forms is illegal in the current year. We DO however suffer too much misandry under a weaponized (((alien))) controlled gynocracy.

Really excellent essay.

William Wildblood said...

Thanks for your comment, Buff. I don't think an exact return to the past can be right because consciousness has evolved in that we all have a greater sense of what it is to be an individual. Feminism was a response to that but the wrong response because it was political and egotistically motivated rather than spiritual. It was revolution rather than evolution and we know who the spirit is behind revolution. But perhaps we did need to evolve in some sense though always observing the natural order of creation which does not change.

Bruce Charlton said...

William -- A very interesting post, that breaks some new ground for me. I have for quite a while pointed out that women are *biologically* much more vulnerable to the harms of modern societies - in that it is quite easy to confuse and indoctrinate women Not to want reproduction under any circumstances, or to behave in ways that actually deter potential permanent marriage relationships (which human biologically need).

But you are saying something quite different I think. Women have a different consciousness, and respond to different incentives than Men - and the two are intended to be complementary at both the social and individual (dyadic) level. But this is all so badly broken at present, that it is difficult to see how things ought to be.

Yet we must have positive ideas of what things should be, if we are to understand how they are not.

I was fascinated if not fully convinced by a book I wrote about a while ago - the author (100 years ago) at least tried to formulate how men and women were supposed to work together spiritually.

There may also be insights in the magical-orientated Christian writers who practiced dyadic forms of contemplation and meditation - Dion Fortune and Gareth Knight for example. e.g. GK did a lot of magical visualization etc with his wife (and more as they got older - it replaced larger group activities); as part of what seems to have been a very good marriage (see his biography "I called it magic").

William Wildblood said...

Part of what I am saying is that the Adam and Eve story contains profound truths and some elements of it are being repeated today - to our spiritual detriment.

Jacob Gittes said...

Thanks for this one.
So true.
It's interesting that as women, on average, get more and more miserable from modernity and feminism, most of them don't reject their indoctrination, but rather double-down and blame men and patriarchy even more. However, I believe we are reaching a breaking point: the breakdown of society will be so great, that to survive will require rejecting these evils.

William Wildblood said...

It's as you say. People have invested so much of their being in a false ideology that no evidence will convince them they are wrong so when the crunch inevitably comes it will be severe.

Buff said...

Video for your consideration.

Christopher Yeniver said...

Women face such hardship which men are mostly immune to, besides maybe obsession with the penis, and I mean destruction of the body and conscience of this. Unfortunately, women are led into accepting what is obvious destruction. I am dealing with a coworker's wife who is vegan. The body decays and fades as is normal. What must be asked at a point in life is what we are. If anger arises from questioning a choice then one has not accepted responsibility for that choice.