The Bathsheba Protocol: considering more insidious explanations behind the "progressive" push to force women into the labor market.

Trigger warning: The following post is likely to offend some sensibilities, particularly under those under the sway of the liberal ideologies that have flourished in society in the recent decades, and attempt to impose their arrogant sophistries as universal truths, in the face of millennia of aggregated human wisdom.  

I apologize for any hurt feelings. I do. I have no desire whatsoever to cause any pain to any sentient being unless absolutely necessary. 

However, the surgeon must proceed to apply the calculated violence that it is necessary to inflict on the subject, ultimately for it's own betterment. Pain, as all things, must be brought into balance. 

Sometimes, we are not lucky to find ourselves able to avail the facilities of a well equipped surgeon. 

When we are banished to the wilderness, we have no choice sometimes but to sew our own flesh with whatever thorns and sinew my merciful Rabb is willing to provide us, wherever he finds us and wherever we find Him. 

________________________

It seems my recent post have agitated the algorithm and the people behind it and around it and 'neath it's sway. I can see the ripples come crashing back on my feed. 

"And if you gaze long enough into the abyss, the abyss shall gaze back into you." Fredrich Nietzsche.

________________________

Let us begin with a radical proposition:

Men and women have distinct biological differences, that optimize them for roles specialized to their basic essence as distinct beings, to the extent that men and women are slight variations on the overall biological and psychological constitution of the human species. 

My most benevolent Rabb shares His wisdom with us in the Quran , 

"...Women have rights similar to those of men equitably, although men have a degree ˹of responsibility˺ above them. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise." - Surah Baqarah v. 228 (in part):

The difference is one of degree; an approximate parity is first affirmed before the reality of the distinction is acknowledged. Never doubt that my Most Merciful Master is gracious beyond measure, more than us his ungrateful creation could ever dare to hope for. 

Recall my Master's promise, and be assured that his light is bountiful and always awaiting the gaze of the righteous:

" We will show them Our signs in the universe and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that this ˹Quran˺ is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is a Witness over all things?" Surah Fussilat v. 53. 

And sure enough, we see signs that bear out Allah's instruction that there is a distinction between men and women, and a degree of authority and responsibility has been granted to the former as both his birthright and his burden, his blessing and his obligation. 

Off the bat, men are physically larger, with significantly more muscle mass. Don't irritate me with your mewling about "myeh myeh thats just on average some women can be more physically capable and stronger than the average". Be quiet and sit down, before I start swearing at you. I've had it with your bullsh**. 

What are the implications of physical strength, beyond physical strength itself? For all specialized hardware requires specialized software in order to function at optimal level. 

To answer this, it seems to me we must first examine what necessitates physical strength to begin with, what functions physical strength serves and what benefits it confers upon biological creation. 

I can see only two primary advantages to physical strength: An enhanced capacity for physical labor and physical violence. 

The later is what makes Man the most dangerous of all animals, and the most lethal when he assumes a predatory mode. For all the most terrifying tools that humans have at their disposal, were forged and wielded, for the most part, by Man. 

He invented these tools using the gifts my Magnificent Master granted to the children of Adam and none other. In lieu of claws or fangs or venom:  Mind and Hand and Will. 

Gifts that were wrapped and distributed slightly differently between the two sides of human biological reality. 

For the Mind of Man perceives what none other can, even as it's own perceptions are limited to certain domains. 

The Hand of Man, with it's fancy opposable thumbs unlike anything else in nature, is living, visible proof that humanity is blessed in distinction and serves a unique purpose in the glorious tapestry of Creation. The single little tiny bit of flesh and bone that enables the use of every single implement that has enabled us to dominate the natural order as no other. 

And Man's Will sets him apart from the Angels themselves, who have no choice but to be eternally engaged in endless worship of my Glorious Master. 

It is obvious to anybody with eyes to see, that nature intended a division of labor between the sexes. 

One is meant to nurture, to provide care and comfort. The other is meant to provide and protect. 

This is the Will of my All Mighty Master, who ordains the order of existence, in this world and all others, for He is "Rab ul Alimeen", in the plural, for there are other worlds than this. 

This is is the general pattern between the sexes in nature, especially among mammals. With some exceptions whose existence seem to be aberrations intended only to throw off the liberal progressive degenerates and their insistence on returning human beings to the behavior of animals. Red herrings my fearsome Master wove into in the tapestry of creation to misguide the idolizers of lust to their own destruction. The exceptions that prove the rule, as no other exceptions can. The craftsmanship of my Master is exquisite and beyond compare. 

The females are assigned the most honorable duty of bearing life and bringing it into the world and nourishing it from their own bodies. 

It is somewhat counter-intuitive, if you think about it, for females to be physically weaker than men. Added body mass would make gestation less difficult on the body, wouldnt it? Certainly make it easier to hunt prey or even gather more effectively, and most definitely serve as an advantage in fending off predators that threaten your offspring.

Perhaps motherhood was such a tremendous responsibility, my Most Merciful Master saw it fit to delegate the tasks for which brute physical strength is necessary, to men, whose bodies are more disposable and easier to replace and substitute than those of women, who have only one womb in which to grow the seed of man, whereas a man may plant that seed in more than one field at time. 

This is the starting point of the profoundly social existence of the children of Adam; more social than that of any other living being. So social that on occasion, men are willing to shed blood and die for those societies. All measurements of glory are expressed in reference to the recognition of the collective in some way or the other. 

All we have done, all we have achieved, good or evil, is built on top of this foundation. This desire for immortality that drives us to pursue earthly works despite the, conscious or unconscious, knowledge of their futility and inevitable annihilation in the grand scheme of the cosmos. 

Like Faulkner said, the author seeks immortality by attempting to leave behind a testament that survives his death and persists beyond his life. 

And every man strives to be the author of his own destiny. 

Every pen, every blade, every hammer man has lifted, he has done so in the attempt to carve his name into the fabric of existence, because something inside him demands that his lived experience should not be bookended by nothingness. 

Man must serve, even if it be his own lust. Be wary, oh Sons of Adam, whom you choose as your master. 

Man was built for service, as woman was built for care. To act out of alignment with these teleological inevitabilities is to court disorder and catastrophe. 

This is where the liberal order comes in. 

________________________

For thousands upon thousand of years, human societies across geographic, linguistic, cultural and religious contexts and operated under this basic paradigm: Men work and fight and women take care of the house and children. 

Maybe they lend a hand with the livestock or the harvest. Maybe they spend their spare time weaving goods for home and market to make some extra money and help with the household finances. Most certainly, as much surplus time should be devoted to worship and learning by both genders and the children. 

In times of crisis, the role of women may expand. The early days of Islam has examples of this aplenty. The participation of western women in their native economies only began and was enabled by the necessity to rapidly assemble large numbers of planes and tanks and guns in World War 2, as the men had to go fight and die bleeding in the ditches and rice paddies. 

But this is not meant to be the default configuration for social organization. Just as polygamy is really more intended for situations where lets say you had to slaughter all the fighting age males of an entire tribe, leaving behind a population of women in need of homes and warriors who deserve to be rewarded and the strength of their seed encouraged to multiply. 

For a while even after World War 2, western society settled back into this ancient and abiding pattern. 

Until the boomers came of age. 

Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and you have to credit the boomers for at least two things: ending legal regimes of racial discrimination and the music they made. 

But here is something a lot of people do not know:

The original version of the bill that became Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the employment-discrimination section) banned employment discrimination on race, color, religion, and national origin only. 

Then, on February 8, 1964, Representative Howard W. Smith of Virginia — a committed segregationist and opponent of the bill — offered an amendment to add "sex" to the text. The amendment passed by a vote of 168 to 133, and President Johnson signed the full Act on July 2, 1964.

Smith wasn't a minor figure. He chaired the House Rules Committee and had used that post to stall the bill, releasing it only under pressure from a discharge petition. The National Archives' own account states the sex provision was only added as an amendment in an attempt to prevent the bill's passage, and that although Smith had backed an ERA for years, his amendment to the civil rights bill was likely intended to kill the measure.

The maneuver is widely described as a "poison pill" — a provision so onerous it would cause the whole bill to fail. The strategic logic was partly to split support in the Senate. 

In case you have to quite gathered all the ramifications of the preceding facts, let me attempt to lay them out for you:

They only gave women employment and hiring selection protections because they knew many people who even supported racial desegregation would be deeply concerned at such a radical upset of the natural order. 

In their petulant racial narcissism and arrogance, Southern whites only insisted on a prohibition on gender based selection by society and the marketplace, to try to defecate on the notion that human beings should be treated equally under the law as human beings in their natural and universal forms, and that race was the least consequential of biological differences in the species. 

I don't know if they intended the scenario that eventually unfolded and the cans of worms they were opening. Combined with a lot of the sexual liberation stuff being spewed by activist Supreme Court judges that would never have passed the democratic approval of a sensible public, these "rights" given to women were eventually exploited to the hilt by the more voracious elements of the capitalists, the  Epstein class in all it's sociopathic glory.  

________________________

In my experience, and I must admit I have only my own experience to offer as proof of this at the moment, the single biggest difference between men and women psychologically, is that women tend to be more anxious than men; more easily afraid. 

This goes back to what we spoke about with respect to the distinct psychological patterns that must underlie the very tangible differences in biology between men and women. 

This makes perfect sense. They are more vulnerable on account of their physiology, less able to defend themselves against threats to their person, and may have young children that rely on them for care and require their attention. 

That fundamental difference manifests at the behavioral level as contrasting patterns of risk-aversion vs risk-management. 

Men must be willing to venture into the unknown to procure provision or to mitigate threats. They are hardwired to remain steadier and more in control under conditions of stress and danger. Their judgement and reason is less prone to degradation by cortisol spikes, which are less frequent since their nervous systems operate on a heightened sense of safety knowing that it's operator is capable of rapid departure or mortal violence, as the situation may call for. 

Women tend to be more sensitive to material deprivation, actual or hypothetical. It is their instinct to ensure that enough food is available to feed not just themselves but those in their care. They are particularly sensitive to the presence or possibility of risk or danger, and are ever vigilant for threats thereto. They tend to constrain their sphere of action to the least possible extent, to minimize the surface area of contact with potential adverse situations. 

This makes them more easy to intimidate with the prospect of unemployment, if they have no other means of providing for themselves. Again, under optimal conditions, this would be a husband. 

It makes it easier to scare them into working overtime and holidays. It makes them easier to be forced to parrot the company line. It makes them easier to bully into compliance with a thousand injustices the hateful parasites who see us as worthless livestock inflict on us as we labor to make their capital productive. 

It makes them easier to punish with starvation if they express thoughts or opinions the Epstein class does not like, even outside of work. They are more susceptible to extortion and blackmail. 

It is my belief that corporate hiring policy began to favor women not just to look like they were compassionate and all about equal opportunity, but also because women are easier to control and manipulate. 

The Epstein parasites who control the wealth and all the non-physical labor want to separate the women from the men to make them more accessible and easier to prey on. 

They assign higher paying administrative and office positions to women, even while paying them less than men for the same role; another reason they like hiring women.

They are easier to manage as units of labor. They are easier to victimize to either overwork or underpay or maybe abuse sexually, another reason they want to coral the women in the air conditioned offices and away from the men. 

They need to feed the intern-to-side-piece pipeline and maybe even facilitate the recruitment of women as fungible sexual assets on the various online platforms they built to exploit and market the female form back to the public.

They need to convince them to go sleep with the degenerate, swine-like Gulf oil sheikh to get that account or that contract, and generally entertain him when he comes to town or demands her services. The women in Epstein's stable were not window dressing; they were critical assets.  

They know if more men were around to see these arrogant scum abuse their employees like slaves, they would get their filthy faces caved in so they send the boys outside to die.

Women are easier to exploit because they tend to operate from a place of insecurity. 

Men enforce boundaries. They don't let bosses dictate unfair conditions. 

Men, were built to die. 

We can look death in the eye in a way a woman never will. 

That's why the Epstein class spent decades forcing men out of the most lucrative and high paying labor, dis-incentivizing men's pursuit of education by giving women unequal educational and financial opportunities through not just DEI, but a galaxy of non-profits and trusts and scholarships and funds, all watered by dark pools of Soros-scented corporate cash. 

It is their way of actively undermining the strength of our communities by financially castrating men and putting the revenue streams in the hands of the women. 

It is an extension of how they structured welfare to encourage single motherhood; they really, really want to try to get the men out of the picture and leave the women dependent on their economic superstructures. 

They also deny us professional jobs because they need our bodies to drive trucks and dig ditches and fight and die in the wars of oppressions waged by the parasitic Epstein class and their lackeys and clients. 

All the better for them for us to die and leave more women for their taking.