fools ridicule them; but reasonable persons see very well that
those traits are just the tools for the management of men,
and for the use of men for female designs
Looking into "the battle of the sexes" we find that men are naturally inclined to use direct physical force. Women, we see, tend to use indirect physical force, which usually involves getting a man, or men - privately or through a state apparatus, to use physical force against other men. Rousseau, in "Emile" writes that while man has physical strength on his side "Woman, weak as she is and limited in her range of observation, perceives and judges the forces at her disposal to supplement her weakness, and those forces are the passions of man. Her own mechanism is more powerful than ours; she has many levers which may set the human heart in motion. She must find a way to make us desire what she cannot achieve unaided and what she considers to be necessary or pleasing; therefore she must have a thorough knowledge of man's mind .. she must learn to divine their feelings from speech and action, look and gesture. By her own speech and action, look and gesture, she must be able to inspire them with the feelings she desires, without seeming to have any such purpose." In other words, her power lies in the emotional control which she skillfully and subtly employs.
As our rational faculty gives us our abstract concept of justice, a consideration of human emotion and interest in both private and public spheres causes us to seek a "balance of power"; Kant writes; "A harmonious and indissoluble union cannot be achieved through the random combination of two persons. One partner must subject himself to the other, and, alternately, one must be superior to the other in something, so that he can dominate or rule. If two people, who cannot do without each other, have identical ambitions, self-love will produce nothing but wrangling. In the interest of the progress of the culture, one partner must be superior to the other in a heterogeneous way. The man must be superior to the woman in respect to his physical strength and courage, while the woman must be superior to the man in respect to her natural talent for mastering his desire for her." The close proximity of individuals creates the need for a symbiotic relationship; the poor state of marital relations in this country has been caused by the balance of power being upset in favor of women.
The chief passions that women control begin with sex and expand into sexual love. A strong state of sexual arousal causes the conscious faculties of men to be shunted off - to be literally brainwashed, leaving the void to be filled by manipulative women. The mere anticipation of intercourse produces a tension and craving that has been compared to drug addiction, draining the wealth of men and putting it in the hands of women. Love also causes a lack of consciousness and control in men, however, while sex causes men to be controlled by women as group, love tends to be restricted to a single individual, for it arose as human society evolved into more monogamous behavior. The growth in sexual stimulation in our society accompanied by a loss of love among men and women is regressive and reminiscent of the primitive matriarchies of old when "men did not know their fathers."
Closely tied to emotional control we see the behavior described as "guile," "cunning," or "deceit." Unlike rational persuasion which operates by uncovering truth to the listener, deceit operates in reverse manner by covering up or circumventing the truth so that the listener will act according to false information that serves the interests of the deceiver. Another category, consisting of verbal harassment or "nagging" or "hen-pecking" is applied over a period of time to wear a person down. A physical analogy can be read in Proverbs 27:15; "A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike." Similarly, in Chinese water torture, we see the steady dripping of water on the eye, the harm though is from the psychological effect, like that which Delilah worked on Samson; "she pressed him daily with her words, and urged him, so that his soul was vexed unto death" (Judges 16:16.) Next, there is the appeal to the ego; "With her much fair speech she caused him to yield, with the flattering of her lips she forced him. He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, or as a fool to the correction of the stocks" (Prov. 7:21-2.) Taking our lesson from the woman above, it should be noted that these various emotional methods are often naturally interrelated and can therefore be used simultaneously or applied sequentially until a successful method is reached. A woman may first attempt to seduce, flatter, or deceive, and if these fail, she may browbeat and threaten, and finally, if all else fails - "she disarms him with her tears of exasperation" (Kant); this sympathetic appeal almost always succeeds.
Another psychological method which can include any of the methods above or stand alone is what may simply be called persuasion. Women can be seen everywhere employing this method on their husbands and boyfriends, and frankly, on anyone's ear they can grab a hold of; anything that benefits women; any book, film, article; any topic, social cause, or politician, is said to "Wonderful," or some other positive expression, complete with a glowing intonation of the voice; anything that doesn't serve the interests of women is ignored or attached with a negative description in an icy cold, angry, or otherwise negative tone of voice. All that is left for a man to do is to walk into a voting booth and to do as he has been commanded - or manipulated, and this is called "Democracy." The media, with its twists, spins, fabrications, and seductions - its propaganda and mind control, is largely a projection of feminine behavior into the public sphere. You can understand now why Aristotle said "When the demagogues take over democracy is an illusion" and "What difference does it make if the women are the rulers or if the women rule over the rulers. The results are the same." Solon, the great law giver of ancient Athens recognized this type of control and made anything men did under the influence of their wives to be void under the law. Incredibilly, in America, women have been exonerated for being under a "Svengali" influence, but no man is found innocent by virtue of being under an "Eve," "Delilah," or "Jezebel" influence.
Persuasion and deceit are not only accomplished with words but with false attitudes, body language, clothing, makeup, ad infintatum. One of the main ideas for this is so women can exaggerate or fabricate good qualities and hide bad ones in order to make themselves appear better than they really are, to what end we may see in Kant's example; "By virtue of her sex she maintains a feminine haughtiness in order to restrain all importunities of men through the respect which haughtiness instills; and she claims the privilege of respect even without deserving it" In the the realm of non-verbal communication, he find that male feminist Stendal writing in De L'Amour; "Glances are the big guns of the virtuous coquette; everything can be conveyed in a look, and yet that look can always be denied, because it cannot be quoted word for word." You can see why it is so difficult, with such intangible and deliberately ambiguous methods, to pin blame on a woman .. yes, even a "virtuous" one. Then there is something in between words and looks; "Comte Giraud .. developed an original method of communication, using amputated words which mean everything and yet nothing. He conveys his meaning amply, but you cannot compromise him, however much you quote him verbatim. Cardinal Lante accused him of having stolen this accomplishment from women; and I would say that even the most honest woman knows the trick." When you look at Bill "Slick Willie" Clinton, Richard "Tricky Dick" Nixon, and other politicians, you wonder just how many of their ways they have borrowed from women .. yes, even of "the most honest woman."
Moving from purely psychological means into more material ones, we could begin by listing all those household "duties" that women were once required to provide men with; cooking, cleaning, etc. These things, if truly desired by men, and not because a woman persuades him that these are things he wants, are not forceful extractions and can be part of an equal exchange in return for what a man's produces from his outside job. Woman's natural monopoly of child bearing and the current legal system, however, can lead to extortion, for if a man is desirous of children he can only obtain them through the compliance of a woman; hence, he must not only be concerned with meeting her initial terms for marriage, but he must also continuously strive to keep her happy for fear of being divorced and having his children taken away from him. It would seem that in even the most overbearing patriarchy of old, assuming such a thing did exist, a man could not allow his wife to be unhappy without running the risk that her unhappiness would pass on to his children and harm their development. It is both a pity and an injustice that more women do not realize the harm they cause their children by causing them to grow up without a father.
Having addressed those means and methods which women have a natural advantage in, we must add to these the ones they have usurped from men. The majority of wealth in this country belongs to women, most of governmental transfer payments (welfare etc.) go to women and their children, and every day more women surpass their husbands in earnings. Hence, a man's role as provider has been severely compromised and again we see things tending to imitate the matriarchy of old - only worse. Related to this we find more women than men entering college and getting degrees, preparing them to be the main breadwinners for the new matriarchy families. To their superiority in formal knowledge we must add the information learned in conversations along with all the articles, programs, etc. that the media puts out to "educate" women on how to pursue their private interests - as if they needed help. In the political arena, some 53% of the voting population is female, giving them control of law-making, the military, the police - or simply, all forms of institutional violence to which they can direct at men at their whim. Lastly, the latest studies show that women have equaled or even surpassed men in the private use of physical force. This should not be too surprising though, the movies have long depicted women, offended by mere words, being justifiably allowed to slap a man or throw a drink in his face.
The list above is hardly meant to be exhaustive, a set of books the length of an encyclopedia may be needed for that. Indeed, women have so many means at there disposal, so many variations and combinations of methods that it is hard to even conceive of a powerless woman. If one were to reflect rhetorically, it could be said that the average woman has more weapons at her disposal then the combined NATO forces. The real question should be; "What does a man have to counter this?"; his natural means of self defense - physical force, is denied to him by our feminist society. He can not even withhold his earnings because they are considered community property, and if his wife divorces him, she may still take his earnings through alimony and child support.
If it true, as Rousseau writes, that the methods of women are "more powerful" than those of men, and if it is also true that one of the main functions of government is to protect citizens from each other, than we would expect greater restrictions to be placed on women, and that fact to be reflected by more women being sent to prison than men. If restrictions were doled out equally between men and women without regard for whose methods were the most numerous and powerful we would still expect to find, because of their slightly larger numbers, more women in prison than men. Yet, as we have seen, the prison population is 94% male; and as said before, this is not justice - but obscenity.