Thread by @bronzeagemantis

Maybe like me you are interested in the reestablishment of order of nature in sexual affairs and of certain kinds of very ancient order-reimagined for future. But that has nothing to do with chimping about femael behavior now, which comes pre-caricatured and is impotent cuqq move

https://twitter.com/bronzeagemantis/status/1679125958010216448

I had a long thread about this that Twatter just deleted when I tried to post--wonderful. Should I rewrite it quickly now. Of course a big article is necessary on this

By coincidence yesterday in conversation with someone I brought up standard of Athenian marriage to contrast it with Jonah Hill's shopkeeper outburst impotently trying to control his girlfriend. It's a sorry comparison but fiasco over some nobody's "relationship" reveals much:

What is the premodern order--at least ones that are admirable--in regards to marriage, sex, breeding? How were eg Athenian, Roman, Mosaic marriage law set up, what did they consist in at bottom, what was the purpose?

Premodern sexual and marriage order isn't "family values" as modern conservatives imagine it; also it didn't depend on appeals to shaming or convincing thots. It was patriarchal or more precisely PATRICIAN, and set up by a small cadre of armed men with a view to their interests.

The men who set up any kind of admirable and lasting social order e.g. in Athens, Rome, Jerusalem gave this authority to a legislator--Cecrops, Numa, whoever was behind Mosaic law--who arranged things not on emotional reaction to femael unfairness, but with view to real interests

These interests were: continuity of founding citizen/stakeholder bloodlines, assurance of paternity, especially with view to property and their stake in sovereignty; in the more aware societies also crucially, citizen biological quality. Emotion and denunciation doesn't enter

As patrician orders, Athens, Rome, even Jerusalem weren't concerned with femael "unfairness" or sexual voraciousness in the same way modern conservatives or sheboons are because they weren't femael or "family"-centered, and men enjoy also the company of fun women

So as not to debauch each others' wives there was in all these cases, plus many other similar ones, an allowance made for a courtesan or geisha class to which these men in fact often looked to for romantic and sentimental affairs and such; the rules didn't apply to these women

It would have been seen as peasant superstition and also just plain absurd for Pericles or any other ancient or medieval noble in Europe or Japan to throw a hissyfit over whether a mistress was showing shoulder at a party etc.; social order, purpose of marriage is separate matter

Today as there is no real marriage and so sexual order and no men have possession of their territories, things are thrown into confusion. There is then attempt to shame or moralize women or "degeneracy" as if the law of the jungle is possibly replaced by this impotent complaining

You may agree with me or not on desirability of reestablishing an ancient order on new grounds--but there is no path to that through hyperemotional denunciations of individual cases, priggish moralizing; you are just indulging pleasure in spirit of accusation.

If a true order is to be reestablished, it will have to be done through not just a reset--a major war or similar--but through effecting a change in the spirits of founding men of a successor state. Considerations of interest and biology, not accusatory rage, is proper foundation

The recent development of a bunch of kwan mystery meat types chimping on social media or streams about the unfairness of thots, a rapper "rediscovering family values," or importing the social sanctions of a Filipino slum, is not a win; the behavior of chandalas isn't relevant

Much of "dissident right" is replaying failures of the American conservative right, also: the schoolmarm right, lace-curtain right. Moral braggarty, denunciations, impotent foot-stomping...is entry-point for closet-cases and harridans with complicated past

https://twitter.com/bronzeagemantis/status/1651646336645865472

(Yes do read the Schopenhauer passages on polygamy and on prostitution; in fact it is the preserve of femaels especially to engage in denunciations and moral panics on this matter, as they are preserving a cartel of interest in limiting supply of secks and their control over it)

Hysterical roasties on moral panic, closetcases who seek to regulate the number of times "young men" masturbate, Third World incels who say establishing morality of a Yemen or Manila slum is a "win" against globalist DEGENERACY: or how to make "the right" into a laughingstock