Radicalism of Vilar #1: Even in Sex, Man is Enslaved

Like listening to the audio? You can now get The Book of Pook Audiobook and The Pook Manifesto Audiobook - over 28 hours of human narration! The quality is FAR superior to the machine generated TTS on this site, so if you're going to spend hours listeing to the content - get the nice human version!

You can also get all 4 of Pook's books (with audiobooks) as a bundle!


Women live an animal existence. They like eating, drinking, sleeping – even sex, providing there is nothing to do and no real effort is required of them. Unlike a man, a woman will rarely make an effort to get her partner into bed. If, however, he is already there and she hasn’t planned to set her hair or undertake some other form of large-scale beauty repair and there is no TV program she wants to see, she will not be averse to making love, provided he is prepared to be the active partner.

“But even the euphemisms ‘active’ for the male partner and ‘passive’ for the female do not conceal the fact that woman allows man to serve her in bed just as he does in every sphere of her life. Even through intercourse may give a man pleasure in the long run, it is nothing more than a service to a woman, in which the man is the better lover, arousing desire more skillfully, quickly, and making it last longer.

“Men suspect that women tend to exploit them during intercourse and have developed a certain fear of female sexual appetite.” Signs of this appear in the rites of ancient cultures, in philosophical works of men such as Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, in the novels of Baudelaire, Balzac an dMontherlant, in plays by Strindberg, O’Neill and Tennessee Williams. Since the discovery of contraceptives, this fear has reached almost hysterical proportions.”

I have spoken much about sexual transmutation of men in the past. Men can utilize their sexual desire to make it bloom into their art, their music, their work, their actions, to make their life progress swifter and increase their resonance among people (i.e. “charisma”). As a salesman myself, I know that the highly sexualized people make the better salesmen while the lower sexualized people (of both men and women) become stuck with low sales.

One gender’s transmutation is another gender’s manipulation. At least, this is what the feminists say when they point to the great works of Humanity.

We know that most men do not understand transmutation. They can often just live an animal existence and try to hump the nearest female in sight. These men generally end up mediocre in life. Keep in mind, I am referring not to the highly sexualized male but the male who submits to his sexuality, rather than forging the sexuality into what he desires. Think of the hunk in high school that ended up getting a girl pregnant and is doomed to a life of paying for it.

Most women, also, do not understand transmutation. The “slut feminism” is merely that of an animal existence.

However, women do undergo transmutation. They sexualize themselves as much as possible meaning through exercise, tight clothes, long hair, make-up, and so on to and undergo training in dance and other things. The woman will become trapped in her own game (as Radical Vilar #2 will reveal) but she is certainly trying to get the wealthiest and socially desired male.

Some women (mostly feminists) will resort to writing bad books about female goddesses and the occult as well as being mesmerized by Egyptian mythology. These women are confusing their sexuality with their faith and have the shoes on backward. Nevertheless, they are trying to project that sexuality in some means. This would explain why such women are often extremely ugly.

It is quite common for women to declare men are all pigs who want nothing but sex. But if you have ever tried to eliminate sex from a budding relationship, the woman goes bonkers. She has no mind of herself, just her animal existence, and she projects that onto the men. “All men want is sex!” Well, ma’am, when was the last time a woman said something even remotely abstract? Even with feminist theory, all they do is regurgitate, verbatim, what is heard. There are still no new ideas. The original nut of feminist theory is just a cliché with zombie girls echoing the cliché.

But let us listen some more.

“In truth, reliable contraceptives (invented by a man, naturally) have robbed man of the only triumph left to him in his state of sexual subjugation. Previously, woman was always to a certain extend at his mercy. Now she is suddenly in control. She can have as many children as she wishes. She can even select the father (rich, if possible). If she has no intention of having children, she can indulge in intercourse as often as it appears advantageous to her. Men cannot do that.” Pg. 80-81

This is a good question. Have contraceptives increased man’s power or woman’s? Obviously, it is woman’s whose fortune has doubled. She can now be the slut and be free from most of the consequences. This was much more difficult in the past.

I suspect contraceptives have been historically banned because of men insisting it so. This would explain why the ancient religions all banned contraceptives. Christianity banned all contraceptives unanimously until around 1928. It also finally explains why Onanism was frowned at (a man emptying his seed outside the woman). It kept giving the woman power.

Sex has two main long term consequences (not counting short term pleasure). One, it creates children. Two, it enslaves a man.

With contraceptives, the children element is removed but the enslavement of men is not.

“But Pook! But Pook!” you cry. “Would this not free the men too? All these women and little consequences?”

The changing definitions of man by the moderns have help emasculate men. A false definition is worse than a slander. But the definition of “man” as supported by the moderns is a man who has sex with as many females as possible. There is no historical basis for this. What was the definition of a “man” was the man WHO HAD THE MOST CHILDREN. This is why centuries ago, families would range from eight to fourteen children. Men who were impotent and could not have children strived to display their manliness in some other way (such as America’s George Washington).

The more children, the more new people were under the man’s name. He became the leader of the household. He became the Patriarch in this way.

By pinning the definition of sex on ‘as banging as many females as possible,’ one can pinpoint the further enslavements to men:

1) the married man keeps demanding sex from his wife who she can easily manipulate the man further based on such desire.

2) the bachelor throws his time away (which is more valuable than money) on playing the ‘game’ to get as many girls as possible. Women will manipulate the guy for entertainment, social access, and even money.

3) the guy throws his money away (less valuable than time) at prositutes, both offical and unofficial, just so he can ‘feel like a man’.

We know that for men, sex is very much a mental thing. Alter the brainwashing and free yourself.

It is hilarious when someone tries to defend this definition of man using evolutionary behavior. Evolution only works if you have children you idiots. When I see demographic reports of less and less children born in each generation, I assure you that this is not evolution in work: it is extinction.

Vilar goes on speaking how much women research sex and how it involves men (to ‘rock his world to enslave them’ essentially).

“Contrary to man’s fear, women do not, however, weigh one man against another and choose the most virile- far from it, as she herself is not all that keen on sex. In view of that, and provided all other conditions are equal, she is likely to prefer the less potent man because she can always blackmail him with her intimate knowledge of his weakness. “In the realm of sex, more than any other, man is a victim of the principles of efficiency according to which he is manipulated.”

You never hear about any pressure for the woman to ‘perform.’ The only thing you hear about that is if the woman cannot keep the man (i.e. manipulate him). This would explain why when a wife cheats, the husband “fails” and the wife is a “victim.” And if the husband cheats, the husband “fails” and the wife is again the “victim.”

“That sexual competence in a man is a matter of indifference to the majority of females is shown by the number of highly paid men who marry and stay married, despite the fact that they are impotent (it is unimaginable that a woman without a vagina would have an prospects whatsoever of getting married to a normally sexed man).” Pg. 84 

A young man is often amazed that dating is really nothing more than sex. Women don’t want to know you. They do not care about your dreams. The bait on the hook is sex and the purpose is to reel you in. Women’s greatest fear is the celibate man as he cannot be hooked in any way.