Boys and Girls

There have been quite a few articles about girls and boys on this and other platforms recently, most bemoaning what has happened to them over the last twenty to thirty years. I thought I’d join in, but look at it from a slightly different perspective.

For a start, all foetus start out as female, which is why men have nipples. Female seems to be the basic working form and then, if you have the male gene structure, you get a first dose of testosterone before everything takes permanent shape in your development which sends you down the male route. Those that don’t have this, stay developing females.

This is the main difference. There is no getting away from it. Testosterone and oestrogen code for differences in the development of the child that stay with them for life. The differences between the sexes are controlled by these and other hormones throughout development from birth to the menopause in women, which coincides with a reduction of testosterone in men of a similar age. How these differences are expressed depends on the society the child grows up in. These differences are there to “help”, if you like, the person towards fulfilling their prime function, which is

to be secure enough to mate and bring up young.

Adults can override them if they want or need too and use these differences in areas other than mating. The differences themselves make up the psychological space that the person naturally feels comfortable in, versus those outside that cause everything from discomfort to panic. See Vygotsky’s work on the zone of proximal development. A useful guide to extending the development of the comfort space without neurosis or phobia which, was hijacked as a way of manipulating change in people to make them acceptable to the latest iteration of a “good” society. Nowadays, we consider ourselves too sophisticated for such primitive ideas; however, they are still there and underlie all our conscious behaviours. If frustrated, they come out in different and sometimes very unpleasant and unhealthy ways.

Work is one place where this can happen. Women tend to deal with large groups of people as they would children. Their go to weapons are patronising and shaming. They can’t help it. Men do the opposite and see individuals in the group as either rivals or backers. Their go to weapons are aligning with an important group and defending it and making sure rivals lose as much face as possible before people with high status. They can’t help it either.

Critical race theory and DEI could only ever have been invented by women. The idea that you should put everyone with a personal grievance first, no matter how inappropriate would just not occur to a man, but to a woman, might seem exactly the right thing to do, especially if it was at her own expense and showed her womanly virtue. After all, if your instinct is to make things right for others weaker than yourself it’s a no brainer. Equality of opportunity quickly becomes equality of outcome when this line of thinking is followed. A woman’s primary role is to protect her children and make things right for them until they can operate on their own, so it’s hardly surprising that they are so easily manipulated into believing that they must protect everyone in the world, including the world!

Women are in the majority coded for patience, nurturing and a well-developed sense of empathy; because in past times, they had sole responsibility for keeping the infant alive until it could toddle about after them and human infants are high maintenance. Even women with no children, or those who decide not to have children have this instinct and will use it to protect others that seem most appealing and needy to them. It is taken for granted nowadays that sharing, putting others first and looking after the weak is the right thing to do. Often it is, but not all the time. Anyone who wants to know more about why this aspect of natural female behaviour can be so toxic if expressed in the wrong way, should read Jung’s book on archetypes, especially the many archetypes of the mother.

Whomever is controlling things certainly has!

With men, their instinctual role is to get up the male hierarchy as far as they can, or at least to a point where they can be satisfied with their position and start their own little tribe in safety. The next thirty years is spent defending it. Defending is the male form of nurturing. Nowadays men at the top seemed to have swapped status defence and by definition defence of the country, or tribal space if you like for power; that most ancient of aphrodisiacs and require all other men below them to be beta characters or even drones. The way up to Olympus is most definitely blocked.

In times past, we did suffer from hyper masculine behaviour at all levels of society which for fairness sake did need addressing. However, we have swapped hyper masculinity for hyper femininity and the result is just as grim. Nowadays, hyper femininity has taken over at the level of the plebs, but hyper masculinity is still rampant in the parasite class running things.

The dark side of femaleness has been encouraged for years. The terrible mother who destroys the offspring she can’t control; à la mythical symbols such as Kali in India and Sophia in the Near East. But men are stronger and usually less pulled about emotionally; how can this be? Well, I’m not sure if you’ve noticed but most of the people running the world behind the scenes are old or at least middle-aged men. They have developed, over the last few decades a race of emotionally toxic warrior women victims, to ensure that the message they want everyone to absorb is well and truly drummed into them from an early age.

I often wondered what Soros young leaders programme was all about.

These women defend the hyper masculinity at the top by believing in and doing everything possible to reinforce the plan. If you talk to them, like Greta Thunberg, they believe they are fighting to save the world and bring justice to ill-used populations. In other words, they have weaponised the very things that made women lovable and comforting and turned them into psychic forms of punishment meted out to the lower orders. Meanwhile, the unreconstituted parasites themselves not only support these women into positions where they can act out on the general populations, (Jacinda Arden being one prime example), but make sure that they stay there and that there is a steady flow of people behind them.

These people include men who pretend to be enlightened, but usually only on a promise of a place at the top table if they perform what is needed. See Kier Starmer, Tony Bliar etc. These men are so close to what really matters that you can almost see them salivating with desire as they beg to be allowed to take the last few steps. This of course leaves the parasites free to do what they like as “mummy” can be relied on to mind the baby and stop it from getting into mischief. This of course means the majority of people end up in a permanent childlike state and operating at a low level of consciousness, unable or afraid to make the changes they desperately want.

Natural male primate behaviour has to be branded as unacceptable, even in its mildest of forms because if boys grew up in a more natural way, they would not hesitate to challenge for the top spot and see off anyone who tried to oppose them once past puberty, because it is in their nature. This of course cannot be allowed to happen. At puberty, boys get another huge shot of testosterone, which helps them develop into a man with all the secondary characteristics that go along with it. By psychologically turning them into eunuchs, it’s no wonder young low status boys are getting more frustrated and violent at an earlier age.

Low status women on the other hand, have also had their natural instincts overridden. A recent survey showed that over half the women who worked would really like to stay home with their children until they were at secondary school. This also leads to frustration and anger but is usually displaced into marching against societal hate figures, or espousing worthy causes, which allows women to mistakenly feel compensated for the loss. In what sort of society is bringing up your own children seen as an impossible dream? The state will pay your nursery fees but won’t pay you! How dare you want to bring up your own child.

Once both men and women get over the transient thrill of playing in the new form of society, marketed as “you can do and be anything you like”, old instincts rise to the surface again and it all starts to go wrong. Girls voting Green are developmentally about ten at the oldest; stuck in a fantasy world that a big strong daddy will show them the way and punish the wicked. Unicorns will fly, every day is a rainbow day and people who have upset me will get theirs.

If the Greens let them down, like real children, they will blame anyone else except the person responsible because daddy is always perfect. Those boys voting Reform, want to be allowed to grow up to be men as they understand the concept and cut social mummies apron strings. Most of them would have voted Labour in the past and probably joined trade unions. These are boys looking for a lost tribe to belong too. If Reform lets them down they’ll make their own and it probably won’t be pretty.

Girls and boys are different, but in a complimentary way. Using exceptions to rewrite the rules does not change anything and always makes things a lot worse. As a woman myself it may sound a strange thing to say, but it could well be disaffected young men who end up rescuing us all from the miasma of lies, manipulation and the unhealthy obsession with different groups and their place in the victim hierarchy.

And how will they do this? The way they have since we came down from the trees; a swift punch to the jaw followed by telling them to pack it in! Only half joking by the way. As is said in Ecclesiastes, there is a time for everything under the sun. Men and women need to understand when it’s time to step back and let the other sex take over. Humanity needs both to survive, because we were made that way.

---

This article (Boys and Girls) was created and published by Free Speech Backlash and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Xandra H