The Bride Gathering Cult Part VI: Jewesses as “Hated” “Leah” and Auxiliary Women

“Indeed, if there is a more deceived class of people outside of Jewish women, they are unknown to history. Even black women occasionally grow disillusioned with their disadvantaged role in a multicultural sexual market.” — M.Brahmin

The notion that Judaism is matrilineal is used to propagandize Jewish women with the not always correct “implicit” expectation that Jewish men will remain loyal to them. After all, ostensibly Jewish men are incentivized to be so, otherwise, it is pretended, their children will not be Jewish. It gives Jewish women a stake in Judaism and enlists them as defenders of it.

Yet at the same time it provides Jewish men an “out,” signaling to Jewish women that while a Jewish man is always preferred, worst case scenario she may still derive a Jewish child from a non-Jewish husband. Implicitly, on the ethnic level, it becomes an “open relationship.” In any case, the Jewess is obliged to be loyal to the interests of Jewry in the manner Jewry pretends to be loyal to her natural individual interests of husband-finding and baby-begetting.

In later-stage Jewish inhabitation, Liberalism and Feminism develops in a particularly acute manner among Jewish women, firstly because it is understood to be in the interests of the tribe to which her loyalty has been conditioned —on the false premise, of course, they are loyal to her— and likewise as a coping mechanism. Indeed, competing with non-Jewish women, and saddled with the notion of a perfect Jewish man, she frequently faces obstacles obtaining the natural aspirations of women.

In general, the relationship between Jewish men and women, at least in early stages of Jewish inhabitation, is rather like a man eagerly seeking to keep a girl loyal to him with cunningly deceptive pledges of his own loyalty, while, nevertheless, seeking a better one behind her back.

It succeeds because women are easy prey to the deception of Religious trappings and notions of the “spiritual” whilst Jewish men are unashamed to ply them. Indeed, if there is a more deceived class of people outside of Jewish women, they are unknown to history. Even black women occasionally grow disillusioned with their disadvantaged role in a multicultural sexual market. The JEM we explore will reveal this deception is conscious at least at the highest esoteric level of Judaism by which Judaism is formed.

Such is the nature of women that things that are actually false yet powerful more strongly resonate with them. After all, deception and indirection are necessarily the mode of survival of the weaker sex. Hence one is speaking their language. In general, this makes them susceptible to lures in Art and Religion. This is why AIM becomes necessary.

With the Myth of a matrilineal and endogamous Judaism, the goal, ultimately, is to maintain an auxiliary store of women. This serves five functions:

1. It ensures continuance by providing brides for Jewish men, should they require them.
2. It provides a grounding assurance and confidence to Jewish men, so they might pursue Aryan women. In some sense, psychologically, each Jew already has a wife should he chose.
3. It assures the continuance of a Semitic core among “Religious Jews” and among Jews generally.
4. Through the signaling and social permission of Jewish males, to whom they are religiously faithful, Jewish women provide human barter as a means of developing strategic relations among Aryans. They may be “pawned off.” Here though, the JEM makes it clear that they are often regarded as dubious barter, corrupted goods, as being more trouble than they are worth.
5. Astonishingly these invincibly loyal Jewesses, second class in their own Religion, are willing to play moles, spies and sabotaging roles vis-à-vis Aryan men akin, purportedly, to those played by the Biblical Queen Esther or Judith as she appears in the Book of Judith.

In the Hebrew Bible, there is no figure that more exemplifies the Jewess as “auxiliary woman” than Leah, mother of Judah, an archetypal Jewess. There, in contrast to the “fair and beautiful” Aryan Rachel, Leah “had no sparkle in her eye.” Leah is indicated the less beautiful and less desired. In Genesis 29:33, she is indicated as suffering because she is “unloved” by the proto-Jewish Jacob. Or at least that is how the passage is typically translated into English. The Hebrew word here for “unloved” is sane, שָׂנֵא. It is actually stronger than “unloved.” In its nearly 150 other appearances in the Hebrew Bible it is translated variously as “hate,” “hated,” “hatred” or “enemy.”  Only twice, when referring to Leah’s relationship to Jacob, is it typically translated as “unloved.” 

One should remember this is the mother of Judah himself, a figure who, alongside Yawheh, represents Jewry itself.  Hence “Leah” should become an epithet for Jewesses to remind them how their men regard them. To be clear, the slight comes not from us but rather from Judaism. It is Religiously ordained. Only a rejection of Judaism and its demoralizing myths, as both Religion and Culture, would improve the psychological status of the Jewess. To state it succinctly, as an aphorism to be repeated through the ages, Judaism indicates the Jewess hated by her own men.