A place for a


Darth Vader is the product of a single mother, one-itis and white-knighting

Anakin Skywalker grew up with a single mother. There was no father there to shield him from all the feminine attention and coddling that he got from her; and perhaps to teach him through his presence that one will, in life, always have competition over a woman’s affection and, often, lose.

Be it as it was, he was her one and only object of love, lacking siblings as well. He was parentized in another way, too, in that he was, at an age of, what, 8?, the one working and making sure that there’s food on the table; at least that is my impression. Granted, they were slaves, but we do get to meet him through the work he does for that flying insect thing. He developed considerable skills and got praise for that – but he also got used for it.

All this developed in him a superiority complex. As a young boy, he already shouldered the emotional and wordly responsibilities of an adult male. One can only wonder how much his own emotional needs got neglected for this. In his own eyes, he must have been quite a superhuman being. Taking care of his mother, the big love in his life, and getting all her praise.

When he meets Amidala at a later stage in life, having long been separated from his mother, he got infatuated with Amidala. Surely the fact that she reminded him of that time back on Tatooine was an important factor to him. He wanted to be to her what he had been to his mother: The one and only recipient of her love and attention and praise. Her hero.

This is apparent when he first meets her again. She is polite, but does not display anything he wants her to. He complains to Obi-Wan about this and Obi-Wan says something like: You are blinded by your feelings. She was happy to see us.

To be anything but the sole focus in a woman’s eyes is an insult to mommy-whipped Anakin.

I am not sure whether this is a good thing or not, but Anakin, through never having been broken by a father, also has no respect for authority. As he was in his mother’s eyes, he thinks he alone has all the answers. This surely has some positive side effects on his confidence, but it also blinds him to the fact that he is defeatable and not almighty, because his need to be great is compulsive. He does not merely follow his own gut – no, he actually needs to be superior in others’ eyes.

We can only blame it on Hollywood that Anakin actually gets the girl despite his obvious self-centered, co-dependent and supplicating form of love that he confesses to Amidala a few times. This is very unrealistic. In fact, in the construed story, he is actually under her command; a diminishing situation for a man to find himself in. That she would still love him is beyond unbelievable, although she may be attracted to his obvious skill and handsomeness. As for her being protected by him, I am not sure whether to interpret it as white-knight fantasy or feminine submission. Meh. But then, she is a career politician, so she may be fucked up in many ways herself, allowing for this weird turn of events.

An interesting mention here is also the dialogue between Anakin and Padme, where Padme asks him whether Jedi aren’t supposed to have no attachments and Anakin manipulates his infatuative attachment to his mother and her into love, thus making it appear as if his feeling is perfectly in accordance with the Jedi Code. I personally despise rules, but this is still worth mentioning.

When Anakin’s mother dies, he rages. He kills all those thingies, including children and women. I guess fair enough. But then he goes on to blame himself. He can’t allow for the fact that he couldn’t save her. He used to be her hero. He used to shoulder all the superhuman responsibilities and manage to do it. And now he failed.

This fear of failure as an all-powerful white knight haunts him intensely, right into his dreams, where he sees Padme die. He is blinded by his fear and completely fails to see through the vision as a phantom of exactly this fear. To once more fail the one important woman in his life.

Aand, we all know where this leads. In his so-called good intention to save the girl, he actually turns into the most vile and disturbed creature we can imagine. The shining white knight, as he sees himself, actually becomes a dark vengeful monster full of hatred, non-hesitant to kill innocent children even, so strong his fear of not living up to the standards that he adapted at an early stage in life just to be able to survive emotionally.

Of course, there are two sides to the whole thing. The Jedi Council does indeed shame away the darker sides of the force and calls them evil. They’re all about the shining light force. This leaves Anakin in a lonely misunderstood place he can talk to no one to, aside from the Senator who obviously abuses him for his own cause. Anakin’s own fear of not being a good white-knight opens him wide up for being manipulated by the Senator.

And think of it, the main authoritative figure of the whole story is a female. It fits nicely with the whole light side of the force thing. Even in the last moments, when Anakin kills her, she is presented as a caring thing full of love that is destroyed by his dark badness.

It almost seems as if the writer of the script did vaguely acknowledge the emotional dynamics of the whole situation and the rageful feelings of Anakin, yet fail to respect them as shades of grey, as manifestations of a non-dual universe. Instead, while he let Anakin live out those feelings, he also, in an almost self-loathing manner, vilified them and proclaimed: This is how Anakin turned evil.

The author made all the Jedi and women look good and noble, but Anakin, alone with his fears and doubts, consumed by fear, is made into the villain.

You could almost interpret this like this, from Anakin’s perspective: I failed. I failed to be the hero for those women. I am a bad piece of shit. I am a villain. Everyone hates me.

In that sense, we can almost see the whole saga as distorted through the lens of Anakin, with the good Jedi and the bad Sith. Let’s not forget, it’s just a story. Maybe in the “real” Star Wars galaxy that this story is based on, there were indeed shades of grey. Maybe in that real galaxy, the Jedi were indeed manipulative assholes, at least some of them.

But Anakin’s self-loathing, weird as it sounds, made him actually accept the angle that he is the evil one and that the Jedi are good. This was how Anakin felt and that is what he paradoxically protested against. In a way, his acts against the Jedi were acts against a conviction in his own mind: That he is bad, and that the Jedi are good.

So you could say, Anakin became evil precisely because he wanted to protest against his delusional idea of good. Because the good implied that he was bad and unlovable. He believed he was bad, but he still wanted to be who he was, more than he wanted to actually be good. What a weird paradox, ain’t it.

And surely we can blame the Jedi at least for this delusion of goodness that they fostered in his mind. It is very ironic that before their final fight, Obi-Wan says to Anakin: Only a sith deals in absolutes. While this very statement defines Sith as an absolute.

To protest against good, he deliberately chose to became the opposite reflection of good: bad. He became the opposite kind of delusional hero. He turned his superiority complex around 180 degrees, so that he could keep the superiority, while changing the semantics.

In that sense, he is a good showcase of modern white knights and SJWs. They are vile, but while being vile, they still think they’re doing it for a good cause. The delusion of good creates bad as a perfect reflection of itself, justifying – or, rather, compelling – cruelty and horror.

We may fathom a parallel reality where Anakin meditated a lot and realized that good and bad are really both aspects of his whole self.

The pain in and around Anakin’s life is a direct result of his single mother, one-itis, white-knighting – attempting to save the women in his life – and an intergalactic society that failed to acknowledge his feelings and fears and help him integrate and understand them.

0 votes
  • Karolina Nowicka

    Dear Sir,

    First of all, I’m sorry for every potential linguistic mistake I will make. I am Polish, haven’t used English for a long time.

    I found your page on a blog where single mothers were shunned and portrayed as irresponsible, absolutely selfish, ignorant, slutty and worthless. The author claimed they should relinquish their offsprings (if they truly love them – that wasn’t directly said…) because they would make them miserable and unhappy.


    Now you, Sir, claim that single mothers should experience as much hatred, loathing and intolerance as possible so that no child ever suffered like you did. But does every child of a single mom does?

    Why do you think all the failures and weaknesses your raised by only mom friends experience, are due to the lack of father? Don’t you think it’s a bit unfair to blame a “monstrous single mom” for everything? Yes, I KNOW a child needs the father. I KNOW mothers often show too much affection, raise kids in a stupid way and are emotionally unstable. But for the love of God, there are many happy or moderately contented with life kids without a father. A single parent household is worse than a two parent household, but it’s NOT a living hell.

    Placing a child for adoption is not the way to deal with stupid and toxic mothers.

    First, I read LOTS OF sad stories about both men and women who bitterly regretted not being raised by their birthmothers. Separating a mother from her child, ever right after birth, is almost always cruel, bestial and stupid. Not only for the mother herself.

    Secondly, there are LOTS OF toxic, emotionally unstable MARRIED mothers. Lots of married mothers that push dad aside and don’t let him get involved in the child’s rearing. You do not know them as you focus only on your tragedy. You hate all single mothers because yours hurt you. Let me tell you something: many mothers hurt their children. Many fathers do. Birthparents and adoptive parents may equally be terrible parents. These are FACTS.

    You mourn the lost chance of becoming a real man and you blame your single mom for it. I understand that. Both parents are needed. Yet sometimes it is not possible. To rob a woman of her child just because she’s alone is both bestial and unnecesary. A woman won’t replace a father nor he will replace a mother. Yet single parenthood is NOT the worst that may happen to a child. A single mom is not her son’s worst enemy. Nor is a lesbian mother. Nor is a hooker mother. No mother is destined to be a blessing or a nightmare. I know you can show statistics that teenage mothers are irresponsible and tragicly immature; that poor mothers are unable to provide a safe environment for a child; that single moms are emotional vampires. But it doesn’t have to be THAT way. The society may help these women become more mature and reasonable or throw them into abbyss of despair. Why choose the latter? Because YOU feel outraged and blame your mother for everything bad that happened to you?

    I am a strong supporter of birthmothers’ rights and I think adoption is almost never the best option. I’m NOT for separating children from their fathers without a serious reason. I only think that a single mom, regardless of her age, should never be perceived a selfish, demonic creature which sucks up all her son’s vitality. Many boys get along with their moms and enter the manhood without a problem. And there are many who suffer because their MARRIED mother destroyed them emotionally. Do not think a married mother is somewhat better than a single one.

    • Meh, whatever.

      I don’t even care about rights and all that kind of political bullshit. As far as I am concerned, everyone can live their damn lives as they please.

      But if I was to propose a sound policy, it would be: Let the kid choose with whom to live, where to go to school etc.

      Also “I only think that a single mom, regardless of her age, should never be perceived a selfish, demonic creature which sucks up all her son’s vitality” is bullshit. Some (many?) mothers are exactly that. Reality does not care about what you think ‘should be perceived’.

      • Karolina Nowicka

        Oh, but you’re hundred percent right, Sir! Mothers ARE. Not single mothers. :) Would your mother be any better if she was married or cohabiting with your father?

        Please, bear with me for a while longer. I know I’m an unwelcome guest but I crave for a discussion, a lecture, an answer, ever for a scolding. At present I’m so shocked and depressed because of your attitude towards single moms (something I thought was a distant memory of the past) that I really need more explanation.

        Yes, children should have a say with whom they should live. But not until a certain age. Till then, they should live with both parents, unless one of them is violent, abusive or in any other way destructive.

        Unfortunately in many, many cases the father is not around so the mother has no choice but to raise her kids (sons, to your horror) alone. The man is either dead, or abroad, or not willing to parent his child. Do you always shake with disgust when you hear about an abandoned mother nurturing her son? Do you feel once the man spat in her face saying “That’s not my child, whore!”, she should also experience loathing from the society? What good that would bring? More abortions? More women pretending they do have a loving hubby, only that he works in a different city? Or would that cause hundreds of women from 13 to 45 years old being dragged to “the fallen women” houses and after the birth made to relinquish their infants. Just because there would be no MAN to support them. Is that what you dream about?

        The reality is, there is not just one way to be a “full” man or a woman. Thus when we judge single moms raising boys we shouldn’t immediately think “My God, how can she teach her son to be a MAN?” Every parent or parents need to teach his/her/their children, to be WISE, GOOD and HAPPY human beings. Your mother apparently didn’t do it. But instead of focusing on her being toxic and silly, you blame her “singlehood”. You wish you could “exchange smirks” with other men, as if all your pain and grief was about the lack of masculinity, not happiness, goodness or wisdom themselves. Your anger is so great that you would brutally push a girl met on a street and then tell her she should go fuck herself. Let me ask you then: would you be a better man with a violent father? (You claim violence is natural for men.) Would you be more considerate, sensitive, noble? NO. Your sole benefit would be the ability to mingle with other brute men. Is this what raising kids should be about? Please, enlighten me, as I’m just a female, and soon an unwed mother. Not a single one, to be sure, but you would probably think that my beloved, sensitive and caring lover is not a real man, because he had a much better contact with his mom than dad. Because he doesn’t hit women in a street. Because he would never scorn a single mom. Am I right?

        I have read many stories about single mothers, especially in their teens. One thing is certain: the more they are helped (wisely!), the better life they and their children have. Never ever in the history of mankind separating an unwed mom from her child on the sole grounds she was an unwed mother – was something noble. It was an UNNECESSARY cruelty. Once the society stops harassing unwed mothers, they can obtain emotional help with child rearing. And – which is very important – they can find a GOOD partner, with whom they could create a whole family unit.

        Having said that I must put a strong emphasis on young mothers being taught how to raise kids (especially boys) to be good and happy beings (not just masculine). Today’s teenagers are reckless, immature and irresponsible, thus they need extra support with raising kids. So are many 20-somethings. But who made them like this? Their own single mothers? No! Both mothers and fathers. Women are not to be blamed for the today’s youth’s mistakes. It’s your western culture that sucks up, because it supports shallowness and simple-mindedness. Your aggressive American feminists that enforce stupid laws (late term abortion) and deprive men of their right to raise kids. Not SINGLE motherhood!

        So I beg you, Sir – since if you suffered so much from your mother, you ought to help other mothers be GOOD mothers. I know how destructive a mother can be. Mine was (is) so, in spite of her loving me (daughter!) very very much. She is not a bad mother. She is a STUPID mother. So I fully understand that a mother can be her child’s worst enemy. But not single mother! Enlist your mother’s mistakes, explain why she was a failure and thus improve our child rearing, so that we could be WISE mothers. It’s not that we would all agree with your statements but it would surely give us, feeble-minded women, an insight into a man’s world.

        I’m sorry for taking so much of your time.

        • I’m not in the mood for this stupid discussion. A boy needs a father. A woman can and will never understand how important this is.

          And you can’t just “teach” people to be good parents. My mother was mentally ill. Deeply. Monstrously. I don’t know if what I saw was simply the shell of a destroyed human being or just the core of the craziness that lives in a female. I really don’t know. And frankly, I couldn’t care less.

          I couldn’t care less to help women. Women are what they are. And everything they aren’t, that’s what men are there for.

          • Karolina Nowicka

            I’ve just read this: http://manwithoutfather.com/2015/09/25/why-i-hate-my-mother/

            Man, how very similar to my mom. Except that my mom wasn’t as scary and sick as yours. And she was married. :) I swore to myself I will not be like this. I’ll teach my kids (no matter of their sex) to be independent, smart, sensitive but not weak… I don’t know if II manage… :(

            I feel much more connected to my father, but he was abusive in the past. And comptemptous. Very rarely however. Many fathers are. Why the f…k do you think a boy would always be better off with a father?

            But you don’t want to talk. Thank you anyway.

          • Because … a boy is male and so is a father. Pretty straightforward, if you think of it.

          • Karolina Nowicka

            No. You don’t know how it would be with an equally insane father. Mentally sick or toxic parents are bad for a child. Both mommy and daddy.

            As for SANE parents – yes, a boy needs daddy, a girls needs mommy. But sometimes you just can’t have what’s best. End of the story.

          • Whatever.

  • Anonymous

    Damn! I never realized this tell now. Very true!