Sexual Marxism

‎

Sexual Marxism is the elaboration of blackpill and philosophy of praxis. Sexual Marxists tend to advocate for an egalitarian "redistribution of sex", where everyone gets sexual access, no resources are transferred from men to women and Sexual struggle. See the Complimentary Heterosexual Affections Directive as a proto-sexual-Marxist idea.

It is important to note that Marx never proposed any sort of explicit incel-assistance so this term is mostly used tongue-in cheek. Many consider true Marxism a bit hostile to incels due to it's absence of a position on the incel issue. A more proper term would be a term never used: Incel Fourierism, as the socialist who proposed direct incel-assistance was Charles Fourier the founder of utopian socialism, not Marx.

However, it is to be noted that Marxism is a methodology and the revolutionary ideology of first subject object of history, namely the proletariat, that seeks to abolish present state of things, it is not a rigid dogma or Stalinist statist oppression. Therefore, any charges that orthodox Marxism precludes the very possibility of a "sexual Marxism" is negated.

Sexual historical materialism

The earliest forms of sexual relations were characterized not by exclusive unions between individuals but by forms of group marriage, in which marital rights and obligations were distributed among groups rather than confined to a single pair. Out of these arrangements there gradually emerged the pairing family, a more stable union between one man and one woman but it lacked exclusivity typical of monogamy.

Engels says:

Monogamy arose from the concentration of considerable wealth in the hands of a single individual – a man – and from the need to bequeath this wealth to the children of that man and of no other. For this purpose, the monogamy of the woman was required, not that of the man, so this monogamy of the woman did not in any way interfere with open or concealed polygamy on the part of the man.

In this the Chads emerged as the ruling class. Freed from labor within production, they were able to control the means of production by exploiting the surplus product made possible through the division of labour and the differentiation of communal society into classes. This differentiation similarly marked the beginning of the monopolization of the means of reproduction by the chad.

Monogamy as an institution began on the basis of assuring the paternity of the chad and ensuring that the property of the chad would be inherited by, and remain under the control of, his children. By doing so, the chad was able to supply himself with an abundance of fertile women from the labouring masses. This marked the beginning of infidelity on the part of the chad and the development of polygamy or harems of women to which only he had access.

Similarly, the chad also restricted women from accessing other men, depriving them of sex and thus creating the class of incels. Chads, by virtue of their superior sexual prowess and attractiveness, deprive incels of access to the means of reproduction. It is therefore upon the incels to rebel against the chads and socialize the means of reproduction.

Chads also changed the previously communal status of women by competing against one another and by depriving incels of access to more and more women. In doing so, they made women more individualistic, incel-phobic, obsessed with looks, and drawn toward the dark triad—qualities that make them chad-philic.

Incels constitute the reserve army of sex-deprived individuals. Chads, having monopolized the means of reproduction, subject the proletarian class to inceldom, depriving them of sex in order to control them and exploit their labour power. At the same time, they create free time for themselves by forcing the proletariat to sell all their living hours for survival, allowing the chads to engage in sexual activity with women of their own class. When not satisfied with that, they molest and harass the daughters and wives of proletarians.

Potential policies

Full-on sexual Marxist ideas include:

• covert government program to societally brainwash people to make incels more attractive to women. We already undergo a tremendous amount of cultural brainwashing and attribute that brainwashing to our "own choice". Sexual Marxism would just change what ideas are fed to people. Sexual redistribution discussions tend to hinge upon the topic of liberty.
• Government funded prostitutes or escorts for incels
• Mass legal rape and universal forced monogamy This is the concept aligns closely with ‘free-love’ whereby a while society of mixed legal ages and genders come together with a single concerted goal: the gratification of sexual urges and a true procreation randomisation. To do this, ideas range from mass gathers at roofed stadiums for evening orgy sessions involving masks (to not only shield personal appearance, but also to prevent genders being easily identifiable so to add accidental homoerotic risk to the event), to smaller localised organised mating events where all participants are required to mate to allow biological factors dictate procreation, to the more radical idea of ‘The Purge’ style nights of legality for taboo hedonism (please note that the incel wiki does not recommend or condone this)
• Culturally encouraged volunteer corps of women to sex up incels (although this idea came from Charles Fourier, who predated Marxism, and founded utopian socialism)

Certain forms of Marxism, particularly though aiming at changing sexual desire, has been advocated in academia, and also by women, although not under the term, 'sexual Marxism'.

Partial libertarian critique of top down enforced monogamy

As the number of females is equal to the number of males, dispropotionate success with females from one male neccesarily results in the failure of another male; thus sex, is a zero-sum game.

Secondly, enforced monogamy is not analogous to 'sexual communism'. Chimpanzees are sexual communists whereby every male has sexual access to every other female though, some males have more sex. Monogamy by contrast is better described as being sexually egalitarian.

Thirdly, enforced monogamy evolved in the absence of statist regulation; thus people will socially enforce monogamy without the state intervening. It can be argued that statist intervention within sexual lives is what has caused the abating of the enforcement of monogamy. Monogamy evolved primarily because humans are gregarious animals that depend on each other communally for survival, it was only possible to take care of children if others were willing to put in effort to gather food and resources in order to meet the groups material needs. Thus women needed monogamy in order to solve this problem and attached themselves to husbands to provide and protect both themselves and their children. Humans were able to form closer bonds with their kin and form kin-based marital alliances due to the fact siblings would now be more genetically related to each other as full-siblings under monogamy in contrast to being only half-siblings. These kin-based marital alliances fostered trust between males and as a result societies become much more stable and violence declines. Engels says:

If now the economic considerations also disappear which made women put up with the habitual infidelity of their husbands – concern for their own means of existence and still more for their children’s future – then, according to all previous experience, the equality of woman thereby achieved will tend infinitely more to make men really monogamous than to make women polyandrous.

Thus as long as the problem of finding a provider exists, women will naturally engage in monogamy in order to solve this problem. However because the capitalist state interfers with the sexual market by creating perverse incentive for women to do otherwise by solving this problem for them (through excessive capitalist welfare) women no longer need to participate in monogamy in order to ensure reproductive success. This is a problem that dispropotionately affects the poor as the upper class (whom have for the most part have had relatively stable marriages) have little to gain relative to the socio-economic status from well fare compared to poorer women ($100 is a lot of money to a poor woman but is peanuts to a rich woman; the kind of wealth a rich woman wants can only be achieved through marriages with other upper-class men).

Thus it is by the state staying out of the marriage market by dissolving the welfare capitalist state, that monogamy will once again make its ascendance.

Marx notes that the state of realization of humanity in a society can be judged on the basis of the status of women and their relationship with male sex, for the relationship between a man and woman is the "most natural relation of human being to human being". Marx makes this criticism in reference to the crude communism's communalization of all women.

It wishes to eliminate talent, etc. by force. Immediate physical possession seems to it the unique goal of life and existence. The role of worker is not abolished, but is extended to all men. The relation of private property remains the relation of the community to the world of things. Finally, this tendency to oppose general private property to private property is expressed in an animal form; marriage (which is incontestably a form of exclusive private property) is contrasted with the community of women, in which women become communal and common property. One may say that this idea of the community of women is the open secret of this entirely crude and unreflective communism. Just as women are to pass from marriage to universal prostitution, so the whole world of wealth (i.e., the objective being of man) is to pass from the relation of exclusive marriage with the private owner to the relation of universal prostitution with the community. This communism, which negates the personality of man in every sphere, is only the logical expression of private property, which is this negation. Universal envy setting itself up as a power is only a camouflaged form of cupidity which re-establishes itself and satisfies itself in a different way. The thoughts of every individual private property are at least directed against any wealthier private property, in the form of envy and the desire to reduce everything to a common level; so that this envy and leveling in fact constitute the essence of competition. Crude communism is only the culmination of such envy and leveling—down on the basis of a preconceived minimum. How little this abolition of private property represents a genuine appropriation is shown by the abstract negation of the whole world of culture and civilization, and the regression to the unnatural (IV) simplicity of the poor and wantless individual who has not only not surpassed private property but has not yet even attained to it. In the relationship with woman, as the prey and the handmaid of communal lust, is expressed the infinite degradation in which man exists for himself; for the secret of this relationship finds its unequivocal, incontestable, open and revealed expression in the relation of man to woman and in the way in which the direct and natural species relationship is conceived. The immediate, natural and necessary relation of human being to human being is also the relation of man to woman. In this natural species relationship man’s relation to nature is directly his relation to man, and his relation to man is directly his relation to nature, to his own natural function. Thus, in this relation is sensuously revealed, reduced to an observable fact, the extent to which human nature has become nature for man and to which nature has become human nature for him. From this relationship man’s whole level of development can be assessed. It follows from the character of this relationship how far man has become, and has understood himself as, a species—being, a human being. The relation of man to woman is the most natural relation of human being to human being. It indicates, therefore, how far man’s natural behavior has become human, and how far his human essence has become a natural essence for him, how far his human nature has become nature for him. It also shows how far man’s needs have become human needs, and consequently how far the other person, as a person, has become one of his needs, and to what extent he is in his individual existence at the same time a social being.

—Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, 126-7.

Opposition

Those that oppose Sexual Marxism are neoliberals and sexual trad-cons. Some blackpillers have mixed feelings on sexual Marxism, as some seem to like the idea of legal mass rape, but everything else they tend to make fun of, or not dwell on much.

The opponents of sexual Marxism tend to ascribe a trans-historical character to female nature, in that it is unchangeable and has remained the same for all time. They oppose Sexual Marxism by arguing that it is social dominance that allowed a few men to hoard most women through the process of intrasexual competition, like it is in the case of many species of social mammals.

This critique ignores the fact that humans are a highly self-domesticated species and have been so for much of their existence due to their gregarious nature. In human societies, blending in with the collective is much more important for survival than social dominance, because humans are dependent on each other for survival. While it is true that women tend to be hypergamous in mate selection owing to greater parental burden, only few women date up beyond what is expected by the income gap between the sexes with the incidence of such marriages even declining, and evidence suggests women's sexuality is highly malleable by social norms (see Roy Baumeister's research).

Animals as a model

Sexual marxism is nothing new, even from an interspecies prspective. Society is able to recognize the sexual needs of the animal version of human incels, such as teaser stallions, who are deemed too genetically undesirable to pass on their genes to thoroughbreds, but out of pity as thereby permitted to mate with nurse mares. In contrast, the tone pertaining male involuntary celibates in western society is one that concurs with make disposability and non-compassion, with calls for redistribution of sex commonly mocked with derision. As such, the sexual needs of human involuntary celibates are often regarded as less important than animal incels in captivity with the former receiving less pity in western society for his sexual needs in comparison to the latter.

Marx states:

The criticism of religion ends with the teaching that man is the highest essence for man – hence, with the categoric imperative to overthrow all relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence, relations which cannot be better described than by the cry of a Frenchman when it was planned to introduce a tax on dogs: Poor dogs! They want to treat you as human beings!

Marxism-Rodgerism manifesto

It may seem difficult to understand the realities of the blackpill. It may be hard to come to terms with how - and why - the world functions as it does. And even when you do, it is even harder to understand where to go next.

But there is one set of techniques which shines a clear light on the world we live in. A scientific and logical analysis of systems of limited resources - Marxism. When we undertake a Marxist analysis of the sexual economy, we immediately find its nuances explained and its realities presented for all to see.

The fundamental element of inequality is exploitation. In economic Marxism, exploitation occurs when a capitalist takes most of the value a worker's labor creates, leaving them barely enough to survive. In other words, the worker's surplus value is stolen from them. This is how capitalists make profits. Sometimes, the capitalists let some segments of workers keep more of their value, in order to bribe and pacify them.

In the sexual economy, there are two distinct classes of men - Chads...and everyone else. There is a group which keeps most women for itself - the Chad-Bourgeois - and a much larger group which, despite being responsible for maintaining global civilization with their labor so that Chad is free to take all he wants, is denied most women. These are the sexual proletariat.

The sexuality of women should be evenly spread among society, but it is not. Instead, it is commodified by sexual capitalism and given to Chad. The Chad-Bourgeoisie allow the sexual proletariat to have just as much pussy as they need to keep the human race alive through reproduction. But even here is it not fair; the proletariat get Chad's leftovers - only when the Chad-Bourgeois no longer want a woman does she go to settle down, marry, and reproduce with a non-Chad.

Now, I mentioned before that the economic bourgeois sometimes bribe workers by giving them more than they would otherwise. In the modern era, the Chad-Bourgeois are facing a world where the proletariat is no longer consigned to the feudal life of arranged marriages without any questions asked, and can see the reality of sexual inequality via media and their own insights. The Chad-Bourgeois responds by bribing the sexual proletariat - they, too, are now allowed to have sex before marriage, and perhaps fuck many women. These women are, of course, still the ones Chad doesn't want, but it bribes most of the world. Remember, this happened when the sexual free market, where women can now choose their partners without having to marry a non-Chad in the end, replaced the Feudal system of arranged marriage. This is sexual capitalism.

The people so bribed are normies. This is the main reason why normies are blind to the sexual capitalist system and lack revolutionary potential.

But the system is imperfect. Due to the female's nature, not all members of the proletariat can be bribed just by the Chad-Bourgeois allowing (pseudo) free sex for everyone. A group at the bottom is inevitability left out - incels.

As sexual feudalism shifted to sexual capitalism, a contradiction was exposed - the Contradiction of Sexual Capitalism is the existence of incels, and the conclusion of the capitalist stage of history must be the resolving of this contradiction. Due to how females are hardwired to be only attracted to Chads, incels always lose in a sexual free market. Many females would rather be single than marry an incel, and a result the incels become a class which doesn't even get marriage, much less any additional bribes. Due to their extreme condition, the incels become "blackpilled" and see the system as it is. The incels thus attain class consciousness.

The basic structure of the sexual world is that the Chad-Bourgeois take all the pussy they can, especially the desirable kind, while eventually passing their leftovers to the sexual proletariat as bribes and allowances. Among the latter group, those are who successfully bribed are normies, and those who become class conscious are incels.

So how do the Chad-Bourgeois manage to keep society under their control, even with incels attain class consciousness? In Marxism, the answer is the Base and superstructure. In a sexual capitalist society, all we know is shaped by the system of sexual economy we live in. Our culture, beliefs, and so on are bent to conform to and reinforce the Chad-Bourgeois narrative. In order to prevent the sexual proletariat from attaining class consciousness, the Chad-Bourgouse use culture to create a false consciousness for them to live in instead.

The key to understanding this is to understand that truth is relative to one's class. Comrade Lenin explained this with his concept of partiinost, party truth. What is "true" depends on your class, truth for one class may be falsehood for another. Thus, what class's "truth" you're listening to is very important.

For example, let's take the Chad-Bourgeois idea of "confidence." Confidence is an intentionally vague idea to explain Chad's sexual success as anything besides winning the genetic lottery. It is said that someone - anyone - with "confidence" can also live like Chad does. For the Chad-Bourgoise, this is true. All a Chad has to do is be willing step outside or set up an online dating profile and they will get all the pussy they want. However, for the rest of the world, this is not the case. By enforcing the idea of confidence instead of genetic luck, Chad yet again bribes the sexual proletariat - bribes them with hope. The idea of confidence explains structural inequality as personal failure - in the same way the capitalist tells the exploited worker that he, too, would be rich if he only worked harder, so does the Chad tell the sexual proletariat that they could have sex if they were only just a little more confident. In this way, the sexual proletariat are blamed for their own oppression - their celibacy is a result of their own moral failings, because they were not "confident" enough. The Chad-Bourgeois present themselves as having earned the pussy they inherent, while the rest of the world deserves to live without. Confidence is just one example of how sexual capitalism distorts culture and creates false narratives to keep people blind.

Normies love false narratives because they are bribed. A normie, who may have even had sex, believes that his success in the past means the confidence narrative and so on is true - he can truly be a Chad, if he works hard enough! Thus the normies convince themselves Chad's world is not only fair but desirable, because they too might have a chance of being chad.

Normies are deceived to varying degrees.

A regular normie has had their bribe a few times and doesn't bother to think about the realities of exploitation and the sexual economy. These normies can be blackpilled with evidence, but most of them just double down on the false consciousness due to their hope that they can be a Chad.

A beta is a normie who is faced with the reality of sexual inequality. He may be an orbiter, hanging around women in the hope he'll get sex. He may be a nice guy, who is nice to women for the same reason. He may be cucked, whereby he shares a single woman with other men so that he can at least get laid. Though he may deny it, he is painfully aware of these material and sexual realities.

A white knight has come against a blackpill before, and it scared them. They swing the other way - they actively try and spread Chad's narrative and enforce it, because they are trying convince themselves. There is great overlap between white knights and Betas, as the latter often exhibit white knight behavior. Many Betas turn into white knights when confronted with the black pill.

All normies have one thing in common - they do not want to accept the reality of the blackpill because they want to continue to believe they can be Chad. Another element is that they enjoy Chad's narrative when it suits them - regarding incels. They don't like to remember that Chad is sexually more successful then them because he is just better....but that's not so bad if it means that they are better than incels in turn, since they at least "earned" some sex and incels could not! In economic capitalism, the reality of economic status defined by class is ignored in favor of an individualist, democratic narrative, and sexual capitalism works the same way. The realities of incels and the Chad-Bourgeois are overlooked in favor of the lie that it's all about individual action, that any individual can work his way to the top of the sexual marketplace through hard work and imaginary concepts like "confidence."

By the methods described above, the Chad-Bourgeois extract all of the surplus value - in this context, surplus pussy - from the workers/sexual proletariat for themselves, and maintain the system through bribing normies and creating false consciousness. But here's where it gets really interesting - the immortal science of historical materialism explains even more than this.

Everyone knows that even among Chads there is a hierarchy - a racial hierarchy, with white Chad at the top. In the 1960s, Comrade Mao Zedong developed Marxist-Leninist-Maoism to explain the differences between the first world and the third world. Maoism reveals the first world exploits the third world through imperialism, and sets up a global class hierarchy of sorts. This economic hierarchy in turn ties into a sexual hierarchy - one where the imperialist white Chads are above the colonized Chads. A critique of imperialism explains the racial Chad hierarchy - which, of course, filters down into the sexual proletariat as well.

Following this trend, we can see the close interconnection between looks (Chad privilege) and economic success. Females like money and power...and it seems Chad ends up with those as well.

We all know that studies have proven Chads are much more likely to succeed in economic sphere. They are given quality jobs and often end up in very social, very prestigious positions like executive officers. But this shows us that wealth comes second. Poor Chads still dominate the sexual proletariat, and their poverty, on average, never lasts long. In other words, sexual inequality comes before economic inequality, and due to how intertwined they are, it means that economic inequality is a consequence of sexual inequality due to society's constant preference for Chad. Sexual inequality predates economic capitalism, feudalism, even primitive tribalism - sexual inequality is the original and eternal form of hierarchy, it is harbinger of all other inequalities in other areas.

Thus, the Revolutionary and Immortal Science of Marxist-Rodgerism is born. We see that the fundamental conflict is between the well endowed Chad-Bourgeoisie and the sexual proletariat, and that all other conflicts ultimately derive from this great inequality. We see that the Chad-Bourgeois manipulates culture and society to further its narratives and worldview to maintain this power structure. Finally, we must conclude that the only way forward for humanity is to dismantle the system of sexual capitalism so that sex can be distributed fairly to all members of society.

Incels of the world, rise up! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

Courtesy of Communcel on r/incels https://archive.is/gJdp2

See also

• Sexual trad-con
• Sexual realism
• Sexual fascism
• Caamib
• RooshV
• History of the Love-shy Revolution
• Anti-Feminist Left Front and the Movement Against Involuntary Celibacy
• Lumpenproletariat
• Incel Party