 And, like Freddy Krueger, I am back. My name is Sam Vaknin, I am the author of Malignant Self-Love, Narcissism Revisited. And today we are going to discuss the Manosphere. The mainstream media would have you believe that the Manosphere is that niche in cyberspace or misogynistic men congregate in order to plot how to exact revenge upon incalcitrant and exploitative women. But there's a lot more to it than this. The Manosphere reflects the congruence and confluence of several very important social and cultural trends. And it is comprised of disparate elements which disagree with each other and even harshly criticize each other. So to generalize this way is both inaccurate and misleading. Let's start with pickup artists, PUAs. These are communities of men guided by self-imputed expanse, so-called expanse, who purport to have found the exact sequence of buttons to push, to get a woman to succumb and offer access to her body. So if you follow their recipes, there is no woman in the world who will be able to resist. Of course, pickup artists fail to see the irony. Like homebroken and trained puppies, they jump through whoops held high by females, and they adhere religiously to a script that is written entirely by the fair sex. It's kind of, you want to sleep with me? You have to go through these motions. You have to act clownishly for hours, and then you may succeed. I have even less respect for self-disparaging and self-loathing incels. These guys whine constantly and pathetically about being shunned by women, and how they have a God-given right to sex by force if need be. These are the black pillars. The people who took the black pill. Some of these misfeeds even undergo extensive cosmetic surgeries to fix their alleged facial deformities. It's a form of body dysmorphic insanity known as look-muxing. Now, black pills, red pills, blue pills, these come from the movie The Matrix, where people were given pills, which allowed them to see reality for what it is. And other people took pills, which misled them to regard the Matrix as reality. So if you take a red pill or if you take a black pill, you're exposed to reality as it is. You wake up, so to speak. You wake up from the Matrix, and you are able to discern what is really happening and to defend yourself or protect yourself from untoward machinations and stratagems especially by women. Red pillars, as opposed to in cells, are more benign. They claim only to have seen the light, and the true nature of women, as rapacious and psychopathic entities who leverage the institutions of society to their unbridled and disempathic benefits. So say the red pillars. Of course, unfortunately, the logical extension of this alleged power asymmetry and power grab is to avoid all committed relationships, enter meaghtow, men going their own way. The thinking is this, casual sex is fine. Committed relationships, including and especially marriage, play to the benefit of women. Women use the law, use, I mean legislation, use institutions to extract and extort men, so when they get married with the men, they then abscond with half his property and migrate towards a higher level men who will come to it in a few minutes. Now all these meaghtows, the red pillars, the black pillars and any other pillars of society, all of them breed on the grounds and they are a groundswell which reflects really unprecedented social trends. Human society had first come to being in an organized sense with the agricultural revolution. About 10,000 years ago, Jericho ostensibly was the first urban center in today's Palestine, and there was 10,000 years ago. For thousands, for millennia, for thousands of years, we have been organizing society around specific gender roles. Women born with one set of genitalia had their assigned roles in society, and men similarly born with another set of genitalia and a different hormonal structure and more musculature had their roles in society. In many societies, their roles were not considered superior or inferior. Women were not considered inferior to men, they were considered different to men. Because the belief was that women had different endowments, distinct endowments, to men, they were relegated to and confined to highly specific set of functions which they could never exit, there was sort of a glass ceiling if you wish. Men similarly were confined and imprisoned and incarcerated within a role space, a space of functions, and so men, for example, had to do everything which concerned muscles and strength and brawn. Women had to do everything which had to do with a family or raising children, everything. And so these roles ossified over time, coalesced and ossified and fossilized, and by the 19th century, during the Victorian era, gender roles were codified, literally codified. Up until that time, women were considered chateaux, property of men, similar to beds or pieces of furniture. And in the Victorian era, they were, on the one hand, liberated in some sense, especially the economic sense, but on condition that they adhere to and accept highly specific gender roles from which they could not deviate, and if they did deviate, they were imprisoned. For example, there was a movement called the Souffre Jets, and they tried to open up society to level the playing field, and many of them were imprisoned. They were matrons, they were respectable ladies, but they were put in prison. So the Victorian era was a Faustian deal. Women sold their freedom in certain arenas of life, for example, politics, in return for the protection of society. So society protected their property. Society protected their access to their husband's property. Society protected their child rearing functions, and society codified men's role in ascertaining and securing sufficient means to raise children, and on the other hand, women gave up access to certain types of education, most professions, and politics. This was the Victorian Faustian deal, which was undermined, mainly in the 1930s, 1940s, 50s and 60s, by feminism and the feminists. There is no question that traditional gender roles are dead, and that sex has become merely a physical function no longer associated with intimacy. Both men and women feel disoriented and overlooked in this mainstream of gender vertigo. And appeal, contraception, widespread or widely available abortion, they all liberated women. They restored women's ownership and control of their own bodies. From that moment on, women were the choice makers. They were the decision makers, as to the structure of the family, the size of the family, or whether to have a family at all. It is also true that women are empowered, and having been only recently emancipated, or imitating the traits and behaviors of men, but not of men generally, of anti-social men. It is veritably a post-apocalyptic age for relationships and dating. We know that children who are abused in families tend to become abusers later in life. They tend to emulate an anti-social and psychopathic role. They tend to internalize or interject the abuser. Minorities, such as women, who have been, people who have been abused, tortured, traded over millennia. Women have been enslaved for 10,000 years. Women have been treated as property. Women have been tortured, mutilated, sold. Women really have a record which far outweighs anything done to black people in the United States. I mean, slavery in the United States pales in comparison to what women had to go through literally in all patriarchal societies and cultures around the world. So now that they have been emancipated and liberated, it is not surprising to psychologists at least, it's not surprising to social psychologists, that women are adopting the role of their abusers. Women now want to be the abusers. They are the abused children who later become abusers. They become narcissistic. They become psychopathic because all abused people, all victims of abuse, adopt narcissistic and psychopathic traits. Actually, today the bleeding-edge research shows that it is impossible to distinguish the victim of complex post-traumatic stress disorder. It's impossible to distinguish the victim of domestic violence, spousal abuse, family abuse and narcissistic abuse. It's impossible to distinguish the victim of all these types of abuse from people with personality disorders. For example, victims of CPTSD, victims of complex post-traumatic stress disorder behave exactly like people with borderline personality disorders. They have modulability. They are emotionally dysregulated. They are very frequently psychopathic. They have no impulse control. They are defiant. They have splitting defenses. They see everything as good or bad, black and white. Decotomous thinking. So it's no wonder. It's not surprising that women haven't been liberated after 10,000 years of slavery have become, effectively, psychopaths. Absolute psychopaths. This was to have been expected. The solution is not avoidance or manipulation. We need a new social contract between the bearers of disparate genitalia. And we need to think with our heads rather than with our nether organs. The thing is that, as I said, more and more financially emancipated women mimic psychopathic men. They adopt both psychopathic misbehaviors and psychopathic traits. And there's a curious gender inversion, seems to be occurring. Men are assuming hitherto feminine roles and reactive patterns, even as women are becoming more and more menly, so to speak. They assume masculine gender roles. For example, judging by numerous reports from the crowded clinics of couple therapies, men are now more sex-averse, frigid, than women. Men tend to consume porn and masturbate much more than seek a woman to have sex with. They compensate with porn, pornography. This used to be what women did in the 1950s and 60s. There was no concern over frigid men. Women were frigid. Now the majority are actually men. I am not talking only about primary breadwinners. 43% of all households in the primary breadwinner, the person who brings money home exclusively, is a woman now. 40% of all children are raised by single women. So there's an inversion of roles there as well. Women are becoming the providers. The majority of college graduates are women. The majority of judges, the majority of teachers, the majority of doctors are women. These are high-paying professions. Women are better equipped to deal with a network empathic world based on empathy, founded on empathy. So of course they have an advantage in the future. But I'm talking about far more fundamental, primitive, animalistic things. I'm talking about the sex drive. People's sex drive. Men are becoming more like women used to be in the 1950s and women are becoming more like men used to be throughout the ages. Promiscuous, adulterous, psychopathic, disempathic, users, predators. Men today are more romantic. They are more likely to be infatuated. Studies show that men are more likely to suggest to transition to a committed relationship after a bout of casual sex. In other words, after a one night stand, the men is more likely to ask to see the woman again. Most women overwhelmingly decline such overtures for further contact after a one night stand. So it seems that men have become the weaker sex or the softer sex. Many men are stay-at-home dads. Stay-at-home dad is a new phenomenon and already overtaken. Modern Western societies, civilized industrial societies, women, as I said, became primary breadwinners. And women are catching up to men in the frequency of cheating on their intimate partners and the number of one night stands of casual sex encounters. Especially when these involve drinking or other forms of substance abuse. Women drink as much as men. They drink as much as men. They have casual sex as much as men. They cheat almost as much as men do. And they have become men. These behaviors used to be the differential diagnosis, so to speak, between men and women. In the 1950s, women did not cheat. Men cheated. Women did not drink. Men drank. Women did not have casual sex almost. Men did. I mean, that's how you do it. That's how you used to tell a man apart from a woman. And today, these distinctions are gone. Behaviorally, at least, men and women are indistinguishable. We have one gender. I call it a uni-gender world. We have one gender with two different types of genitalia. In many places, more women than men frequent singles bars and dives. Women are surging on dating apps where three-quarters of women admit to scouting for anonymous sex partners or for infidelity accomplices. And women sue, of course, for 73% of all divorces. The floodgates are wide open. In a uni-gender world, gender roles are fluid and often inverted. Gender vertigo ensues and ensued. And it was followed by male avoidance in a largely misogynistic atmosphere, I mentioned only. And again, all this is part and parcel of a bigger trend. The ascent of aloneness, atomization, alienation. What Emil Dukheim, the sociologist, 90th century sociologist, the father of sociology, Emil Dukheim called it anomy. He said that as the population explodes in numbers, societies will lose their coherence and cohesion, their meaning, norms, values, everything will be destroyed. He predicted a wave of suicide. And he predicted the rise of loneliness and aloneness, which Marx also predicted. He called it alienation. More and more people of both genders choose to live alone. Since 2016, in the West at least, the majority of people actually live alone. They find their own exclusive company irresistible. Technology rendered us utterly self-sufficient. So why be bothered with the quirks, moods, emotions, and expectations of other people? I mean, relationship is a full-time job and it's a difficult job. It requires investment. It requires a monetary. It requires recreating the will time and again. It requires compromise. It requires skills that we have lost and that we do not wish to regain because frankly, we don't need each other anymore. Procreation, marriage, and family are phased out. Sex is gradually displaced by pornography and the occasional casual masturbation with someone else's body. When it comes to relationships, the price is just not worth the price. The common wisdom when I was growing up was that as men get older, they have a greater number of potential partners and this is known as hate, age, hypergamy. So men age 60 can theoretically have a partner, a woman, as an intimate partner who is age 20. It's not that uncommon, but a woman age 60 usually cannot have an intimate partner age 20. So men can choose from any age. Women are compelled to choose older men. As women age, they have a shrinking pool of possible mates and this is age, epogamy. So men have age, hypergamy and women have age, hypergamy. This evolutionary asymmetry had always had profound social implications. It affected the structure of our societies as well as our institutions and it affected the ways that these institutions function. Both formal ways, codified mores, norms, even laws and informal ways. We all relied on this basic assumption that women marry up in terms of age and men can marry anyone, up and down. But all this is beginning to unravel and to change for the first time since the cultural revolution thousands of years ago. Women are emancipated sexually and financially. They're gradually taken over the reins. This is a tectonic shift. It's an earthquake of unprecedented proportions which midges, dwarfs the pandemic. Women are taking over. It's the end of the age of men. Women are adopting either to exclusively masculine and even defiantly anti-social behaviors including ones pertaining to mate choice, mate selection and sex, and this hypogamy is the new normal. Women prefer to stay single. They prefer to stay childless. Women are wedded to their careers, their workaholics. Women, the top priority of women, the utmost value is self-actualization. And so they choose to sleep only with better, weak, emasculated, feminine men. Usually in hook-ups or short-term so-called relationships. Are you listening well? Women don't want alpha males anymore. They don't want winners anymore. The meaghtaus and the incels and they get it all wrong. They get it all wrong. Women are looking for better males, weak males, emasculated males, zeros, losers. Women are looking for men to have casual sex and dump and discard. Disposable men. Women are looking for men, in other words, that they can fully control and manipulate. Our dystopian reality is unigender. It is a world without women in effect in this sense. Sex, hypogamy, a preference for accomplished strong alpha males, even for casual sex, is out the window, wake up. Women want to be on top in every possible way and in every possible situation. So red pillars got it right. They got it right when they say there's an 80-20 Pareto principle, but they got it wrong as to the identity of the 20. 80% of women do want to sleep with only 20% of all men. That part is true, but the red pillars and the black pillars and the meaghtaus, they are getting the 20% wrong. Women want to copulate with the 20% who are loser beta males. Weak, not men in the classical Victorian gender role sets. Not winners, not rich, not famous, not powerful, not intelligent. Women don't like that. Women are competitive now. They want to be the winners. They want to be on top. They want to control. They want to dictate. They are nobody's war. Women seriously avoid the intimidating and challenging alpha men whose success and prowess constitute an unbearable narcissistic injury to the competitive, independent female. Aren't you getting this? Look around you. You, I mean, incels and meaghtaus and all these manosphere guys, I don't know which universe they inhabit. They are still bodybuilding. They are still emphasizing muscles, the way they look. Plastic surgery. Who cares about all this? No woman that I know. Women are interested in one thing only. An animated dildo that they can do with anything they want. The nicer is, the weaker is, the more cooperative is, the better it is. Why the better it is? Because compromise is guaranteed. Because a transactional, women want a transactional relationship where they contribute to decision-making as much as the men. And that doesn't go well with alpha men. Indeed, alpha men today are called jerks. There is a surging global subculture of misogynism, woman hatred, that women have been ignoring at their peril. I mentioned incels in voluntary settlements. I mentioned meaghtaus, men going their own way. I mentioned pickup artists. I mentioned red pillars. Women who realize that women rule the world and are cruelly manipulating men. I mentioned black pillars, men who give up on ever having any sexual or romantic relationship with women, and so on and so forth. Many in these groups espouse militancy and even violence against women. Women have been murdered by members of these groups, black pillars. Such strident misogynism is new. Misogynism is not new. Men has always been afraid, terrified by the woman's sexuality, by women's sexuality, female sexuality. The female sexuality threaten the coherence and cohesion of the family and the verifiable paternity of children. If a woman strayed, if she had sex with strangers, the unhappy husband ended up raising other men's children. So men were terrified by female sexuality. Indeed, in the middle ages, the vagina was supposed to have had teeth. I'm kidding you not, it was called vagina dentata. And women were terrified that the woman might, you know, close the trap on whatever they had to offer by extension. Woman hatred is not new. For example, there was a guy about 100 years ago, Otto Weininger, and August Strinben, famous playwright. They were rabid misogynists, rabid misogynists, much worse, by the way, than anything on offer today because they were intelligent and educated. When I was 19, I wrote the following texts. And just for you to understand, I grew up with the last of the dinosaurs. So 19 is a long time ago. And I wrote this. I think that there is a schism between men and women. I'm sorry, but I'm neo-Winingerian. I fear women. I love women viscerally. While in the abstract, I recognize that they are members of the human species and eligible to the same rights as men do. Still, the biological, biochemical, and psychological differences between us, men versus women, are so profound that I think that a good case can be made in favor of a theory which will assign women to another, perhaps even more advanced, species. I'm heterosexual, so it has nothing to do with my sexual preferences. Also, I know that what I have to say will alienate and anger you. It was an article that I published. It was 19. Still, I believe, as does Dr. Gray, that cross-gender communication is all but impossible. We are separated by biology, by history, by culture, by chemistry, by genetics, in short, by too much. Where we see cruelty, women see communication. Where we see communication, they see indifference. Where we see a future, they see a threat. Where we see a threat, they see an opportunity. Where we see stagnation, women see security. And where we see safety, they see death. Where we get excited, they get alarmed. Where we get alarmed, they get bored. We love without senses, they love with their wounds and mind. They tend to replicate, we tend to assimilate. They are Trojan horses. We are dumb Hercules. Hercules, they succumb in order to triumph. We triumph in order to succumb. This was written decades ago. So, you know, in cells think they've invented the world. They've discovered the will. You know, migtails, they think they are, they're the first ever. It's wrong. There have been numerous such movements, numerous such movements throughout history, most recently in the 19th century. I mentioned Otto Weininger, who was in the early 20th century. And even someone like me, a kid, 19 years old, was able to write this. And it was published and accepted because the discourse was on. As feminism erupted on the scene, the discourse was on. Men were alarmed. Men felt defensive. Men felt aggressive. Men felt frustrated. Men hated women for up ending the apple cart for upsetting the social order. It's natural. People defend vested interests. People defend the position of superiority against usurpers and upstarts. And of course, slaveholders fight a civil war to protect slavery. Women were slaves. And they were rebelling Spartacus-wise. And of course, the Roman Empire reacted. Feminism, however, went astray. It caricatured men into a one-dimensional stereotype. And now women aspire to become that caricature. Women drink heavily, curse profusely, are in yourself anti-social and defiant, promiscuously and indiscriminately engaged in emotionless one-night stands. They become alcoholic. They cheat on their intimate partners and generally act as grandiose and entitled masses devoid of any hint of empathy. Yes, this is the profile of the modern woman, especially under age 35. It's not me who is saying this. It's social scientists and psychologists such as Twinge and Campbell and many others. The new generations of women are like the old generations of dissolute psychopathic men described by Cleckley in his masterpiece, The Mask of Sanity. When confronted about their egregious misconduct, women respond indignantly with a double standard, standard statement. When you confront a woman and you say, you misbehaved, it's not okay what you've done. She answers, this is what men also do, no? You've been doing it for centuries. Why can't I do it now? The answer is, well, absolutely not. It's not true that all men behave this way. A tiny sliver of minority of men behave this way. You're imitating the wrong type of men. Men that even other men frown upon. Only some men behave the way that most women behave today. These men are widely criticized, chastised and shunned by the community. These men are decried. They are held in contempt by the vast majority of men. And yet these are the men that women emulate. Don't misunderstand, men, my position, men and women, of course, should be utterly equal. Utterly equal when it comes to all public goods, education, healthcare, you name it. Men and women should have equal access to absolutely everything, equal wages, all manner of rights, economic opportunities, the law, treatment by the authorities and in society. It's inconceivable that people should be discriminated against because of their genitalia. It borders on insanity. No one is saying this, but there's a difference between being equal and being identical. Women should be equal, but different. Gender differences are the poetry. They're the poetry in the engine of life itself. Sexual attraction, family formation, procreation, romantic love, they all found the gender differences. But now women want to be identical to men, another type of men. Not merely equal to men, but identical to men. And this threatens the very fabric and the existence of our species. And what is much worse, in their attempts to emulate men, women use the feminist sexist caricature of the so-called typical male as a template. What is this typical male in the eyes of the feminists? It's a dictator, drunk, vulgar, men whore, womanizer, who cheats on his spouse and works himself to death in a jungle hostile universe. Really? I don't recognize a single man I know in this description, which is very common in feminist literature, especially radical feminist literature. Women have been taught by feminists to mistrust men. About half of all women are bitter and broken, victims of abuse, divorce, single mothers, impoverished and hopeless. Men go their own way is a movement in the manosphere of men who renounce all contact with women, except perhaps casual sex. And it's a reaction to the fact that women have gone their own way a long time ago. Men are going their own way because there are no women left. There are no women left. Only narcissists with a different genital apparatus. How tragic that we have lost each other, men and women. How heartbreaking.