International Brotherhood of Men

I think contemporary narrative that prevails in the analyses of patriarchy is feminism.

Its really hard to remove feminism from a male head. I noticed it. Even the most based incels I know, have a strong feminist bias, they think feminism history is accurate, but there is a spin, they flip the narrative.

When you live in the frame of your enemy, no matter if you flip his narrative you still live in his grip.

For instance imagine the people who were labeled "atheist" a while ago. They were interacting mainly against christian people, I refer to hitchens and dawkins and so on. Broadly, on the internet, they are considered winners of debates and such meager accomplishments. In any case, they lost the day they chose to name themselves "atheist". Why? Because it is a slur.

In the bible and in gilgamesh and in ancient texts, call someone "godless" equates to when communists construct the ideological basis through class analysis necessary to demonize a group, follows death usually.

Or think of, for example, satanic panic. Some people saw all boomers scared of satanism, and they acquired the character of "the adversary" (of the boomer) and boomers crushed them. Why happens? Because they take the characterization of the enemy they are defined by the enemy.

Online they tell us often "SJW win if they label you". Which is correct. They win if they label you and incels broadly have really a hard time tackling this issue. Because incels are broadly described by mass media. Incels will rejoice because they are given "a role", but that is just a clever laid trap, the incel falls for it.

Well, I could expand each of these topics but the central point of this message is that patriarchy is not what we think it is. Because feminists told us what it is. Its not antisocial, its not inefficient, its not primarily done by lower strata people (feminists blame low status males) instead is done by elites, is not ended (elites still do it), its not about murder rape and comically stylized retarded feminist accounts of it, its not bigotry, its not traditional. Exactly, I dont think is a matter of tradition or any of that.

I think, and feel free to disagree with me if you want, that patriarchy has to be invented anew. I have some ideas. But I think there isnt much to "rediscover", rather all we can do is observe patriarchy where it exists: mostly in elite families.

gynocentrism is okay. just don't overdo it.

VH911 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 16:37 gynocentrism is okay. just don't overdo it.

Well I heard people at the manosphere refer to gynocentrism. I am legit convinced we are doing matriarchy which is why everything is so dysfunctional.

Theres a negro author named chinweizu who talks about matriarchy in africa, its the one I reference for an honest account of the horrors of matriarchy, since africa is matriarchal. I think I see similar stuff in the west, increasingly more so. Men who listen to "female shamans" (how I call them), basically foids who interpret male emotions and give them morale and so on. This shit is what I see in the west. Im not sure I agree with gynocentrism theory. I think we are descending into matriarchy alarmingly fast.

I would assume best thing to do is counter it with patriarchy. But I mean a new one. For coincidence I wrote as a literary exercise of a fictional character that was using brain implants on foids. Its an exercise of fiction that I did not expand here due to forum rules of course.

Sustacel250 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 17:16

VH911 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 16:37 gynocentrism is okay. just don't overdo it.

Well I heard people at the manosphere refer to gynocentrism. I am legit convinced we are doing matriarchy which is why everything is so dysfunctional.

Theres a negro author named chinweizu who talks about matriarchy in africa, its the one I reference for an honest account of the horrors of matriarchy, since africa is matriarchal. I think I see similar stuff in the west, increasingly more so. Men who listen to "female shamans" (how I call them), basically foids who interpret male emotions and give them morale and so on. This shit is what I see in the west. Im not sure I agree with gynocentrism theory. I think we are descending into matriarchy alarmingly fast.

I would assume best thing to do is counter it with patriarchy. But I mean a new one. For coincidence I wrote as a literary exercise of a fictional character that was using brain implants on foids. Its an exercise of fiction that I did not expand here due to forum rules of course.

matriarchy mainly because authority positions are increasingly occupied by females, government, education, institutions.
we need patriarchy, a new one, which is not based on religion, but science.

VH911 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 19:06 matriarchy mainly because authority positions are increasingly occupied by females, government, education, institutions.
we need patriarchy, a new one, which is not based on religion, but science.

My view of "patriarchy" is that some elites expand their circle of trust outside of the family unit and I derive my bias from my views of political philosophy. I like "elite theory" and authors are mosca, pareto, machiavelli... In this context patriarch is a very competent person who figured out the foid menace and will handle and manage foids (but do many other things as well) and this is my bias. I declared it right now so you can understand my perspective

Sustacel250 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 19:16

VH911 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 19:06 matriarchy mainly because authority positions are increasingly occupied by females, government, education, institutions.
we need patriarchy, a new one, which is not based on religion, but science.

My view of "patriarchy" is that some elites expand their circle of trust outside of the family unit and I derive my bias from my views of political philosophy. I like "elite theory" and authors are mosca, pareto, machiavelli... In this context patriarch is a very competent person who figured out the foid menace and will handle and manage foids (but do many other things as well) and this is my bias. I declared it right now so you can understand my perspective

it needs to be backed up by a strong base-law. but a democratic aspect is needed otherwise it won't be stable.

VH911 wrote: 19 Jul 2025, 19:53 it needs to be backed up by a strong base-law. but a democratic aspect is needed otherwise it won't be stable.

I was thinking enclave-based, so I would personally enter in competition with failing hierarchical structures, demonstrating the redistribution model of foids actually works. I think feminists created an advantageous chessboard where things like this can happen for real. Nowadays, even if sounds absurd to say it we live in a world of great opportunities.