TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

13

H.L. Mencken - In Defense of Women (self.RedPillWives)

submitted by HieronymusBoschClone

Hello RPWives,

I was preparing my post on anti-feminism when I gave Mencken's hyperbolic book on women a glance through. Although I wouldn't recommend reading this text to any of you, I thought this quote relevant given the last few recent posts.

My experience of the world has taught me that the average wine-bibber is a far better fellow than the average prohibitionist, and that the average rogue is better company than the average poor drudge, and that the worst white-slave trader of my acquaintance is a decenter man than the best vice crusader. In the same way I am convinced that the average woman, whatever her deficiencies, is greatly superior to the average man. The very ease with which she defies and swindles him in several capital situations of life is the clearest of proofs of her general superiority. She did not obtain her present high immunities as a gift from the gods, but only after a long and often bitter fight, and in that fight she exhibited forensic and tactical talents of a truly admirable order. There was no weakness of man that she did not penetrate and take advantage of. There was no trick that she did not put to effective use. There was no device so bold and inordinate that it daunted her.

Keep ya chins up, lassie's!

 

Regards,

HieronymusBoschClone


[–]blondie_brownie 6 points6 points [recovered] | Copy Link

This resonated with me in terms of shit tests. Before I knew what I was doing or why I was doing it or how it was hurting my relationship, I shit tested a lot. And I shit tested in the worst ways possible in order to get him to cave: crying jags, temper tantrums, the siltent treatment, being passive aggressive, being downright aggressive, begging, pleading, and generally manipulating to get my way. I think that a huge part of becoming a RPW for me was realizing that, yes, I do know exactly how to get my husband to do things for me and how to get him to cave to my tests, but that I choose not to do that because I respect him.

[–]stevierose345 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy Link

I have been wondering how you got your name from the very first. Are you identifying with the artist or a someone or something he depicts in his paintings? Off topic, I know, but I had to ask.

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

I considered SalvadorDalisNeighbor, but Hieronymus is just too much fun to type.

[–]stevierose345 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Would that be the neighbor who witnessed his meeting with Gala on the beach where she left her husband and child to become his woman?

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Sorry, I don't identify with any of these artists in particular. I'm just a huge fan of their style and it's what got me interested in sketching.

Although Hieronymus Bosch definitely has to be my favorite!

[–]stevierose345 4 points4 points [recovered] | Copy Link

I get it. You should check out Salvador and Gala's relationship. It defies all logic. I guess it points out the power of love even in the most bizarre circumstances.

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh I know all about it :) Dali was a very interesting character.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Haha, thanks for sharing this excerpt!

[–]cats_or_get_out 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

This whole book is wonderful. (I kinda have the hots for Mencken, so I am biased.)

EDIT: This book had several working titles: "The original title for Defense was A Book for Men Only, but other working titles included The Eternal Feminine as well as The Infernal Feminine."

"According to Mencken's biographer, Fred Hobson:

"Depending on the position of the reader, he was either a great defender of women's rights or, as a critic labelled him in 1916, 'the greatest misogynist since Schopenhauer','the country's high-priest of woman-haters.'" (From Wikipedia)

Hahahaha after reading much of his other stuff, I think of him as a playful misogynist.

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 5 points5 points [recovered] | Copy Link

It's a pretty awesome book to be sure. He was married, you know. I always find it entertaining how married men can be considered misogynists (although his writing does nothing to dispel the notion, though).

What other works of his do you like?

[–]cats_or_get_out 7 points7 points [recovered] | Copy Link

The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche This book provides a lot of context which is sorely lacking from most discussions of Nietzsche's works and ideas. It is chock full of interesting biographical information and helps you understand Nietzsche's growth from seminary student to party guy to Schopenhauer devotee to Schopenhauer hater, from Wagner devotee to Wagner despiser. I think Nietzsche is misunderstood and misquoted (out of context stuff) by a lot of folks.

Prejudices A collection of works

Newspaper Days A collection of works

Notes on Democracy This one is an eye opener. Wowee From this we get such zingers as this quote: "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."

He was not a fan of the "masses." He was a reporter on the Scopes Monkey Trial, and he recognized that populace can be completely irrational--eschewing science in favor of teaching folk lore in public schools.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."

This book challenges our sacrosanct ideals of democracy and describes how the aristocracy is, in fact, a better rule of government. I don't necessarily agree with all his ideas, but he has some salient points and a humorous, biting style of writing.

As far as women go, I think he's a realist though always a humorist first. Men fare just as badly under his pen, but In Defense of Women has some time-tested truth:

Men will keep on pursuing women until hell freezes over, and women will keep luring them on. If the latter enterprise were abandoned, in fact, the whole game of love would play out, for not many men take any notice of women spontaneously. Nine men out of ten would be quite happy, I believe, if there were no women in the world, once they had grown accustomed to the quiet. Practically all men are their happiest when they are engaged upon activities—for example, drinking, gambling, hunting, business, adventure—to which women are not ordinarily admitted. It is women who seduce them from such celibate doing

Bahahahaha

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you for the outline! I've read "Notes on Democracy" and I basically agree with everything he says (I spend a great deal of time on the antidemocracy side of the reactosphere). I've only read some on his thoughts on Nietzsche so hopefully sooner rather than later I'll read that text. And that quote about the black flag is a classic :D

[–]cats_or_get_out 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Have you ever noticed how we can't criticize democracy directly?

It is as if pure democracy is holy and perfect, and all of our flaws with the political system arise from our mortal bastardization of this holy state. It is as if our current manifestation of democracy is the Catholic Church on the eve of Luther's Theses.

Take the current political discord in the US. People are upset with the two party system, with delegates and superdelegates, the Electoral College, the candidates themselves, etc.

To the average American, this election cycle represents democracy gone wrong, as if with some alchemy, maybe a sacred rite or prayer or a totem, we can "restore" our "democracy" to its pure and holy form. This chaos, to them, seems an aberration. But this is not an aberration but a tangible product of democracy.

The will of the people is mob rule, so chaos and power bullies will rule. In the mob, power is not evenly distributed among its members--the ruthless will silence opponents, and the mob will exact it's revenge ("justice") as it sees fit, without any temperance of cool logic. (See the Scopes Monkey Trial). People are ruled by feelings and group think. Feelings aren't bad, but they are no substitute for logic.

[–]HieronymusBoschClone 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Every religion has a two things: a creation myth and rituals. Democracy serves both, if only in a superficial sense. That's the thing with democracy: it like a secular religion of sorts and I'm not the only person to make this connection either.

It seems like your the kind of woman that might appreciate some of the blogs I compiled in this list. I hope you find them as thought provoking as I do!

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter