Witches & Anti-Theists – Rebelling Against The Father – Illimitable Men

Short Essays

# Witches & Anti-Theists – Rebelling Against The Father

May 15, 2024by IM

“Resentment, born of weakness, harms no one more than the weak person himself.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

Because it is a woman’s nature to seek to please the most powerful man in her life in return for his protection and validation, when she is possessed by resentment and thereby in a state of aberrant disgust, she wishes for inversion, and she wishes for inversion (that which is unholy and in opposition to divinity and thereby beauty) by toppling, conquering and overcoming that which she should be subject to (man). This in itself is a microcosm of the metaphysical within the individualised negative feminine (which in itself is a byproduct of the immature), given how the lifelong rebelliousness widespread within the growing multitude of mentally ill-adjusted and aberrant women is a developmental stage typical of teenagers, and thereby normal and healthy within them, but when exhibited by otherwise adult women in their 20’s, 30’s and beyond leads to antisocial and narcissistic behaviour that gives rise to the misanthropic, life negating, civilizationally sabotaging witch archetype.

Be that as it may, this is why women are fascinated with men they hate. Because although they hate these men ideologically and disagree with them in principle (in mind), he actually complements her and appeals to her basest needs and desires in spirit. In a way she can’t quite articulate (and doesn’t even want to verbalise or explicitly recognise) there’s “just something about him” – his masculinity is a magnet for her attention, even if she’s going to go about giving him that attention negatively.

She disagrees with him in mind, because symbolically and representatively he represents to her a simulacrum of God, or “the father” aka the archetypical masculine authority at the hierarchical apex of which her life should revolve around (like the Earth around the sun), which she has owing to one traumatic reason or another, come to spiritually delegitimise and reject and thus actively rebel against. She as such defines herself by what she is in rebellion to, like an anti-theist (who often incorrectly refers to themselves as merely atheist) defines themselves in relation to what they are in rebellion against – which is why in much the same way a “militant atheist” (correct label: anti-theist) seeks out the religious to mock and ridicule whilst smugly scoffing and giving themselves pats on the back for demonstrating what they believe to be superior logic to you, an ideologically feminist woman will do exactly the same in her pursuit of the most concentrated source of masculinity she can find. Find it, challenge it, criticise it, then ridicule it in her failure to empathise with it or appreciate its reason for being.

They seek out what they hate rather than avoid it out of disgust, because they are not actually disgusted by it, but negatively attached to it – which means to seek it out and lord over it is to reaffirm and thereby strengthen their aberrant identity. And in their own perverse way, they actually love it and hate themselves for loving it because they do not value it intellectually – and yet all the same it effects them in such a way that they want to be proximal to it despite their rejection of it. It’s like there is a separation between mind and spirit, and whilst the mind says no, the spirit says yes – these women are conflicted in that two fundamental aspects (mind and spirit) are out of alignment, but resentment feels more empowering to them than vulnerability, and therefore they lean towards the negative out of egoism because of the tainted comfort it brings.

It is for this reason a growing number of women who do not like or agree with my writings have reached out over the years to inform me they have read all my writing despite disagreeing with it, whilst I on the other hand would not have even the slightest remote interest in entertaining their unresolved psychological hangups for even 10 minutes – which is effectively what the corpus of their opinions amounts to – immodesty, conceit, a lack of proper training n the form of paternal nurturing, and unresolved resentments which have calcified into a worldview posing as progressivism and intellectual enquiry.

These women always have a point to prove and a bone to pick – and yet they have so little useful to say. Each one of them thinks they are the first to “challenge” me, and yet is just another in a long line who tried and failed. They just want a sounding board and a punchbag to throw all their contentions at, and yet no answer is the right answer including the right answer – which is the truth as best as I know it. They are insatiable and intolerable – because they are spiritually sick, and I have absolutely zero intention of trying to save any of them, because I no longer possess the required foolishness that can only be found in the naivete of youth to believe such a thing is even desirable, let alone possible.

I do not hate these women; I simply do not wish to suffer them. If they can save themselves with the assistance of my writings, I am genuinely very happy for them. Conceptually, I like the idea of intelligent women also being wise women and thus becoming respectable women because they have a sound head on their shoulders and are assets to their families. But I am not going to bother myself with personally aiding in the endeavour. They’re not my women, so they’re not my problem. And given these aberrant women are often outlier women of at least above average intelligence (to be fair, to enjoy my writing at its best, you have to be), it goes to show cognitive ability is no immunity from spiritual sickness – that is to say, if she is resentful and disordered, her elevated cognition is more likely to help her justify her feelings of resentment rather than actually keep them in check – a most unfortunate realisation I most certainly wish was untrue, but alas.

This is why the relationship between a woman and her father is such a crucial point of evaluation, because it indicates to you how overall spiritually healthy she is. A woman who does not merely like but more importantly both respects and thusly idolises and appreciates her father is going to be the least mentally aberrant, because she is not in a state of spiritual sickness. She may have some foolish ideas, because she is a woman, women are emotional and nobody is perfect – but she doesn’t have a fundamental point to prove, a bone to pick, a hierarchy to topple or a “I’ll show them” attitude, and therefore she is as ripe as can be for cooperation in union with a man. She is not against God, natural law, order, hierarchy, authority or life itself and nor is she a seething misandrist or misanthrope. It is no coincidence that feminist minded women are so fanatically obsessed with and in support of abortion despite it being a largely non-issue within our time – because those in rebellion against God also want the ability to give him the middle finger by rejecting his gifts (the divine spark) whimsically and without accountability, but nonetheless, I digress.

The connection between feminist minded women and anti-theists (people who think religion is dumb and hate on it) is that both are in rebellion, in the same way the archangel Lucifer rebelled against God before he became Satan. The anti-theists (the militant atheists) are in rebellion against their parents and by extension God due to an “abusive” religious upbringing (where the parents actions are conflated with the teachings of God, and therefore both are rejected) as much as the feminist is in rebellion against her father either because he was excessive in his discipline, failed to protect her out of negligence, or failed to protect her out of passivity – the latter point meaning he was too weak to be worthy of her respect, and therefore failed to protect her from her own hubris and foolishness as well as the subversive socially perpetuated memetic pathogens like feminism, which is in practice merely nothing more than a rejection if not an outright inversion of the natural order by failing to recognise the inherent authority of man, whilst advocating for female supremacy under the disingenuous guise of equality.

This is why there is a mismatch between these women’s sexuality (her true self, her desire to be conquered and to surrender to a man and take pleasure in this) and her sociality (her socialised self, her desire to compete with, conquer and humiliate the man) – her true nature is in alignment with God, whilst her affliction is in rebellion of it, and so for as long as these contradictory aspects reside in her unreconciled, she remains frustrated and unable to become her most loving, elegant, wise and feminine self. She is unable to bloom, because she is in all her ugliness constrained by weeds which ooze venom, which spiritually takes on the form of resentment for those who have hurt her (usually her parents or an ex lover if not both), and the subsequent arrogance it births in demonstrating she is superior to them. No longer does she simply accept herself as a woman, and so she is less of a woman – she is warlike, and now defines herself in relation to how well she can conquer a man and demonstrate her superiority over him through her exploitation of him. These are, fundamentally, bad women, daughters of Lilith who will hurt men that are not ruthless or shrewd enough to protect themselves from them, like sailors following a Siren’s song they are easily duped into their doom.

And so if God is the guiding light for man, then man is the guiding light for woman. So when you think that guiding light is a misleading light, you come to embody the darkness in defiance of it, falsely believing that what you rally against is evil, when you are in fact doing the bidding of evil. Your lack of wisdom makes you the devil’s plaything, your noble but corrupted intentions insufficient to make you virtuous – you try to topple God, you try to topple patriarchy – you attack all the core pillars of society necessary for your people to flourish – and you do this from a place of misanthropy and arrogance whilst offering an inferior alternative that fails to produce the same outcomes or stability that these things can and have, whilst hyperfocusing on their imperfections as evidence of their unviability.

This is why women who have rejected God often come to reject men, and women who have rejected men often come to reject God, because to them both represent the same thing – authority. Now just as she may rationalise God is superior to man and therefore the only one worth following, unlike man, in doing so she fails to adhere to God’s edict to follow man, and therefore operates in defiance of his express teachings despite claiming reverence for him. Failing that, she may go the other way entirely and lose faith in God due to the suffering she has experienced at the hands of men, reasoning that she wouldn’t have had to hurt the way she did if he was real, and therefore because she did that he can’t be.

Nonetheless, the pattern remains. Those who reject the natural order are in rebellion against it, and show the associated psychic maladies as a result of it. Whether it’s rebelling against God or your own father, the outcome is the same – resentment, frustration, arrogance, and a negative, distrustful cognitive modality that seeks to ridicule what has been rejected in affirmation of the self whilst sabotaging the moral and the good out of a misplaced sense of justice. It is a most heinous spiritual affliction and an all too often defining quality of our time, and so the more people we can rid of it, the better.

You can support IM's work by purchasing his audiobook or subscribing on Patreon

### Share:

- Twitter
- Facebook
- Reddit
- WhatsApp
- Telegram

### Like this:

Loading...

## 26 thoughts on “Witches & Anti-Theists – Rebelling Against The Father”

1. I agree with a lot of your writing, but I must say that your viewpoint on atheists as a whole is something I don’t agree with. To each their own. I’m an atheist, and I don’t hate on religion, I just simply do not subscribe to it. There is no rebellion involved because I do not believe in the presence of a higher power.

   Loading...
   Reply

   1. You misunderstood the piece if you think I have a problem with atheists. My observations are not about atheists as a group, but about anti-theists, who inaccurately describe themselves as atheists. If you don’t hate on religion despite not following one, and don’t reject religion because you reject your parents, then you are not an anti-theist, you are an atheist. There is a reason the title of the article says “Anti-Theist” and not “Atheist” – I was very particular and specific with my use of terms as to try to minimise the likelihood of these sorts of misunderstandings, but alas.

      Loading...
      Reply

      1. That is fair, Warren jumped the gun on that one.

         Loading...
         Reply

   2. Atheists are generally anti-theists. Even Molyneaux admits as an atheist he would rather live round Christians. There are no known societies where atheism rules and tyranny is not the result.

      Loading...
      Reply

      1. No atheists are not generally anti theists, you simply tell yourself that to justify your dislike for them. You’re presumably referring to communist societies which were atheist officially out of ideological reasons seeing religion as a rival ideology to be eliminated and not out of any interest in theological debate or moral concern over how religious societies conduct themselves the way your average atheist who simply disagrees with religion may do so. Ironically atheists have held power in religious societies since time began, Donald Trump being a good recent example, they’ve just been quiet about it.

         Loading...
         Reply

2. Extremely well written piece of work! Thank you, IM!

   Loading...
   Reply

   1. Thank you for reading it.

      Loading...
      Reply

      1. IM, I have one question regarding the feminine spirit of some women.

         What are your views on a single mom who initiated divorce from an verbally/physically abusive weak man, but who is very feminine, believes in God (and also goes to church with her son/daughter), admires and loves her father/parents and really desires and want to submit to a strong masculine man with whom she genuinely wants a beautiful and healthy traditional family? I might add she doesn’t want any conflict in general, she is anti-feminism, loves children, wants alot of children and really believes in traditional gender roles.

         Please answer

         Loading...
         Reply

         1. It sounds like you want to do it, but I wouldn’t recommend it. You will have no authority over her children, yet will be expected to financially provide for them – and the real father/ex is a woman beater (you said he’s physically abusive) which means she, like a typical woman, is attracted to dark triad and/or otherwise violent men as evidenced by her mate choice which means she’s not as special as you’re implying (you clearly like her a lot). It’s not your job to save her, or her kids. Find the childless version of her.

            Loading...
            Reply

3. In summary, the more stable in your masculinity you become, the more challenged you’ll be by women who are craving your protection and presence.

   Since they cannot have it, they will simply try to dump their frustration onto you (if you let them).

   Loading...
   Reply

4. Hardest hitting line:

   “you attack all the core pillars of society necessary for your people to flourish – and you do this from a place of misanthropy and arrogance whilst offering an inferior alternative that fails to produce the same outcomes or stability that these things can and have, whilst hyperfocusing on their imperfections as evidence of their unviability.”

   Loading...
   Reply

5. even though I felt background negativity in this essasy, it doesn’t make it not true. Good piece, thanks for writing

   Loading...
   Reply

6. Cogent & packs a punch as usual. Where’s the image from? AI? Thanks for sharing.

   Loading...
   Reply

   1. Thank you. And yes, I make all my essay images with Midjourney now.

      Loading...
      Reply

7. Excellent piece

   Loading...
   Reply

   1. Further, I strongly correlates with my experience with my ex-wife who fought with me at every turn. Her father was completely brow-beaten into submission by his alcoholic stay-at-home house wife and thus she turned strongly feminine. Thank you for helping me understand what happened in my 37 year relationship (we met at 15 and I was her ‘out’).

      Loading...
      Reply

      1. An interesting, but highly outlier occurrence – where the rebellion leads to virtue because what it is rebelling against is not what is right and proper, but through the bad luck of being born to such a terrible parent – what is wrong – and therefore brings about order in defiance of chaos rather than inversion in defiance of order (as is typical). It also bears stating that rebellion doesn’t always occur in these scenarios – meaning people don’t always use their toxic parent(s) as anti-role models, but instead rather tragically become them – the stuff of intergenerational curses.

         Loading...
         Reply

8. A woman’s natural state is rebellion. It started with Eve. And hasn’t stopped since. The sooner you men figure that out, the better for her and you. Political leaders have known this forever.

   Loading...
   Reply

9. Thank you for the ideas and coherence. What would you suggest please for a man that doesn’t have access in the beginning to know her family or refined details, to look in her behaviour when he decides to invest time in view for long term? Thank you again.
   I meant from this perspective of how her father was viewed in the family and the internal relationships?

   Loading...
   Reply

10. Dear IM,

    While reading this piece I noticed similarities with the way radical, liberal women would speak about and treat President Trump. To me is seems that these may be the same subconscious processes going on between an opposition of god and those in high political office. I’m curious what you think.

    As always I delight in reading your work and I often learn new words from your articles.

    Best.

    Loading...
    Reply

    1. God is the ultimate authority in the universe and the president is the ultimate symbolic authority of the country in the same way the father is the ultimate authority in the home. Their issue is with authority, specifically, masculine authority – in any and all of its forms.

       Loading...
       Reply

11. ***Those who reject the natural order are in rebellion against it, and show the associated psychic maladies as a result of it.***

    Wow. You captured the deeper core essence of a woman’s nature in this post. A lot to unpack in one reading. A key personal learning is that sometimes a man needs to walk away if a woman violates his integrity. This cuts to the heart of the post: any woman who refuses to submit to a man remains eternally in conflict with her true self. By the time she accepts this, she’s fiercely independent, strong…and alone.

    Loading...
    Reply

12. IM do you believe in God? I am an atheist (not an antitheist), but I like Catholic Church traditions and the culture that shaped our European continent. I think it was a determinant factor in our victories in previous ages. We discovered and conquered America. Europeans pushed technology sky-high. This religion strongly promoted monogamy and virtues that were precious and efficient. Men had time to work, invent, and conquer because they didn’t have to constantly look for a new woman.

    But I can’t believe in God; it’s just not in me. I have a more scientific outlook on this. If I cannot prove something in any way, or even come up with an experiment, then you shouldn’t bother. Of course, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist, but you can come to the same conclusion with witches and Harry Potter. And what advantage does believing in God give me? Maybe a stronger bond to tradition in our family and a stronger influence on my kids and wife. But I can’t believe. And even if, how could I use Machiavellianism and manipulation on other people? It’s a sin. As an atheist, I don’t bother.

    Your texts can be checked. I can check your knowledge on women or other people (as in Machiavellianism) and it really works. Or at least it’s more helpful than harmful, and that’s a great advantage compared to leftist bullshit.

    Loading...
    Reply

    1. I believe in God as a concept (for reasons I’m unable to articulate), but I’m not religious in the sense that I do not follow a religion. That being said, I do think the vast majority of the population is better off with religion than without it, although I do not think belief in it should be mandatory. My dilettante level reading of both the Bible and the Quran has shown me that each text should be respected if only for the sheer amount of wisdom they contain that is still relevant to the human experience despite the age of said texts. As a social ordering and bonding agent, religion performed a crucial role for stabilising society, and I think the loss of it in combination with the advent of constant technological disruption has led to the chaotic, disordered and socially unstable society we live in now, where women are constantly trying to upgrade their man and men keep looking for new women to sleep with. People seem to find it very hard to simply pick each other and stay with one another without social, religious and community pressure bearing down on them. The destigmatisation of divorce alongside increased accessibility has been terrible for society, and that is a byproduct/consequence of a decline in religion (which treats marriage as sacrosanct and makes divorce much harder, unlike secular marriage – which to put it bluntly, isn’t worth the paper it’s written on).

       Loading...
       Reply

    2. If you would like a scientific proof that God exists, I would recommend that you go to this site https://winteryknight.com/ and read his posts. He often makes post that provide deep scientific proof of the existence of God. Here is a good article to start with. https://winteryknight.com/2024/03/30/christopher-hitchens-debates-william-lane-craig-does-god-exist-6/

       Loading...
       Reply

13. I think the Palestinian women in Gaza actually behave in the way you want all women to behave. Women being a decoration to men like in the roles that Melania Trump and the Vance guy’s wife and so on are acting have brought us to the current state of the world (I e. the past thousands of years). If they can’t have power as themselves they try to overpower others in satanistic ways. I had such a woman caretaker growing up and no father figure whatsoever. So wanting them to be more submissive, attacking their ego in whatever ways, makes it worse. They will rebel even more so your writing serves no purpose except for pleasing your own ego. It gives no solution to the problem. Telling women to be god-fearing is no solution. You see God as a male human which is ‘ridic[k]ulous’ indeed. That’s your flaw: you cannot even imagine female authority. As you can’t see it anywhere with your eyes you believe that it doesn’t exist and can never exist. It’s too scary for you to even imagine it. I’m female but not woman-brained and therefore found powerful solutions for myself in social isolation that make me proud but I’m still working on the ultimate solution to heal from the aftermath of trauma and to overcome my fated isolation. I am of course a misanthropist what else could I be in this lifelong state of isolation and having been distorted into an inferior being. And yet, I respect and value you as my servant. It doesn’t mean you are right or wrong you just help me to get closer to the truth of myself with your writings. You serve me like any being that I come in contact with. I call the human beings I like and can relate to ‘my extended family of gifted rebels’. You have the honor of being a member of that family. There are different levels of freedom one can reach in that group. I think you will stay stuck on a lower level unfortunately. Your ideas are too fixed in the status quo and what has been. It probably gives you the needed emotional security. Like autistic: all they want is to feel safe. So their world needs to be predictable. No room for ambivalence and uncertainty. It needs a special brain to be able to dig long enough without knowing the outcome. Without knowing what’s right or wrong. Someone that can go for decades and bear that uncertainty. Someone that open- minded. With that rare and powerful spirit that allows them to exist in such a precarious way. As of now I think only certain females can reach the highest levels. So females will be the natural pioneers in the pursuit of a righteous battle against evil. They have the potential for possessing the strongest egos. They will be the most courageous. Males have feared females and so they rebelled against nature that’s what created the world. Men’s fear of women = the satanistic world. Women internalized that fear. That’s it. The fear of the true self. Overcoming that fear is the solution for humanity. Women’s love of themselves = Divine World. And that means the death of women as we all see them with our eyes every day.

    Loading...
    Reply

### Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Search for:

## Follow Illimitable Men

Powered by

## Discover more from Illimitable Men

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading