TERF Traditionalism vs. White Sharia
The Anti-Simping Principle and the virtue between two vices
iFunny is pretty male-dominated, for understandable reasons. So it is a bit of a culture shock going onto Substack and realizing that a lot of the people ‘stacking on here are of the fairer sex. And along with this comes a lot of men who do not act in a way I am used to men acting to women online, particularly in right-wing circles. They’re treating them like equals… In fact, I would actually say they’re treating them better than equals, because often times they will give their terrible takes the benefit of the doubt because a BASED woman said them! WAOW!
Back in the day, women really had to prove their worth if they wanted a place in online communities, because it was intuitively understood by men that women make honest and authentic discourse between men impossible when they are given free reign in a traditionally male space. Drinking establishments are probably the greatest example of this, since online communities do sort of function in a similar way to the old coffeehouse or pub of English society. During the zenith of the coffeehouse in England and other parts of Europe during the 17th and 18th century, it was a mostly male-only establishment. The political, financial, philosophical, and scientific talk that went on at these establishments was simply of no use to women (few of which were educated), and if women entered they would muddy it up by encouraging male competition. A similar mentality came into being for the pubs and saloons of the Anglosphere. This was supposed to be a place where men could relax and unwind after work, get a drink, play some darts, have casual conversation with the usuals. By the way, there were often designated women’s sections for these establishments, they were just segregated from the men’s sections.
As the number of male-only drinking establishments was either snuffed out by the law or dwindled by popular animosity, both the bar and the coffeehouse suddenly developed an entire new telos — as a place of romantic mingling between the sexes. In fact, the concept of a male-only or female-only bar is now so counterintuitive to westerners that they could only think such a thing much be a ‘gay bar’, because now the entire purpose of the drinking establishment is to look for sexual partners.
This same phenomenon does not necessarily happen online, because most people like to remain anonymous online and so have explicitly blotted out the possibility of successful romantic pursuit, but men still become “simps” for women all the time online implicitly, without even realizing it. It’s just in your DNA. Men still like to talk cutely with women and be charmed by women even when they have no intention of pursuing her, it’s a bit strange but it’s true. This obviously completely derails the comradery and honesty of such places, as the bar turns from a place of rare peace between men on earth to one of subtle warfare.
But don’t think this is all men’s fault. Women go miles to encourage this behavior, and even when people attempt to continue having honest discussion women will take advantage of men’s desire to be validated by them in order to fallaciously bag on heterodox beliefs. Women don’t even always do this consciously, they are creatures of conformity (at least, more-so than men) and so associate men with heterodox beliefs as something of a disturbance. But the “platonic form” of this is what the ‘cels call “Arguing With Holes”. Basically, when a woman responds to an argument with “Well, you’ll never get a girlfriend with THOSE opinions”, a more sophisticated way of saying “I have a hole, and you can’t access it, so pipe down!”. It’s clearly not an honest form of argument, but it is a powerful one.
So yes, online it is of utmost importance that you keep your communities male-dominated (or I guess female dominated, but not enough women really care about “stuff” for this to be uber-prevalent) if you want honest opinions and honest discussion. Men need places to be men, and women are also probably better off away from men more often. Which I’ll get to later. But the old saying to prevent wamen from becoming “one of the guys” was “Tits of GTFO”. This served two purposes: Firstly, to make women ragequit from interacting with men online, and secondly, as a sort of threat against men who pretend to be women online (who are numerous, perhaps more numerous than actual women in many spaces) that nobody is going to believe them without actual evidence of their womanhood. Today I would say the funniest means of doing this is to casually use the word “cuntoid” with reference to women, as if it isn’t even insulting but a neutral term.
But… What if we think outside the internet… You know, speaking of all this, I should get into broader social topics about the state of interaction between men and women. But first, a boob break!
TERF Traditionalism vs. White Sharia
So, as a society, we are at an impasse. We are nearing a state where everyone’s basic needs are met, but suddenly people have stopped having kids. And who is overrepresented among those who don’t have kids? Well, White people obviously, but furthermore, for people in general the amount of births are decreasing and the amount of births are decreasing the most among those with above average intelligence and middle to high income (with the exception of the top 1%). Even if our issue of racial demographics was solved entirely, we would still be facing a fertility crisis, and perhaps even worse, a dysgenics crisis.
This is not historically normal. Historically, the upper class outbred the lower class. The upper class had lower infant mortality rates, more resources to support more children, and greater mate selection. In fact, the difference in functional fertility rates (i.e. children who survive to adulthood) was vast enough that if you are a European male, most of your DNA today probably comes from Europeans of the upper third (or even ninth) of society during the middle ages. So no, your ancestors were not “all peasants”. There are times in history where this can get out of whack, most famously in Imperial Rome, where there was a fertility crisis among the Roman elite. Roman women were not having children, and were being replaced by the largely foreign lower class. Augustus devoted a lot of time and effort in trying to make Romans have babies, like an ancient Shinzo Abe, but it mostly failed. By the high imperial period, Rome (at least in the major cities) had been thoroughly mutted, then the bad times followed. This is demonstrated both by genetic samples from Rome as well as burial inscriptions hinting at increasing foreign ancestry, language, and customs. Not to mention, the depressing reports from Roman conservatives at the time.
And yet, today it is happening. In fact, it’s been happening for a while — longer than you think. Fertility has obviously collapsed since the 1800s when it was deleteriously high, but it started becoming a pressing concern for European countries during the early 20th century. This is why Nazi Germany spent a lot of time trying to get women back to baby-making. We don’t hear as much about this because of the baby boom temporarily increasing birth-rates.
Anyways, the fertility crisis is happening, and while I’m not saying we have to have favela birthrates, we do have to avoid becoming Korea and literally blipping ourselves out of existence (even in a positive scenario where we don’t have to compete with immigrants).
So… What is the solution to this? Well, everyone has their own solutions, but there tend to be two routes people go down on the right for this issue. The first route is the idea that women would want to have babies if society did not make it very difficult to have a fulfilling family life. The radical end of this is the “TradTERFs” who basically blame the entire low fertility rate on a “good men crisis” and men’s porn addictions. The second path views the lack of families as a problem of excess and decadence, and that the level of comfort and benefits our society grants single women discourages them from starting families. The radical end of this is the “White Sharia” crowd — I feel like this doesn’t really need an explanation.
Now, I would say I err more to the latter, as I’ve read several enlightening articles on this very site about the fertility crisis in the past year. But I would recommend (in this order) these two:
And basically, while other causes like religiosity, biological infertility, and increased access to birth control do play a role, the strongest driver seems to be the independently rising socio-economic status of women. Women get more welfare, more jobs now are suited to women’s specialties (especially public-sector jobs), and perhaps most importantly, women are dominating men in educational attainment (even though women produce relatively few breakthroughs).
Also, I don’t believe childcare has become too expensive, because I don’t think the financial conditions of Americans have done anything but go up in the past 50 years. Sean Last has a great video on this. Essential goods like healthcare, housing, and cars, have gone up in price, but a lot of this is due to all of those things becoming more heavily regulated and higher quality. Either way, it is impossible to justify this when people in the 1800s were popping out 5 or 6 kids in a shack. What has actually happened is an increase in standards (particularly for our children) outweighing our increase in QoL, an increase in family planning (family planning might be another serious cause of birth rate decline and dysgenics, especially because stupid people are bad at it), and more than anything else a decline in marriages. Again, read that Aporia article I linked. The Baby Boom was a Marriage Boom and the Baby Bust has been in the wake of increasing divorce rates and declining/delaying marriages.
The other theories do sort of collapse when you note the extremely low birth rates of Eastern Europe, despite many of these places being very conservative. Second and Third wave feminism may have put the nail in the coffin, but it all started in the first wave and was temporarily halted by the Baby Boom. During Soviet rule women were elevated heavily in academia and in the bureaucracy, resulting in this:
If I wasn’t so busy with Finals, I would probably go ahead and track down the dataset for this and graph it with fertility in Python…
I think, ultimately, you begin to realize after this that there is a suppression of women that is intrinsic to almost every true civilization for a reason. Here is a rather brilliant quote from "The Fuck Rate is about to Implode" by
:“Our civilization is held together by a pact: mid men get pussy, everyone else gets core infrastructure.
This pact harnesses the single greatest source of psychic energy known to man: men’s desire to secure the partnership, youthful attention, and children of attractive women. It comes at a cost — high status men have to give up access to pussy they’d otherwise have, mid women have to settle for mid men early instead of sharing a high status man for a bit and then otherwise remaining single / mercenarily marrying at old age, which they’d prefer … but the cost is almost certainly worth it for everyone involved. Plumbing is nice, you know.”
Now, let me clarify — “mid men getting pussy” means mid men getting mid women. But women are just more picky than men, it’s by design. Men are the drivers of evolution in nature due to more variation in traits, so there needs to be this pressure. So women tend to want men who are above their own SMV when you adjust for sex.
Yes, women seem to almost have a natural repugnance for men they don’t know. It’s very sad but it is the only reality I can surmise from what I have read. Especially with this stupid new “bear vs man” meme. But, it makes sense, because — to give the “femcels” (who for some reason are almost never actually virgins) some credit — men do not generally have “good intentions” with them and do in some respect on a neurological level view women as objects or even “prey”. This is why most societies recognized the need to shelter women from the outside world, the world of men, and segregate male-female institutions. Women don’t just stand the risk of men overpowering them, but also the risk of men manipulating them. Women do manipulate men, but it’s almost a totally subconscious affair, while men are more intentionally sinister.
The feminist solution to this is to “teach men not to rape”, which works about as well as “teaching men not to murder”. Violent criminality is nearly a pathology in its own right due to how hereditary it is, how much repeat offense plays a role in it, and how densely concentrated it is, but Libtards obviously insist on it being a result of nurture and not nature because they are Libtarded.
Does this mean that I support “White Sharia”? No. Some people on the “trad right” (Varg being an example) will insist that patriarchy is semitic and not European, but I think he’s underestimating the gap between “Patriarchy” and “The Islamic Middle East”. (modern) Middle Easterners are just hilariously sexist and perverted people, it’s almost difficult to find an analogue in the West at all. The Burqas are just something out of a cartoon, it’s so ridiculous. And that’s saying a lot, since ancient Athens was extremely restrictive of Women. Like, women even had their own little guest room to stay in and do some sort of women hobby when a male guest came over. Women were sort of veal-like back then. I find veal-like women attractive but I don’t tell women this, as the appeal of veal-like women is their own insecurity of how soft they are. Huehuehuehue, see women? Stop demanding gender integration, us men are twisted! I used to think I was twisted, but I’m actually not that twisted! That’s how bad it is!
The main problem with these very sex-segregated and restrictive societies, is that they can result in some… Unnatural homosocial behaviors, to say the least… As I talked about in my post about Greek Homosexuality, pederasty (in the classical sense) seems to be a characteristic of societies which are very restrictive towards women and very segregated by sex. Notions of this are as old as Aristotle, but it makes some sense. It would be nice if we could get a very androgenic society like Greece without any homoerotic elements, but it is risky. Again, I discussed in my post that Abrahamic creeds did not do a great job stopping homoerotic behavior in the Islamic world, implying it is something deeper. It may be related to marriage age gaps in men and women. Aristotle implies that the Cretans invented pederasty in order to placate men and stop them from marrying too young, as the island was overpopulated.
Yes, ideally we don’t want men and women interacting all the time, but we do not want men to be utterly isolated from women. And we do not want women gaining high status in society, as the impact it has on fertility is ultimately not worth the economic benefit it provides. That is, if it even does provide that much of an economic benefit. Remember, a lot of women get bullshit degrees and choose bullshit jobs in the public sector or in fields created by government demands like HR.
And of course, this all loops back to the original issue, the “microcosm” of this where sex-integrated online spaces are detrimental. Could I ever talk about this honestly in real life? No, because women would get really angry that I’m suggesting their sexual and financial privilege should be stripped in order for civilization to not die, and insist that it’s men’s fault for liking porn or something. Erhhh, I think some of the negative corollaries with Porn are not causal, it’s just that the sort of people who have bad traits X, Y, and Z tend to also be porn addicts. Also, women shove fruits and vegetables up their ass so they should really be quiet. And also, women should just be quiet in general because their assholes are too close to their vaginas. Holy fail! GOODBYE!
I can’t imagine the whiplash of someone who’s never read your Substack before encountering any of your posts. That said, so true!
i tend to notice that the most fervent opponents of white shariah (Even if its largely a meme) tend to be those tradterf types, because they realize that their retarded womanbabble would finally be shut down