For people reading this article and not familiar with BDSM, it stands for bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, and sadomasochism, and the purpose of this article is to inform both men and women of white women are particularly interested in dominance play, which includes BDSM.
Women are particularly interested in genres of books related to BDSM, particularly the 50 Shades of Grey novels, which have sold over 150 million copies worldwide. Women are also more likely to read than men; on average, women read 15 books yearly, while men only read nine.
The reason for the female fascination with the 50 Shades of Grey genre and erotic fiction in the form of books over pornography is because the woman’s sex drive is more driven by emotions and building a connection that cannot be built in a porn studio environment.
With books, a romantic setting can be created in which romantic connection and emotion are built throughout a romantic novel; that’s why it’s usually in the middle or toward the end of the book when any sexual activity happens.
Most romantic books have a buildup of tension that is emotional and sexual, and the threat of an overarching enemy that threatens to tear the heroine and the hero from one another goes to crack the passion and excitement that women crave in their romantic fiction.
Four men reading this, a woman derives sexual passion and traction not through visuals but through emotion and mental attraction.
To add credence to this argument, in the literature search and screening process, 60 articles were included. BDSM-related fantasies were found to be common (40–70%) in both males and females, while about 20% reported engaging in BDSM.
Why do Women Like BDSM
Louise Perry
The feminist author and writer Louise Perry argues that the reasons women are strongly attracted to men who are larger than them and have an interest in BDSM are due to historical evolutionary factors that influenced female behaviour for over a millennium.
Louise Perry stated that humans are descendants of apes and that when they engage in sexual activity, it is quite violent. Rape is a common factor in humanity’s historical ancestry.
Mrs Perry follows the argument that BDSM is a holdover of humans and the evolutionary past in regards to sexual activity between both sexes.
Women prefer taller men because human beings are sexily dimorphic species, meaning there are two genders, male and female. On average, males’ upper bodies have 75% more muscle mass and 90% more strength than females.
Also, the ratio of male-to-female average heights across the world. Globally, the ratio is 1.07, meaning that, on average, men are about 7% taller than women. Across the world, this relative difference between the sexes can vary from only 2–3% to over 12%.
What this means for women is that historically immense physical strength and size protected them from other natural predators as well as other males who could potentially kill their babies or commit an act of rape.
Therefore, the male’s size and larger proportion are attractive to women due to the perceived safety that comes from that kind of strength naturally in today’s modern Western world. In a post-industrial economy, physical size and strength do not play a massive part in our daily lives.
This applies to people, particularly those working office jobs or who are part of the laptop class, such as journalists; however, a woman, due to these historically ingrained reasons, still likes to be held by a man larger than them so they can feel safe and protected.
For a woman to be happy in a relationship, he needs to feel safe and protected; this applies to women a thousand years ago, and the same rules apply to today’s contemporary woman.
This article focused on relationships, compatibility, and incompatibility, and this information can be related to dating advice on maintaining a relationship, be it spiritual or sexual. This information can even be used in long-term relationships as well.
Still, the primary focus is on relationships within the first two years, particularly during the dating stage.
To understand a relationship and its compatibility, it is first necessary to understand the goals and purposes of each individual or organisation regarding the filament of their needs, be that the need to be felt, the need to be here or the need to be understood.
Furthermore, understanding each other’s responsibilities and duties within any relationship is critical to establishing compatibility and finding out quickly whether the relationship won’t work due to different priorities, philosophies and cultures.
Actress Sophie Turner: Relationships Compatibility and Incompatibility
Romantic Relationships
No matter how much you love someone and how much they ignite your passion, you cannot get over any incompatibility because those differences get to the heart of who you both are if one person is a Hindu and the other person is a Muslim when it comes to having children that will be a road that cannot be easily crossed.
These incompatibilities should have been resolved during the first few months or discussed during the first date.
Once you start to sleep with someone and develop deep emotional connections, it becomes harder to dissolve the relationship.
As human beings, we sometimes make the mistake of trying to make a relationship work where there are incompatibilities because we love that person.
Love is not enough to keep a relationship, particularly a romantic one, functioning and building lives together.
Due to loving that person, we keep trying to resolve the issues; all we are doing is taking ourselves into a deeper and deeper hole; the only solution is to realise what we are doing and climb out of that situation.
Again, this is easier said than done; that’s why it’s important when going on a date that both parties are honest concerning what they want for themselves and any relationship, as well as any incompatibilities.
For instance, the couple Joe Jonas and Sophie Turner are getting divorced; this is a celebrity marriage and divorce partly caused by Joe Jonas being an extrovert and Sophie Turner being an introvert and more the homebody.
If you are a person who enjoys spending time indoors and doesn’t particularly like going clubbing and being around lots of people, then somebody opposite to your personality may very well be incompatible for a long-term relationship.
Even in the short term, they make you feel loved and appreciated because they have something you wished you had, which could be more extraversion and confidence.
That’s why when it comes to dating and relationships, it is best to be honest with who you are and not who you think you are, but every person reading this, including me, has the right to make their own mistakes.
Relationships Compatibility and Incompatibility
Sexual Incompatibility
Men and women are different; we view sex differently, which means different things to different sexes. For men, sex can be an enjoyable activity, and for men, sex does not necessarily mean the establishment of a deeper human connection.
However, it is a contradiction to this that the only way or the main way men get emotional connection is through sexual activity. This is why when men seek marriage counsellors, the common complaint is the lack of sex.
For women to have sex, they must feel safe, feel her, and that the deep connection and bonding happens before sex; that’s the only way she can enjoy sexual activity if there is already a bond with a man; on average, he is not bothered.
When it comes to deciding when to have sex for a woman, it may be advantageous to wait a minimum of three months to get to know this person and to see how compatible or incompatible you both are.
One factor also consider is your society’s sexual norms and whether or not it’s normal for your society’s women folk to have sex on the first stage for the fourth date and that the man, when it comes to sexual activity, will operate in the social norms enforced by women.
For a man dating a woman, she needs to feel safe, feel respected and have a romantic atmosphere. I will not say love because you may have known this person for less than one week or a maximum of six months.
It takes two years if not longer, to genuinely get to know somebody, and six months is not a lot of time, but there’s no point in deluding each other that it is to love that this does not stop a man treating a woman like a lady and being romantic.
If you are dating with intention, this woman could be the love of your life, the mother of your children or the last woman you ever sleep with; if that’s the case, it’s best to start on the right foot and build a connection.
Women do not deserve to be pumped and dumped by men. This is where a man sleeps with a woman but is never courted again; this significant trauma and any man wishing to pursue a successful relationship and sleep with the same woman is best to make her feel safe and satisfied.
That’s why when you first get to know one another, you establish where you are going, and when you like to have sex, there’s no pressure, and you can genuinely get to know one another.
For a woman, if you are not interested in the man in any sexual way, then leave the relationship so you are not wasting each other time.
If you’re not interested in a woman for a relationship and only for sex, leave her alone or establish straightaway that you’re not interested in a relationship, just sexual activity.
Relationships Compatibility and Incompatibility
Men and Women are Different
If you are a man or a woman in the Western world and particularly if you are a member of the laptop classes, these are people who work primarily with laptops or the tech spaces; if that is the case, then the difference between a man or a woman is not immediately apparent.
Working in an office, you don’t need superior male strength, and muscle mass does not affect your job performance. This can make the psychological and emotional differences between men and women invisible.
In regards to growing up in this environment, both men and women are told each other are the same and have the same goals and objectives regarding relationships.
It is shocking for a man that women are not interested in having sex like a man and having sex repeatedly because male testosterone is 16 to 20 times higher than a woman on average.
For a young woman, when she starts dating, it’s pretty shocking and maybe even scary how much the male sex drive and male motivation are devoted to having sex.
The lack of knowledge causes incompatibility and friction between the sexes that doesn’t need to be there.
For women, on average, to achieve orgasm when it comes to self-pleasure, it takes eight minutes, with a male partner’s sexual release taking 14 minutes, but the average male orgasm takes five minutes.
This incompatibility is due to a woman not feeling safe with her partner or not being loved; on average, everything with a woman’s sex drive is a lot more complicated.
This is why, to have a compatible sexual relationship and a relationship in general, both men and women must accept that you are different, that the key to success is communication, and that you both feel uncomfortable and maybe even embarrassed.
Also, when it comes to bonding and building connections, men and women do this differently; for women, it’s through verbal communication; for men, it is through group activities.
If a woman wishes to build a stronger bond with her man, doing something together is a way to build an emotional connection, and for a man, letting his woman talk to him through communication is a way to build a relationship with her.
Furthermore, when a man sees a woman with a problem, he does not need you to fix it; I recommend listening to her and not letting the issue stress you out.
With the male brain, we see a problem, identify it, and immediately want to fix it for a woman; with a woman, their brains are better at communication, so if they have a problem, they will keep talking about the issue.
Men find that incredibly stressful, but for a woman, that is how they relieve stress; this is why before a woman wants to talk about her problems, you might ask, do you want me to be a sounding board? You wish to seek a solution, or she must feel she is being seen and heard.
That’s why communication is critical within a relationship; both people communicate their wants and needs, and both parties try to meet each other’s emotional and physical needs. Still, with that stated, the other person is not obligated always to meet those needs.
This is why having hobbies, group activities and even friends outside of relationships is critical to help keep the relationship functioning.
Relationships Compatibility and Incompatibility
The Talk
Suppose you are a man or a woman who is dating with intention.
In that case, you are both looking for a long-term relationship that could involve having children, getting married, or staying committed to one person throughout your life.
If that is what you are looking for and what you both want, that’s a good sign of compatibility; if you are both compatible, you must talk about what you want for your relationship and how you wish to structure your lives.
Suppose you are working 35 hours or more per week. In that case, it is essential to know when you can have dates together, schedule times to have long and deep conversations and establish your mutual and separate interests within and without the relationship.
Also, it’s essential to establish whether or not you value mental stimulation for yourself. I don’t want conversations always resolved around sex, defecating, TV, food and work. I like intellectually stimulating, but that does not necessarily apply to you.
If you are going to talk about what you both want, you must know what you wish for yourselves in your relationship; that way, you are not sleepwalking into a disaster or making choices based on fear.
Instagram feeds us all our insecurities about our capabilities and manipulates what we believe is possible and what is reality; when people post content and other images on social media, they are only shown snapshots of the best part of their lives.
Life is complicated, and people and relationships, whether romantic or platonic friendships, are complex.
However, social media presents a dynamic of perfection that doesn’t exist in reality.
Even the best relationships in the world require commitment, mutual communication, and willingness to understand your partner.
Instagram is deadly and destructive for relationships because it presents the illusion of perfection, whether physical attraction or a prosperous lifestyle.
Men see thousands of images of women on Instagram and other social media platforms or desensitise the man to a natural woman’s beauty.
Women have scars, stretch marks and many other floors that are not just physical.
These unauthentic beauty standards manipulated with plastic surgery, Botox and fillers damage relationships because they make people increasingly selfish and view Romans and their relationships through a purely image-orientated viewpoint.
Instagram is Bad for Relationships
It doesn’t consider kindness, femininity, the ability to communicate with your partner, or the ability to go through the highs and lows of human life, which causes people to retreat from reality.
Instagram ultimately makes relationships into a product, and life becomes commercialised as to whether or not a man or a woman will look good on social media feeds.
We don’t look for the man or woman who makes us happy; we choose someone who’ll impress our friends and look good on social media.
Connection and building a relationship are built through mutual communication; building mutual understanding creates intimacy. Intimacy is not created through a camera image but through being with someone, being there for them, and finally knowing someone.
That is the considerable risk to building a relationship; it cannot be through text or images; it requires both parties to be willing to take significant risks and vulnerability, which creates the possibility of being hurt emotionally or even physically by another human being, which is truly scary.
Looking for love and romance and finding your soulmate has affected humanity for as long as humanity has tried to find somebody who will accept who you are and love you for your faults just as much as your strength within a relationship.
Unfortunately, we get traction, appreciation, and love confused.
Also, being attracted to a person in a sexual sense or in the sense of admiring a person does not mean you are in love with that person, nor does attraction mean love, which can create confusion between the emotion of love and attraction.
Appreciation, Attraction, and Love are not the Same Things.
Appreciation
As people, either men or women, we seek a connection with those around us.
We want to be seen, we want to be felt, and we want to be listened to, and this is expressed by other people appreciating our qualities and abilities, which makes us feel that we are being seen.
It’s this appreciation of who we are which can be mistaken for loving somebody, even though this aspect is part of what it means to love another person to appreciate who they are and what they do for one another.
In our lives, we all need to know other people appreciate us and acknowledge our existence, which is reciprocated in relationships that let people know they are loved and valued.
Appreciation, Attraction, and Love are not the Same Things.
Attraction
Being attracted to another person does not just mean loving that person’s physical characteristics; it can also mean loving aspects of that person’s personality and mind, which different people will find highly attractive.
Attraction can also be where we seek something that is missing from ourselves.
This could be a personal or physical quality, such as financial quality, within another person to meet our emotional and material needs.
Sometimes, attraction can come from an element of childhood trauma, which means in our adult lives, we look for the love that was not provided to us or the security not provided in childhood.
The stereotypical example is a young woman in her 20s dating a man in their 40s who is financially well-off and meets the emotional need of provisioning for young women, which takes them out of survival mode and helps them feel love and secure for the first time.
For a man, another stereotypical example is a man who comes from a single-mother household who saw his mother struggle and blames his father for his mother’s struggle within relationships.
He is constantly drawn to the struggling woman who needs a man in their life. The man is competing with his father to be the man of the household and proving to himself he is not like his father, nor is it like other men from his perspective.
The key to understanding attraction is not just about other people but also about yourself trying to meet the emotional and physical needs that can stem from our childhoods.
Appreciation, Attraction, and Love are not the Same Things.
Love
If you are reading this, unless you have had a terrible childhood or been in a coma, you would have experienced love in your life, the love of a parent, the love of the family pet or the love of a first girlfriend/boyfriend.
What we mean by and interpret as romantic love gets confused with appreciation, attraction and lust. All of these can be part of love, but they are not the leading cause of what it means to love and be loved by somebody.
True love requires understanding the person or people you are with to love them, not who you think they are but for who they are.
This is the same kind of love a parent has for their child or a child for their parent.
Any adult with parents understands that when becoming an adult and transitioning from a child to a teenager, a fully-fledged adult will learn to love our parents for who they are, not for who we hope they are.
People are messy and complicated; true love comes into being through mutual understanding of one another.
The Red Pill movement or Red Pill community comes from a counterculture to the sexual revolution, pickup artistry communities from the 1990s and 2000s, and a counterculture to the impact of modern technology, liberal economics and how society has been governed by a set of social norms given since the 1960s.
The Red Pillars have many different forms and objectives that they wish to achieve, like Jordan Peterson, author of The 12 More Rules for Life, and Louise Perry, favouring a return to traditional social norms and religious living but not necessarily the belief in God.
Red Pill is not a united community nor a united political movement; it is merely a collection of political philosophies mixed in with economic and social policies that differ from people’s, such as Rolo Tomassi, AKA George W. Miller, the author of the Rational Male Series.
The other actors monetising loneliness in men, such as Fresh and Fit of Podcast, Whatever podcast, and Andrew Tates of the World, use real social issues to generate revenue and prey upon the weaknesses of young men in their teens and 20s helped contribute to the rise of in cell culture.
The Red Pill Movement, a Counterculture to Sexual Revolution
Sexual Revolution and Technology
The sexual revolution happened throughout the 1950s to 1970s, which also overlapped with the Silicon Age starting in the 1970s. These two revolutions of technology and sexuality are strongly interconnected due to both being responsible for the rise of the red pulp counterculture.
Undeniably, the sexual revolution was ultimately a positive benefit for women. It freed them from the burdens of child-rearing due to the invention of the contraceptive pill in May 1950 and went mainstream in the 1960s, with the pill initially only intended for wives married to men.
Women finally have sexual freedom; they also can enter the workforce on masse and provide for themselves financially. This is a benefit because they’re not tied down to dependency on men.
The consequence was that using the analogy of Thomas Sowell, the economist, social thinker and author, states that in any social or political policy, ‘There are no solutions, only trade-offs’.
Trade-offs will be discussed throughout this writing, but overall, there were more positives for women than negatives; the consequences for men were that they were not prepared for consequences in this new societal environment.
In the past, the only thing a man needed to do to secure a wife was to hold down a job, which made them unprepared for women having their financial agency and prepared to develop tools of self-improvement.
It is the inability to adapt to the consequences of the sexual revolution that is leading to the rise of involuntary celibacy in men, with the creation of new technologies which are making docile men hooked on games and pornography.
Gaming is so damaging to the male drive to improve because it gives the mind the illusion that they are successful and provides the dopamine illusion that they are winning at life.
In contrast, they are just plain computer games. Furthermore, what the red pill movement gets right is that males have a higher sex drive than women and desire to spread the seed and have access to unlimited sexuality.
The issue with pornography is that if the male, particularly in Generation Z, born between 1997 and 2010 and even more risk averse than any other generation, then pornography is a very easy cop-out.
Modern technology does not just affect men; it also affects women, with social media platforms being a means for micro-cheating. This is where a woman seeks attention and validation by using social media to gain love and affection.
Men also do this through pornography and other sexual imagery or content, though women cheat emotionally and men cheat sexually.
The problem with using social media to boost self-esteem and damage the relationship is that if somebody gives free love and affection, not getting that from a committed partner decreases the value of that kind of attention.
What is also added to the issue for men and women is that dating apps and social media give the illusion of unlimited romantic and sexual opportunities, which is inaccurate.
Human beings understand the world visually; we understand the world by what we see and interpret, which is not necessarily based on true reality that isn’t unlimited Tinder matches online.
The Red Pill Movement, a Counterculture to Sexual Revolution: Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson’s and Louise Perry’s of the World
Jordon Peterson is a Canadian academic, author, and podcaster who shot to fame in his opposition to Bill C-16 and added the words gender identity or expression to three places.
First, It was added to the Canadian Human Rights Act, joining a list of identifiable groups protected from discrimination. These groups include age, race, sex, religion and disability.
Jordan Peterson also argued that children and teenagers should not make these decisions at such a young age and that becoming an adult is hard. He stated, ‘Do you really want to be able to choose your own sex at such a young age?’.
The ways that Jordan Peterson is related to the red pill counterculture is that Peterson’s dominant audience on YouTube is predominantly male, with the platform itself being male-orientated in viewership.
This was added to Jordan Peterson’s online content, which targeted male self-improvement and said that males must learn how to live to have a wife, children, and intimate human connections.
Jordan Peterson has also made controversial comments, such as it would be beneficial if every man had access to a woman regarding personal and sexual relationships to motivate men into action.
He has also recently made a critical move to join the American independent media organisation on the right wing.
The religious right of American politics is called The Daily Wire, which also marked a significant move by Peterson to more religious-orientated content and a move away from secular liberal lifestyles to a more religious-orientated lifestyle with an emphasis on the traditional nuclear family.
Louise Perry is the author of the 2022 book The Case Against the sexual revolution; like Jordan Peterson, she is against female promiscuity, where women have many sexual partners with multiple men throughout their lifetimes.
Mrs Perry, like Jordan Peterson, is in favour of the traditional nuclear family and marriage and for women and men to marry in their early 20s rather than the norm in their late 20s or early 30s in the English-speaking world.
Peterson and Perry represent more of the intellectual side of the red pill movement and counterculture with the hopeful return from their respective sexual norms that predate the sexual revolution and a return to intergenerational harmony.
Louise Perry, in addition to creating a link to the decline in global demographics regarding her other works, points out that to tackle this crisis, a return to traditional family and society moving away from the liberal norm should be a way to increase global birth rates in the Western world.
She also argues that liberalism is not compatible with motherhood; to be a liberal, she argues to be free of the constraints of children, family, and any other kinds of responsibility.
She has identified the disharmony between liberalism and motherhood and that people cannot have it all, be they men or women. Living as an atomised individual can be fun for people in their 20s, 30s, and maybe even their 40s.
Still, as we age, we have increasing health issues, and in our 60s, 70s, or older, it’s very unlikely that friends and people who are not blood relations will take care of them during their old age or when they become infirm.
Added to this is the belief that the welfare systems in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia won’t exist in the future due to not having enough young people alive to pay the taxation that goes into funding these nations’ welfare systems.
The Red Pill Movement, a Counterculture to Sexual Revolution: Andre Tate
The Andrew Tates of the World
Andrew Tates made his financial wealth by creating Only Fans accounts using young and attractive women to generate financial revenue from female beauty and young men looking for the illusion of romantic relationships.
The Only Fans platform does not work as a standard pornographic website. It works as something much more profound that targets the human’s psychological need for emotional intimacy.
Intimacy does not come through sexuality, only through the belief that a person is being seen, heard, and felt.
This is the genius of Andrew Tate and people who use the Only Fan platform.
They’re not selling sexuality; they are, in fact, monetising the human need for connections because, in common culture, People believe having intercourse will lead to intimacy.
It is a myth people believe that intimacy is developed through sexual intercourse; the way intimacy is actually developed is through communication, and what Only Fans do is give lonely men the illusion of intimacy through communication with women on these platforms.
So, Andrew Tate, in terms of the red pill community and others like him on the Whatever podcast, Fresh and Fit podcast and Rolo Tomassi, have worked to monetise and marketise male disenchantment to become wealthy.
The Red Pill Movement, a Counterculture to Sexual Revolution
The Sexual Marketplace
These red pillars also respond to the changing dating environment, particularly the women entering the workforce in the 1960s and 70s and why pickup artistry started to rise in the 1990s and 2000.
The pickup artists were men who discovered how to attract women by using dark triad traits of Machiavelli’s narcissism and false confidence that particularly works on young women who do not know the difference between a competent man and one presenting an illusion.
It was this attitude of seeing women as purely sex objects and men as part of these communities that contributed to the growing dissatisfaction men and women currently have with dating in the Western world.
These groups also like to use evolutionary psychology or, more accurately, their bastardised version of the science to justify the way they treat women.
They state that because women are sexually hypergamous, women choose sexual partners based upon being competent, capable and valuable in their societies, either financially, their particular high-value skill set or being a solid part of their community.
In practical terms, this means a higher value man, in reality, is subjective to each woman; however, the men in the red pill movement see this as women being too picky, and they should lower their standards of meeting.
This is where people like Jordan Peterson say that men need to rise and become worthy of women, and in contrast to people like Andrew Tate and Rolo Tomassi argue that women need to come down to men’s levels.
Furthermore, they comment that women only want to bang the winners and that men in their 20s will not achieve a meaningful sexual relationship until they earn a six-figure salary in their 30s or 40s.
What does it mean to be Conservative, and how does it mean different things to different people’s indifferent nations, different cultures, different legal systems, and differences in how their societies are governed and the historical background of their nation?
A Conservative from the United States or the Western world in ultraconservative nations like Iraq, Iran or Saudi Arabia will be seen as radical leftists.
Conservatism also means many different things to people on politics’ left and right sides.
On the left, a Conservative is somebody who favours small government and low taxes and is in favour of liberal economic policies and religious conservatism.
In contrast, a Conservative may view a liberal or leftist as somebody who wants to tax the rich, destroy normative and cultural institutions, and see the elimination of a nation’s identity.
This can be seen strikingly in 2015 when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared his country the world’s first post-national state while defining Canadian values.
This means that Postnationalism or non-nationalism is the process or trend by which nation-states and national identities lose their importance relative to cross-nation and self-organised or supranational and global entities and local entities.
What Justin Trudeau and other liberals are aiming for is a world of their nations not having ties to their historical past and their cultural legacies, in this case, the Anglo-Saxon past and the history of English.
To a lesser extent, nations such as America, Australia, Canada and other postcolonial countries of the conservative and social traditions developed and created in England.
These institutions are the English common law and legal system that is not top-down but bottom-up when it comes to creating and implementing laws, not from a higher authority but from an authority from the People.
The Death of Conservatism: the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
The Lesson from Edward Gibbon
Edward Gibbon is a historian and author from the 18th century. He created his most famous work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, where he discusses why the Roman Empire fell and how this was linked to the failure to pass on the cultural legacy of Rome to another generation.
He strongly linked the death of conservatism in antiquity and the early mediaeval ages to the fall of the Roman Empire.
His reasoning can be linked to people in our time not having children, who are not creating a family unit and a social and educational environment where a legacy of culture, nationhood, and belief in their own home nation identity is not passed on to their children.
This is why people like Justin Trudeau and people educated within liberal educational systems don’t see themselves as English, American, Canadian or other because they were raised to be individualistic and not part of a community.
You may be familiar with this, but you must ask yourself if you have a father, mother, brothers, uncles, or other family connections worth my titles and descriptions.
Suppose these connections are fragile and can easily be broken. This is a sign of the failure of intergenerational families from the Silent Generation that fought during World War II from 1939 to 1945.
The succeeding generations of boomers, Generation X, Generation Millennials, and Generation Z, have failed to pass on the baton of culture, civilisation, and other legacies of their societies to the next generation.
According to historian David Starkey and the Conservative philosopher and politician Edmund Burke, Conservatism is each generation passing on the legacy of previous generations and the institutions created for each succeeding generation.
Conservatism is not the absence of change, merely the conservation of national identity and ensuring there is a nation and a better society and that each subsequent generation is simply the custodian and protector of that legacy for England; this has been happening for over 40 generations.
For the Chinese, that would be 66 to 88 generations.
The proverb speaks to public service, to actions that benefit others, not oneself.
The Death of Conservatism
Liberalism is the Death of Duty
What does it mean to have a liberal society, and how to be liberal is to be free of social constraints, which include the family and other constraints that can be positive, such as fatherhood and devotion to the family? Liberalism is the focus on the individual over society as a whole.
Economic and social liberalism has strengthened since at least the 18th century. It can be argued the reason for its success can be seen in its poster child of liberalism, the United States and the British Empire.
To varying degrees of success nearly 300 years, the most dominant nations on this planet have been nations that part of the Anglo-Saxon culture grew and had the legacy of liberalism and freedom baked into their political systems.
This freedom has seen the rise of their economies and the development of unprecedented technological change since the ending of World War II in 1945.
But with the stated liberalism is the death of duty and lease to people’s liberation, which is both good and bad, you cannot be a liberal if you are a mother or have commitments to something beyond your wants and desires.
One hundred seven thousand people in America have died due to the fentanyl crisis and drug overdose in 2022, enough people to fill Michigan Stadium, the largest stadium in North America.
Of those people recorded in statistical data, 107,000 of those 70,000 died due to fentanyl.
The Fentanyl crisis is the most significant health threat facing the United States.
It is a crisis growing out of control, linked to multiple factors such as the over-prescription of fentanyl for pain relief and modern technologies such as social media affecting people’s communication abilities and further exacerbation by modern living.
Here is the definition of Fentanyl, also spelt fentanyl, a highly potent synthetic piperidine opioid drug primarily used as an analgesic.
Because fentanyl is 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine, its primary clinical utility is in pain management for cancer patients and those recovering from painful surgical operations.
Fentanyl Crisis
The Tripling of Fentanyl Deaths
According to an article published in REUTERS, data from the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention shows that fentanyl-related deaths from drug overdoses increased from 5.7 per 100,000 people in 2016 to 21.6 per 100,000 in 2021.
The crisis is getting so severe that during Joe Biden’s State of the Union address to Congress, he stated that Republicans and Democrats united in their support for ending the fentanyl crisis, with President Biden getting a standing ovation.
Joe Biden, President of the United States of America: ‘So let’s launch a major search to stop fentanyl production in the sale and trafficking more drug detection machines inspecting cargo at the board’.
My apologies if reading Joe Biden’s words does not make much sense. I state this because I watched the address and found it hard to listen to what he was saying, most likely due to his deteriorating mental health, allegedly from Alzheimer’s.
Fentanyl Crisis
The Origins of Fentanyl and The Growing Crisis
Fentanyl was first created in 1959 by Dr. Paul Janssen; it was initially marketed as an analgesic drug under multiple formats as a patch, lollipop or spray.
The first cases of drug overdose using fentanyl and the beginning of the fentanyl crisis were discovered by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the early 1990s, starting in Wichita, Kansas and has since been a growing crisis, becoming a cancer within the USA.
In the early 2000s and 2005, the American police force and other law enforcement agencies were cracking down on the internal manufacturing of fentanyl illegally.
Unfortunately, they discovered that the drugs were being imported from outside of the USA from Mexico and China.
The DEA says the powerful Jalisco and Sinaloa cartels smuggle most of the fentanyl that crosses the border. It’s hidden in vehicles, by individuals, or in cross-border tunnels.
In addition to blaming China and Mexico, Republicans blame President Biden for failing to secure the border.
It is impractical for the United States to build a wall across the border with Mexico, which is 954 miles (3,145 km).
The border between the United States and Mexico traverses a variety of terrains, including urban areas and deserts.
The border from the Gulf of Mexico to El Paso, Texas, follows along the Rio Grande, forming a natural barrier.
This means there needs to be a political settlement with Mexico that destroys the cartels. If the situation has deteriorated too much with Mexico, the United States may need to consider military action or the incorporation of Mexico into the union.
Fentanyl Crisis
Fentanyl Crisis: Who is it Affecting and Why
Overdose victims have risen for over 20 years, with fentanyl being the key reason. Currently, almost 70% of all fatalities in the United States are due to the use of fentanyl, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Another shattering fact is that fentanyl is behind 80% of deaths of 15 to 24-year-olds in the USA; this drug damages America’s youth.
Currently, as of writing this article, fentanyl has killed five times as many Americans who died fighting in the Vietnam War, and with the fatality rate for using fentanyl being over 70%, it is a critical factor of why so many Americans are dying even though the drug makes up only 13% of illegal drug use.
The reason why fentanyl is becoming more widespread is because of how potent the drug is.
1 kg of fentanyl can create 1 million counterfeit pills that can then be passed off as another hallucinogenic substance.
It is even distributed as oxycodone, a pain killer for which people do not need a prescription, which increases the chance of becoming addicted to fentanyl.
According to the New England Journal of Medicine, the increase in fentanyl use reflects the potency of this substance and its low production cost, which gives traffickers strong incentives to mix fentanyl with herring and other drugs and narcotics available on American streets.
The production process of fentanyl also requires specialised equipment and expertise.
The American Revolutionary Wars for American Independence was a conflict fought between the second Continental Congress/Confederate States of America or the United Confederate States of America from 1775 with the first battles at Concord and Lexington and the conflict’s conclusion in 1783.
The American Revolution is remembered in popular culture, particularly in the United States, as a revolutionary conflict against the tyranny of Kings.
Unfortunately, this is historical nonsense that is politically necessary to maintain the unity of the USA.
The United States in 1783 and its final constitution, which came into effect in 1789, was necessary to build up secular saints in the form of the founding fathers and the viewpoint of tyranny against liberty to provide this new nation with legitimacy.
All countries require their founding myths, heroes and villains. For the Americans, this was British tyranny, the tyranny of Kings and the perceived abuses of American citizens with little basis.
However, it can be argued, and I will argue, that the American Revolution was a war for independence based on self-interest and political interest and not upon revolutionary principles near those principles were used as a means to justify rebellion.
These arguments are supported by historians such as David Starkey and Robert Middlekauff, who wrote the book Glorious Cause of the American Revolution from 1763 to 1789.
American Revolutionary War
Myths and Lies
In the American popular psyche, the American Revolution was a war against British tyranny and the tyranny of King George III of England.
This is false on multiple accounts because the British in the 18th century were the home of liberalism, the development of modern capitalism and the industrial revolution.
Furthermore, the British Isles was one of the most unrestricted places on the continent and free from French tyranny, the Bordon dynasty of France and the Habsburgs of the Holy Roman Empire.
Also, England’s freedom of the press was formally established in Great Britain with the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695.
Secondly, the kings of England have been limited monarchies and not absolute monarchies since before the Norman conquest in 1066, preceded by the old Anglo-Saxon kings of England from 927 until the death of Harold Godwin at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.
Preceding the Norman conquests, the kings of England still had limited powers, and constitutional limitations were placed upon the power of English kings since King John of England signed the Magna Carter in 1215.
England never had and never will have an absolute monarch.
By the early 18th century, England’s Kings were now kings of Great Britain since the act of Union with Scotland in 1707 meant that monarchs were primary ceremonial positions.
The last monarch to overrule Parliament or not follow Parliament’s wishes was Queen Anna, who reigned from 1702 until 1714, being the last Stewart Queen of England with the dynasty ruling England from 1603 until 1714.
American Revolutionary War
Why Rebellion Was Necessary
The reason for the American Revolution was not revolutionary but merely a war of independence based upon the interests of the perceived interests of the English colonies and the English homeland no longer aligning.
The English Parliament, or the British Parliament, passed taxation acts such as the Stamp Act and the so-called Intolerable Acts to get tax revenue from the American colonists.
The British had no effective way to collect taxation from the American colonists in the 13 colonies. Each colony had its state legislature, but the legislative houses proposed no taxation programs or means of taxing the colonies.
The historian David Starkey argued that the British passing Acts on goods in America was merely a way for the British government to try and get the American legislative houses to devise their means of taxation.
Thirteen colonies with the first permanent English colony in America were founded in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607.
The founder of the Jamestown settlement was the adventurer Captain John Smith, famous for being saved from execution by Pocahontas, the daughter of an Indian chief.
The way the English and later the British founded their colonies was a hands-off approach and not in total the 1760s with the administration based in London attempt to tax its colonists.
This hands-off approach and virtual independence of American colonists made taxation practically impossible, which is why the United States, until the present day, has a solid anti-taxation culture.
This is why the United States did not have general taxation until the American Civil War, 1861 to 1865, due to the American political and social culture of taxation.
The financial requirements of the Civil War prompted the first American income tax in 1861.
At first, Congress placed a flat 3-percent tax on all incomes over $800 and later modified this principle to include a graduated tax.
Also, a central bank was not created in the USA until December 23, 1913, when President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law.
It stood as a classic example of compromise — a decentralised central bank that balanced the competing interests of private banks and populist sentiment.
American Revolutionary War
No Taxation Without Representation
Great Britain’s constitution and political make-up from the 18th century until the present day does not lend itself to federalism due to the nature and size of the population of England’s constituent nations, with England dominating the British Isles. Scotland in 1700 had a population of around 400,000, with England’s population of over 6 million.
This discrepancy in numbers continues until this day, and that’s why any attempt at federalism will lead to division and eventual breakup of the United Kingdom.
With the creation of dissolved assemblies in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland saw a growing separatism because Great Britain is not a union of nations but a union of parliaments.
(In September 1997, referendums were held in Scotland and Wales, and most voters chose to establish a Scottish Parliament and a National Assembly for Wales. In Northern Ireland, devolution was a key part of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement, supported by voters in a referendum in May 1998.)
With this knowledge, 13 colonies would not have been able to change how Britain functioned as a nation, which meant that independence may have been the only option.
This is also supported by the acceptance of American Independence in 1783 that England’s colonies and empire would eventually break up due to self-interest.
This argument in philosophy was argued by the Conservative philosopher Edmund Burke and Adam Smith, the author of The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, arguing the eventual death of the British Empire in the 18th century.
Both thinkers put forward self-interest in the governing ideology behind the American Revolution and for the future of the British Empire going in the same direction.
Nations’ quirks make them great and strange to outsiders, for the English is their parliamentary government, which keeps the union of the British Isles alive.
American Revolutionary War
The American Revolution and its Impact on American Culture
William Pitt, the Elder and former Prime Minister of Great Britain, stated, ‘ The Americans are England’s children, not our bastards.’ Unfortunately, the Americans rightly or wrongly felt they were treated as bastards, not legitimate children of England.
During the American War of Independence, William Howe, 5th Viscount Howe, marched on Philadelphia and defeated General George Washington at the Battle of Brandywine, which took place on 11 September 1777.
The conduct of British Regulars and German mercenaries in looting and living off the land turned the colonists against the British military, trying to crush the rebellion and traumatised the American public.
Also, neither side is certain who fired first during the battle of Concord and Lexington. Due to American regulators perceived to have fired first, it further traumatised the American political consciousness.
According to the American journalist and YouTube Star Johnny Harris, the United States will never get rid of its guns because Americans are frightened or paranoid about a strong central government.
This is why the Second and Third Amendments of the American Constitution are so fundamental to the American psyche.
(Third Amendment to the United States Constitution: No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the Owner’s consent, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.)
From the point of view of the 13 colonies in the American political culture, American citizens/English citizens were attacked and invaded by German mercenaries and English soldiers to protect their liberties, and instead, their property was destroyed.
And this is why the American Revolution and the American mind was a revolution in reality, looking at the facts and conventions of the time.
The American Congress copied and pasted the English constitution into the American one in 1789, and, according to the historian David Starkey, the Americans dressed up the English constitution with Roman decoration and French universalism.
Starkey also argues that the United States was so successful because it used English constitutional and English common law of the 18th century, making the American system not revolutionary.
This will compare and contrast the American Revolution of 1776 to the French Revolution of 1789.
The French had five republics and two empires within 200 years; in contrast, the United States had one brief civil war in the middle of the 19th century.
The songwriter and singer Joe Jonas and his wife Sophie Turner, the star in the hit TV series Game of Thrones that was aired between 2010 and 2019 where she portrayed the character Sansa Stark, have announced officially they are getting a divorce.
“A statement from the two of us. After four wonderful years of marriage, we have mutually decided to amicably end our marriage.”
“There are many speculative narratives as to why, but, truly, this is a united decision, and we sincerely hope that everyone can respect our wishes for privacy for us and our children.”
Speculation around the couple’s divorce states that Sophie Turner wishes to maintain a more independent lifestyle away from her child and husband, with Joe Jonas wishing to have a more domesticated and family-orientated lifestyle.
During the divorce proceedings, though it appears both couples are separating without too much hatred, this could change during the court proceedings and custody battle with Joe Jonas aiming for a 50–50 split with their two children co-parented equally.
Modern Relationships
Modern Relationships and Lessons That Can Be Taken From Their Split
This diversion over ethics and lifestyle may have led to divorce or a breakup, highly likely from the beginning of their relationship.
When starting a relationship, people try to look for emotional chemistry and not with the practicalities of different personalities.
Modern culture values chemistry over what would work in a relationship.
If you are a person who likes to have a more family-orientated lifestyle, enjoys going to bookstores or has a more home-orientated lifestyle, then a person the polar opposite of this would be ill-advised.
A person who is very different to us in terms of ethics and personality could lead to great friction below the sheets that do not translate to a life partner/husband/wife.
Modern Relationships
The Wisdom of Sadia Khan
After teaching Psychology to students across the UK and United Arab Emirates (UAE), Sadia Khan now specialises in explaining how childhood trauma influences adult relationships.
What this means regarding understanding relationships is that in our childhood, most likely unintentionally, our parents or primary caregivers do not give us the kind of love we want.
Children, on average, spend 35 minutes per day with their primary caregivers having quality time.
This means that children are not receiving the appropriate attention from their mothers or fathers.
As children, we depend on our father, especially the mother, for security, love, affection, and knowing they will be there for us.
With not having the appropriate affection and not being done maliciously by the primary caregiver, what this means for us in adulthood is we start to exhibit toxic behaviours or behaviours we have copied or adapted to try and fill an emotional need.
A successful relationship is meeting partners, husbands, wives, boyfriends or girlfriends’ emotional and physical needs, like telling somebody I love you and giving physical affection that doesn’t have to be primarily sexual.
Suppose anybody’s interested and would like to share their emotional needs in the comment section.
In that case, I like hugs, kisses and somebody telling me they love me due to my family not being emotionally or physically affectionate.
It is not borne out of hatred or malicious behaviour, merely how they were raised or received that kind of love and affection when they were children and do not lack it emotionally as adults.
A good analogy of these behaviours is a mother who tidies after her child and provides them with all consumer necessities.
Still, they do not show physical or emotional affection with words like I love you.
In adulthood, due to lacking that affection in childhood, we will need that from our partners to feel emotionally fulfilled.
Without this, there will be resentment due to both parties not getting the love they desire.
Communication, trust and acceptance are essential in a relationship; women should not be afraid to talk, and toxic male stereotypes should not hold men down.
If a woman believes you are a homosexual or not man enough because you have emotions, that relationship is not for you.
Modern Relationships
Birds of a Feather Flock Together
In modern relationships, we are starting relationships based on surface-level appearances and egos due to our societies, popular culture and social norms, and the fact that people now date online and not through friends and family.
This could very well be a reason for the 50% divorce rate due to people’s choices not based on morality and shared interests, as well as behaviours within relationships that were born out of how they witnessed their parent’s behaviours.
That’s why people meeting either through their parents, friends, or family was traditionally a better way to get a long-term partner due to the similar personality traits within friend groups and families.
As children, if we witness our parents or primary caregivers giving their spouse or partner the silent treatment, we adopt that psychology and behaviour as adults are spouses whose parents conducted their own behaviour the same way both couples will understand the psychology.
This is why similar behaviours are so significant due to a better understanding of why our loved ones behave the way they do in relationships, particularly in modern relationships.
Suppose our partners swear and conduct toxic behaviour, such as swearing during an argument.
In that case, we know that both parties understand what to expect and the reasons for that toxic behaviour.
To have a successful modern relationship, understanding why we do things and the emotional reasons for that behaviour is essential for the relationship to work long-term.
If you are a person who doesn’t like the silent treatment, sees it as counter-productive, and that the conversation is to be had to resolve the situation, if you did not experience this behaviour from your parents or primary caregivers, you won’t understand this behaviour in adulthood.
