what even a woman hesitates to say
wrote a while back about a soul pal i heard on the radio. it was jan kerouac, and i was bummed to find out, shortly after deciding i was going to try to meet her, that she was dead.
though too late to meet her flesh version, her two finished books are easy enough to get. reading trainsong at the gym last night, i found this nugget from an exceptional woman (in an interview tacked to the end of this edition):
GN: Speaking of balls, what do you think of Norman Mailer’s saying that women can’t write because they don’t have any?JK: It’s just obviously not true, because women do write. Yet—well, maybe I shouldn’t say this, but it’s true that I haven’t met as many women whose mentality I’ve respected as men. Men who haven’t known many mentally stimulating women might easily make the generalization that women can’t think. On the other hand, I was taken aback by an interview with Jorge Luis Borges, where he said that a student of his was one of the most intelligent women he’d run into but that she couldn’t quite grasp some meaning in a book he was teaching. Then he started saying that women were incapable of thinking things out that far. He said women take the world for granted more than men—that women see themselves as actresses and have this shallow idea of how the world sees them. I was really enjoying the whole thing, and then I thought, “Well!” But then I thought, “Well, he’s never met me!“
most of the women i’ve worked with and known have been better suited to drone life than intellectual brilliance. and that’s the same with most men i’ve met, but not at quite the slacker rate as with women. though i like HL mencken’s In Defense of Women very much, i think he was pouring too much coal to his thesis. but he’s dead on target in his observation that most people worth a damn have healthy doses of the masculine and feminine in their ingredient list.
you’ve probably run into the woman whose friends are mostly male — a “one of the guys” type, however feminine otherwise. it’s not the only indicator of superiority, but men are quite obviously attracted mentally and sexually to women with strong male personality traits. frankly, any woman i’m with not approaching ayn rand brilliance (fast) and strength eventually bores the fuck out of me. of course, i think most people in this world of either sex are just butt stupid and worthless. maybe the only difference i see is a remnant of practical societal sex differences. no idea where some people got the idea that you can take the average housewife, have her raise a girl as she was raised, then send that young woman into the business world and expect the odds are good she’ll be something other than a poser. that shit takes generations, or abnormality, to overcome.
and yeah, the same applies to “blacks” (a term which, unfortunately, is applied to mixed race people as well) and any other group that’s suddenly given access to previously closed areas. these are the nasty truths we’re supposed to not discuss. but i have eyes and a brain. i’ve seen the shit for years. most people assume you can safely force this lunacy on society by pointing guns at heads. just one more reason “civil rights” crap, when it extends to coercing people into association with others, is evil and destructive.
superior women will always be sought after. same with superior “blacks”, gays, or whatever. what’s the only reason (other than building the borg) people want them forced on others? because they know those populations aren’t generally up to scratch yet. same old story. i think the great harry browne was one of the best writing on this subject — how the “government” screwed away race and sex issues for probably hundreds of years to come with the utter bullshit of “civil rights” legislation, forcing people (with guns and threats, of course) to associate against their will. ever read EEOC’s piss? it’s sick.
thence flows the result: the workplace damned, and tension and hatred that will remain for at least decades more (if this place exists), courtesy of the US ruling class lawbreakers. their mantra? “you have all clamored for something so loudly that we will now force it on you. guess you must want it really bad!”
July 28th, 2006 at 00:34
You hit on a really good point, that the men in our society went to work while the women stayed home and raised the family. Then the “Civil Rights” thing comes along and changes all that. But if you put women in the office, make them CEO’s and other executives, then what are the men supposed to do? Who’s going to raise the kids at home? They want everyone not just to be equals, but to be exactly the same.
July 28th, 2006 at 01:12
the kids are an afterthought, sent to government indoctrination centers to have their brains pummeled with dreck. most of them will accept it, then go on to raise even stupider kids. good plan!
yeah, that “exactly the same” thing is crazy. there are plenty of dumb motherfuckers in the world, and the only equality is of natural rights. maybe one day those rights will be given some breathing room.
November 1st, 2010 at 05:27
[...] by some women, keep it in your socks, hell hole. next time you want to denounce female writers, let a superior thinker do it for you, and think general, not [...]