Good relations between the sexes are absolutely fundamental to a functioning society. The union between men and women in loving marriage is the most powerful social alchemy that exists. Absent such relations, healthy families cannot exist, and so a next generation of properly civilised people cannot be brought into being. Thus without good relations between the sexes, a society either collapses into totalitarianism or dies.
The current sitation facing the West – of fertility rate collapse – is a function of several things. One of those things is deteriorating relationships between the sexes. Dave Chappelle observed some years back that men and women don’t get along any more. Relations have only become worse since then.
There are two extremely unnatural approaches to relations between the sexes. We’ve swung from one to another and they’ve both failed.
One is the excessive order approach. This is best exemplified by the Abrahamic cults. The narrative of scriptural passages such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 “Women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church,” or 1 Timothy 2:11-12 “A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet,” is that women are categorically less than men, inferior.
Islam is, of course, even more extreme than Christianity in this regard. The Abrahamic approach to relations between the sexes is suited to equatorial people, a totally different sort of person to the white and Asian people who are the likely audience of this book. Thus it is rejected under the First Rejection.
The second is the excessive chaos approach. This is best exemplified by today’s total confusion. Gender relations are in a state of flux owing to no-one being willing to state, or even knowing, what masculinity is and what femininity is. The girlboss is just as much a travesty of humanity as the man in a dress, for both are miserable.
This excessive chaos, rejected under the Second Rejection, is a consequence of Communist influence. Communist logic is that men and women are identical, and therefore there are no such things as natural sex roles or natural sex-based behaviour. Some social justice warriors, delirious on this logic, will even claim that men are taller and stronger than women because they monopolise sport and exercise opportunities growing up.
Neither of these approaches are satisfying, as can be seen from the high divorce rates, from the involuntary celibacy epidemic, from the monumental suicide rates among trans people and from the popular rush from OnlyFans to tradwife then back again.
As usual here, the Alternative Centrist approach is first to understand the truth of the matter, as per the Fourth Acceptance. The truth is that most human behaviours are natural, and significant sex-based behavioural differences are also natural.
Sex differences in behaviour are readily observable in toddlers, and become accentuated in puberty. Cross-cultural studies demonstrate that these sex differences are biological and not cultural in origin. In fact, there have been about a billion years of evolution establishing differences between the sexes.
Most adults are readily aware of the differences between the sexes. At parties, it’s often observed that women migrate to the kitchen and men to the barbecue. In the workplace, it’s often noticed that women prefer to avoid dirty and dangerous jobs. In the dating market, many have seen that women generally select for strength and men for beauty.
“Neither prejudice nor ideology” is the motto of the Alternative Centrist approach to relations between the sexes. Thus the Alternative Centrist approach categorically rejects the approach of the Establishment Right, and of Abrahamic religions, that women ought to be subjugated. It also categorically rejects any ideology informing relations between the sexes, such as Communism, feminism or blank slate theory.
The approach is to accept that the two sexes are equal metaphysically, but in body and mind are different in a great number of ways, and in some of those ways profoundly.
The Alternative Centrist approach agrees, to a major extent, with Muammar Gaddafi. He wrote, in The Green Book, that women ought to be free to pursue any profession they desire, same as men. But a woman’s natural function is to bear children and raise a family, and if she is prevented from doing this by adverse economic conditions, she is just as much a slave as if made into a breeding sow by religious fundamentalists. Therefore, a just system would allow one man to afford to raise a family on his wage alone.
The Alternative Centrist feels no need for the insanity of quotas for women in governance, in academia and in boardrooms. For one thing, women are already doing better than men at university. For another, the inherent genetic differences outlined above seem to cause men to strive harder to distinguish themselves in the workplace. Geoffrey Miller’s brilliant book The Mating Mind explained how men evolved to put in tremendous efforts of diligence and applied intelligence to impress women. Women, not needing to chase men, need not make such efforts. This, and not discrimination, appears to explain why men have greater career success than women in many contexts. The Alternative Centrist approach is to leave them to it, and not to force women into their spaces.
Absolutely no obligation is felt by the Alternative Centrist to give representation to sexual deviants in high office. Thus there will be no quotas for homosexuals, asexuals or anything similar. Recognition of the greatness of Hadrian precludes the Alternative Centrist from banning homosexuals outright. Heinrich Himmler was correct when he argued that homosexuals, if tolerated, will seek to bring more homosexuals in, and therefore their numbers have to be kept at a minimum. Transsexuals will not be tolerated at all.
If the Alternative Centrist state ran a state religion, as per The Alternative Centrist Approach To Religion, it might have a relatively even mix of men and women among the priests and priestesses, as per ancient Greece and Rome.
The general rule on this subject is that the subtler the relevant quality, the more it is accessible to both men and women, but the grosser the relevant quality, the more it is particular to one gender. So spirituality is something for both men and women, but raw physicality divides the two, e.g. men into soldiering, policing and labouring; women into caring, nurturing and pregnancy.
Thus in spirituality and academia there might be a roughly even mix of men and women; in politics and other warrior-class endeavours it will be mostly men; most people jobs will be done by women and most tool-using jobs will be done be men. Fundamentally, though, both will be worthy of the same level of basic respect, although Lysistrata-style pisstakes are always encouraged.
*
This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.
*
For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!