Sex, Women, and Conservatism--I
By Dallas Claymore
Posted On March 29, 2005

Editor's Note: This is the first in a series of articles by Mr. Claymore previewing his upcoming book, "Sex, Women, and Conservatism."

“The world has changed.
I feel it in the water.
I feel it in the earth.
I smell it in the air.
Much that once was is now lost.” (i)

Although these lines from Galadriel are in reference to Tolkien’s Middle Earth as opposed to our modern age, they aptly describe the revolution in social relations that has transpired since the 1960s. Former ways of interacting are now obsolete. The old social mores and rules are gone forever. Nowhere can this be seen more vividly than in attachments between the sexes. Until only recently on the historical timeline, interconnections occurred with a clear understanding that men and women are different from one another, and that differences must be tolerated. With the transcendence of radical feminist thought, these same differences, at least when they are displayed by men, are now treated as signs of mental pathology.

Recent evidence substantiates long held beliefs concerning the presence of innate distinctions between the sexes. These disparities are not simply genital deep. Variations in behavior are more hard wired than the majority of the mainstream media ever suspected:

An international team of 250 scientists, conducting research first reported last Thursday in the British journal Nature, has completed a full map of the X or "female" chromosome which helps determine sex in human beings. The researchers found much greater genetic variation between the sexes than they had expected. All told, as the Los Angeles Times described the team's conclusions, "men and women may differ by as much as 2 percent of their entire genetic inheritance, greater than the hereditary gap between humankind and its closest relative--the chimpanzee." Huntington Willard of Duke University, one of the key researchers participating in this latest effort, told the Chicago Tribune that by now "any of us over the age of two realizes there are plenty of differences between males and females that are characteristic of the two sexes."(ii)

Regardless of what science is able to prove, many of us tainted with post-modern college educations side with the social constructivists regarding sexual variation. It is believed that the reason “male” and “female” are not synonyms is due to society imbuing us with norms of behavior to which we conform. The belief that men and women could be interchangeable, were it not for the stereotyping of the community, is something commonly believed among progressives, but, most alarmingly, supported by large segments of the general population.

Many readers undoubtedly matured in the setting of full equality for men and women, but this has not prevented men from being unconsciously, and sometimes consciously, guided by the standards of chivalry when interacting with women. For those who grew up in the seventies and eighties, it was a time when boys were expected to follow both the mandates of chivalry and equality. The result often was confusion. It is bewildering for a young man to make sense of how one should behave towards women when every public authority proclaims “Men and Women Are Equal” while these same public authorities rig the laws to favor women over men via affirmative action hiring practices, the creation of a sexual harassment industry, and the unjust treatment of husbands and fathers in divorce and custody courts. It is constantly alleged that men are favored in our society yet the government has taken every measure to ensure that the exact opposite is the case. As conservatives, it is hard to know if there is anything about the current juridical practices and statutes that anybody would wish to preserve, but the only thing that’s for certain is that none of these laws and preferences will be changing anytime soon.

In this new millennium, we are immovably wedded to much of the irrationality that has posed as conventional wisdom for the last forty years. As much as we’d like to make fun of the mumbo jumbo that emits from relationship “experts” and talk show hosts on our boob tubes, we still must vicariously deal with all the soot they’ve blown into the public’s lungs every time that we greet an unfamiliar person.

The current situation can be depressing and disheartening, but my message to the reader is strictly one of hope. Certainly the culture has become toxic but that does not preclude us from exploiting it to our own advantage. We can, and must, excel in an arena that is biased against both men and conservatives. Intellectually retaliating against those who attack us is certainly worthwhile, but many men regard it as unmanly to stand up for their rights before women or anybody else who derides us on the basis of gender alone. However, in this book, while I will be refuting many a lie in the pages that follow, the goal is for conservative men to resign themselves to the fact that, while this zeitgeist is not one that we created or necessarily approve of, it is one to which we can adapt. Man can always profit from circumstances to which he did not wish to be placed. Living in the past is counter-productive. We must live and conquer in the present–regardless of how we wish things to be. It is our duty.

In light of this, in the chapters that follow, I will identify and analyze many of the tank traps blocking our advancement and suggest the most efficient and least costly ways of getting around them. I certainly am not King Solomon, but I do regard some of my ideas as being valuable and applicable to others.

There are a million “how to” books out there giving advice concerning women and sex. Sex, Women, and Conservatism is not one of those books. What follows is a strategic discussion to be used in any way the reader likes. All I am attempting to do in these pages is toss a ball into the air and send a Methedrine serve across the net. If it comes back at 500 mile per hour and disembowels me, that’s my problem and not yours.

A quotation from a character in The Lord of the Rings was cited above. In keeping with my mentioning of Middle Earth, I would like to identify your narrator as being far more closely related to the character of Bilbo Baggins than Aragorn. There is nothing inherently noble or royal about me. I am simply one who has seen and observed a large sample of behavior and wish to make use of my experiences for the purposes of analysis. I am just an average guy who had the wits to be more observant than my peers. I certainly was never a Don Juan and never will be.

On the subject of Casanovas, I think you will find that most of them are not the type of men who can teach one much of anything. Their skills simply are not transferable. If you asked them what the secrets of their success were, chances are they would not be able to tell you. As for me, the only areas of life in which I outshined others were the result of study and effort. Few achievements came naturally, but this is why I am able to convey worthwhile advice. The fact that I am not gorgeous, rich, or connected in any way to famous people is perhaps the reason why I have something legitimate to say about this topic. The mediocrities of my birth necessitated a need for me to pay attention.

It’s no accident that Bill Belichick and Bill Parcells were not outstanding football players but turned out to be tremendous coaches because natural phenoms rarely have much of an understanding as to how challenging it is for the average person to perform their craft. My friend Duke is an example of this. He’s one of the rare men I’ve known who qualifies as a lady’s man. If you were to ask him how and why he has done what he’s done, he would undoubtedly respond by sheepishly shrugging his shoulders. He honestly doesn’t know why life has been so easy for him. Only when one begins from the bottom or middle can one have any information with which to impart others.

One must face the realization that whenever one attempts to write a book that is intended to speak chiefly to a male audience that it will, in turn, be read quite often by women. Such an eventuality tells us much about why works like this one need to be written in contemporary America as political correctness has made the truth contraband. Yet, even though this will have female readers, the result will not be the same as in the case of a popular “How To” book boasting of it routinely being bought by women for their men as a way for them to better understand their partners. I don’t think any women will be buying this this one for their men anytime soon or perhaps ever. There’s too much ambiguity in what follows for most women to be completely comfortable with it.

Indeed, even though this is about as mild a tone that I am capable of adopting, I have already said some things that will be construed as harsh by many. Why? Simply because chimpanzees and genetic inheritance are not things we’re bred to acknowledge in the post-millennial United States. Yet, regardless of what our anti-intellectual PA systems convey, there is no reason that a subset of men cannot reset the paradigms within ourselves. In the words of Rosie the Riveter: “We can do it.”

Speaking of Rosie, let me emphasize in bold type an important bylaw that we must always remember; Women are not our enemy. Many a modern woman has been just as lied to and as manipulated by the oppression mongers as any man has ever been. Political correctness is absolutely evil and it’s misconceptions poison everybody. The freshman co-ed in the Womyn’s Studies ovular has been just as fooled as the manicured Metrosexual with Prada shoes at an Indigo Girls concert. They’re both unwittingly part of an experimental grouping within a sick study created by our social engineers.

Speaking of women, I should let you know that there is no misogyny in the pages which follow. Yet, many would try to dye me with that tired misogynistic pen due to my central theme which happens to be,

Women do not have the same interests as men. We are different creatures. We have our own unique desires which should be pursued whenever possible.

I made mention of this in something I wrote over the summer. A woman responded to me that my stance was selfish. I countered, “Shouldn’t I be selfish about my own interests?” I can’t remember whether she called me a name and then ignored my statement or simply ignored my statement. Either way, it’s a profoundly sad fact about our world that a man is not free to identify his own needs and strive for their realization. Just as nations must safeguard their own interests, we as men must identify ours and attempt to protect them when we can. Should we subjugate our needs to another’s there better be a DGR (damn good reason) for us to do so.

The other day I watched a friend’s dog shred a doll that she had just purchased for him. He meticulously tore the insides from it and then deposited them in various places about her condo. The dog’s actions provide us with a very good analogy for the role of men in society. We so oftentimes are rag dolls to be thrown about and to be turned to fluff. I honestly do not believe that becoming compost it the reason that we were placed on this earth. Our lives were not given to us in order for them to be mindlessly sacrificed. We should be grateful for what we have been given. Taking punches and being discriminated against is not an option. We should not go quietly into that good night. We must defend ourselves. We must stand and fight. If we don’t defend ourselves nobody else will.

One more note should be made on the subject of men. “Men” are not a monolithic entity. I readily admit that all men do not think as I do. There’s no question about it. Some of my brothers waste their entire pay checks and family fortunes on dominatrixes, drugs, toys for their cats, shares in Portuguese gerbil farms, or, most deplorably, the greatest hits of the Bee Gees.

Just last month, I met a guy at the gym who sniffed, after a comment I made about a girl on the Stairmaster, that he “doesn’t look at women in the gym.” I gazed at him with the same bewilderment that I would if I encountered an Ocelot walking down the middle of Madison Street. Why would anyone want to avoid staring at girls in the gym? I could not possibly guess what the answer would be. Yet, the fellow was undeniably a man and he had a completely different perspective that your narrator. That’s perfectly acceptable because I do not profess to speak for all men, but they’ll certainly be more than a couple who have had many of the same experiences as I and can profit from my assessment of the situation.

Lastly, there is the topic of “conservatism” which is part of my title and thank God for that. For one thing, it alerts readers that I may just reference God once in awhile in these pages and will not do so in a mystified or angry manner. For my enemies, this will be a goddessend, as it will allow them to paint me as a religious fanatic which fits in perfectly with their pre-primer understanding of those who are not politically correct.

Yet, it is conservatives alone who can most completely, although admittedly not most effectively, refute cultural Marxism on the whole. Many leftists nowadays think that the other side is evil simply because they’re on the other side which is instructive for us as it decreases the need to appease them. I don’t know why they regard America in 2005 as being a patriarchy rife with discrimination, rape, and Rophynol vending machines, but I do know that their views are false and need to be rebutted. Understanding them is not something that I’ll attempt to do in these pages. The causation for their feelings of anger, depression, and guilt would make for a wonderful book but it cannot be this one. (iii)

As conservatives, we hear phrases like “the personal is political” and express amazement that anyone could be that confused about the world. We are able to easily separate what is good for the country from what is good for ourselves. Many on the other side cannot or refuse to do this. They are stuck having to run errands with Marxists and feministas babbling at them from the back seat. Luckily, we are free from such parasitic passengers. When we marvel at the shape of a woman’s derriere we understand that our appreciation is reflective of our own biological programming and not an attempt to entrench a fictional patriarchy. Finding women attractive is not a political statement. It’s a personal statement and, oftentimes, what is attractive to one of us is not attractive to another. We can live with that To us, the purely personal can remain personal. For this reason, this book could be appreciated by many men who are not conservative in the political sense but are old school types who revel in just being the way they are and despise having to pretend to be something they are not. That is why I ask all of you to join me in this impromptu tour of our milieu and insist that the rest of society tolerate our diversity.

---

i. Galadriel, from the introduction of Peter Jackson’s film, The Fellowship of the Ring.
ii. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/373erfbt.asp?pg=2
iii. I would like to recommend an excellent article to you by Dr. John J. Ray on this subject: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=1226

---

Dallas Claymore is a writer from Wisconsin writing a book on sex, women, and conservatism. He can be reached at mrclaymoreusa@yahoo.com.

E-mail this article to a friend.