Feminism and Unwin’s observations by @Asipatravana

Feminists promote and support rape – as long as the rapists are the 'correct' rapists. The recent
example of the Swedish feminist who let her 12 year old daughter be raped by some Rapefugee in
return for being her boi toi is a good example.
This is not surprising. Feminists and Liberals in general preach that social norms are meaningless
and advocate a return to a more laissez-faire lifestyle where emotions and freedoms trump
discipline, tradition, and civilization. The law of the Jungle, in a nutshell.

The key point most young morons dreaming of 'women's rights' and 'personal freedoms' etc forget is
that their utopian world does have a law. The Law of the Jungle. In brief, ability, power and the
chance to breed trump everything.

Unwin was the first among modern scholars though – by no means the last. Peterson seems to have
independently rediscovered several of Unwin's ideas – to suggest a linkage between Sexual
dynamics and cultural achievement within a society.

Of course this is not to say that Unwin was an unquestioned genius. He wasn't. Unwin's strength
was to dispassionately analyse historical and anthropological data without being unduly concerned
about 'charlog'. His weakness was that he was still a liberal & worse, a Freudian.

That said, his research was further curtailed by two major factors – one, he died very young at
barely 40, and two, he lived and worked through WW1 & the inter-War period. Even so, his
findings were what most today will describe as 'controversial' & 'disturbing' – before a ban.

Of course, we can also suspect that he must have been acquainted with the writings of Spengler –
even though Spengler had little to say about sexuality in general – & the mysterious Ragnar
Redbeard. Even so, Unwin's studies don't validate Social Darwinism but something different.

The primary postulate the so-called Law of the Jungle would imply is that 1) Individuals sought to
reproduce. 2) the absence of any prevailing legal structures. Thus its evident that the onus of
reproduction lay primarily on women, both on account of time & effort required.

We see similar aspects in other intelligent (& violent) animal societies as well. For example, lions
kill all the cubs in a pride after defeating the incumbent head so that the lionesses don't waste time
& energy on a dead rival's descendants.

Among the degenerate and Liberal civilizations, the same behavior is observed- a prime example is
the recent movie on the tyrant Khilji whose culture advocates that pagan children are to be castrated
and turned into slaves. Aryas, being Arya, never had such a practice.

Anyway, back to the topic. Thus in a laissez-faire society, the Men have the incentive to sire kids on
as many women as possible. The women, for their security & their kids', have the incentive to have
their kids sired by the most influential/strong Male in the region.

Thus we observe a trend where there is greater incentive for men to weed most other males, to
create small tribes compared to large organizations, and to dominate said organizations in order to
attract more women. This system is what some call 'Hypergamy'.
So what's the catch here? Thing is- 1- Males don't actually have to provide for Females in such a
system. Rapes, Wars, Kidnappings would've been common. 2- Beyond a point, Females will lack
the incentive to defend their current children wrt potential future kids.

Even today, we can see similar systems at work. The concept of Bride Kidnapping which lingers on
in Central Asia and Africa. The plummeting marriage and Fertility rates in regions like Sweden
where female proto-hypergamous incentives aren't countered by male ones.

The turning point remains hidden in the mists of time. But I personally hold that it were the gods
who ended this state of affairs and brought order to Mankind. Degenerates like Atheists will not
understand. So let me explain.

Atheists, being essentially unreasonable goons with no idea of Udayana or Aquinas, harp on and on
about the material aspect of Gods. That's absurd for anyone who thinks about it. A key point in most
faiths is the polycentric nature of the gods and the faiths.

Abrahmic scholars, like children, divide the gods into one for wind, one for water, one for fire, such
crap. But anyone who has read the Bhagavada Gita knows the nature of Krishna. His words were,
even earlier, echoed by Indra when he said that he was the Sun.

Which puts the recurring conflict between Indra and Surya's children in a very different light but
thats another story. Now modern scholars used to think that Agriculture and Civilization preceeded
the gods. We know this is false. The Gods and their Temples predated Humanity.

In so far that one can argue that the Gods are civilization. Now the Sexual dynamics of the Jungle
have created a system that dis-incentivizes Men from building great things and Women from having
many kids - since most sons will die or flee anyway.
Instead you needed a system where the various actors could reach a stable state where
1-The Elite Men enjoy advantages by sacrificing their present Sexual advantages.
2- Elite criminals are punished.
3- The Prole Men can breed.
4- Prole Women don’t have to fear for their kids.
The trouble is- this is really shit tier system. Note that you're not actually solving any issues- merely
distracting everyone. Elite women - the most fertile, pretty- aren't being helped at all. You've
guaranteed security for the kids of Prole women but not for them themselves.
Prole Men have been turned into essentially slaves and while you've curbed the Elite criminals and
trust the Elites to crush Prole criminals, there's nothing to stop the Elite Men's excesses. So you
need some utilitarian doctrine- and someone to enforce it- to keep the peace.
But then again- quo custodiet ipsos custodes? It's not enough. The logical answer is to artificially
elevate someone to the level of this utilitarian, infinitely wise, infinitely capable doctrine. But then
again - quo custodiet ipsos custodes?
So you replace this fallible custodes with an infallible invisible agent, beyond the comprehension of
your fledgling society, to reign over your peoples baseless desires. The first and greatest of all
judges. Not for nothing does Indra say "Aham Manur"
To 'watch' over the fallible society though, it is necessary to install priests, and it's even more
necessary lest they be corrupted by fallible desires to insulate them from fallible society. The
modern concept- both among Hindus & Degenerates- of Brahmins is incorrect.
World over, the priestly class lived in seclusion and often grueling, self-inflicted deprivation in
order to better comprehend the voice of the gods. Even Abrahmics have similar systems, and the
relative belligerence of the "priestless" sects such as evangelicals is evident.
Because in absence of detached interpreters, the underlying instability of society will require an
ever increasing Prole class with more and more women and slaves. The Society will be inherently
expansionist and predatory with no real internal impetus for the higher studies.
Thus the gods have directly sanctioned an inherently unequal society with strict social hierarchy
which artificially restricts women's rights for added security for their kids. Minor differences among
humans exist depending on climate, terrain but this model is mostly true.
By restricting Sexual rights among Social strata and enforcing fidelity & security for children above
all – the Society achieved massive advantages over its earlier avatars. This system had overrun the
most fertile areas of the World as it promoted population growth.
This was compounded by enforcing a limited form of Hypergamy where young men must ensure a
secure life for any potential children (compared to earlier system of doing so for a woman).
Ensuring that increasingly women were exchanging personal freedom for tribal integrity.
Since I started writing this on a whim, I can't actually crack up the book - but this online sourced
quote from a review by Huxley will serve as a gist of Unwin's studies.
“Unwin’s conclusions, which are based upon an enormous wealth of carefully sifted
evidence, may be summed up as follows. All human societies are in one or another of four
cultural conditions: zoistic, manistic, deistic, rationalistic. Of these societies the zoistic
displays the least amount of mental and social energy, the rationalistic the most.
Investigation shows that the societies exhibiting the least amount of energy are those where
pre-nuptial continence is not imposed and where the opportunities for sexual indulgence
after marriage are greatest. The cultural condition of a society rises in exact proportion as it
imposes pre-nuptial and post-nuptial restraints upon sexual opportunity.”
In all of Unwin's studies, higher civilization or mere cultural dominance was only achieved by
societies with well defined social structures with high levels of Sexual fidelity and a preferably
monogamous marriage system with restricted divorce laws.
So what's the catch again? Problem is while the gods have given us order and civilization, we are
inherently incapable of appreciating their gifts on account of legacy of millions of years of
evolution. This discord primarily affects the Elite women for already given reasons.
The situation has been further complicated by the decline of the Ethnocentric Nation State & Tribal
Faith, and the rise of Socialism. In essence, the utilitarian invisible agent we once described has
ceased to be an agent of Metaphysical order and one of base commerce.
Thus, we observe certain tendencies:-
1- The replacement of the Prole Husband with the welfare State.
2- The disdain for child-rearing and, in extreme cases, children.
3- Hatred for Tradition and Order.
4- The increasing 'polygamification' of sexuality
This also explains the seeming incongruity of Elite-driven Feminism affecting Proles the most.
Since the Welfare State is most exploitable by the Elite & natural hypergamy among women still
holds true, the impact gets transmitted down the line.
Also the decline of traditional values such as tradition, stoicism, faith, tribal cooperation leads to the
rise in the sexual potentiality of formerly disdained male traits such as violence, asocial aggression,
& general viciousness. Of course, physical power remains a fixture
In brief, modern Feminist society has not only displaced the Husband with the State and the Father
with the Thug, it has also ensured that we are stepping back into the Stone Age in terms of Sexual
dynamics.
As Unwin concluded…
“If the British anthropologist J. D. Unwin is correct in his assessment of society, this present
generation in the Western world may be the last one. In his book, Sex and Culture, professor
Unwin studied eighty ‘uncivilized’ cultures and compared his results with sixteen ‘civilized’
cultures extending over the last 4,000 years. He found that when strict heterosexual
monogamy was practiced, the society attained its greatest cultural energy, especially in the
arts, sciences and technology. But as people rebelled against the prohibitions placed upon
them and demanded more sexual opportunities, there was a consequent loss of their creative
energy, which resulted in the decline and eventual destruction of the civilization.
Remarkably, he did not find any exception to this trend.”
Now at this point of time, the anti civilizational aspects of Feminism means that only societies that
aggressively clamp down- not only on female ability to aspire for such nonsensical 'freedoms' but
also restrict their potential to learn of them – will survive in the long run.
Further the mere aspect of Male aggression such control would entail as well as the Prole Women's
tendency to fixate on tribal stability and children's security when insulated from Feminist absurdity,
implies that the Males of such a community will be more attractive in general.
In brief, Feminism is a self defeating mechanism geared to select for the Reproductive systems most
inimical to it and the most brutal and vicious in its inimicality. This is compounded in the absence
of Ethnocentric or Faith based fidelity.
This is a society wide memeplex, so even nominally pro-civilizational women often will indulge in
absurdities about 'rights'- or rather, the continued breakdown of the societal hierarchy- ultimately
only assisting in the continued collapse of the incumbent civilization.
As such, it's the end of a Spenglerian age. Whoever is left standing by the time the door stops
turning, will know the answer to all things. One way or the other, Unwin will have his pound of
flesh. An educated Hendo Feminist is a threat to Hindu civilization. An educated Mlecchaa Feminist
is also a threat to Hindu civilization.