This piece on the cost of feminism on sex and sexual relations, written from a female perspective, tells some uncomfortable truths. And yet… the Genie isn’t going back into the bottle… so what to do?
Sex has become currency in a culture that no longer believes in permanence.
You give more, and you’re praised more. You sleep around, and you’re considered confident, liberated, empowered. But underneath the applause, something else starts to take root:
- Trust becomes harder. The more relationships you’ve cycled through, the harder it becomes to believe that love can last.
- Bonding feels impossible. The physiological glue that sex was designed to be starts to wear thin after repeated detachment.
- Pleasure gets dull. What was once meant to be the intimate language of love becomes just another sensory hit—like a drug you need more of but enjoy less.
- And being “experienced” starts to look a lot like being used.
Because the body wasn’t made for turnover.
It was made for covenant.
We weren’t designed for endless exits and revolving doors. The soul was never meant to be a hallway with a lockless door. There’s a reason sex feels like it should mean something. Because it does. And no matter how loudly the culture claps for promiscuity, the soul remembers what it’s owed.
We tried to separate sex from love.
We tried to pretend our bodies are just vehicles and not sacred vessels.
We tried to turn freedom into frictionless access.
But casual sex didn’t empower us.
It just made us easier to reach, harder to know, and numb to our own worth.
All she says is true.
And yet, women aren’t going to turn back into Victorian era virginal maidens.
So there are only two paths left:
Continued degeneration, the culmination of which, at best , would resemble sex in the mini-series called UPLOAD. That is, a tinder-like app where you just match with someone suitable to have sex with, complete with ratings and STD screening, and you show up at theirs or vice-versa, have the sex, have them leave, and then you carry on with your day. Like ordering a takeaway.
- Conscious Evolution of the female species. Although we now know that evolution in the Darwinian sense we all learned at school is absolutely impossible, because math is a thing, there is still the psychological evolutionary capacity for cultural norms to change society quite drastically enough that a social shift actually and effectively occurs. After all, that’s how we got here from the Victorian “prudishness” to the current “a Champagne cork in my butthole is the swimming costume, dad!”
The third option —of a return to simpler, more religious times— while attractive in principle, and while a relative few people are to a certain extent “doing it” (the Amish, the Mormons, etc.) is for the most part a choice that will not, and indeed cannot, last in time. (I’ll explain why most of these efforts are doomed, with a couple of exceptions, later).
Degeneration appears to be the ubiquitous default now, and perhaps it will be, in which case, the human race will, indeed, finally emulate Universe 25 and collapse into obscurity.
Conscious evolution of women on the other hand, is, at first glance, unlikely. Biology inevitably overcomes ideology, in the short term, but culture can modify if not biology per se, the biological impulse.
Just as feminism corrupted and weakened the natural biological feminine instincts of women —aided and abetted by both (((the usual suspect))) as well as beta/incel/MGTOW/nerds-who-can’t-get-laid crowd— a cultural shift can, and will, re-rout and co-opt aspects of female solipsism and concern for status into a way of behaving that will tend to ensure that young girls are educated from a very early age, in how to navigate the pitfalls of modernity and sex.
They will have the example of their mother, aunts, friends, and even kind and well intentioned (or at least well-adjusted) strangers, as to how a woman should behave with regard to her sexuality, sex, and search for a husband.
This second path has multiple possibilities but generally speaking they will be limited to the following:
- Some religious form of upbringing rooted in a religion that is essentially man-made and/or false (eg Mormonism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, whatever Amish-ism is called, along with all the other fake forms of “Christianity” Protestantism entails, [Jehovas’ witnesses, Baptists, Seventh Day Adventists, and so on with all the other 39,999 versions of Churchianity).
- Cultural secularism rooted in “best practices” usually reliant on underlying Christian ethics now masquerading as “good logic”.
- Some religion that is either wholly or mostly based in reality (1958 Sedevacantist Catholicism, Eastern/Russian Orthodoxy, including Greek Orthodoxy, Coptic Christianity).
The first version will generally devolve into essentially a social club of secularism with a veneer of “tradition” within a generation or two, assuming it had any redeeming qualities to begin with. This mostly applies to all Protestant denominations, which sooner or later become “led” by materialist con-men, atheistic lesbians, and “transgender” “bishops”.
Those versions that do or have lasted in time (Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Mormonism) to a certain extent do so by also having absurd levels of unreality welded spore-like onto the brain of its practitioners (child brides and child rape being acceptable practices in both Islam and Judaism), a caste system in Hinduism along with an attitude of complacency because hey, there is always the next life, and so on. There are a few exceptions, the Amish for example but their non-violent principles and other oddities remove them quite thoroughly from having the capacity to survive any serious stress-test involving force. Especially if modern warfare is considered. Shintoism in Japan, Taoism in China, and to a lesser extent various forms of Buddhist or Buddhist adjacent religions can be relatively stable, but not exactly prone to innovative social structuring of humanity along lines that would make say the colonisation of other planets within a couple of centuries a stable endeavour.
Cultural secularism generally does not survive past one generation, though there are exceptions. My own family has a traceable history going back over 800 years, and shows a people that went from Viking raiders to Catholics, to Crusaders (yes in the actual crusades) to returning Crusaders, to feudal lords and noble naval military men, to losing their Catholic religion due to Vatican II and the secularisation of their philosophy by the baby boomer generation (the low point of our history) which nevertheless retained concepts of our word being our bond, death before dishonour, giving up not being our way and taking shit from anyone also being counter to our DNA. My generation rediscovered real Catholicism and hopefully will re-instill it in my children, but I can already see their DNA will see to it the baseline concepts of carrying our surname are deeply engrained already without any prompting from me. Perhaps over a thousand years of fighters in a family lineage produces some epigenetic changes that makes these qualities durable even in temporarily secular settings but I would bet they could not survive past two generations of secularism.
The last option, choosing a religion that is at least broadly (orthodoxy, copts) aligned with the truth, or actually aligned with it (1958 sedevacantist Catholicism [totalist position only, not sedeprivationism]) ensures a long-standing historical tradition of generally being a successful philosophy , as well as a rich and textured cultural and social backdrop from which to draw as well as get support from.
Bit be clear, a proper Catholic or Orthodox woman today will still have to contend with fuckbois, general degeneracy in the population, the assaults on reason from literally every direction, the constant push for feminism and destruction of the nuclear family, and so on.
Therefore, in order to navigate all this successfully, women will need to become more like the heroines of old comic books. Women like Jane of Tarzan and Jane fame. In short, the type that is a lady in public, not a lady in private, and is able to be a damsel in distress that can shoot the first freak to try to take advantage of her in the face with a shotgun. And then get the salt and cold water immediately on her summer dress to get out the blood-spatter stains as she throws it in the washing machine while now in her underwear, shotgun nearby.
Such women will be the evolutionary companion of Alpha-style Men that have learnt not to kill someone for bringing their coffee out cold because they were chatting with another waiter instead of attending to the customer.
They will be the kind of woman that if she figures out she actually married Dexter, will buy him plastic sheeting at wholesale prices and gift him Japanese handmade knife sets for Christmas.
These women exist and are being made even as we speak. It is a messy process and most will fail, but those who persevere and pair up with suitable “Tarzans” will achieve a level of marital comfort that is ideal for the production of as many children as possible.
Such women hold the future in their hearts, but also in their minds. Because it will be through the Catholic virtue of using their reason to temper and direct their passions and emotions; not to stifle them or repress them at all, but rather to evoke and direct them in the proper direction.
So, there you have it ladies.
Be chaste with the unworthy, selective with the worthy, and finally wanton with the one you marry. Always a lady, in a fine dress, but with a PPK strapped to her thigh under it.
A mother to your children, a lover to your husband, a quirky, intelligent, funny lady to strangers, a loyal friend to those worthy of the friendship, and to your family.
Is it a tall order?
Sure.
But at least it’s based in healthy, positive, realistic, biology and psychology-aligned reality. Unlike feminism, DIE ideology (Diversity, Inclusion, Equity [of outcomes]), and Clown World lies.

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here