Witches & Anti-Theists – Rebelling Against The Father

“Resentment, born of weakness, harms no one more than the weak person himself.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

Because it is a woman’s nature to seek to please the most powerful man in her life in return for his protection and validation, when she is possessed by resentment and thereby in a state of aberrant disgust, she wishes for inversion, and she wishes for inversion (that which is unholy and in opposition to divinity and thereby beauty) by toppling, conquering and overcoming that which she should be subject to (man). This in itself is a microcosm of the metaphysical within the individualised negative feminine (which in itself is a byproduct of the immature), given how the lifelong rebelliousness widespread within the growing multitude of mentally ill-adjusted and aberrant women is a developmental stage typical of teenagers, and thereby normal and healthy within them, but when exhibited by otherwise adult women in their 20’s, 30’s and beyond leads to antisocial and narcissistic behaviour that gives rise to the misanthropic, life negating, civilizationally sabotaging witch archetype.

Be that as it may, this is why women are fascinated with men they hate. Because although they hate these men ideologically and disagree with them in principle (in mind), he actually complements her and appeals to her basest needs and desires in spirit. In a way she can’t quite articulate (and doesn’t even want to verbalise or explicitly recognise) there’s “just something about him” – his masculinity is a magnet for her attention, even if she’s going to go about giving him that attention negatively.

She disagrees with him in mind, because symbolically and representatively he represents to her a simulacrum of God, or “the father” aka the archetypical masculine authority at the hierarchical apex of which her life should revolve around (like the Earth around the sun), which she has owing to one traumatic reason or another, come to spiritually delegitimise and reject and thus actively rebel against. She as such defines herself by what she is in rebellion to, like an anti-theist (who often incorrectly refers to themselves as merely atheist) defines themselves in relation to what they are in rebellion against – which is why in much the same way a “militant atheist” (correct label: anti-theist) seeks out the religious to mock and ridicule whilst smugly scoffing and giving themselves pats on the back for demonstrating what they believe to be superior logic to you, an ideologically feminist woman will do exactly the same in her pursuit of the most concentrated source of masculinity she can find. Find it, challenge it, criticise it, then ridicule it in her failure to empathise with it or appreciate its reason for being.

They seek out what they hate rather than avoid it out of disgust, because they are not actually disgusted by it, but negatively attached to it – which means to seek it out and lord over it is to reaffirm and thereby strengthen their aberrant identity. And in their own perverse way, they actually love it and hate themselves for loving it because they do not value it intellectually – and yet all the same it effects them in such a way that they want to be proximal to it despite their rejection of it. It’s like there is a separation between mind and spirit, and whilst the mind says no, the spirit says yes – these women are conflicted in that two fundamental aspects (mind and spirit) are out of alignment, but resentment feels more empowering to them than vulnerability, and therefore they lean towards the negative out of egoism because of the tainted comfort it brings.

It is for this reason a growing number of women who do not like or agree with my writings have reached out over the years to inform me they have read all my writing despite disagreeing with it, whilst I on the other hand would not have even the slightest remote interest in entertaining their unresolved psychological hangups for even 10 minutes – which is effectively what the corpus of their opinions amounts to – immodesty, conceit, a lack of proper training n the form of paternal nurturing, and unresolved resentments which have calcified into a worldview posing as progressivism and intellectual enquiry.

These women always have a point to prove and a bone to pick – and yet they have so little useful to say. Each one of them thinks they are the first to “challenge” me, and yet is just another in a long line who tried and failed. They just want a sounding board and a punchbag to throw all their contentions at, and yet no answer is the right answer including the right answer – which is the truth as best as I know it. They are insatiable and intolerable – because they are spiritually sick, and I have absolutely zero intention of trying to save any of them, because I no longer possess the required foolishness that can only be found in the naivete of youth to believe such a thing is even desirable, let alone possible.

I do not hate these women; I simply do not wish to suffer them. If they can save themselves with the assistance of my writings, I am genuinely very happy for them. Conceptually, I like the idea of intelligent women also being wise women and thus becoming respectable women because they have a sound head on their shoulders and are assets to their families. But I am not going to bother myself with personally aiding in the endeavour. They’re not my women, so they’re not my problem. And given these aberrant women are often outlier women of at least above average intelligence (to be fair, to enjoy my writing at its best, you have to be), it goes to show cognitive ability is no immunity from spiritual sickness – that is to say, if she is resentful and disordered, her elevated cognition is more likely to help her justify her feelings of resentment rather than actually keep them in check – a most unfortunate realisation I most certainly wish was untrue, but alas.

This is why the relationship between a woman and her father is such a crucial point of evaluation, because it indicates to you how overall spiritually healthy she is. A woman who does not merely like but more importantly both respects and thusly idolises and appreciates her father is going to be the least mentally aberrant, because she is not in a state of spiritual sickness. She may have some foolish ideas, because she is a woman, women are emotional and nobody is perfect – but she doesn’t have a fundamental point to prove, a bone to pick, a hierarchy to topple or a “I’ll show them” attitude, and therefore she is as ripe as can be for cooperation in union with a man. She is not against God, natural law, order, hierarchy, authority or life itself and nor is she a seething misandrist or misanthrope. It is no coincidence that feminist minded women are so fanatically obsessed with and in support of abortion despite it being a largely non-issue within our time – because those in rebellion against God also want the ability to give him the middle finger by rejecting his gifts (the divine spark) whimsically and without accountability, but nonetheless, I digress.

The connection between feminist minded women and anti-theists (people who think religion is dumb and hate on it) is that both are in rebellion, in the same way the archangel Lucifer rebelled against God before he became Satan. The anti-theists (the militant atheists) are in rebellion against their parents and by extension God due to an “abusive” religious upbringing (where the parents actions are conflated with the teachings of God, and therefore both are rejected) as much as the feminist is in rebellion against her father either because he was excessive in his discipline, failed to protect her out of negligence, or failed to protect her out of passivity – the latter point meaning he was too weak to be worthy of her respect, and therefore failed to protect her from her own hubris and foolishness as well as the subversive socially perpetuated memetic pathogens like feminism, which is in practice merely nothing more than a rejection if not an outright inversion of the natural order by failing to recognise the inherent authority of man, whilst advocating for female supremacy under the disingenuous guise of equality.

This is why there is a mismatch between these women’s sexuality (her true self, her desire to be conquered and to surrender to a man and take pleasure in this) and her sociality (her socialised self, her desire to compete with, conquer and humiliate the man) – her true nature is in alignment with God, whilst her affliction is in rebellion of it, and so for as long as these contradictory aspects reside in her unreconciled, she remains frustrated and unable to become her most loving, elegant, wise and feminine self. She is unable to bloom, because she is in all her ugliness constrained by weeds which ooze venom, which spiritually takes on the form of resentment for those who have hurt her (usually her parents or an ex lover if not both), and the subsequent arrogance it births in demonstrating she is superior to them. No longer does she simply accept herself as a woman, and so she is less of a woman – she is warlike, and now defines herself in relation to how well she can conquer a man and demonstrate her superiority over him through her exploitation of him. These are, fundamentally, bad women, daughters of Lilith who will hurt men that are not ruthless or shrewd enough to protect themselves from them, like sailors following a Siren’s song they are easily duped into their doom.

And so if God is the guiding light for man, then man is the guiding light for woman. So when you think that guiding light is a misleading light, you come to embody the darkness in defiance of it, falsely believing that what you rally against is evil, when you are in fact doing the bidding of evil. Your lack of wisdom makes you the devil’s plaything, your noble but corrupted intentions insufficient to make you virtuous – you try to topple God, you try to topple patriarchy – you attack all the core pillars of society necessary for your people to flourish – and you do this from a place of misanthropy and arrogance whilst offering an inferior alternative that fails to produce the same outcomes or stability that these things can and have, whilst hyperfocusing on their imperfections as evidence of their unviability.

This is why women who have rejected God often come to reject men, and women who have rejected men often come to reject God, because to them both represent the same thing – authority. Now just as she may rationalise God is superior to man and therefore the only one worth following, unlike man, in doing so she fails to adhere to God’s edict to follow man, and therefore operates in defiance of his express teachings despite claiming reverence for him. Failing that, she may go the other way entirely and lose faith in God due to the suffering she has experienced at the hands of men, reasoning that she wouldn’t have had to hurt the way she did if he was real, and therefore because she did that he can’t be.

Nonetheless, the pattern remains. Those who reject the natural order are in rebellion against it, and show the associated psychic maladies as a result of it. Whether it’s rebelling against God or your own father, the outcome is the same – resentment, frustration, arrogance, and a negative, distrustful cognitive modality that seeks to ridicule what has been rejected in affirmation of the self whilst sabotaging the moral and the good out of a misplaced sense of justice. It is a most heinous spiritual affliction and an all too often defining quality of our time, and so the more people we can rid of it, the better.

---

You can support IM's work by purchasing his audiobook or subscribing on Patreon