A beautiful young Caucasian woman with her hand in her hair.

Women Ruin Everything

4 mins read

Editor’s Note: We share another gem from our friend, the Gentleman Adventurer, Adam Piggott. You can also read this article, and the rest of his writing, at his blog.
One of the most important aspects of the alt-right is its determination to learn from and not repeat the mistakes that conservatives have made over the last hundred years. The mistake that got the ball rolling, the grandaddy of mistakes if you will, was women’s emancipation [Ed – referring to suffrage]. As The Z Man pointed out the other day, as soon as women got the vote they banned alcohol, gambling, and prostitution.

Morality, at least in the modern age, is the set of rules the girls use to control the boys, which is why the prim-faced moralizers of today are running around trying to stamp out anything that smacks of masculinity.

This is due to women having to deal in absolutes whereas the boys do not require a long list of rules and regulations to arbitrate disputes. Boys in the playground will invent a basic game and get to it. If any disputes arise along the way then these will be dealt with accordingly, either by force or by someone with a smart mouth. The girls on the other hand will sit down and carefully construct a long list of protocols and behavior codes before they even play the game. These will be designed both to ensure that everyone is a winner while also guaranteeing that the prettier and more popular girls always come out slightly ahead.
Today The Z Man discusses the iron law of conservatism which is that any organization that does not expressly declare itself as right wing will eventually be infiltrated and subverted to the side of the Left, also known as O’Sullivan’s Law after the British journalist who came up with it. And all throughout conservative history the greatest supporters of this subversion have been women, precisely because of their tendency to impose rules and behavior codes.

Lauren Southern

In that same post The Z Man links to this Gavin McInnes video where he discusses the difference between the alt-right and the alt-lite. His discussion more or less amounts to placing the leading figures of both groups into their respective sides, along with a fair amount of good old fashioned Nazi talk. It was all pretty boring stuff that managed to avoid anything of substance. But McInnes, who professes to be firmly in the alt-lite camp, made an unintentional and revealing slip up. The very first alt-lite figurehead that he mentioned was Rebel journalist Lauren Southern.
Young, beautiful, and female, Southern identifies as an attack helicopter in order to mock those who believe in gender identity. She has written a very successful book that she self published with the title, Barbarians: How Baby Boomers, Immigrants, and Islam Screwed My Generation. She is the poster child for young conservative women. But the reason that McInnes put her first, even if he would never admit it, is that he wants to get laid.
Women ruin everything because men want them and men will betray just about all of their supposedly deeply held principles in order to get some tail. Southern is an entryist. She may well be entirely acceptable to the alt-lite camp but she will be followed by women who are slightly less so but who will gain entry on her coat-tails. Once ensconced they will begin the process of changing things in order to make it “more acceptable”. They will campaign for codes of conduct and rules and regulations that only succeed in beginning the process of subverting the alt-lite over to the left. They will also undoubtedly begin a movement called “women of the alt-lite,” or some other abomination.
A woman can never be a kayaker; she has to be a female kayaker, and that is precisely due to the fact that as a straight kayaker she won’t measure up against the men. Women band together in established groups in order not to feel inferior, but the rules that they come up with in order to police themselves are very soon imposed upon the group as a whole. The infiltration method that they utilize to infect the whole is a compliant male who wants to get laid. Whether it is kayaking, or video games, or political movements, the results are always the same.
The Z Man stated that O’Sullivan left out the most important part of the law, which is the actual definition of what is Right Wing.

What is it that forever separates the Right from the Left? What is the thing about which there can be no meeting in the middle, between Left and Right? The great divide that can never be crossed, is biology.The Left embraces the blank slate and rejects biological reality. The Right accepts biology, human diversity and all the truths about the human animal that arise from it.

I think that The Z Man needs to go one step further. The ultimate law of biology as pertains to the human species is that men and women are fundamentally different and have differing and often conflicting aims. It is no coincidence that the Left have been doing everything in their power to confuse and subvert these biological realities simply because they conflict with their ideological goals, namely that of equality. Therefore any organization that is expressly Right Wing must then exclude women from any form of participation.
Thus the alt-right have to be extremely careful of this entryism. We are already beginning to see it with women such as Brittany Pettibone and her co-host Tara McCarthy. They have a YouTube show called Virtue of the West and have already interviewed personages such as Tommy Robinson, Vox Day, and Ricky Vaughn. While not expressly alt-right, their about pages manage to firmly place them in the alt-right camp.

Virtue of the West is a video podcast co-hosted by Brittany Pettibone and Tara McCarthy and is dedicated to helping you reconnect with the traditional values that once made Western Civilization great, including but not limited to the glorification of the nuclear family, motherhood, masculinity, femininity, etiquette, traditional gender roles and love of one’s own culture, race and country.

If they are truly dedicated to traditional values and motherhood then they will do much better to find a good husband and continue that with which they proclaim to be of such importance. And more importantly, they won’t enable the process of infiltration and subversion of the alt-right, which as history shows has almost always been perpetuated by or for women.


  1. Good point, the prerequisite for a woman with a loud voice in the alternative right should be 4 kids.

  2. There will be no return to tradition or the Judea Christian values of the West. These values all collapsed well before the beginning of the 20th century. It is a fools errand to try to restore what never had the strength to sustain itself on its own merit.

  3. Funny that you say, “she has to be a female kayaker”. When in grad school we had an invited speaker series that featured a prominent woman scientist. She was certainly talented and a dynamic speaker. The host professor introduced her as “one of the leading women chemists in the world,” for which she promptly reported him to our university, b/c she wanted to be known as “one of the leading chemists in the world.”
    Never mind that his statement was true. Never mind that it could be (and most certainly was) intended to inspire young women in the audience. Never mind that she won awards specifically for women in science that essentially said that same thing. Nope, she had to complain b/c she had achieved that level of parity w/ men (of course being really cute and coming from an affluent family led by her father had no bearing in the matter).
    Women ruin everything

  4. This is why men and women had separate social and political organizations.
    Women may create their own groupings; under the umbrellas of Alt-Lite, Alt-West, Alt-Right, fine. With GamerGate mechanisms in place with no leaders, no codes of conduct, and no hierarchical structure there can be no single target to infiltrate, demonize, or subvert.
    The danger is in an attempt to create a monolithic hierarchical structure where those techniques can be used. Women, in an amorphous, anonymous, and principle based group with the idea of “No enemies to the Right” will not be able to warp that group. Ridicule and scorn would heap on them if they tried, which is more than effective as a means of self-policing.
    You can’t come up with a code of conduct for a movement if there’s no hierarchy, no leaders, and no rules other than the one principle.

  5. To really fix the issue of voting, it needs to go further than restrict the vote to the men, it needs to be restricted to 1 vote for every married man, married, non-divorced, with 3+ kids, and who derive 100% of their income from the private sector. Those on welfare (should be significantly reduced if not eliminated) or who are in an elected office or are working in the public sector have temporary suspension of their voting rights. Exceptions can be made for widows/widowers and medical. Elected office should be limited to men who meet the above recommendations.
    This removes the stupidity of youth from the equation.
    This removes everyone who is not invested in the future of the country and therefore will be tempted to support low-time preference policies.
    This removes those who in getting their meal ticket from the government will be tempted to keep the post going regardless of what is best for the nation.
    This removes women and their support for feminist tinged socialism.
    This removes most degenerates from pushing their degeneracy on the public.
    This solidifies the family as the unit and template of the nation.
    On the issue of divorce, in such a setting, parents would do well to encourage their kids to seek good marriage material. In such a setting, those who still proceed to choose poorly and suffer from a divorce (I’d like to see no-fault go bye-bye), well, if you choose poorly in one of the most important decisions of your life, should you really be trusted to vote well or to hold office well? Again, within that setting, not in the one we all grew up in and we are slowly waking out of.

      • “Only those who own at least 1 full acre of land in the district in which he lives should be able to vote.”
        Interesting. What comes to my mind in reading this is that you need a restriction on how property is purchased. This is necessary to protect the locals from foreigners purchasing a majority of the land and/or rapidly raising property prices, be they from China (Vancouver, etc.) or from California (Colorado, Texas). Speaking of Californians, applying a defined time period of residence before voting rights…at least local voting rights, are granted would help with Socialist rich or Corrupted rich people leaving their spoiled lands to come elsewhere and then start advocating for the very politics that ruined the places they are fleeing.
        So say you have some Los Angels couple, who have one kid and 2 dogs, been divorced once, move to North Carolina. Even after say the 8 year residency period, they wouldn’t be able to vote for Cali Socialism because they still don’t meet the other requirements I mentioned above.
        As to the quote from John Adams, Communist academia has a lot to answer for. Adams was not being prophetic, he just could rationally extrapolate what would happen because his education actually taught him all of the humanities prior to 1965.

        • Those are all good considerations, and something that would need to be addressed. I would have no problem with the suggestions you provide. If and when this becomes something that we are dealing with in reality, we would need to come up with specific restrictions on voting, for sure.

  6. I disagree with you but that doesn’t mean I’m right and you are wrong. It’s just my opinion. I do think that when women focus on whatever their goals are and don’t bother with proclaiming “I am woman” they are just fine. Women like Florence Nightingale, Madame Curie and Mother Theresa, for example, and Margaret Thatcher. They pretty much did what was important to them without making a big deal about their gender.
    I went to MIT and got about half way through my PhD when I had to drop out due to health reasons. At any rate, when I was applying to graduate school I was given an opportunity to apply as a woman for a particular scholarship and I told them I didn’t want my gender to play any role in the qualification process. Either I qualified on my own merits or I didn’t but I didn’t want any special treatment because I was a woman. I applied without checking the gender box and got the scholarship anyway, and it meant more because I had done it on my own merits, not because of preferential treatment.
    I think the minute women start expecting or accepting favoritism because of their gender then they pave the way for their own mediocrity. Because it’s human nature – you will think you will work just as hard if the hill is just a little easier to climb, but you won’t. The only way to reach your full potential is to face the full challenge.
    I’m not talking about social courtesies, BTW – men holding doors for women or calling them “honey” – those are just part of being civilized. When a man holds the door for me, I say “thank you” and smile. Being a lady is just good breeding.
    But when it comes to accomplishing things, you either succeed on the merits or you don’t. Asking people to lower the standards for you or to pander to you is to admit weakness. It proves you don’t deserve to be there. If you can only succeed as a “woman scientist” vs. just being a scientist, then you’re not all that good, frankly.
    Also, BTW, I think it makes perfect sense to have all-male clubs and colleges and so on as well as all-female ones. There is a natural social tension in co-ed groups and sometimes it’s nice not to have to deal with that.

  7. HUMANS RUIN EVERYTHING! your going to simply it down to one who were born with dicks and ones who came out with vaginas?! it’s 2017 you morons, and ur still waging a war , propaganda and all because WHY?! this shit is so 1978

    • Thank you for your comment that was so chock-full of common sense, sugartits.
      Now, if you look at what we said, you’ll see it’s true, that, in general, men play fast and loose with the primary rule being “Get the job done,” whether that job is work or having fun, but once women are involved, many basic guidelines become hard-and-fast handcuffs on innovation and speed.
      So, in short, find a man, make him a sammich, and watch the magic happen.

    • Ah, the great year of 1978, when illegitimacy rates were about 15%, compared to over 40% now…and marriage rates were 40% higher. Yeah, we have improved so much since then.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Previous Story

Maundy Thursday

Next Story

Good Friday

Latest from Culture