The archetype of the Strong Independent Woman® has been culturally reinforced over the last half century in virtually every imaginable media. Whether it’s Disney’s capable Princesses ready to save themselves from certain doom – as well as their quirky, hapless but handsome male heroes – or the now clichéd ‘tough bitch’ of action movies and video game protagonists who measures herself by how well she can kick ass and /or swear as the culturally contextual equal of “any man”. Her template-crafted character is strong, confident, measuredly aggressive, decisive (but usually only when shit gets serious so as to prove to the audience she’s ‘digging deep within herself to discover her yet unrealized resolve), judicious, loving to those loyal or dependent on her (immediate family, children and female friends), capable of solving problems with little more than the feminine intuition men magically lack – but above all, she’s independent.
As this cultural archetype is broadcast to society at large, the want then is to find parallels of this Strong Independent Woman® in the ‘real’ world. The media character is only marginally believable now thanks to endless revisions and replications, so we look for the examples of independent women equalling and exceeding the, paltry-by-comparison, achievements of the unenlightened ignorance of their male “oppressors.” High ranking company CEOs are usually the first rock star independent women to nominally shine (often undeservedly) in such a role, but then, by order of degrees, we can move down the economic social strata and cherry-pick or conveniently create the match of any mediocre man. As most men are, or have been conditioned Betas it’s not too difficult.
It really is the End of Men you see. You’re no longer necessary because, well now, there is nothing men can collectively and uniformly do that women cannot find some individual example of matching and / or exceeding. Women don’t need men anymore, they’re independent.
If there’s one thing I know, it’s branding. The Strong Independent Woman® caricature has generously earned it’s registered trademark. I sometimes use that ® to emphasize a particularly long-evolved meme; social conventions so embedded into our cultural fabric that they literally have become their own brand. The Strong Independent Woman® is actually one the best examples of this branding. However, to really understand the gravity of so long a cultural branding, you must go to the root of how the brand of the independent woman was originally intended to evolve by the 2nd wave cultural feminists who spawned it. In a way it’s succeeded far better than any feminist of the period really had the foresight to expect.
An Independent Woman was to be independent of men.
While a lot of feel-good aphorisms like confidence, determination, integrity, and the like became associated with this desire for independence, make no mistake, the original long-term feminist goal of fostering that independence in women was to break them off into individuated, autonomous entities from men. That individuation needed to be as positive and attractive to women as possible, so a social pairing of that independence from men, with a sense of strength and respectability, had to be nurtured over time.
Since the beginnings of the sexual revolution, women were acculturated to believe they could ‘have it all’, career, family, a husband (of her optimal hypergamous choosing) and, if she were influential enough, leave some indelible mark on society to be remembered by for posterity. To achieve this she’d need to be an autonomous agent, strong, and above all independent of men. Women would embody and perfect the maverick individualism that men seemed to enjoy throughout history. If she couldn’t manifest ‘having it all’ then she was still, by male force or by personal choice, not independent enough to realize it. Of course, the irony of all this can be found in the marriages of virtually every ‘high profile’ feminist luminary of the time (all the way up to our current time) to the very powerful and influential types of men their stated independence was to emancipate all women from in order to truly be independent.
The Case Against Male Self-Esteem
Matt Forney’s lightning rod post, The Case Against Female Self-Esteem drew a frenzy of internet hate, but at the core of that post was a question that Strong Independent Women® and their male identifiers don’t like be confronted with; do they truly want independence from men? Do the men they want to be independent from even exist, or are they conveniently useful archetypes; vaudevillian chauvinist cartoons from the 50’s, planted in their heads, courtesy of the feminine imperative?
While I can’t endorse a message that would diminish anyone’s self-esteem, male or female, Matt’s post, even so much as suggesting the idea of limiting female self-esteem, uncomfortably turns a cultural mirror back on over 50 years feminist and feminized social engineering. For over the past 50 years the case against male self-esteem, with the latent purpose of emancipating women from dependence on men, began in earnest — not with some anger inducing blog post, but as a progressive social engineering that would run the course of decades to effectively erase men’s inconvenient masculine identity, or even memory of what that identity ever meant to men. The case against male self-esteem has been the social undercurrent of popular culture since the early 1960’s.
I think it’s important for red pill men to internalize the popular idea of feminine independence. The true message that the Strong Independent Woman® brand embodies is independence from you, a man.
Its latent purpose isn’t the actual empowerment of women, or efforts to bolster self-esteem, strength (for whatever loose definition seems convenient), confidence or any other esoteric quality that might flatter a feminine ego. Its purpose isn’t to foster financial or economic independence (as evidenced by ever evolving fem-centric laws, educational and financial handicaps), or religious social parity, or even efforts to achieve its vaunted social equalism between the sexes. What feminine independence truly means is removing the man – independence from men. Feminine independence’s idealized state is one where women are autonomous, self-contained, self-sufficient and self-perpetuating single-gender entities.
If that revelation seems aggrandized and over the top, it should. It’s extreme, because the purpose itself is extreme. When you consider that the sexes have coexisted in relative gender complementarity, to produce our very proliferate species, for a hundred thousand years, the idea and implementation of separating the sexes into independent and solitary entities is extreme. Obviously effecting this independence is an impossibility for a race of social animals like human beings. We’ve relied on cooperative efforts since our tribal beginnings and the species-beneficial psychological hardwiring of that cooperation is one trait that made us so successful in adapting to changing, dangerous, environments.
For most manosphere readers (especially MRAs) I don’t think I need to illustrate the many manifest ways that women are dependent upon the men; if not men’s generated resources and provisioning, then certainly their parental investment, companionship, emotional and sexual interest. We’re better together than we’ve ever been apart – even when the ugly mechanics of hypergamy, or male aggression, or any number of negatively perceived gender dynamics prove useful survival traits for us, there is no true independence between the sexes. There is interdependence.
This is what equalism makes a mockery of. In its striving for a homogenous goal-state of androgynous gender-parity it fails to account for where the species-success that the complementarity of the past 30,000 years has brought us. From a heroic male perspective we generally accept that no man is an island, but feminism and equalism disagree – a Strong Independent Woman® is an island,..or she will be just as soon as a man gives her her due to become so.
“I doubt that any man or woman, even a century ago, would have selected a mate by the same criteria as we do now, because their priorities were completely different then – their survival hinged upon good mate selection. “ Now you’re just MSU. Only true for the women, and that barely except in extreme circumstances, transportation to Australia and the like. Either a man had the means and prospects to get a wife, or he stayed on with his mam (dad frequently being deceased by 18, when the church&state permitted marriage (except by license) or lodged with extended family.… Read more »
“The question isn’t can we override the impulses nature has hardwired into us but why do we want to? What purpose and to what end does overriding them serve? …There is no achievable goal, because when that goal is met the impetus of feminism’s power ends.”
And the truth will set you free.
“We simply haven’t evolved to the point where a househusband is considered desirable, much less normal.”
And hypergamy will never let you.
I swear, after reading that article, i can only imagine how much disdain , loathing and utter contempt those power women must have for their house-husbands, amplified by a factor of a thousand having to work alongside the ultra high powerful men they long for during ovulation.
I would put down good money the amount of women cheating on their househusbands in the corporate boardrooms is 10 times the national average.
LT “Physical attractiveness is a status symbol, nothing more” Where is a Picard palmface when you need one.. – Physical attractiveness is a characteristic that suggests fertility and health. http://www.canyons.edu/faculty/rafterm/0%200lli%20Social%20Psychology/Social%20Day%20Pages/Day%205%20Info%20Pages/1993%20-%20Adaptive%20significance%20of%20female%20physical%20attractiveness%20-%20The%20role%20of%20waist-to-hip%20ratio.pdf – Sexy son theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexy_son_hypothesis You know what happens when ugly people mate? They create uglier children. Like making copies of copies of VHS tapes (whoa, just aged myself there), the signal quality degrades until it’s unwatchable. These children will have harder and harder times trying to mate, and become further isolated and retreat from the cruel world and become omega’s who WoW or fat cankled feminists bitching in Jizzy… Read more »
[…] all want to portray the Strong Independent Woman persona. My ex wife made a point to make clear to me she was this way when we met up until she […]
[…] eminent Dr. J had a very insightful comment in The Brand of Independence. I’ll leave it to readers to read through the whole comment, but it was in reply to one of […]
@ Dr. Jeremy; “Personally, I don’t expect to dissuade you from seeking a system that prioritizes your own needs (and power). I’m not sure that is possible. I just hope others are intelligent enough to see the self-serving nature of your argument and not buy into the persuasion – sacrificing their own needs and the needs of the majority in the process. Frankly, we have already gone too far down that road…and the majority of society is suffering for the comfort of the few already.” I have often seen you make the argument that the manosphere complaint with feminism/hypergamy/feminine imperative… Read more »
[…] sexual partners, advanced sexual skills, her reliance on her IUD form of birth control and her Strong Independent Woman mentality do not deserve courtship or marriage, and probably not even any type of long term […]
[…] many American women currently have to some degree and she was brought up by her beta father to be a Strong Independent Woman®. As I incorrectly assumed that my wife would assist me in getting back on track, I also […]
I’m way late to this party, but I had to share this:
The Navy Corpsman
[…] was the first institution, legalized and normalized that laid bare feminism latent purpose – strong independent women® could remove the man from the equation of effecting an optimal hypergamy, while at the same time […]
[…] hear a woman complain about “men’s fragile egos”, men being threatened by ‘strong independent women®‘ or some other frustration about men not cooperating with their rapidly decaying, dualistic […]
[…] more palatable. ’40 is the new 30′, “you still got it”, and of course the strong independent woman® brand offers a plan for […]
[…] weren’t things women or children had the capacity to reciprocate. The advent of women’s independence, real or imagined, has served to strip men of this core understanding of the differences between […]
Become Happier By Avoiding Sex, Marriage, Fatherhood, And Parental Alienation Syndrome. [Introduction] My information is a combination of three stories. The first story describes one of the most important books that I have ever read (Adult Children of Parental Alienation Syndrome by Amy Baker). The second story uses information from online articles to reveal events that are enormously influenced by family problems (like Parental Alienation Syndrome). Parental Alienation Syndrome is probably the worst family problem because it can last for decades after the relationship with the spouse or the lover has ended. The other family problems can be eliminated when… Read more »
[…] The Brand of Independence […]
[…] struck me as the type to ‘settle’ on a Beta provider because she was too headstrong and independent® for that – she was certainly hot enough to attract the Alphas and independent enough to never […]
Speaking of independence, there are just too many Career women now that are so very high maintenance, independent, selfish, spoiled, greedy, picky, and so very power money hungry which is why many of us Good men are still Single now since these women will Only want the Best and will Never settle for Less.
Strong independent women are really a complete turn off for many of us men and always will be.
“Have you taken a poll of this broadcasting? How much is “Independent Woman” and how much is “he’s cute.”?”
are you kidding? professional women, and black women (in general, and ESPECIALLY professional) say, “i’m strong & independent and don’t need a man,” HOURLY!
what’s funny is that they say it in the presence of a man they’re interested in or type it in their online profiles…independent & proud BUT CONSTANTLY SEARCHING & LOOKING for a man.
Livingtree2013 hit the nail on the head with the following post “The power that men have you think is earned, whereas the power women have is inherent with their gender, not earned at all, and thus not worthy of any sort of respect (which we agree is earned). And so therefore to make it seem like a fair deal for you, you place the “attractiveness” criteria upon us, so it almost seems as if we earned the right to be the arbiters of sex in this society, but you know that even if we weren’t earning it, you’d still have… Read more »
Have you ever been with a woman?My guess is you haven’t had pussy since pussy had you.
This is so much bullshit!
“It’s not just the power of intercourse, a woman holds over a man, but the social validation a man receives when he’s with a woman. Society affords him a level of respect hitherto unknown to him. In many respects, a man is only a man through a woman.”
Society may dangle the carrot of respect,but no mans value is attached to his woman GTFOOH!
Still clinging to the Jungian nonsense about men’s “validation” in sex. This is one of the most common tropes Blue Pill conditioning would have men believe – that their status, their worth, their right to exist, is only valid if he’s got a woman beside him to it grant to him. Here’s a wild idea; guys want to fuck because it feels good physically and we’re responding to 15 times the testosterone women feel at their horniest influencing us to do so. Women and undersexed men want to attach some psychological schema to an evolved male sex response because it… Read more »
@Ollie The essence of our anger is women have that power over us and men’s nature makes them completely susceptible to it. Your shot was a little off here. Why are men angry? First, we discover that we’ve been lied to about what women like in a man. Second, we discover that women have been fucking lots of other guys and gaming us for our time and financial resources while playing Hide the Vagina ™ with us and lying about their hypergamous activities. Third, we expected women to act like men and became angry at them when they didn’t because… Read more »
Olli Livingtree2013 hit the nail on the head with the following post LyingTree was here to reinforce the FI, to try to chivvy men back onto the plantation, and to restate 2nd stage Feminism in terms that she thought would be more palatable to men. Her “point” was to try to stuff Blue Pills down men’s throats. Ollie, you keep chasing tangents, running down rabbit trails and generally overthinking things here. Why don’t you go out to a coffee place and chat up whoever i behind the counter, man or woman, for 5 full minutes of taking-turns and adding value?… Read more »
Lover, Father, Husband, Provider.
If you wanted to be pedantic you could say a man can be a provider to someone other than a wife and child. But he can’t be identified by any of the other titles, without a spouse.
@Rollo I wasn’t referring to validation from having sex, but the societal validation a man has when a woman is on his arm. Parents, siblings, friends, colleagues, acquaintances and total strangers view you in another light when you’re with a woman. Is a family man perceived in the same way as a single man. Of course not. This is regardless of whether we (personally) care about it or not. It’s a factor in social acceptance. p.s. Livingtree2013 is no insanitybytes22. She’s able to construct logical, rational arguments and present her ideas in a coherent fashion. If you read most of… Read more »
Stopped reading here
@Ollie You can’t be serious,what society do you live in? Women don’t give this value to men,lover ,father ,husband,provider men build their own value and then allow woman to share in it.It is her value that goes up when the man of value plants his seed in her,even more when he stays to be a father and provider. In today’s society with open hypergamy and cuckoldry,following a feminine primary social order a mans value is temporary and only recognized when it serves her purpose,where is the value in being a cuck? Where is his value when he takes her someplace… Read more »
Olllie p.s. Livingtree2013 is no insanitybytes22. She’s able to construct logical, rational arguments and present her ideas in a coherent fashion. LyingTree2013 wasn’t Bytes, the two text styles are way different. I was here, present, most of the time she cluttered up the place. If you actually read her “arguments” they ultimately devolve to motte / bailey or bait/switch games, circularity of the “it’s true because it’s true” and of course every women’s fave, “It’s true because Mom says so!”. You also should be able to notice how much of the time she spent avoiding the simple, direct questions asked… Read more »
Ollie I wasn’t referring to validation from having sex, but the societal validation a man has when a woman is on his arm. Parents, siblings, friends, colleagues, acquaintances and total strangers view you in another light when you’re with a woman. Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? Why would you want to give other people power over you like that? Why do you care how total strangers view you? What difference does it make? You are totally buffering with this stuff, handing people you don’t even know a veto power over yourself. You’re making everyone else your mental point of origin.… Read more »
Something I’ve become keenly aware of over the past 10 or so years, is the ever increasing number of men looking for validation of their very existence from someone else, or ‘ society ‘ at large. Ollie this is the dumbest shit I’ve heard all day. Take AR’s advice pal. Wanna know how inherent my inborn value is over a woman? I can knock a woman up and she can give birth once in 9 months. During the term of her pregnancy, I could knock up another hundred or more chicks. And so on, and so on. 1 egg vs… Read more »
@Rollo When we still had a patriarchy, a married man was viewed as a responsible, stable figure. A family man could improve his lot in life, because his boss saw him as a steady hand. Someone who ultimately wouldn’t rock the boat. Contrast this with a single man looking to do the same. His boss would likely view him as a little reckless, unsuitable for the reins of responsibility he would invest in him. We still see vestiges of this thought process in the corporate and political realms. A family man is seen as the better fit. The single man… Read more »
“When Mark Minter left us, his parting shot was to call us losers.”
If your intention is to persuade, you probably should’ve left that bit out.
Per women and added value I agree (to some extent). I’m not sure what everyone is arguing about. When Tucker Max’s mug is on the cover of a new book and it’s noted (correctly) that his wife looks a lot like Catlyn Jenner that is noted BECAUSE it is a reflection on him, isn’t it? If you’re at a job interview with a good company and they ask you why you’re switching to their company in hopes of a higher paying job, it’s probably better to say, “Well, my kids are going to college soon…” than “Well, I’ve been needed… Read more »
Per women and added value I agree (to some extent).
Women are added value for betas, but not for alphas. Alphas’ value is based on their status. Women follow status. A beautiful woman with a man might signal that a man is alpha, but not necessarily, since beautiful women will go the BB route.
And conversely, a man might be married to a woman who has lost her beauty, but that doesn’t necessarily signal that the man is beta. If a man behaves with social skills and has status, then he’s alpha, no matter his mate’s looks.
[…] cocky Beta who gets his comeuppance with a swift kick to the nuts from a Strong Independent Woman® archetype has been standard fare for comic relief in action-adventure movies for some time now. […]
[…] cocky Beta who gets his comeuppance with a swift kick to the nuts from a Strong Independent Woman® archetype has been standard fare for comic relief in action-adventure movies for some time now. […]
[…] Rational Male: The Brand of Independence […]