The esoteric roots of feminism
Updated: Mar 19
The Semitic races conceptualise God as an entity outside and above us—as an oriental despot, as Marx would say. The Indo-Aryan races conceptualise God as an energy that flows through and round us—it pools itself into particular deities; hence Mithras means “friend” in Latin and that’s because Mithras can be like a friend beside you (on the battlefield, god of the legions) as opposed to a distant and unknowable potentate.
The situation is usually described as being akin to a bonfire, every spark is separate and yet every spark is also the fire; or it is akin to a waterfall—every drop is the waterfall but the waterfall is not reducible to God. This is what we mean when we say “God is within” or “I am God”. It’s the approach taken by Jung when he says, “Who looks outwards, dreams; who looks within, awakens.” The reason many Europeans are secular is because the divine is explained to them as a distant entity that they must submit to but who offers little to no evidence that he exists.
This is relevant to feminism because the oriental God rejects the feminine—the feminine is an absolute abomination, so the Semite rejects nature. You can tell Christianity is a European religion because it includes the cult of the Virgin Mary—and this is entirely alien to Judaism and Islam. The virgin birth is the most European aspect to Christianity—and it is only attested to by Luke; and Luke was the only European apostle (Greek)—the others were Semites. As a Greek, Luke (light, Apollo—Lucifer, Luci-bel) could appreciate the divine feminine—just think about the Artemis cult in Greece and how important it was. So he brought the feminine back into Christianity and, within Catholicism, Mary became almost co-equal with Christ (although Catholics always stress she is not divine, they venerate Mary—they don’t worship her).
So Europeans, compared to other races, have always been quite egalitarian in their relations between the sexes—the Germans even let women participate in a limited way in battle, and then we also have the Amazons. Feminism is a corruption of the natural European attitude that came about because the divine feminine, the goddess, was rejected. Feminism is basically an Anglo thing—it was invented by Mary Wollstonecraft and she was married to Godwin, the founder of modern anarchism (all very non-coercive, just like today—persuasion only for Godwin, so he had his “safety words” and “consent procedures”).
You can tell feminism is an English thing if you read Pride and Prejudice: all this, “Why, Miss Bennett, may I peradventure to suggest, if I may make so bold, a constitutional around the pear orchard whereby I will take the opportunity to adumbrate the general social situation in the district, with particular reference to your cousin, the estimable parson Matthews,” turns into feminism in the end; the extreme decorousness to “the ladies present” combined with the pride that your daughter could read (the Bible and edifying sermons, of course) eventually turned into modern feminism—which is essentially a decadent form of politeness where it is considered impolite to even mention that men and women are different, and essential that all women are highly educated.
This process was accelerated by Puritanism and the Enlightenment. Why? Because both attacked the cult of the Virgin Mary. The Puritans saw Mary as “non-canonical” and superstitious because Puritans are Christians in Christianity’s most Semitic form (no Luke, no light); and the Enlightenment attacked “the virgin birth” because it seemed totally irrational. This is why America is ground zero for feminism: it’s very influenced by Puritanism, the Enlightenment, the English, and the Jews. Feminism is a return of the repressed goddess: with the goddess removed that energy had to go somewhere and it returned in rationally expressed feminism as filtered through English politeness and Enlightenment rationalism—rather than a spiritual relation to nature and motherhood, it became a rational demand that women should be treated like men.
A further aspect on the American scene is that the pioneers found themselves in combat with a very hostile nature—Americans tend to orientate their homes inward, whereas Europeans like to set up their homes with a view. This is because in America “nature” is not a centuries-long tilled field (with an annual precession of the icon of the Virgin to ensure fertility) but rather a hostile antagonist filled with bears and things that want to kill you. I remember I stopped outside Yosemite once in the snow and I was struck by the immense scale of the landscape that filled everything up—there was no phone reception, nobody about for perhaps eighty miles. The hostility was palpable—and you barely get that sensation in Europe. Hence Americans want to draw inwards, away from Indians and bears—and into the safe arms of the strong father.
This also explains why Americans tend to destroy nature and the environment—their relationship towards nature is antagonistic. All the respect for the feminine goes into feminism—a process that turns women into men (safe). This is why the Jews do well in America, although not a natural pioneer people—they also see the feminine as something hostile, as an abomination, to be repressed (“they paved paradise, put up a parking lot”). Yet “the goddess” has to come back somehow—the energy doesn’t just terminate; and it comes back in feminism, in this angry vituperative revenge on men.
People sometimes note that many modern feminists have been Jewish women and adduce it was “created by the Jews”—not so; it’s just Jewish women, when they arrived in America, were exposed to secular Anglo feminism and embraced it with alacrity. Women always want to challenge men and Jewish women have been among the most historically repressed by men—so Jewish women absorbed Anglo feminism and used their scholarly abilities (high intelligence) to finesse it. The whole movement was their long-awaited “shit-test” against Jewish men—millennia of backed-up goddess energy finally found a channel thanks to the Anglos. Feminism’s kernel remains that Anglo politeness and the European view that while women are not equal to men they deserve quite some consideration, more so than in other races and religions.
Now, it is true that modern feminism sometimes speaks about “goddess energy” and a return to “the goddess”—and that is partly down to men like Joseph Campbell, who taught at a women’s college and who talked about the goddess positively. Yet this idea is all materialistic, it’s taken as a metaphor for respecting women in academia and professional life—not as an injunction to worship the Virgin Mary. That’s the problem—the goddess is still not respected and this adoption of “goddess energy” is just more of the return of the repressed, more feminism. Of course, the general scene is secular now—but even where it has residual religion it has no goddess.
That said, I do think European women understand better than men, in an intuitive way, that reality is about “energy flows” and not about some entity “out there” called “God” (who may or may not exist). Bottom line: to end feminism we must reincorporate the goddess in some form into European religious practice in order to release the pressure caused by the repression of the feminine in modernity.