By Rasa Von Werder, December 18th, 2020




WHY MEN ARE SCARED OF WOMEN!  (See other insights below – important

– must be read!)


0c77ea227f54e487af9629013d47f8ee 0d46f1bbf9bf51d41246f81eef1574c1 0d83fce3a80a6c5ce72ed354cc636d62 0da4a48559d076f2fbcc1d9ed3fa0960 0e40c1eef3d515fc7bd809b5e842ac4b 01-2016fuji_3070web_0

Who’s Afraid Of An Aging Population? (Updated for 2020)

I had long wondered why so many men, especially the elites, are terrified that our overall population is (gasp!) aging. It is not just because they fear that their economic Ponzi scheme of necrotic growth for the sake of growth will unravel, though that is clearly part of it as well. No, I think that their real fear is that the Crones (i.e. Women over age 50 or so) will have an *unprecedented* level of power due to relative strength in numbers, and thus so will Women in general. That is because Women are living longer than ever before, as well as having fewer kids. And the men are getting scared. Hence the recent push to whittle away Women’s reproductive rights, eventually including most if not all birth control as well.

Additionally, with birthrates declining over time, and each new generation thus slightly smaller than then previous one, that effectively means that there will be fewer younger Women relative to slightly older men, giving younger Women that much more bargaining power in the dating market despite an overall surplus of Women in general. Thus by the 2030s, Women will get the best of both worlds, and be even more empowered as a result of such demographic trends.

(Note that this also means that statistically more younger men will be “mentored” by older Women in that regard as per the laws of supply and demand, which would also help further accelerate the transition to Matriarchy as well.)

Ah, you say, but what about the supposedly legitimate economic fears of an aging (and eventually shrinking) population? Well, a recent study came out that found that such fears are essentially overblown. In fact, moderately low fertility (i.e. between 1.5-2.0 children per Woman) and a shrinking population would actually maximize living standards for the general population. Another recent study found that there is essentially no robust correlation between population aging and economic growth, contrary to what many people seem to believe. Not to say that an aging population will not pose some challenges, but on balance the benefits would outweigh such drawbacks. And our Monetarily Sovereign federal government can easily absorb the fiscal costs of aging such as pensions and healthcare.

Oh, and by the way, there is that elephant in the room–make that the elephant in the Volkswagen–OVERPOPULATION. Left unchecked, it will destroy the very planet that gives us life. While technology (and Monetary Sovereignty) can largely solve the foreseeable economic challenges of aging and declining populations, the same cannot really be said of the intractable ecological problems of overpopulation. And the only ethical way to do this is to voluntarily have fewer children, i.e. well below the “replacement rate” of 2.1 or so. According to the best evidence, the best ways to accomplish this is 1) female empowerment and 2) poverty reduction, since after all, the number one cause of overpopulation is the MEN who force, coerce, deceive, and/or brainwash Women into having kids that they otherwise would not have (or much sooner and closer-spaced than otherwise). Seriously.

Sorry fellas, but the truth hurts.


22bf8c17316c43cd3720297ae884610b 24c4460be7014e81f30b88a3d28d2bbd 025_009_SweetEarth_NEU 26f8d6bbc336c86eb4fa9a24d076a1f8 29a66152c6f9ad7e36b9f580afed82e5 29a54835804d2c8f6521fa839cc8b1d3 030PF1809_9M4MK_1 30-20190308-IMG_0370-part-2-Edit

So what about countries like Japan, Italy, Greece, Spain, etc. with so-called “lowest-low” total fertility rates below 1.5? Yes, it is likely that they will hit a sort of short-to-medium-term “pothole” on the road to sustainability if they stay below 1.5 for too long. Their populations’ aging and decline will be significantly more rapid than for countries with TFRs between 1.5-2.0, and may be more difficult to adjust to from an economic perspective. Well, the answer to that, again, is increased Female empowerment. We see that European countries with greater Female empowerment and more generous social safety nets for Mothers and children tend to have higher fertility than those with less female empowerment and stingier safety nets such as Spain, Italy, and Greece. Even though all of those countries have TFRs below replacement, Northern and Western Europe are generally around 1.6-2.0 while Southern and Eastern Europe are generally significantly below 1.5 children per Woman.

The proof is clearly in the pudding.

Make no mistake, if Women were to take over the world tomorrow, the global TFR would plummet to 1.5 or lower almost overnight. But it would not stay below 1.5 for very long, as it would gradually rise back up to around 1.5-1.9 where it will remain for at least a generation or two, and eventually rise to around the replacement rate of 2.1 after the population shrinks significantly over time. And honestly, it can’t happen soon enough. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. We must leave room for Nature, lest Nature not leave room for us. We have been warned, decades ago in fact.

As the great Marianne Williamson once said, at this juncture of history we are now at the “menopause” of humanity, in which what we really need is fewer babies, and more wisdom.

In other words, VIVE LA FEMME! Let the planetary healing begin!

30bc18e66f6d643f296fb7fea48cead5 30-million-islands-experience-planned-for-chester-zoo-970957671 31c2b74b7063c8deb9d3771225d248c1 31ee2bbf18667a7823e42d42cc728759 32-700x438 33e34a34f6c942cad4c857dffbd6cff3 36_222464_orpheus-in-the-underworld 36ed6016f556dac0b808941bd78a251e

Sunday, January 5, 2020

Patriarchy Has A Kill Switch, And We Already Know What It Is

Author Yuri Alexandrovich wrote a great article recently for Medium, in which he articulates something that we all intuitively know (but often don’t want to say out loud) about the patriarchy and how to end it. After first establishing that patriarchy is inherently evil (and thus cannot be redeemed), he then goes on about what holds it all together. This thing that holds the entire construct all together is its sine qua non and thus is it’s own Achilles’ heel, and that thing is control of female sexuality, and the primary tool used to control that is slut-shaming. That is, the shaming of Women for expressing their sexuality in the way they choose. And thus the “kill switch” is to put an end to the practice of slut-shaming.

Wait, what? There is still slut-shaming in 2020? Absolutely. It has diminished somewhat since the (largely male-defined) “sexual revolution” half a century ago, to be sure, but it is still there. The double standard still exists, and it has in fact become more of a double bind in which Women are expected to be “sexy” (as defined by males) but not sexual by their own definition. And ending it is thus the unfinished business of both feminism and the real sexual revolution for Women.

(That’s not the only double bind here, there is also the historical one in which Women are expected to both obey men as well as be the “gatekeepers” of sex, with no way to opt out of either contradictory requirement.)

As Yuri Alexandrovich himself says:
So here is our kill switch: we stop telling women when, where and with whom she is allowed to get involved romantically. Her body, her choice. And she is perfectly capable of making it a responsible choice, thank you very much.
And lest anyone misunderstand his words, read too much into it, or try to put words in his mouth:
NOTE: This is not to suggest that anyone should change their own behavior. We do whatever we are comfortable with. That, of course, includes staying monogamous, still a perfectly valid choice. But it can not be justified as a moral choice anymore — rather, it is a personal preference.
Female sexuality (or more accurately, female-defined sexuality) is an extremely powerful force to be reckoned with, which is why the patriarchy has gone out of its way to suppress it (and/or supplant it with male-defined sexuality). As I have noted before, the suppression of Women’s sexuality was not entirely about maintaining control over the male bloodline (though that was originally a major part of it), but more generally about power and control over Women directly, as well as over other men indirectly via artificial scarcity.

In a similar vein, patriarchy’s favorite brainchild, capitalism, needs scarcity (whether real or artificial) to function. That is how the oligarchs control the serfs. And the kill switch of capitalism is thus to give it the one thing it cannot survive–abundance. The analogy should be apparent now.

Ending slut-shaming will not end patriarchy overnight, of course, but is nonetheless necessary for it to end sooner rather than later. And if we wait until we return to full-blown Matriarchy before liberating Women’s sexuality, we will never be ready, as Women’s sexual liberation is a key step on the path to Matriarchy. That is, if we make the perfect the enemy of the good, we ultimately end up with neither.

One thing needs to be clear. As hard as we fight for the right to say “yes” to sex, we must also fight twice as hard for the right to say “NO” as well. The LAST thing we want is for sex of any kind to be perceived as mandatory, so enthusiastic and mutual consent must be a precondition for all sexual acts, period. And that is true for both Women and men, by the way. Also, we must be careful not to fall in the trap of the “reverse double standard” that has become in vogue in some circles these days (Oprah and Dr. Phil, I’m looking at YOU!), in which men are the ones vilified for their sexuality while Women are ignored (if not celebrated) for doing the same exact things. Doing so is a sure path to a sort of “reverse patriarchy”, not the Matriarchy proper that we should be aiming for. The same goes for a “reverse double bind” as well.

Put simply: Women should have the absolute right to be as sexual–or not–as they themselves want to be, without the need for justification or apology to anyone, period.

So what are we waiting for? Kill Switch Engage! Let the planetary healing begin!

8f206a8afaf787b477068726f954e1f5 8x10_WhirlingHorse2-sepia 09e2b1_7625aecd242c4bdd8106be09279e836d_mv2 09f5de17f7cb4e6e23a4bb64c9e6cc06 9a9542e5888b5c37031a6ea53afe708c 9ce82e74d915d1d34bd86da31d5a1ef0 9d26fd07c651c77e8492a960f5e950a8 9d974db44636c0521cb9203c161790ed

Thursday, October 29, 2020

What If Roe v. Wade Were Actually Overturned?

With the conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett now confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the landmark Roe v. Wade decision now hangs in the balance. That is, Women’s hard-won reproductive rights are now in grave danger, and this goes WAY beyond abortion. Undoubtedly, birth control and things like that will be next on the chopping block, and so on, and thus we are just a few steps away from Margaret Atwood’s worst nightmare. Add to this the fact that the current lockdown-induced “recession” (more like depression) has actually hit Women harder than men and set back Women’s progress by decades by dumping even more unpaid work on them at home, and the future looks even worse still.

Horrible and ghastly as this prospect is, there is perhaps a silver lining, namely that it may spur Women to go on a Lysistrata-style sex strike. This may be the final straw, and such a strike may be enough for Women to actually take over for good. That is, what would otherwise take decades at best would be accelerated in a matter of weeks or months, Goddess willing. Perhaps that is why She is allowing all of this parade of horribles to happen at all?

38-1479hide270 38b47d4c3b5ac5ffa23e94fc1cd3c9b9 39a3072ac750d2fb1905cde30294d132 40e429c6e47e3cf476f99d0646c309ba 41_00212646_klingsors-zaubergarten 41_00642612_georg-friedrich-kersting_die-stickerin 043N08953_6GW4X.jpg.thumb.500.500 43-0676a 43-0799a

Of course, a sex strike is a short-term tactic, not a long-term strategy. For the ultimate kill switch on how really smash the patriarchy for good in the long term please see a previous article here. And interestingly, the late 19th century feminist Victoria Woodhull would have in fact supported both.


afad92b3e9c5f1101f5e848625353591-700 ALBtNVw An_Oyster_Supper_by_Horatio_Henry_Couldery art-1-121 August Spiess - Parzival is determined to go out into the world and his mother Queen Herzeloyde says farewell to him from the Parzival cycle Singers Hall c1883-84 (mural) - (MeisterDrucke-159596) b0c320bd05585fe35cb0bbe0b0bbc146 b04b9181-44c8-4d2b-a7ed-fc06e264932a


Mature Content

This site contains artistic nudity which may be considered offensive and/or inappropriate. Furthermore, this content may be considered adult content, if you are not of legal age or are easily offended, you are required to click the exit button.