This thread began with rushdoony's extensive quote of Julian Lee's excellent article:
How To Develop Great Self-Control, And Even Complete Celibacy
I want to thank rushdoony for introducing me to Julian Lee. I have been reading Lee's writings, and find them very enlightening.
Here is another great article by Julian Lee:
Lessons From "The Apprentice": The Nature of Women In The Workplace
Last night Donald trump selected as his apprentice Kelly, the ex-army officer and West Point grad. Kelly beat out 16 other contestants and his formidable rival: a lithe, profound blonde named Jennifer. (We don't learn their last names.)
It looked like Jennifer could easily win. A southerner, she had no discernible accent. Girls from the better southern families have it burnished away in finishing schools. Jennifer had that cultivated, understated manner still found in the southern belle of the higher classes. Her breeding showed sometimes outwardly: Standing up when Kelly joined the table. Northern barbarians don't do that. But her true allure came from restraint and things not done and not said. Here is a principle forgotten by the modern woman, now far removed from the subtle power exercised by Lao Tzu's "mysterious female."
Among the women she was my pick early on. She kept aloof from the brute language and constant kvetching of the northern women. Aside from having more culture, she was the professional Queen of Spades among them. She was an accomplished and rising lawyer with academic credits that were truly jaw-dropping. When it finally came to the heat, she presented herself like a trial lawyer; she was verbally more acute and skillful than the more colorless Kelly. She had researched Trump's organization, showing a knowledge of his corporate situation. (The others had been too dumb to think of that.)
Her performance as a team member had been calm and cooperative. Though afforded few opportunities to shine, her competence was obvious. To wrap up, she had large, dewy eyes and an arresting feminine form. Posing in a cameo Levi's ad, she passed as a model.
In the final interview she presented herself so compellingly that Kelly seemed overwhelmed and ready to croak. It seemed that her resume eclipsed his. For the first time he was nervous, his voice showing breaks. But in a dramatic moment Trump turned and fired Jennifer to leave Kelly standing.
The ascent of Jennifer had intrigue. I could see she was the female to reckon with. She was the only one with feminine charisma, i.e., soft understatement. The others were crass and hardened, swearing like toughs and generally acting like a cheaper variety of male. Jennifer had elegance and unobtrusive skill. She was a smooth speaker. Whether hurriedly inserted into a T.V. commercial, or in front of a coliseum of stony executives, she was unflustered.
With each episode she was shaping up as the master strategist. At one point she hoodwinked a sophisticated Levis honcho, swooping in to gently lift credit for her team's win. She had little to do with it, but connected to the Levis boss in a cool last-minute effusion of talk. The male CEO bought her, even citing her as "best contributor" in a project where she played no central role. This stuck in the craw of her Asian nemesis, Ivana. (Which was a gas because Ivana was an insufferable harpy always 'ragging" about Jennifer.) At that point I knew that the blonde Jennifer was the one to watch, and that she was cunning.
Cunning is the forte of the female. In the Genesis story it is Eve who consorts with the cunning snake. One who is cunning uses subtle means to move things in their favor. A woman uses it to get a man to serve her, sometimes in untoward ways that he oughtn't. (Cunning shares a root with cunnilingus, as well as another vulgar word for female.) Guile or "gyle" shares provenance with "gynecology."
A General can win wars if he is strong in these feminine traits of cunning and guile. One of Jennifer's strategies was to avoid nasty battles in the early stages, both in and out of the board room. She kept her distance from the other women, letting them tear at each other, and made alliances with strong male players like Andy. Throughout most of the series she preserved a soft image; you didn't expect her to draw much blood in a fight. In the words of one peer, she flew "under the radar." Finally in the last two shows, when it was do or die, we found out she had very good claws.
Heretofore restrained, she made quick work of her most serious rival, Sandy. A few well-worded diatribes and Sandy was on the ground, mortally wounded. She allowed adversaries to underestimate her, leaving them unprepared. She saved her best shots for last. In the final climatic interview when she marshaled her accomplishments, blow by blow -- Kelly seemed stunned. But moments later "The Donald" dramatically fired her and chose Kelly. In a bit I will analyze that.
Women A Problem In the Male Workplace
The entire series reveals the natural differences between men and women. We get to see why women are unsuited to the male world of work. The men contestants were unflaggingly easygoing, sincere, and faithful in group work. They did not attack each other. They were similar to dogs. The females tore at each other in every show. The T.V. censors probably had sore thumbs from pressing the "bleep" button whenever the women were talking. "The Apprentice" showed why humankind invented the term "cat fight" to describe the arguments of women. Yet, when we see groups of females working together in the domestic realm -- getting together with children, preparing food for a gathering, etc. -- we see little of that behavior. Could it be that there is something unnatural about women in the workplace? Could it be that in this realm the female is naturally insecure, so that it brings out her more negative potential?
A humorous moment occurred when it slipped out that Jennifer herself held this view of the female. When asked why she had so many early project failures, she answered: "I was working on an all female team." This got a stupefied reaction from the New-Think crowd. Someone asked what she could possibly mean. "There was a lot of in-fighting" she explained, just as if in-fighting and female groups go together. There was a moment of cognitive dissonance as the culturally brainwashed grappled with this Old World view of the female.
When a woman does well in the male's traditional world, she often had a strong male influence from an early age. Women like talk show host Laura Ingraham think and speak like men. These kind of women usually have strong intellectual influences from a father, brother, or other male. Thus they can spar in that realm without resorting to claws. Jennifer was raised in the southern culture still influenced from the top down by men. This accounts for the survival of some feminine softness, and her intellectual clarity. Another case of a female imbued with male intelligence is Donald Trump's beautiful Nordic deputy, Carolyn Kepcher. She sits quietly beside Trump like a royal minister, exhibiting masculine restraint and intellectual acuity that is the product of long association with males. Notwithstanding her high position, she retains a feminine personae that leaves her attractive as a woman. You couldn't imagine her brawling, or tainting a deal with sex. Women like Kepcher, who live with a strong male in charge, retain both their feminine aura and a firm moral structure.
When patriarchy declines women become coarse and unpleasant because they no longer have the shelter of male protection and the security of a clear social structure. They also lose mental clarity. Raised in matriarchal federal schools and fatherless families, they are not exposed to male intellectual rigor and fair play. When they end up in the stressful workplace of men, having to compete with males -- and other women according to male standards -- out come the claws. Lacking the male influence women also become morally unclarified. These women miss their highest potential for feminine emotional and spiritual development. That is found among other women in family work, surrounded by the protective structure of supportive male patriarchy.
Women In The Workplace Are Often Dangerous: Why Trump Chose Kelly
Towards Jennifer Mr. Trump lodged two complaints: 1) She was part of a lot of team failures, and 2) Team members disliked her. In Kelly, Donald Trump had found a loyal male who acted like a dog. He was not truly polished, so Trump could finish him, shaping him as a true protege. Trump could lift him to a higher station, and be his unquestioned superior. The real reason Trump fired Jennifer was that she was too able, too smart, and too cunning. A survivor like Trump must have sensed that Jennifer was so skilled, and so subtle, she could do him in. She could wrest power from him, or money. Millions of men know what Trump knows -- that a cunning female can divest you of wealth, progeny, and life. The fact that she was a major league attorney made her more dangerous. That same strategic guile that brought her to the final round warned Trump off. Shark in the water! Trump explained obliquely: "People just don't like you." Kelly was also disliked. But he was less risky.
The Female Will Use Her Sexuality To Gain Advantages, Get a Man, Or Just To Muck Everything Up
Women in the workplace present another separate problem, and that is their willful sex appeal. Women will always use their sexuality to gain whatever advantage they can. She has this special power, and in her bones, the weakness for using it. This plays havoc with the structured relationships created in the male domains of workplace, hunt, and brigade. Proof emerged when Ivana actually dropped her skirt in public to get a higher price for a candy bar. (The appalled look on male-seasoned Carolyn was worth the price of admission.) In our military today we have seen a breakdown in moral order after just a few years of female enlistment, witnessed in the Iraqi prisoner abuses, and the spread of illicit sex among male and female soldiers.
This power and tendency in the female, plus her relative physical weakness, excluded her from critical missions requiring cohesive and well-ordered relationships (business), a chain of command (the military), and extreme organization (the hunt).
The Female Will Always Use Sex Appeal to Get an Edge In Male Enivornments
Once the sole province of the prostitute, makeup is used heavily by females in the workplace to gain advantage through sexual appeal. Because the harlotry of heavy makeup is now socially accepted, her influence over males becomes covert even though practiced overtly. Men generally don't even recognize what she is doing. Women may justify it under the rubric of "beauty," but she knows she is pushing for raw sex appeal.
Females have long known that the color red exerts a sexual influence on males. This is because it suggests blood, piercing, and the female organ. The suggestion of blood also makes a subtle reference to the spilling of the "higher blood" -- the male semen. Long fingernails give a subliminal message of "piercing," the sexual act, and blood. Emphasizing the lips is an old female trick to conjure the youth and health of the ingenue, and is sexually exciting to the male. Red lips suggest blood rushing to the face in the state of sexual passion. Lip emphasis also brings kissing to mind, and oral sex, and provides a subliminal reference to the female's other "lips" below (her labia).
Darkened eyes are designed to suggest mystery, the hooded eyes of sleep, the bedroom. Despite the claim to equality, most women can't resist pushing raw sexuality in the workplace with men. They know they are not truly equal in that milueu, so they use sexual attractiveness to even the scales.
Without makeup, the woman appears to be just what she is: A weaker, paler version of a male. Makeup and raw sex appeal serve to obfuscate this reality and give her a kind of edge that is inappropriate to the situation (business, military, etc.) This creates confusion in the male work environments, and the collapse of male order. In this book title the author is not content to sell sex appeal as mere influence, but lets us see she views it as a form of force.
Women are well aware of how sexual attractiveness gives them advantages in male environments, and seek to exploit it. But it creates inefficiency and chaos in these environments, and gives her power that she does not earn rightly. Other titles from the Women's section of my local bookstore: The Female Advantage, The Power Of Beauty, and Face Value: The Politics of Beauty.
The Ultimate Cunning
In reality the female knows that she was never unequal as a human being. She knew that in the home, family, and interpersonal relations she possessed feminine advantages rooted in the ages; she dominated the once vast realm of Home, and a vaster realm called Society. We don't understand that matriarchs and matrons of the 19th century were influential and respected personages. Have you met many impressive matrons or matriarchs lately? How about a female personage? Woman gave up a lot when she began to neglect these realms. But this is what happens when you chase endless desire.
As she turned to the "tenth house" -- the world of men's work, woman knew that her power of sexual fascination gave her a unique edge in business among men. That is why the female does not forgo lipstick and eye shadow in the business world. She well knows that sex appeal mitigates disadvantages among perennially vulnerable men. In the great pinball machine of business, she utilizes male attraction like magnetic energy -- deflecting here, influencing there, and weedling in wherever she wants.
Women today are running a vast scam. She acquires masculine intellect, training and skill, plus legal equality. Then she dollops on the big lips and hooded eyes, because she knows it gives her an ungodly edge among men in the workplace. She finds herself "more than equal."
"Patriarchy" is really the attempt by men to keep women in reasonable bounds and in natural balance with him.
Feminism is really a play by woman to take all and everything in the realm of power.