Hardened men make for attractive men, for toughness is a trait that men and women alike covet in men. Almost all respect a hardened man even when they dislike him. At the same time, hardened women make for utterly repulsive beings. They do not inspire desire nor respect, merely alienation. Hardening is conducive to the cultivation of masculinity, but to femininity it is toxic. To femininity it is harmful, deleterious. Women must seek wisdom and respite in the face of suffering, not masculination. For women to preserve their greatest asset: their femininity, they must avoid masculinisation at all costs. This is healthier and more conducive to a woman’s development than adopting masculine boisterousness.

Women are taught to debauch their femininity in pursuit of power and social acceptance under the rule of feminist dogma. They all too unwittingly realise not what they give up by capitulating to feminism. Much to woman’s detriment, adhering to the feminist roadmap results in a vitiation of her desirability to the kind of man she yearns for. Of specific note in regard to this is the contemporary culture. The current economic model and prevailing social-programming of the time push women towards masculinity by framing it as “liberation.” Feminism sells women the lie that to masculinise is to become free. It convinces the feminine to divorce herself from her nature and to aspire to be that which she isn’t. That her desire to nurture, support and mother is weak. She should become more manlike, fierce, assertive, a conqueror! Indeed what banal trite, there is no man of worth breathing that wants to commit to the fabled feminist “real woman.”

As such, the typical woman aims to emulate the qualities of men rather than master the art of femininity. These women have been contorted in belief to reject traditional femininity as abhorrent, weak. They delusively idolise emulating the behaviour of man whilst ironically harbouring a hatred for man. They idolise such behaviour because they have been taught it is necessary to acquire success and respect. They could not be any more wrong. Nothing raises the ire and disdain of man more than a woman who attempts to make him obsolete by emulating him. Men desire not masculine women, neither do they wish to compete with them. Men desire feminine women, they want to take care of them. Men of substantial worth reject women devoid of femininity.

Women have two distinct choices, the prior I believe leading to richer, longer-lasting happiness and the latter, not so. They may refine their femininity and cultivate that quality to captivate the love of a powerful man. Said man will provide the bulk of the income. Work will be relegated to the realm of hobby, coming not before family, keeping house and child-rearing. The latter is that of the career woman, of independence. This is the ethos that has led to the collective masculinisation, stress and misery of today’s women. They forgo the refinement of femininity to work in the world of business. To be competitive in such an environment they toughen up to survive, reducing their social appeal.

Toughness (distinct from resilience) reduces a woman’s femininity, thus mitigating her desirability to men. A resilient woman can maintain her femininity and draw upon feminine strength without masculinising. Resilient women continue to build upon and maximise their femininity in spite of hardship. They do not give in to the corruptive allure of masculinisation and poison themselves with a lust for conquest. They expend their efforts on becoming personable, wise and altruistic. They look for shelter in friendship and compassion, rather than sacrifice their femininity on the altar of feminism. They enhance rather than contort themselves. They do not entertain bitterness and allow hatred to warp them into pathetic vaginal caricatures of masculinity. They embrace traditional femininity for the value it holds to men and the rewards that yields. They do not adopt the contemptuous inferiority complex symptomatic of feminism. They do not chain themselves to the views of “friends” who condemn them for aspiring to be traditionally feminine.

Those who undergo pain often become tougher of heart as a coping mechanism. With toughness comes a certain masculine component. The more damaged and pain afflicted a person becomes, the more they harden and toughen. This hardening is a natural response to ineptitude, dysfunction and disappointment. Hardening is necessary for masculine self-improvement because men are charged with leadership. Men cannot be attractive and fulfilled in their relationship unless they lead, women can. Men can have it all, they can become harder and likewise more desirable in their masculinity.

This could even go so far to explain why in the psychological sense women have a propensity to value the ruggedness that experience brings in men. While men on the other hand tend to prefer innocence and inexperience in women – defining this as not only as seductive but psychologically desirable. The why is simple: such a woman is free of the contamination of bitterness and cynicism that the failures of experience would wrought upon such a woman. These psychological aspects are the predominant culprits responsible for spoiling a woman’s femininity. There is little feminine that can remain feminine in the presence of distrustful cynicism and vitriolic bitterness. Such women find themselves unloved, condemned to loneliness for they reek of repugnant undesirability.

In essence the more worn and experienced a woman becomes, the less feminine she becomes. Whilst a more battle-scarred and experienced man becomes more masculine. This is symptomatic of toughness, for toughness is a masculinising procedure. It is thus I must make an observation: it does indeed appear that men become more masculine with time and sufficient hardship. Antithetically, women, less feminine. Therefore it stands to reason that toughness is conducive to masculinity whilst detrimental to femininity. It is in my estimation that men not only prefer young women for their more nubile bodies, but additionally, for their more innocent – and so feminine – disposition. This perhaps goes some way in explaining the feminine obsession with maturity, for mature woman are (physically) oft perceived less desirable than the immature. Diametrically an immature man is of markedly lower desirability than a mature one. What’s good for one is not good for the other. It seems to be the nature of gender and biology itself to impose different measures of desirability upon men and women. Without these differences, there cannot be union. Yin-yang is necessary to maintain the balance needed for love to flourish. Women being yin, men being yang. When we try to reverse yin and yang so that women become masculine and men, feminine – monogamous love fails to flourish. Indeed it seems the position of yin and yang within the gender duality are static impositions.

This leads to my next point of estimation, I do believe that the fundamental reason the societies of the world have always tried so hard to protect and provide for their women in a manner of care that is all but absent in nature to their respective men is due to something of a matter of instinct which seeks to preserve the spiritual femininity of women, with an inherent understanding that the failure to protect women from the world and its evil would lead to the masculinisation of their disposition and thus rather tragically, the irrevocable loss of their femininity, for not enough new girls can be born and protected sufficiently from their older counterparts to replace the entire female demographic with women of femininity. It would seem that societies on some fundamental level have realised, perhaps not always in a way that they are conscious and eloquent enough to articulate, that femininity in and of itself carries a certain intrinsic value that is necessary for the sustenance and self-preservation of a society, and it is this value that is to be protected and sustained. These societies realised that subjecting women to the same kind of pressures that men are subject to would cause them to lose their femininity along the way, and such women would better benefit society by retaining their femininity rather than sacrificing it out of necessity in the emulation of man. For if society should forfeit femininity, demanding women fend for and coarsen themselves with the ugliness of survival, the very society reliant upon those who would maintain it would feel the tremors of emancipation as the feminine spirit is forcefully eviscerated from the societal psyche, leaving nothing but a collection of beings who strive to be manlike in its wake.

Without the counterbalance of gentle and demure femininity to complement the assertiveness of traditional masculinity, any affected society would foster detached apathy through competition within its citizenry rather than inclusive empathy through community.

Femininity is not just a gift to women, free of the shackles of responsibility that define manhood and the accompanying economic struggle that brings, but likewise a gift to men also, who would confide in and find emotional solace within the spirit of their lovers femininity, expressing momentary vulnerability to the softest of souls in a way that only a man in agape with a woman would dare. A woman who feels safe enough and looked after enough is feminine in the most natural and charming way, momentarily carefree as she “lets her guard down”, she is a happy woman, a sweet woman, a kind woman and perhaps most importantly to our humble species, an attractive woman. Rarely do women get to experience this type of innocence anymore as the forces of feminism masculinise them into perverse hybrids, women composed of the worst that femininity and all her flaws has to offer whilst likewise borrowing the very worst that masculinity has to offer, educated to never let their guard down “in the face of oppression”, be this evangel preached directly through activism or indirectly via the harshness of the workplace and the economic machine that it serves, today’s women face emancipation from femininity, like their fellow-men do from masculinity, sold a narrative that their inherent disposition is incompatible with the gender identity that the prevailing ideology would demand of and subscribe to them.

Just how can the feminine continue to exist within the modern world when it is psychologically beaten out of women on a day-to-day basis? How can women be kind, caring and sensitive when they must work in the world of business, a masculinising albeit sociopathic world of margins, deadlines, quotas, targets, bottom lines and politics? You see the workplace itself undermines the cultivation of femininity, the hardened woman is but a feeble caricature of the ideal man, should she be stripped of her femininity via the hallways of heartbreak, the glass table of the boardroom or perhaps an amalgamation of both, such a woman is a walking emanation of all the ugliest that masculinity has to offer and with none of its perks, for she learns the ugliest of masculinity along a pilgrimage for personal conquest rather than learn it in whole in the way that only a boy who seeks to become a man can. She does not learn the nuances of masculinity, its duty, its honour, it’s burden or it’s inherently biological need to protect and provide and thus forth and so such a woman imposes herself ruthlessly and demandingly, without thought nor care for those she imprints her apathy on, belittling the men she hates along the way with vapid deep-seated hatred, corrupting fellow women in her wake, imploring that they too sacrifice their femininity under the guise of “motherly advice” in the promotion that her younger counterparts become like that which she has become, a caricature of a man, a woman who emulates the worst of masculinity without embodying any of its finer or more nobler traits.

Such a woman is a parasite, wondering what value she can take from those around her rather than what value she can add, she is psychologically unlovable to the desires of man and yet some remnant of femininity remains, she craves to be loved despite the impossibility such a task proves to be. It’s hard to love a monster and men do not love monsters like women do, they loathe them, even fear them and in the most extreme of circumstances, they kill them. You see masculinisation affects women differently than it does men, within men it fosters growth and actualisation, within women it fosters contempt, dissonance and discontent, corrupting the very souls of who they are, stripping them of any desirability beyond the flesh, which too, will eventually fade with age.

Is there anything less feminine in the world than a ball-busting cynical parasite devoid of the charms and femininity that men the world over have come to admire and cherish in women for eons and eons? No, no there is not, and it is the crucifixion of femininity being perpetuated as an affront to masculinity within modern ideology, feminism containing the largest amount of estrogenic blood on its hands, that is unilaterally killing feminine spirituality in favour that we sacrifice it on the altar of corporatism in an effort to “equalise” the feminine with the masculine. What this really means it to condemn the true and natural feminine spirit as weak, to redefine it with masculine ideals, reinforce those ideals and then imprint those ideals onto society’s men and women until they believe this perverse form of femininity is “true femininity”, calling for the worship of this one brand of ideologically sanctioned femininity which remains to be nothing more than a corrupt bastardisation of the femininity that comes naturally to women who are free of Anglo social engineering efforts. What feminism has failed to realise is that although it has benefited many women superficially, it has done so at the cost of that which makes them truly women, that which makes them valuable to men beyond their bodies, the overlooked spiritual sense, the beauty that can be derived from their natural femininity. You see feminism spoils femininity in the name of equality, then the imbeciles who cause the damage are so incredibly ignorant (or incredibly intelligent, I cannot but tell the difference) as they seem to be at such a loss to understand just why men and women, but markedly women, are unhappier than they’ve ever been before.

I do think perhaps one of the most abhorrent things in the modern female psyche is that of scorn. Scorn is something I consider to be a truly fascinating state of being, you see scorn is a particular feminine flavour of revenge, it is effectively revenge on steroids with a feminine twist. Scorn is where the death of femininity within the soul of a woman rebirths itself vengefully in a manner of heightened sociopathy, such a woman bears the physical hallmarks of the feminine form, but to her very soul is ravaged by the most detestable, despicable and deplorable facets of both the masculine and the feminine. A scornful woman who derives her current state of being from the defining moment which initiated the destruction of her spirit’s femininity is a woman who is emulating the traits of man, straying from the path of womanhood and crossing into the realm of manhood, albeit such a woman will never truly be a man for she will lack the logic of a man, the appearance of man as well as the burden and societal expectation of a man, and so thus at best her bitterness leads to this type of quasi woman, a caricature of a man, embodying but the worst traits of both the masculine and the feminine, leaving us with what can only be described as a hollow, hybrid monstrosity that is neither man nor woman in the truest sense of the word regardless of its physical anatomy.

You see unlike men who can become better, stronger and more attractive men by growing through their pain and thus amplifying their inherent masculine energy, women do not become better women with pain, they become more manlike, and thus they are stripped of that which makes them attractive to men to begin with. See what is good for man, at least in this instance, is not good for woman. When women become “hardened” it, rather poetically, and quite ironically in its majesty, strips them of the very thing that makes them attractive beyond the realm of the physical to men in the first place, it emancipates them from their femininity, and to ensure a man truly loves a woman, and simply doesn’t just view such a woman as a disposable fuck puppet at best or a blathering idiot at worst, she must capture his interest psychologically and emotionally, not just physically, because many women can capture the eye of a man, but only a woman of some real feminine energy and depth can capture the heart and thus devotion of a man. You see femininity, like masculinity, must be cultivated, although rather unlike masculinity it mustn’t be taught through pain, but through love.

Puppy love is the exception: it is the one love that can be educational to men. Puppy love is the inevitable experience in which naivety prevails, boys become men, and they learn first-hand through the misery of heartbreak and the cacophonous confusion of the indecisive female mind that the unilateral worship and adoration of the feminine form, the willingness to be captivated in the beauty of the feminine form, be it from the sound of her voice, to the touch of the skin, or the smell of her sweat, is nothing but a futile and suicide-inducing endeavour. Men learn for themselves in their quest for masculinity that they must not worship women, but rather, that they must lead them. Women do not go on a quest for femininity; they are born with it, and oft sacrifice it short-sightedly for power within the depths of delusion that makes up modern groupthink, only to realise in old age once their beauty has faded that they traded in their greatest intangible asset long ago.

Relevant Reading:

Buy “Fascinating Womanhood” in the USA

Buy “Fascinating Womanhood” in the UK

Buy “Fascinating Womanhood” in Canada