Species Dominance, Artilects, Artilect War, Cosmists, Terrans, Gigadeath, Essays, Media, etc



Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis


This flyer relates the “half meeting” of my nawalt (not all women are like that, i.e. exploitative of men, hypergamous, solipsistic, etc.) It discusses my mixed feelings about such an experience.

A few days ago, I had an amazing experience. I was reading about one of my favorite topics, specifically, “the classification theorem of the finite simple groups” which I believe to be the greatest of all human intellectual achievements. I idly typed in the label in quotes above into YouTube to see what would come up. I’ve done this before, so a lot of the videos that came up I had seen before but there was one I had not noticed before.

It was by a woman. In it she said that she worked together with two of the smartest men in the world, who are creating a revised, simplified, shorter, comprehensive, unified, second version of the proof of the theorem. I was amazed.

This woman sounded Russian, in terms of her accent, and her poor use of the definite and indefinite articles in her English (i.e. missing “a”s and “the”s in her sentences) so typical of Russians. But her family name was French, and she had the charm of a French woman. (I know, because I lived in French speaking culture in Brussels in Belgium for a decade, and had a French speaking wife (my 2nd).

Of the seven cultures/countries I’ve lived in in my 70 years of life, I consider the relations between French men and women, the best in the world, certainly the best of my seven. The worst was in Japan, where the two sexes live in different worlds, where the men, the “salary men” are manslaves to their fluffie parasitic housewives, who barely see each other, so there is no time for development of the relationship, because the man is always at work, coming home so late he orphans his kids and widows his wife.

Second worse, was in the US, where the two sexes don’t trust each other. The men do not compliment the women, and the women do not nurture the men, whereas in French culture, it is part of the national value system, for the women to make an effort to be seductive to the men, and the men to pay real attention to the women, so that both sexes are much more satisfied by each other than in any other culture I have known. It is therefore no surprise that France has a world reputation for being “le pays de l’amour” (the country of love).

I listened and watched this woman, and was charmed. She had the charm of a French woman, which I was familiar with and appreciated very much after the experience of living in French speaking culture for a decade.

I remember one time in a bank in the US, where I was spending 6 months as a PhD student with a famous professor (Richard Michalski) who was one of the pioneers of a specialty that is now blossoming and having a strong impact on the world, namely “machine learning” which is a branch of computer science,  called “artificial intelligence.”

I was talking to one of the tellers and heard an accent. She was not an American, so I asked her where she was from. She said France, so I was delighted to find a French woman, after the coldness and suspicion towards men of American women, so I said to her “Ah bon, je parle le francais. J’habite a Bruxelles (Great! I speak French, I live in Brussels).

She transformed. Her face lit up, she turned on the French charm, behaving as her culture had taught her, to be seductive towards a man, and I gave her the attention that French men give their women. She was flattered, and I was charmed.

The contrast with the interactions I had in those 6 months with American women was stark. The contrast was painful. I hugely preferred interacting with French women than American women, because French women are so much more nurturative towards men, and make a real effort to be nice to men, whereas American women are suspicious of men, and don’t go out of their way to try to charm them, the way French women do.

So, it was refreshing for me to feel the Frenchness in this mathematician woman, with a French name, and a Russian(?) accent. As I listened to her, my feelings swelled. My god, this woman is amazing. She is obviously a near genius by female standards, because she’s collaborating with two of the smartest men on earth, who are busy creating the second, revised version of the proof of the classification theorem of the finite simple groups, which I consider, in its first version, to be the greatest intellectual achievement of humanity.

This is a major claim, so I need to talk about it for a bit. It was a work of genius. It took about half a century, and the work of several genii, literally some of the smartest men on the planet, e.g. guys like John Thompson, Michael Aschbacher, Daniel Gorenstein, etc, names that the general public have never heard of and will never hear of, because their intellectual level and the level of difficulty of their work, is so far above that of average people, that they will never even know that such work exists, and that such levels of intelligence are even possible.

The proof took about 15000 pages of journal articles, with several hundred research mathematicians, virtually all of them male, which is to be expected, because the genii are male, and women can’t compete with men at such lofty levels, given women’s 4 IQ point average IQ inferiority relative to men, and women’s 10% lower IQ variance than men’s, so that the morons and the genii are male.

Thompson, and Aschbacher were arguably, in their prime, the smartest men, i.e. smartest humans, on the planet, one in a billion, and yet here was this charming, French acculturated woman, up there collaborating with them, i.e. with the two men responsible for the second, revised, coherent, simplified, version of the proof.

I listened to her talk about what she was doing and was bewitched. I was doubly hooked, because she had the charm of a French woman, plus the fact that I truly admired what she was doing, i.e. I truly admired her obviously very considerable mathematical brain. I include a link below to her talk, so that if you are that one person in a thousand, who can understand what she is talking about, then, you might be as intrigued as I was. Nearly all of you will not understand the math, but you will probably be able to pick up her French charm, her nurturative FIPness.

I left a comment on that video, stating that I thought it was a pity that there were not millions of clones of her, so that millions of male mathematicians would be able to have intellectual romantic relationships with such clones, being able to share their male intellectual passion for mathematics with a like-minded female, which for nearly all male mathematicians, is simply not possible, because women like this Russian/French woman are rarer than hen’s teeth.

Those of you who follow my videos on masculism and MGTOW, know that I consider it important for FIP women (financially independent person) to be competitive with men in the workplace, but nurturative with men at home in their personal relationships, so you can image how I felt when I was watching this amazing woman, who was definitely nurturative, because she was culturized in the French tradition, and for all I know, the Russian tradition, but since I have never been to Russia, I don’t know about that.

Nearly all men are raised by mothers who are nurturative towards their sons, their offspring, their kids, who share half their genes. Little boys often worship their mothers, because their mothers are the focus of their whole young little lives.

When a man receives the nurturing of an adult woman, that reminds him of what he felt as a small boy, and it is heartwarming, intoxicating. That was how I felt for an hour as I was listening to this Russian/French mathematician woman. I felt I had met my nawalt, i.e. a woman I could truly admire, unlike 99.99% of women I come across. Most women are too stupid for me, since I’m a PhDed, full research professor, but not in the same intellectual league as this woman.

I will not try to contact her, because she is female. It will be in her genes to be hypergamous, because women evolved that way, so she would not be interested in a mere run of the mill prof like myself. She would feel she could do better, and that would be a near certainty, because she was giving a talk at the prestigious Institute for Advanced Study (IAS) in Princeton, the “Einstein Institute” where such genii as Einstein and Godel lived and worked. The IAS is often referred to as the “genius institute” because you have to be a genius to be invited to work there.

The very best are made professors there, such as Ed Witten, who is considered to be today’s Einstein, who dominated the formulation of string theory, the favorite theory to explain all the phenomena of the physical world.

You’re probably sensing a contradiction here, because I’m describing her as a nawalt, when she is probably as hypergamous as any other woman and hence an awalt (all women are like that). I think that’s true, but she was the kind of woman for whom I would put aside my MGTOW ideas IF (a very big hypothetical IF) she had the same feelings for me, but of course she won’t, why would she?

I’m not a genius. I’m smart. I’m smart enough to be able to follow the works of these mathematical genii behind the classification proof of the finite simple groups, and plan to teach it over the next 30 years of my life, in my role of being a globacator, i.e. global educator, i.e. filming some 120 YouTube lecture courses, in PhD level pure math and math physics, to teach students at this level in these subjects around the world for free, and giving them an e-library containing links to full content books supplied by Google, so that students can simply click on a link and be able to read and study technical books on their computer screens around the world, thus revolutionizing gradual level education.

So, probably in time, this woman will come to hear of me, because of my work, as I film, course after course on the classification theorem of the finite simple groups, (humanity’s greatest intellectual achievement) plus courses leading up to it, i.e. over 100 of them.

We share the same intellectual passion, the same love of the subject. We both feel the same awe, the power, the beauty of the subject, the knowledge that it is possible with the sheer power of the (male) human intellect to construct whole “cathedrals of mathematical logic” that is the proof.

The proof is awe inspiring, wonderful, truly awesome, in the original sense of the word, magical, gee wizzing, oh wowing. Studying it, and especially when some difficult abstract concept finally clicks in my brain, giving me a “oh wow” reaction, gives me intellectual orgasms.

I could sense the same feeling in this woman. She too shared this intellectual passion for the classification proof, because she has devoted most of her professional life to it. You could feel her love of the topic and her obvious mastery of it as well, with her superb, and from my perspective, female mathematical genius.

Mathematical abstraction and mastery of all the myriad details of the topic flowed out of her so easily. She was born to be such a person. I found it intoxicating. I really admired this woman, which is a feeling I rarely have. Most women I can’t take seriously, because women are such child minds to me on the whole.

Women are not interested in my intellectual passions, but this woman was. I could sense her passion for this subject and I deeply admired her mastery of it, which is something I could appreciate, because I have taught myself enough of the topic to be able to judge her extraordinary ability, which is right up there with the two world class male colleagues she is collaborating with on the second revised proof.

So, I feel I have met my nawalt, in the sense that this woman is no airhead, no feminazi bitch, no parasite off men. She’s obviously a FIP, because she is a prof in the math department of a British university. She has the charm of a French woman, probably married (divorced?) from a French man, would be my guess. She is nurturative, so in my eyes quite a prize, quite a woman I could give my heart to, if she were in a position to do the same, but I see that as a pipe dream.

As I said above, I’m smart enough to follow the work of these mathematical genii, the smartest men on the planet, the one in a billion type, i.e. only a handful of such men in the whole population of the earth, BUT, I’m no genius. I would not be able to absorb all the details of this complex proof and manipulate them with the obvious ease that this woman can.

She is a female genius, whom I admire and like very much, so my so called meeting with her is more a “half meeting” i.e. I have become acquainted with her on the internet. I can watch her and study her ideas on the internet. My “half meeting” with her will probably never be more than that, because if she wanted a relationship with a man, she could do far better than me. Her female hypergamous nature would ensure that, making it a virtual certainty, so since I’m not a masochist, I will not contact her.

Now, it’s possible that someone might see this video and bother to contact her on my behalf. That is a possibility, but I won’t contact her myself. I will be happy to be simply a distant admirer, relishing the thought that “my nawalt” is out there, that there is a woman out there whom I truly admire, respect and like.

That thought gives me some comfort, because having absorbed the main ideas of the MGTOW movement and combining them with my masculist ideas, has made me cynical of female nature, and suspicious of having any kind of serious relationship with a woman.

In particular, the red pill of the MGTOWs (i.e. the knowledge that women do not love men, but rather men’s sexploitability, to provide women with resources to make life easier for women to raise the next generation) is truly a poison pill for men, as they swallow it. Men hate being treated as cash machines by sexploitative women, and are walking away from women in their hundreds of millions now, worldwide.

Swallowing the red pill, is depressing for men. It means that they will not be able to have a repeat in their lives, as adults, of the feeling they had with their mothers as very young boys. The reality of the world is such that men are waking up to the sexploitative reality of women’s nature, and are reacting negatively against it, by choosing to go their own way, rejecting being manslaves to fluffie parasites, to sexploiting women.

It’s a bitter pill to swallow, so just being able to know that there is a woman out there whom I could actually admire and respect, is a comfort of sorts. I feel that I have now found my “nawalt” (in a modified sense), who is real, whom I can admire, respect and learn from, and will learn from, because she is a real expert in her field, and that is part of my admiration for her.

So knowing that this woman exists, that there are such women, although obviously there are extremely few of them, gives me some comfort in a MGTOW dominated intellectual environment, which teaches men that women see men as cash machines, an utterly depressing thought.

In that MGTOW darkness, that depressing reality concerning women, it is an oasis of light, a lighthouse in the MGTOW fog, to know that my “nawalt” is out there. She is real. She exists. I can admire her from a distance, which is probably all that I could ever expect. But that is better than nothing, which is what fully swallowing the MGTOW red pill implies.


Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis

(YouTube channels) “de Garis Masculist MGTOW Flyers”  “de Garis Essays”)




%d bloggers like this: