Feminism (part two)

"Support" by Sierra Koder

Further thoughts about Feminism |
Monday – February 9, 2026

Ah, the other day I wrote a post about feminism, which I've already linked to in the heading, but that post mostly covered the metaphysical side of feminism, and since I didn't mention some more "profane" aspects of feminism in that post, allow me to do that here. Here's a quote from my "Political Notes" page: "A more "profane" reason for feminism could be because some women prefer a man who conquers her. Really, I am convinced that feminism, at least in part, can be thought of as a kind of rebellion against weak men, a way of provoking the masculine quality, and this would be understandable from the point of view of a hysterical and agitated woman, especially if she is young."; I decided to quote myself here because this post will mostly cover that aspect of feminism, which I hold to be a certain and probably significant part of this feminist hysteria. Yes, there are of course major reasons having to do with the downward tendency of the material domain, and from the egalitarian point of view feminism should be expected since the material (temporal) domain is physical and what matters in the physical sense is power, and since women hold less power, less temporal power, it would be, as I just noted, a natural consequence for the activists of egalitarianism to assert that women should be "equal" in all material regards, and since none of these people typically care for the metaphysical aspect of sex, the ordered hierarchy of nature plays no role, really this is again just to be an expected consequence of the humanist axiom. Also, if you want to understand why the notion of equality is preposterous you should read my post from the other day that I have linked in the heading, because it would serve no purpose for me to repeat myself in this post.

    Yes, when it comes to the aggregate or average sensuality of a woman, it is true that she expects to be conquered by a man, and this is why women—historically and for the most part—have been fairly "flexible" with the notion of of their status of concubines, if this was extended to them, because a man of the temporal order was indeed a worldly man, and because of this this man could be expected to be able to provide security, food, and entertainment, and really a life that was easier, materially speaking. This is not to say that women don't mind if their husbands are adulterous, but I do gather a certain tendency on the aggregate part of women, to not allow adultery to settle into their mind to the same extent that it tends to dominate the more terrestrial mind of men, and of course profane science would either reject this notion or claim that women had some kind of "evolutionary advantage" in the deep and primordial past by having a fairly easy time to let her attention on one man slip, and that women therefore should be considered more opportunistic in regards to the relationship between a man and a woman, and to a certain extent this view is shared by Judaism and Christianity, but only to a very certain and limited extent, and in this connection I would point to Genesis 3:6 and Deuteronomy 22:23–29. Is it then the case that women are more likely to accept a man that has conquered her? Well, this question cannot be answered without taking the proper context of being a woman into account: I do not believe that women are less steadfast in their relationship with a man, but I do believe that the modern notion of marriage has effectively inverted the normal relationship between a man and a woman, a relationship that normally finds its proper manifestation in the cosmological order as the man being more inclined to seek out adventure and therefore more adept at dealing with temporal matters, something that puts the woman in a subordinate relationship to the man, not merely a coordinate relationship on "equal" grounds as moderns demand. What this means is that women, normal women, seek out men, normal men, that are capable of conquering their emotions, that is the feminine manifestation in human form, and from a traditional point of view women exhibit the feminine qualities of a histrionic and provocative character, something that is a prerequisite for sincere sensuality in women.

    What I am trying to say is that feminism can surely be understood from the point of view of women that have been, and are, sensually depraved, which is to be expected in a society that is not grounded in the natural order; and what this effectively means is that women become more and more hysterical, provocative, and unstable as this sensual part of their character remains unconquered and out of control, and since women are not able, generally, to conquer this part of themselves, they become progressively more and more unstable and destructive, which is why feminism is more than merely a further step towards egalitarianism, but really a primal and uncontrollable attempt to provoke the masculine urge to put the temporal domain back into proper order, really to encourage men to conquer their feminine spirit. Of course, since modern men have responded by attempting to make themselves into women, the destruction (Kālī, काली) of the feminine spirit goes on and tends towards more and more radicalism; this is why the Goddess of destruction (again, Kālī) in Hindu mythology is depicted as namely a Goddess, because destruction and hysteria as a feminine quality is a universal motif in all traditions, at least all traditions that are derived from the great primordial tradition.

    In contrast to this, the aggregate of men have very little interest in being conquered by anything, since this would render the raison d'être of the masculine force as manifested in the temporal domain moot. On the other hand, the urge on the part of most men—particularly those who exhibit the qualities of the Kṣatriya's (क्षत्रिय), the warrior, as borrowed from the Hindu caste system—is to seek out the world, and this is why most men, to varying degrees depending on their abilities and aptitudes, tend to find sensuality in women of "lesser mysteries", that is to say women who can be described as aesthetically exotic and "perfect"; this should also be understood as a way towards divinity since the path towards the "celestial paradise" starts with the "terrestrial paradise". In this way, men and women can finally complete the identity of "Yin and Yang", according to Taoism.

    Finally, yes, feminism is primarily a further deviation that is in keeping with the social chaos of the modern world, but feminism can also be understood as an inevitable part of that tendency towards divinely inspired vengeance.

Reginald Drax – February 9, 2026.