Featured

Sticky: New Policy: All Commenting Is Free for the Time Being and Foreseeable Future

At least for the time being and forseeable future, I am revoking my policy of charging $10 for lifetime commenting privileges for frequent commenters. It was instituted when I had 3,000 visitors a day. But at this new site, we are down to an average of ~200 visitors/day. It’s true that last month that went up to ~900 visitors/day, which was very, very nice. However, the eight month total is still averaging 200 visitors/day.

The old commenting system where frequent commenters had to pay will not be instituted again until I reach ~3,000 visitors a day, which could be quite some time, considering that we seem to be stuck ~200 visitors/day for some time now. So you all might be able to comment  here for free for some time now.

Anyone not commenting because they think it’s not free is more than welcome to come back.

But even though commenting is free probably for some time now, it would still be very nice to get donations to keep the site running. See the post below for an explanation on how to do that.

Featured

Sticky: Support Beyond Highbrow

I often do this work all day long. It’s what I do. I also have some other income. I have a very small trust fund, and I work a bit on the side. However, my health prevents me from working full-time at a regular job.

Perhaps you worry that you are making me rich. In that case, I will tell you how much money I make so you won’t have to worry about that anymore. I live on about $14,000/yr.

If you value this site and the work I put into it, for which I get very little reward, please consider a donation. Even a small amount would be nice. Donations motivate me to write more, and when they’re not coming in, I don’t want to write so much. So when you donate, you are keeping this great site going.

And you are also contributing to the research that powers this blog with so many brilliant and scintillating topics that it will make your head spin. I mean, it’s not just highbrow, it’s Beyond Hghbrow. And so are you.

How? Go to PayPal and navigate to my email:

Go to PayPal and navigate to my email address to donate to this awesome site!

Donate button coming soon!

Want to support this site and not send a donation?

Go here.

All proceeds help pay me for this interesting service, and on your end, you can host that free speech stuff a lot better than with having a mainstream host.

Alt Left: I Got Sexually Abused!

Actually I didn’t but what happened to me counts as sexual abuse in the Victim Marathon everyone is running these days, so I might as well discuss it. I’m mainly doing this to show you how retarded a lot of this “I got abused hurr durr!” crap you hear from every other woman nowadays is. Next time a woman tells you that, sit her down and ask her exactly what happened. Half the time it will be nothing. But she will insist that she’s just all fucked up from this completely unimportant event or events.

Ok, here’s what happened.

One day when I was around 10-12, some weird old asshole leered at me in the bathroom on the fishing barge and asked,

“Hey kid, how big is your goober.”

He could have stepped out of a movie. He had the classic sicko pedo deranged grin. Aqualung.

This was back before everyone decided to become complete faggots and turn into professional victims for the rest of our lives. We kids didn’t go around thinking, “Oh noes! I just got harmed! I just got molested! I just got abused! Now I’m fucked up for eternity!”

That’s all a modern innovation and I think it shows how the notion that civilization always moves forwards is a lie. Because we were way more adaptive back then.

So, sure, I was a bit frightened, but I’m good at ignoring people. I just figured he was some weird asshole, maybe a pedo, but who the Hell knows, and who cares anyway? Some weird asshole freak made a weird comment to me. Ok, that’s funny and a bit disturbing, but back then, that wouldn’t lead to retreat to safe spaces, triggering, therapy for decades, “trauma”, and all the rest of the modern idiocy and indulgence.

We would just laugh at him and say what a freak he was. The world is full of freaks and disturbing weirdos, right? You might meet one one day, right? So, if this happens? It’s a normal thing, right? There’s no need to panic and turn into Perpetual Victim over it.

The Dangerous Myth That All Pedophiles Believe

As I mentioned in a previous post, most if not all pedophiles believe that kids are horny as Hell, want to have sex all the time and especially want  to have sex with adults. They claim all sorts of evidence in favor of this notion. Obviously, considering their orientation, this is a convenient thing for them to believe, right?

I read this a while back and was very dubious about it, so I did a lot of research to see if what  the pedos were saying was true – mostly, do little girls really have a sex drive and come onto men?

I didn’t have any personal data of my own. There was none from my childhood, but girls didn’t like me then anyway, not that I cared since most of them had cooties anyway.

After age 13 and into adulthood, I had lots of contacts with kids. I worked in schools for over a decade. I taught school for six years, all grades. I’ve spent a lot more time around kids than most people have. In that time, some teenage girls definitely came onto me. Some even openly propositioned me right in front of the whole class. But those were teenage girls with the full-blown sex drives of women, as different from little girls as lions are from tigers.

Once a 12 year old girl who I had befriended the previous year in my job at an elementary school literally propositioned me for sex in a park. I turned her down of course. But based on a few things I gathered from our conversation, she was also pubertal and past menarche, so she doesn’t count.

I would think that if little girl children really wanted to have sex with us men, I would have experienced it by now. I’ve experienced more than enough teenage girls and grown women who acted horny around me. If girls did this regularly too, I should have gotten it from them. Also, I’ve been around far more kids than 95% of men.

So based on my own life, I was thinking this is pedophile bullshit. But I had to find out. So I did some work.

It was very hard to find the data (probably due to pedo hysteria), but what little I came up with said no, little girls have no sex drive whatsoever, and nor do little boys for that matter, and neither should they, either of them.

And I don’t have any data, but I don’t even think little girls get wet, although it’s an interesting question but I’m terrified to ask anyone about it. Imagine trying to ask someone a question about that! Better yet, try getting funding for research into that question! Good luck!

Four months before menarche, there is a massive increase in the capacity of the vagina for lubrication. This is an essential part of the female physical sex drive along with admoninal tingles, hardened nipples, flushed cheeks, rapid breathing, and the rest of the ill-defined soup that no one understands, not even women themselves.

I’m sure little girls have discharge. All females do. Chafing is a thing. To prevent that, the vagina likes to be bit wet. To test it, sometime when you are with a naked woman (if you ever get lucky enough to get with one), sneak your finger into her vagina for as long as she lets you.

Don’t be soy and ask permission. Be a man, dammit! Just fucking do it! If she doesn’t like it, she’ll stop you. You will find that even if she is not turned on at all, it is a bit wet. That’s its natural state. I just figured this out for the first time a couple of years ago, believe it or not. The vagina likes to keep itself a bit wet, and it also engages in constant self-cleaning processes, and both are related. But discharge isn’t lubrication. They’re two completely different things.

I think this delusion – that little kids are horny as Hell and are just dying to have sex with adults, no doubt especially with pedophiles themselves, must be one of the main delusions that go along with pedophilia. I guess it’s hard to be a pedophile if you realize, correctly, that little kids have no interest at all in having sex with you. Gay pedophiles believe the same thing. They insist that little boys are horny as Hell and get erections all the time. I sure wasn’t and I sure didn’t. Some even say that little  boys can ejaculate. There’s no way that’s true.

I suppose the truism here is that people believe whatever they need to believe to make their view of the world (which includes their sexual orientation) work and be logical. It’s not much fun to realize that your basic view of the world, your ontology, your whole set-up and outward orientation towards reality, is a Goddamned gigantic lie. It’s such a miserable thought that it’s almost enough to make you go down and purchase a gun and buy it that very day. We simply can’t live with such utter futility. So we make up whatever lies we have to make up to make it seem like our existence is rational and not doomed and senseless.

Perhaps it’s how we get through the day. Perhaps if we don’t do that, we simply don’t get through the day. And when it’s all said and done, the one thing that remains about all the rest is blown to dust is that whatever we need to do to make it to another day is about the most precious possession we have.

A Good Deed Never Goes Unpunished

Greg Rambo: Has Highbrow ever taken on the subject of Scientology? They seem to think that whatever you accuse them of, that means you’re guilty of the accusation yourself.

I don’t know much about it.I would like to look into it. I have a book on it and I dipped into it, but you know me. I’m reading like 200 books at any given time probably.

I’m running into this “What you accuse other people of, that’s what you are.” It’s really upsetting to me.

I stumbled across a child porn pic the other day on Queera I mean Quora of all places.

Ok, the pic was this little girl on a bed. Who knows, maybe she’s five years old? Bare-ass naked. Not necessarily a big deal. Humans are animals and when we take off our clothes, we are naked. That’s called our natural state. There’s nothing obscene or evil about some kid with their clothes off. It’s a perfectly natural state for a young human being to be in. Not evil at all. You think it’s evil every time some kid takes their clothes off to take a bath or a shower? What’s in God’s name is wrong with you?

Anyway, she’s on all fours. With her ass to the camera. Peering over her shoulder and looking at the camera. And, yeah, her legs are spread a bit. So it was pretty gross and it hit me like a kick in the stomach. That pic is illegal because it is probably posed, somewhat uncomfortable, pretty unnatural, an unlikely position for her to have gotten into on her own, and, yeah, involves lascivious display of the genitalia. Dost test. Bingo. Illegal as all Hell.

Below that he had two posts which are instructive for showing us how these guys really think.

The first post is a fantasy of his that I doubt took place. He describes graphically how when he was 12 years old, he had sex with his eight year old sister. It was pretty explicit and I could reprint that here legally, but I won’t because it’s gross. Most 12 year old boys have not reached semenarche yet, so I doubt if the story is true. More likely a fantasy. Then he says something about how he wants to do this to an eight year old girl right now. This is typical thinking for these guys.

Next was a comment about how lots of men want to have sex with teenage girls (no shit), and then he adds that lots of men even want to have sex with pre-pubertal little girls (probably not a whole lot, but also probably way more than you want to think). He then added that a lot of little girls are horny as Hell, get very wet, and are dying to have sex with adults. If you spend any time around these guys, you hear this over and over. Fantasies about wanting a little girl to come onto them. Endless testimonies about how little girls are horny as Hell and come onto men all the time.

I got so mad that I called up the hotline and reported the sonofabitch. No good deed goes unpunished. My brother heard about and called up my Mom and told her, “Bob looks at child porn.” My Mom was and is absolutely hysterical about this. “Don’t go to those websites!” Except Queera is a just a regular website like Facebook. Is Facebook a child porn site? Queera doesn’t even allow real porn or even erotica.

Some sick fuck pedophile (the real kind) put that pic on his profile along with two other completely pro-pedophilia (the real kind) posts. I’m sure that all of my enemies who read this are going to run around shouting that Lindsay admitted that he looks at child porn.

Look what happens when you try to do the right thing. You run across some sick shit on the Net, so, like a good citizen, you report it to the authorities. The fact that you did this makes you a proven pedophile and a consumer of child porn.

I swear every day I hate people a little bit more than the day before.

Alt Left: What’s CP and What’s Child Erotica or Harmless Material?: Legal Dilemmas of Child Pornography Law

There’s legal or softcore child porn (CP) and illegal or hardcore CP. Most people are idiots and don’t know the difference, including this fool who reported a bunch of perfectly legal sites.

Bottom line is creepy pictures of little girls don’t cut it. There’s plenty of that out there. It’s hard to describe but it’s pretty little girls often in some rather skimpy clothes. They are often posing seductively and sometimes they have their tongue hanging out of the side of their mouth. Gross, huh? Sure, but it’s all completely legal.

If they have their clothes on, it’s pretty much legal. Nevertheless, there have been some recent very bad rulings that found that even pics of clothed little girls could be CP. These rulings were very bad because just looking at the rulings, it would be very hard to say exactly what is legal and what is illegal.

Even nudes of little girls are often legal if they look natural enough. It’s disturbing but it’s quite legal. There are nudist sites all over the Net with pics of kids, teenagers, and adults bare-ass naked.  All completely legal.

To be illegal it has to appear posed, unnatural, uncomfortable, a position the child was unlikely to get into on their own, and most importantly, must display lascivious display of the genitalia. This is called the Dost Test. The Dost Test has never even been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court, so we don’t have any idea how constitutional it is. It resulted from a case in California that laid out exactly what CP had to contain in order to be illegal and not simply child erotica, which is 100% legal.

That’s for children’s pics with no sex involved. Once you get sex involved, it’s a whole new ballgame, and any photos of kids having sex, either with themselves (masturbation photos are illegal), each other, or with adults, are absolutely illegal. They can’t even be posed with an adult looking like they are about ready to have sex. I could describe pics like that I saw and reported, but I don’t want to gross you out.

CP cartoons (including manga and hentai) and 3D are mostly legal. In some places like Germany they are illegal. In other places like Japan they are completely legal. In the US, it’s mixed. Apparently it’s illegal to create them but it’s not illegal to possess them, as if that makes sense. The clothed models have been a mess ever since the terrible Black Cat Scans case. In that case, the men who created the website went to prison, but the 25 million who went to the site and downloaded the pics got off scot free.

It’s generally considered a miscarriage of justice, especially because when those men, who happened to be of a certain (((type))), made that site, they checked out the law and figured that the site was completely legal. And it was. But after the site had been up a few years, the government decided absolutely criminally to try to redefine CP to include the Black Cat Scans which had previously been excluded. So those guys got blindsided. It’s as if spitting on the sidewalk has always been legal. So you spit on the sidewalk from time to time.

One day the Feds decide to reinterpret some vague law called “Antisocial Behavior” to include “Spitting on the Sidewalk,” although that act had never been included before. So you get taken to court and the Feds make the case that under their new interpretation of the Antisocial Behavior law, they now include Spitting on the Sidewalk, though it was always legal before. They try the case and some hack judge convicts you for a crime you weren’t even aware was illegal.

Bottom line is you can possess all the clothed model pics you want to (But why would you want to?) but I guess you can’t make websites putting them up there and charging people to see them. I guess.

Clothed models are usually little girls around pubertal age (11-13) dressed up in some pretty dirty clothes (like lingerie) and posed in some pretty dirty positions (guess). They’re creepy as all get out, but it’s not CP. Most of the girls were from impoverished families in rural Russia. In every case, their mothers got them involved in the modeling.

A number of the girls got followed up and by 18-20, almost all of them had married the local rural Russian thug and already had at least one kid. Some were single Moms already. There was an uproar when the men went to prison. 20-40 former models all made videos testifying to the fact that they were not harmed at all by this modeling and how well the photographer had treated them.

The photographer had treated all of the girls and their mothers very well and there had been no sexual behavior at all between him and the girls. The girls and their mothers were all very fond of him. The videos are still sitting up on Youtube if you are interested. It’s a pretty sorry case all around.

Central to weird CP theory is that CP is the portrayal of a crime and hence is illegitimate. Except shooting clothed model pics isn’t a crime, so strike that one out.

Next is the argument that the girls are harmed by being photographed even if there is no sex involved. This applies to pics of girls alone nude and posed in various ways. Merely by getting posed that way and  having  photos taken and certainly if they know the photos are on the Net for anyone to see is enough to cause harm. That’s an interesting argument.

But for the clothed models, the photographs were basically legal, the girls were clothed, and no girl was harmed by getting pics taken of her.

Where’s the crime?

Next we see how CP law keeps creeping upward and upward to encompass more and more things.

No crime? No matter. Girls not harmed at all and quite willing? No matter.

Because a brand new idea has been thrown out. The concept of a record of a crime and harm to the girls is dead because now we have new reasons!

The new reasons say that “CP” is bad even if there is no crime, no girls were harmed because the material is being used by pedophiles to masturbate to. Which I guess is evil or something. This is how they roped in the cartoons and the 3D stuff. No crime of course. And no harm of course. Hell, there are not even any real humans to be victims of a crime or to be harmed! The things being victimized by crime and harmed are pictures, drawings,  and 3D graphics. They’re not even real people! They’re completely fake!

But now they’re illegal too because they turn pedophiles on. That seems a dubious reason to make something illegal.

How bout if a man takes photos of boys walking to and from school?

How about a man who orders a video of little girls during majorette exercizes?

And how about if these men are pedophiles who use these perfectly harmless photographs to masturbate to pedo fantasies? So what? What’s wrong with that? But, guess what? Feds (FBI jerkoffs) have arrested men for possessing photos they took of boys walking to school and for ordering videos of girls doing majorette exercizes.

Because pedos were using them to jerk off. That misinterpretation of the law seems very wrong, sorry. That’s absurd. Also, you are arresting men for thought crimes. After all, the photos and videos are only illegal because of the thoughts that go through these men’s heads when they look at them.

Ridiculous. If I look at those same videos (not sure why I would but anyway) I would most certainly not experience sexual fantasies about either the girls or the boys. So I get to possess this material because it doesn’t turn me on (because I don’t have illegal thoughts), whereas these pedos go to prison for possessing the same material, apparently because they have illegal thoughts while looking at the material.

Back to the female who got solo photos of her taken as a child. What if the female is not aware that her pics are out there? People are looking at them and she hasn’t a clue? How is this automagically harming her? Osmosis? Via another dimension? Some psychic mechanism. Clue me. She’s not being harmed by the people looking at her pics.

Another argument is that even if the female is not aware her pics are out there, the mere memory of her having those pics taken as a girl is going to continue to harm her, assuming she even remembers such things. That’s a better argument,  but that harm is going to take place whether the pics went up in flames and are gone or whether they are in 10,000 places on the Net, right?

Als,o believe it or not, I met a woman who was molested and later had statutory rape committed against her by her uncle and his friends from ages 12-17. They took videos of the whole thing. She has reconciled herself to what was originally a trauma by deciding that this was fun and it turns her on.

She’s actually looking for the videos now, which seems a bit dangerous. Well, there’s one woman who had pics taken at age 12 and doesn’t care. Furthermore, she presents an interesting case. Yes, the videos portray a crime. Sure, she was legal from 16-17 so all this sex was legal at that point. But shooting videos of it wasn’t. She was still underage and although she can consent to sex, she can’t consent to making porn, which is probably a good idea.

We need an 18 to do porn law because as soon as we start lowering that number, the Net will be flooded with the newly legal girls. Now you can do porn at 17? Fine. Except in a week the damned Internet will be flooded with “17 year old girls doing hardcore porn!!!” Because pornographers have no basement on sleazy. They’ll go as low as you let them. I don’t particularly care about teenagers making this stuff consensually and people looking at it at home. But keep it off the damned Internet!

But the girl was going along with it quite happily, so one wonders what the big deal is. Further, the girl is not being “revictimized” by this videos being out there because by her own admission, she likes these videos.

I don’t know what to say. Considering her age, most of those videos could well be floating around anyway. After all, hardcore with 14-17 year old girls is said to be everywhere on the Net,  mostly unlabeled.  No one seems to care much. But the early stuff is creepy. I don’t want videos of grown men having sex with 12-13 year old girls legally floating around on the Net. I don’t care if she likes them. I don’t care if she didn’t get hurt and isn’t getting hurt by them. I just don’t want that crap out there on the Net. Maybe if you keep it your drive to yourself, it might be ok. But I don’t want that garbage floating around legally.

What about the case of creep shots and surreptitiously taken photos of little girls and teenage girls. That stuff’s out there too. In this case, the female doesn’t even know anyone took pics of her. Furthermore, she probably doesn’t even know if her pics are floating around. It’s really hard to make a case that she got harmed at all by some creep using a hidden camera. Sure it’s an invasion of privacy but the person doesn’t even know their privacy got invaded, so what of it? I guess it probably ought to be legal but I’ll be the first to say the pics are creepy and uncool.

The “Tom Hanks Is a Pedophile” Charges

I watched a video of some Qanon conspiracy theorist going on about the “Tom Hanks is a pedophile” story. He wouldn’t be a pedophile even if it was true because he seems like regular women just fine. Also the girl was 13 if what she says is even true. That’s too old for pedophiles. That’s called statutory rape, although, yes, in some states like California, it’s called child molestation.

That’s a bad law though because 13 year old girls are almost all pubertal. Menarche in the US now hits at age 13, and the physical sex drive comes on about four months before menarche. Prior to that I do not believe that girls have any physical or psychological sex drive at all. Kids simply don’t have a sex drive like we adults do. I don’t think boys have a sex drive either. I sure didn’t. I think I thought about sex maybe five minutes a year as a boy.

Anyway, there’s a woman out there who says that her father sold her to Tom Hanks at age 13 as a sex slave for Mr. Hanks. Well that’s one thing. Not only that but a mind-controlled sex slave, which is a concept I find dubious. I have no idea if she’s telling the truth. You’ve got me.

The video tries to make the case that Hanks puts international pedophilic codes into his tweets. I have no idea if that is true or not either. He tweeted a photo of a lost glove next to SRC USA. You put that into the Russian search engine Yandex, and you get a bunch of (apparently legal) pedophile sites. The man in the video proceeds to report all the sites to the hotline, but all of those sites were legal because every pic I saw on there was 100% legal.

Every Day I Hate People Just a Little Bit More

I swear I’m starting to hate human beings a little bit more every single day. And yeah, trust me, they deserve it all right. You guys are all right though. If you were like the Normie faggots I hate so much,  you wouldn’t even read here.

And I don’t feel bad about this either. I’m 100% right. They deserve all my hate and 10X more on top of that. It’s one thing to be an idiot. Fine, you’re retarded. No problem! So is 90% of the population. I can handle it as long as you’re nice and you don’t handle any dangerous tools or objects around me. Nice idiots are just fine, especially if they’re female. The dumber the hotties are, the more we can trick them into bed! Hey, that’s got to count for something!

What I can’t handle are dangerous idiots, and 90% of human idiots are the dangerous kind. Nope, nope, nope. Dangerous idiots, not ok.

Way too many dangerous idiots on this Clown Rock in the Current Year. I keep wanting to dial back the clock to 1977 when the world was sane and people weren’t such shitheads. I never works. I wake up and every time, it’s Current Year 2020 all over again. Then I want to go to sleep and never wake up.

I’ve always been afraid of death, but now I am starting to wonder. If it shortens the torture of festering in this Clown County’s soyciety a bit, is that really such a bad thing? I’m wondering.

Alt Left: Left Libertarianism and a Rejection of Carceral Liberalism and Leftism

I’d say I definitely have some serious Left Libertarian tendencies. Are you familiar with the term “carceral?” I am seeing that used a lot now. Carceral feminists (100%, obviously), the Carceral Left (way too many of them), carceral liberals (all of them). A lot of conservatives are carceral too. That’s their whole raison d’etre after all. Centrists? What’s that? That’s just a carceral liberal with some economic conservatism.

I hang out on Reddit a lot, though I am banned repeatedly. That place is sickening. They’re all liberals or Left, but they’re the Carceral Left or Carceral Liberals. They’re constantly screaming to throw more and more people in jail in prison, mostly men for either having sex with women or trying to do so. Apparently there’s no worse crime for a carceral libbie than trying to get laid. I think they’ve never met a law they don’t like. They’ve never met a jail or prison they are not ecstatic about.

Which is why I don’t understand why they hate cops so much. Wait. You never met a law you didn’t like (and in fact libbies are constantly screeching for more laws, greater penalties and toughening up laws). You can’t get enough of prisons and jails, especially since they’re full of men and there’s nothing libbie faggots hate more than men. So they love laws, love prisons, love jails…but they hate cops?! They yell about defunding the police but they want to throw all of us men in jail for even looking at a woman. Forget flirting and dating. That’s all harassment now. Forget sex. It’s all rape and abuse now.

I’d say that the  Alt Left, if anything, should be a civil libertarian movement. We should be an anti-carceral movement. The problem isn’t so much cops. Sure, they enforce the laws,  but they don’t write them. The problem is the whole shitstem. The cops, the DA’s, the judges, the bailiffs, the jail and prison guards, the parole and probation officers, the jails, the prisons, and more than anything else, the goddamned legal code.

These maniacs have already made half of ordinary life illegal, but that’s never enough. Every year on January 1, I wake up and there’s 50-100 stupid new laws in my state, supposedly one of the most liberal states in the country but actually the home of Carceral Liberalism.

I advocate, for starters, wiping lots of laws right off the books. Anything that doesn’t obviously and directly harm an innocent person is an objective way needs to go. I want to make it do prisons and jails cannot be filled past capacity. Our California penal institutions are still 121% full, and we just let a lot of them out due to  overcrowding. The courts allow our prisons to be 133% of capacity. Many of our county jails are under court mandated overcrowding mandates. I want the prisons to be capped at 100%. Fuck 133%. What is this 133% crap? You don’t like it?  Fine. Build more prisons. Good luck with that.

This is my dream. We’ve reduced all the jails and prisons to 100% capacity max. They’re usually close to being full. The police go out on their rinky dink calls for the petty chicken shit crap they waste most of their time on and a lot of the time, they decide not to make an arrest. “Hey, the jails are full. We don’t usually make arrests on this petty crap. We have better things to do.”

I was alive back in the 1970’s and 1980’s.  Cops had a reasonable attitude back then. They would often arrive at places where people were breaking the  law but they would simply choose to not do anything about it. I was there on several occasions when police came out and said,  “We don’t usually waste our time on  this crap,” or “We don’t usually like to get involved in this stuff,” or “Look, we have better things to do than waste our time with this BS.”

That seems to be gone now.  Cops nowadays seem to be itching to arrest anyone they can for spitting on the sidewalk. I don’t get it. Someone clue me here. They bored? Change of culture? Not enough action?

There was a sense of finesse, of nuance, of reason, logic, rationality, and sense. That’s how the law is supposed to be, from the cop on the beat all the way to robes in the courts. The law is a grey area. It’s supposed to be enforced and and prosecuted that way. It’s supposed to be an area free of heated emotion that distorts cold logic and reason.

I actually read legal journals. You might want to try it some time. It’s not as hard as you think. One thing they keep talking about is keeping emotions out of the laws and courts. The ways they do this is to write hard legal codes into court decisions that tie the hands of judges and force them to rule as logically as possible, the reason being that of course judges to say nothing of juries are subject to the worst whims of emotions that distort, warp, twist, and wreck both law and justice.

Alt Left: I Am a Civil Libertarian

It seems like 99% of the population, including my own siblings and mother, don’t have the slightest understanding of me at all, and in fact, their views of what I am are frankly libelous. Almost everyone thinks I am a much worse person than I actually am. Just about every nasty thing you hear about me is probably a straight up lie.

First of all, idiots assume that if you are passionate about or arguing for a certain position, you obviously have a personal interest in it. Wrong! You learn that in Idiocy 101! Come on! Actually many of the things that I am most passionate and outraged about have no effect on me whatsoever. I have no skin in the game. I’m not the one who’s going to get in trouble. People don’t understand that people like me have “radical empathy.” I will passionately advocate for a position that has nothing to do with myself at all. I’m not going to get in trouble. Further, I often advocate for things that I don’t even have any interest in.

I believe in radical justice. If someone is being harmed by some soycietal idiocy, I feel compassion for this person. I don’t like to see innocent people get beat up by shitheads, especially dangerous shitheads, in other words, the majority. I care about innocent people. I don’t have to have skin in a game to feel passionate about it. Why can’t I feel deeply injured when any innocent person is set upon by the latest deranged mob of dangerous retards (the majority)?

But no, this is what everyone believes:

    1. If you talk about something, that means you do it.

If you write about something, that means you do it.

If you argue for something, that means you do it.

If you argue against the prohibition of something, that means you do it.

I admit that 3 and 4 have somewhat of a greater basis in fact, but still, there are many people like me who will argue in favor of things that have nothing whatsoever to do with our lives. We will argue against the prohibition of things that we have nothing to do with. In particular, we will argue for purely philosophical opinions that have nothing to do with our lives. People just can’t figure this out because they’re too fucking retarded. Too fucking dangerously retarded, excuse me.

If you see me arguing for something weird, think of it this way: in a lot of ways, I am a rather extreme civil libertarian. That’s the position that I am arguing for – a civil libertarian position. It often has nothing whatsoever to do with my life at all. It’s often something I have no interest in. If the Alt Left is anything, it’s civil libertarian. In some ways, we are radical civil libertarians. That’s usually why we are coming from some position or other – not because we have any personal stake or even interest in it but instead because we are fighting for abstract positions of justice.

Next time you stop and think, “Wow! Why is Lindsay arguing for something so weird/sick/evil/whatever, consider first of all that I am probably just arguing for it from the principles of purely abstract civil libertarianism.

Here is an overview of the issues that civil libertarians care about.

Alt Left: What Crime Did Prince Andrew Commit?

In the Epstein/Maxwell affair, the accusation from Virginia Giuffre (VG) is that she was ordered by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew a couple of times in order to gain blackmail material on him.

The faggots and cucks on Reddit are all screaming that Andrew committed “child rape.” “He raped a child!” they scream. What a bunch of homos. A recent post on Reddit ordered everyone to stop calling the “victims” of the “abuse” young women. “They were little girls!” the gays all screamed. Really? A 17 year old girl is a “little girl?” Have any of these dickwads ever met, spoken to, and spent time with an actual 17 year old girl? I have. They’re virtually adults. Hell, a lot of 16 year old girls and even a few 15 year old girls are practically adults for all intents and purposes.

Especially past 17 1/2, there’s not a whole lot of difference between them and an 18 year old adults. They’re inexperienced, they don’t know what they are doing, they’re awkward and clumsy when it comes to flirting and sex, but they’re very enthusiastic. Getting down to brass tacks, they are often quite immature, but I would call them more “very immature women” than girls. It’s far more of a woman than a girl, that’s for sure.

Next we look at the rape allegation. Supposedly Prince Andrew “raped” this girl! These Reddit “men” actually believe this feminist shit where half of all normal sex is rape. Good God, they’re queers.

She never tells us how the sex started with Epstein and Maxwell. Was she raped? Was she talked into it? There are allegations of “sex trafficking.” Sex trafficking means you are being held prisoner, you can’t really leave, or they are making it hard for you to leave by coercing you into staying somehow and threatening you with consequences, often violence, if you try to leave. Sex trafficking is sex slavery. You’re being held prisoner. It’s very much tied in with pimping, and Epstein was mostly a pimp before he was anything else. Maxwell was a madam, in effect a female pimp.

Was VG really a sex slave? How? That means she was being held prisoner? She was? How was she a prisoner? Giuffre was coerced into staying? How? Giuffre was threatened if she tried to leave? How?

I’ve been over this story for a long time. Giuffre never states that she was raped one time. She just says Epstein told me to have sex with this guy, so I did it. That’s perfectly legal because she was legal when he was doing that. Apparently this girl likes to follow orders. She’s a grown woman now, right? She still likes to follow orders? Tell her to come over and I will give her some sexual orders to obey, ok?

It’s not enough to say “I was Epstein’s sex slave.” She was legal. How exactly did Epstein make her his sex slave? He said, “You are my sex slave. You shalt obey me, miss.” And this fool girl believed that? Well, that’s legal.

Prince Andrew had sex with this girl in Virgin Islands. She was legal, 17. AOC is 16 in Virgin Islands. Someone explain to me how it is rape and sexual abuse to have consensual sex with a perfectly legal girl. I’m dying to know. VG was legal everywhere she had sex with Andrew. She was legal in New York. She was legal in New Mexico. She was legal in the UK. Please explain how consensual sex with a perfectly legal girl is rape in any of these places.

VG was a “sex slave” from 17-23, apparently, so most of this was when she was a grown woman. Why all the focus on the one year when she was a girl, albeit a legal one? Between ages of 18-25, was she being “raped” or “abused” the whole time? Most gay media stories on this subject say she was “abused” from ages of 18-23. How in God’s name can a grown woman be “sexually abused?” She can’t. Even teenage girls can’t be “sexually abused.””

Sexual abuse only refers to child molestation, generally but not always sex with a child under 13. The media also says that VG was “abused” when she was 17. Every time she went off to have sex with some guy Epstein told her to, she got “abused.” How in the Hell did she get “abused” by having consensual sex with all of these men? Keep in mind she was completely legal.

I’m not feeling a lot for this silly woman. She got paid $15,000 for getting “raped” and “abused” by Andrew, and apparently she got paid big money every time she had sex with someone Epstein told her too. Sounds like she’s making pretty good money for a girl working on her back. I never knew getting “raped” and “abused” paid so well. Hell, at rates like that, I might even let myself get “raped” and “abused.”

But really, I’m feeling terribly sorry for this woman. I’m sure that must have been horribly traumatic to get all that money for one consensual sex act! If some hot chick gave me $15K for sleeping with her, I’d be traumatized for years! I’d have PTSD for the rest of my life!

People are saying that Andrew may have bought this girl. No one knows if Andrew bought her. Epstein was probably just giving this girl away to his friends. I doubt he was charging anyone. This seems to be about the worst they have on Andrew. If he bought her, Andrew is guilty of the crime of – gasp – buying a prostitute. Like this doesn’t happen millions of times every day in the US. Like rich men don’t buy prostitutes all over the world all the time.

On the other hand, she was a minor. It was legal to have sex with her but not to pay her for it. So if he knew she was underage, he’s guilty of the crime of buying an underage prostitute, which apparently some sort of a crime, even if it’s not called that. We now know that he knew she was 17.

Fine, but did he pay her or not? That’s the important part here. Even if he did, frankly, men who buy underage prostitutes are almost never convicted. You have to prove they knew she was underage, and that’s hard to do. Generally they go after the pimps who are pimping these girls out, not the customers. Men probably buy underage prostitutes tens of thousands of times a day in this country.

They are also saying that he committed some crime called “Buying a Trafficked Prostitute.” But that’s only if he bought her. There’s no such crime as “Having Sex with a Trafficked Prostitute.” You can have all the sex you want with these trafficked women. You just can’t pay them for it.

Neither of these are even crimes. Show me where there are crimes called that. As I said, cops don’t worry about the buyers. They have a hard enough time keeping up with the pimps and the traffickers.

Ok, VG’s a prostitute. She’s a whore. Nothing but a little teenie whore, and a well-paid one at that. Epstein is pimping out an underage prostitute, and he may also be trafficking her. And pimping out an underage prostitute is indeed a crime. I forget what it is called, maybe something like “Profiting from Underage Prostitution.” I recently looked over the sex laws in some European countries and a number of them had crimes along those lines, phrased in different ways.

The problem with the trafficking laws is the way they were written. As noted above, the trafficking laws are designed to prevent human slavery of various kinds. The sex trafficking laws are designed to fight what is better known as sex slavery. These women are imprisoned. They can’t leave. They’re being forced to prostitute themselves or forced to work for some particular pimp.

But the law was abused by the pigs at the same time it was written. It applied to not only the sex slavery, as was proper, but it threw in  the notion that anyone pimping underage prostitutes was automatically engaging in sex slavery. So the law is designed to prevent trafficking in prostituted sex slaves and also underage prostitutes.

The problem is that the addition of “and also if they are underage” part to the law is that this goes against the spirit of the law – that it was designed to prevent sex slavery. There’s no proof that all underage prostitutes being pimped out are sex slaves, though tragically quite a few probably are exactly that. It’s just more pigs abusing laws and writing laws based on emotional hysteria rather than clear-eyed, cold, legal logic.

But anyway, Andrew just had sex with some legal girl, probably for free. He may have had no idea she was a prostitute or not, and if he didn’t pay her, it doesn’t matter. He knew her age but she  was legal. He probably had no idea she was being “trafficked,” and it wouldn’t matter if he did unless he bought her and even then, nobody gets prosecuted for such a crime.

Precisely what crime did Andrew commit here?

Inquiring minds wish to know.

Alt Left: Just Banned from Reddit Again

I got banned from Reddit, so I went and got a new name and signed up under that one. I got banned almost immediately. So now I’ve been banned twice. But now I have a new name, ha ha. A Satanic feminist sub reported me to Mommy Reddit because I wrote a comment asking why it was wrong for adult men to fantasize about teenage girls. After all, 100% of all straight men are attracted, typically maximally, to teenage girls. There is some other data suggesting that attraction declines with each declining year, but all men are maximally aroused by 16 and 17 year old girls.

One study found that for 15 year old girls, it was 90%, for 14 year old girls, it was 80%, and for 13 year old girls, it was 70%. Fairly high levels of attraction from 10-60% remained even in the pedophilic range – for 12 year old girls, it was 60%, for 11 year old girls, it was 50%, for 10 year old girls, it was 40%, for 9 year old girls, it was 30%, for 8 year old girls, it was 20%, and for 7 year old girls, it was 10%. Below that there was no attraction, thank God.

When females are lumped into a group called 13+, 100% of
normal straight men react maximally to this group.

Since men generally react maximally to teenage girls, what would be wrong with men fantasizing about the things that maximally arouse them? Isn’t that normal human behavior to fantasize about things that maximally arouse you?

For this the feminists banned me, wrote me a scathing email with orders not to contact them, and reported me to Mommy Reddit. The cucks and faggots at Reddit then banned me for something gay called “child sexualization” for stating some basic scientific facts along with a scientifically uncontroversial opinion.

Today I just banned again from another gay subreddit. I attacked feminists in the thread, and I accused people in the thread of being carceral liberals and police state liberals, which is exactly what almost every liberal in the US is. I’d argue that that’s what almost all US Communists are too. US Communists are so cucked and gay it’s pathetic. I doubt if there’s no real man among them.

Anyway, I got banned for “hate speech” for attacking feminists. According to Reddit homos, hate speech is:

No racist or sexist speech in comments or submissions. Also no abusive speech based on religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. These are not rules against swearing; they’re not rules against expressing political opinions.

I went back and looked at my comment. Nothing in there was racist or sexist at all or attacked any of their pet protected groups. In fact, I didn’t even mention anything having to do with race or sex and their protected groups anywhere in the post. The only thing I could figure out is that I attacked feminists.

Somehow feminists, a political formation in the form of a hate movement against men, is somehow in the category of race, sex, gender, religion, or sexual orientation. Obviously feminism is none of these things. The only thing I could figure out is that the mods on his sub are such faggots that they think attacking feminists is the same as attacking women.

Which brings me to another question. All liberal and left women  are feminists. 100%. No exceptions ever for any reason. And worse, close to 100% of liberal and Left men are utterly cucked male feminists. Face it boys, there’s nothing more pathetic than a male feminist. The only real men and real women are found on the Right, which is disgusting. If you’re on the left and you’re a real man, you will get tossed off just like that, with extreme prejudice too. They will order to go over to the conservatives.

Which makes me think: How many rightwing men are conservatives mostly because they are sick and tired of faggotized and pussified left and liberal politics? How many of them are Republicans because the Republican Party is the party of the real men? That’s a dumb reason to vote Republican (What have Republicans ever done for us men?) but most people vote based on the most retarded reasons imaginable that have little or nothing to do with their lives.

How many women have gone rightwing because they like to act feminine? They’re girly girls who love being girly, feminine, and womanish? I’ve talked to many women who told me that the main thing they hate about feminism is how much feminists hate femininity.

It’s true. Feminists do hate femininity.  Of course they do.
They’re dykes and manhaters or both, and they love nothing more than women with short hair wearing pants who are nearly indistinguishable from men. This is how women are supposed to look according to feminists. Like a goddamned butch bull dyke. I’m thinking maybe quite a few real women are voting right simply because they’re disgusted that leftwing women have turned into a bunch of man-hating dykes. They won’t throw you out of the left for being a feminine woman. But you better believe they will throw you out for not being a feminist.

By the way, what in the Hell’s the matter with straight men nowadays? I can’t believe how gay they are. If you’re going to be that gay, why don’t you just quit lying, move to Frisco, and stick a cock in your mouth? Are there any real men at all amongst these Millennials and Gen Z’ers? Almost all of them seem like complete faggots.

Backtracking on an Old Post

https://beyondhighbrow.com/2020/07/28/creating-the-indestructible-man-of-steel/

This article may have been written without really thinking. I think this torture woke me up to the fact I was a bad man.  However, to continue in this phase projects weakness to the woman. But I think if I hadn’t been humiliated like this, I wouldn’t have turned around.

Anyway, as noted in other posts, the next step is not contacting the unloving wife (for 30 days) thereby creating fertile ground for winning her respect back. In my case, the relationship isn’t going to mentioned or any negativity associated with it and if it is, I will go to another room and after that, go to my parent’s home for a day.

Idolatry and the Relation to Relationships

In the Bible much is said about idolatry, and this is the missing ingredient in why I think porn use, love of money, etc. can be a major downfall in a relationship, basically turning the man into ice. Some people will say, “Ah, it’s not a big deal.” However, I don’t think they’re aware of how the things that men turn into idols slowly but surely destroy end up causing their own destruction.

In my case, these things made me self-absorbed to my girlfriend, causing the horrible thing going on now. I have to put in extreme measures like 30 day no-contact rules (sort of – because I have to live with her) just to win the respect back because even if I did start it, I cannot show weakness. This only drives the woman away.

Now while I am married to her, the bottom line is I haven’t won back her heart. In fact, even her recent sucking up is something I don’t buy. Unless extreme measures are taken pretty soon, she’s going to start mocking me again. In that case, I won’t be able to take it!

Think about it – if she was bullying me for a whole month over my supposed cheating and had righteous anger over other things, what’re the odds that she’s going to stop the snide little comments? Believe me, it’s those little smart-ass comments that get under my skin, feeding my insecurity.

The Toxic Relationship Excuse

The thing is, most relationships – even with seemingly normal people – can become toxic. We simply can’t get out of the relationship just because it’s toxic. The mean things said probably aren’t what the person really wants to say but more that they are fed by anger and resentment.

In that case, as I’ve noted in other posts, the person has to appeal to the subconscious to really make the other love them because that’s the real problem. As noted, love is not logical.

When Your Wife Is Calling You Retard and Autistic

I don’t know what to make of this, except she was in some “falling out of love” phase. Come on, if the guy she was cucking me for was retarded, she’s be in his special-ed class everyday for tutoring!

Anyway, the mom says the woman’s in love but fighting it, but I think the problem is she was falling out of love. On the other hand, I believe she’s coming back out of it. She didn’t really mean what she said, but it’s probably just being mean- revenge for my bad treatment of her for many months.

She has a niece who’s autistic. She isn’t cruel to her.

Married Three Times?

If people are marrying three times, I figure they don’t know much about keeping a marriage. Maybe they married the wrong one, but maybe not. Come on – people fall in love with what seem to be bad matches.

Well, in my opinion, keeping a marriage going would be the same as finding a mate to begin with. You don’t want to appear desperate and boring. You want to keep the surprises up.  All this taps into the mate’s subconscious because ultimately love is not logical.

Be Careful What You Wish For!

I was thinking lately some sci-fi thing where I thought, “If men could fool women into falling madly in love with them, could it come out with bad consequences later on?” You might think that’s the woman of your dreams, but what if she isn’t? Nowadays, we probably got lots of guys taking on this, “Don’t be boring” “Be a  Mystery to Women” advice, and perhaps they really are getting the women they desire, but is the desire really the best destiny?

Females Are Attracted to Masculinity

They want men who are strong, providers, and trustworthy.  Also, they can’t stand boring men. It’s as simple as that!

They don’t like crybabies because they come across as being mental, child-like, or feminine.

It’s not too hard to achieve these goals for a man. Strong doesn’t have to be a power-lifter, and no man has to be totally trustworthy, etc.. There’s room for error but not major error.

Looks Do Matter

They don’t mean everything, but come on, guys, you’re saying you’re not attracted to looks? Of course you are and so are the women. I don’t think it takes much to turn the problem around. You don’t need plastic surgery.

O.K., my woman thinks I look better with facial hair now that I’ve shaved it since January. O.K., I’ll grow it back then. That doesn’t hurt my pride or anything. It’s not a big deal!

Don’t Cry During the Breakup

Don’t cry ever generally if you’re a man. Women simply don’t respect guys who cry. They might feel pity but the feeling that you’re weak overpowers the thought. Basically, you become a child, not a man to them, so they can’t go along with you seeing as they don’t think you’re strong enough to handle life’s situations.

Anyhow I did break down a few times during my near-breakup – because I had never had a near-breakup before and I didn’t know how to react to it. I just realized I was madly in love with the woman, but it’s was too late, sucka!

Crying is Cheap

That’s true and talk is also cheap. If you say stuff, you need to have credibility behind it. In other words, there has to be action showing you mean what you say. It’s like in the Bible where it says doers and not sayers of the law are justified.

 

How Christianity Can Help Dating

There’s always the thing where people say daily prayer would make good things happen for the righteous. However, it’s more specific than that. Christianity can melt your heart so you’re not too hard-to-get for women. A self absorbed man is a turn-off to girls.

However, on the flip side, a genuine faith could provide that lack of boredom, that sense of mystery that would get women chasing you as all the dating experts want to happen.

Well, a Christian faith is all about being molded into a better man anyway, and it’s never a dull show.

How to Keep From Being Boring

I might seem interesting on the net, but around real-life girls, I’ve simply always been nerdy and shy. There was exceptions like during high school and college where I was a party animal, but in that case, I actually became too wild, so I came across as crazy or mentally challenged.

Anyhow, a big problem is now that I’ve let go of my self-absorption which worked well on my girl for a long time – but eventually caused a near-break-up and month of masochistic torture – there’s the possibility of being too nice which really means too boring or too predictable.

How to Change That?

I really don’t know.  That will be a challenge with my new wife.  Anyway, as far as women besides my wife, being too nice has always been a major problem and why they aren’t chasing me.

How My New Wife Tricked Me into Falling Madly In Love

She simply employed the same strategy that they tell guys to do to girls. Basically, she became super-hard to get, all-out rejecting me in favor of some guy who was probably not really interested in her. However, I believed this to be a serious threat.

Always the problem with her is I think deep down I was madly in love with her, but it took the masochistic situation I described in a recent article to actually make me realize it.

What was my problem?

Well, I was super-hard to get for her. I became self-absorbed during my time with her, which initially kept her on because women like guys hard-to-get. I wouldn’t move in with her. I neglected a baby we had, never coming around, and I caused a problem where she’s now on probation.

Other Problems

Refusing to change looks, lying, not being on time, not listening, cheating also I think, even though it was very light cheating with strippers.

Was this actually her goal?

I don’t really know, but it did the job!

What’s Our Relationship Now?

It seems awesome after a phone call I had after being away for a few days. Nonetheless, I fear I’m becoming too boring by spilling the love beans too much and telling too many inner feelings.

Dating Advice on The Net

Well, not sure if it  mimics Robert Lindsay’s but the overall message is:

You get the woman to chase you, not the other way around.  You do this by not be boring.

It’s not about alpha bad-asses getting women but simply guys who aren’t boring.

How to be boring?

In short, don’t be desperate. Don’t be too available, don’t text/call too much, don’t make dorky attempts to show your feelings too early in the relationship.

This is much like Business 101

In business, you want the customer to chase you. Actually, I’ve known that for a long time. That’s why you target people already wanting what you have. For instance, you target online people searching for terms related to what you’re selling.

Man of Steel Marriage Counseling Works Best

Nah, I just don’t buy it when a couple breaks apart – and one isn’t a doormat for the other.  It’s because it’s better to confront the problem directly.  For instance, there was this couple that broke up, a pastor and his wife, and they split ways totally (but got back together maybe a year later).  I’m sure there was anger like from a volcano, but with the two living separately, we don’t really know if the cheating man changed his ways.  Did he really get hurt – like someone who has to look it straight in the eyes?  I mean, people can repress anger/sadness when they’re away from it.  It’s way different when it’s right there.

Bullying as a Forum of Creating Steel – Doesn’t Always Work

I don’t think it works on people who are hardened of heart and don’t want to change.  I mean, the person has to really want to change – in other for this mind game to work.

Anyhow, there are people saying bullying simply weeds out bad things.  Yeah, true, but only, as said, on people badly wanting change.

In fact, a lot of the times harassment only creates hardened crybabies.  Isn’t that the cultural left in many ways?  Think about it!

Creating the Indestructible Man of Steel

Well, the heartbreak of the last month or so has a massive positive side.  Well, the thing is the “beloved” has allowed me to “stay on”.  However, the catch is that she’s treating me like the scum of the Earth.  So why stick around?  Well, I love the woman!

Anyway, I wouldn’t do it otherwise. Isn’t this just like in the Marines where the so desperately want to get out with honors?   They want that goal – but the instructors do everything they can to stop it – so only the people who just won’t quit get the prize. In other words, like on the movie Whiplash, “The real Charlie Parker wouldn’t give up.”

Anyway, why do people need to be smashed and recreated?  Well, they’re just too self-centered, too evil.   Anyhow, don’t think I’m not doing this without prayer – cause this is like  The Exorcist.

 

s

Utility and Beauty May Work in Opposite Directions

A previous post about a nonfunctional stage of the female body which nevertheless seems to be peak beauty in one sense. This got me thinking. Perhaps the world is not supposed to be beautiful. Suppose most beautiful things are either accidents or with the females in the previous post, nonfunctional.

Which also got me thinking.  Maybe pure, natural, functional beauty loses some of its awesomeness because of the necessity of developing utility.

Usually when an object of any kind  starts to acquire utility, utility goes to the front of the line and beauty and appearance go to the back. Perhaps a bit of beauty is always sacrificed when making anything  functional, useful, or utilitarian. Probably things in this world are not supposed to be shockingly beautiful.

Sure, there are beautiful things in the world, but not that much of nature is pure beauty. The parts of nature that are pure beauty are rightly set aside as natural wonders in national parks and whatnot.

The world has to figure out how to function. Rocks, water, trees, grass, lichen, clouds, insects, birds, reptiles, and mammals are primarily concerned with functionality.

Yes, even clouds, rocks and water have to figure out how to work and do what they need to do.

Living things are mostly just concerned with survival, and what in the Hell does beauty have to do with survival? Nothing.

A plant’s objective is to live long enough to scatter its seed and create offspring.

An animal’s objective is to survive, not get killed by predators, find and acquire food, mate, rest, hide, raise offspring, etc. That’s the evolutionary trajectory. Where does beauty fit in? At the end of the line.

Although sometimes we get natural beauty like male peacocks who have evolved beauty in order to compete with other male  peacocks to attract mates where the most beautiful male wins. But this is one of the more unusual cases in our world where beauty actually serves some sort of a utilitarian and even evolutionary purpose.

Mostly beauty just happens by some coincidence of nature and natural beauty just sits there undergoing its natural processes, not trying to either get pretty or lose its looks. Instead it just sits there waiting for you to marvel at or take a picture of it. But it’s accidental. Nature didn’t evolve that waterfall to be so gorgeous that tourists would take pictures of it all day. Nature evolved the waterfall by accident when a stream or river ran right off a damned cliff. Redwoods are accidental. Wildflowers are beautiful accidents. And on and on.