A Brief Treatise on the Chicana Intellect

There’s not much in the subject of the title to start with, so we will keep this short and sweet, just like their physiques and dispositions.

A Chicana, a Mexican-American female, stopped by the blog and posted something really smart. I know, that doesn’t make sense. It’s not possible. Saying a Chicana said something smart is like saying a dog flew up into that tree over there and laid a few eggs in its nest. I mean, it would be so cool if it happened, but when does it?

No way is this an Hispanic female. A Chicana, sharp as a tack, not a lesbian? Forget it. Unless you are born in Latin America or from Latin America. If you’re born in the US, no way. They all got the norteamericano stupid from the EEUU.

I dated a really smart Chicana once, but she was a waste of time. Dominating, man-hating bitch. Not a lesbian, but might as well have been. A feminist. Some thing, without the dueling dildos.

Chicanas are hostile to feminism. With good reason, because feminism kills everything great about the Chicana. It kills most good things about women period, but it really KO’s the Chicana. Her strength is her upright refusal of feminism. She’s happy the way she is, in her place, and boy does it feel warm and nice and good.

I don’t know what it is about Mexican American and female. I mean, I love em to death, but brains? They do not have. Which is neither good nor bad, really. It just is, and all their other qualities make up for it. Even really smart Chicanas don’t have very interesting minds. Chicanos too. There’s something about Chicano culture that just grows moss and mold in the brain. It’s beautiful, like a lot of fungi, but there’s nothing to do with it but cook up some good food, pop open some beers and turn on the tube.

The Chicana intellectual? An oxymoron. The smart Chicana? They exist all right, but usually not impressive. Very conventional intellects, when they got em. A mind of 70 or 140 is subject to the same prison walls and leashes. Breach them, shrug them off!

Latin America? Whole other world altogether. For a lot of those South American women, we are back in Europe again, and the Conquista never happened. Even 1/2 Indian blood can’t kill the wandering and soaring Continental mind. The most suicidal and cringing social nightmares cannot lock it in. Instead, the worse the conditions, the greater the spark to light mental fervor.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “A Brief Treatise on the Chicana Intellect”

  1. Robert,

    You’re obviously a man of refinement and taste because you and I agree on this 100%. Lovely ode to the women of La Raza. Their confusions, warped world views, bent perceptions, undeveloped and stunted musings are beautiful things. From which they gather power and conquer the world. Like alcoholed liquid, it seeps into everything and the water itself is made more volatile and permeating by the added vaporousness of the alcohol itself. That is the Latina power. Let white women freeze the waters, Asian women be a lake, black women be the crashing waves, but Latin women will win by fog. Impenetrable fog.

  2. 🙂 There’s not much I can add to the above stunning intellectual achievement. R.L., I fully understand your stereotypical views on the average Latina intellect. I find your unbridled derision of all things Latina refreshing, as most men with your sentiments have the decency to keep those thoughts to themselves, or within White male circles. I find it very amusing that you doubt I am, in fact, a female Latina. Btw, I don’t consider myself a Chicana, as there are some strange associations with that term that you, yourself have presented here. I think Gloria Anzaldua was a bit on the crazy side but also respect her interesting literary achievements. I cannot, unfortunately, reveal very much about my identity as that would be social suicide, and very stupid of a person with any understanding of personal information protection. I am a bit confused as to your inconsistent use of the terms Hispanic, Latina, and Chicana. They have separate definitions, in my understanding of the nomenclature (which is constantly evolving, so I won’t speak for others on this). I must assure you that I am, in fact, what I say I am, a Latina, female, and of Mexican descent. If you want to make a list of characteristics, I’m also a feminist, but not in the way you understand the term. There are actually several schools of thought within feminist ideology, and I ascribe to the post-1980s era of feminism that is not militant or man-hating. I find it frustrating when the men I talk to seem to have strange ideas about what feminism means, and that we must all be lesbians without bras that carry pocket knives in case we encounter a male. However, that is not of any importance, and I am content to leave you in ignorance about what being Latina or feminist means, as the terms are constantly contested and highly personalized by those identifying with them. I will finish by saying here that I wonder if you would care to answer any of the questions I posed in the comment you refer to above.

    1. Wickham

      “”I’m also a feminist, but not in the way you understand the term. There are actually several schools of thought within feminist ideology, and I ascribe to the post-1980s era of feminism that is not militant or man-hating.””

      Feminism is a religion and no matter what ‘school’ you subscribe to, you provably have faith in the following nonsensical dogmas:

      1) Anti-foundational ontology: Reality is socially constructed
      2) Gender roles are socially constructed
      3) Gender roles are inherently oppressive

      Each of the above ‘truths’ can easily be demolished with a dose of empirical data, but I won’t bother.

      “”I find it frustrating when the men I talk to seem to have strange ideas about what feminism means, “””

      Smart men realise that feminists are not man haters, but self loathing women. Women who despise their biology and natural instincts. Women who never outgrow their penis envy. By claiming that Latina women reject feminism, RL paid them a compliment.

      Anyhow it’s good to have you with us college girl. We hope you’ll stick around long enough to enlighten us with the knowledge gleaned from a few paragraphs of your women’s studies 101 textbook.

        1. @ GSG

          Wow feminism. The radical notion that women are humans.

          LOL. Ah, I remember seeing that on a bumper sticker several years back.

        2. “”LOL. Ah, I remember seeing that on a bumper sticker several years back.””

          Now we know where she gets her education from =p

    2. @ Wickham

      (interesting choice of a screen name for a “Latina”)

      Okay, since you’re already here, I might as well just ask you a few questions: What’s the average Hispanic view towards whites? Because despite my extensive one on one experience with Hispanics, I’m still trying to figure that out. From what I’ve gathered, Hispanics (in addition to Filipinos) have major identity issues.

      And what’s with white Hispanics who hysterically reject their whiteness? I swear, if I had a quarter for every white looking Hispanic who insisted that he’s not “really” white, I could get a good new video game.

      I have my own answers to the above questions, but I’m interested in hearing your take.

      1. B.A.G. – 😀 There’s actually an interesting story behind the use of the surname Wickham. Suffice to say I can’t share that tidbit in a public online forum. I continue to find it strange (mostly amusing) that you all doubt my authenticity. Since I really can’t change your opinion, I will strive to not care about that from now on. This is, as we all know, an artificial, faceless interaction in which no one invests real emotional energy.

        I don’t think there is an average Hispanic attitude towards Whites, because there is no monolithic group that can safely be categorized as such. It’s actually a hotly contested term, because it places emphasis on Spanish origins, and, as I’m sure you’re aware of, there have been many migrations into the North and South American continents. The Brazilians in particular really hate to get that misnomer. But I know it’s very easy to use a common term like Hispanic in a general fashion, and I think I may get the gist of what you’re looking for.
        Lower class American Hispanics, who tend to be more indigenous in ancestry and darker in skin color, usually harbor some level of ill will towards White people (I hesitate to even use the term White because it’s an identity that is also heterogeneous in nature). They see the “White man” as the oppressor, because they are often employed as migrant/seasonal laborers with poor working conditions, and have historically received little respect from their employers. However, probably just as many in the same class are soft-hearted, deeply religious (and socially conservative) in nature, and tend to blame themselves for their current situations. I think as you get further up in the middle and upper class Hispanics, you see much less ill will towards Whites, because they are less dissatisfied with their economic conditions.
        Rarely do you see a person like me that is lower-middle class and still bears ill will towards Whites. I have to admit that I continue to harbor this strong bias. I’m not exactly proud of this, but I figure if you all are fairly honest in your expressed opinions, then I also will be. I know that I carry this bias purely based on my own (extensive :P) experience with Whites who think that Hispanics (especially Mexicans) are stupid, lazy, hyper-sexualized sub-humans. I’m not sure if I answered your question, but I hope it was helpful.

      2. @ Wickham

        Thank you for your response. For the most part you adequately addressed my question.

        (although I’m still curious about the somewhat confused racial views of white Hispanics)

        I know that I carry this bias purely based on my own (extensive ) experience with Whites who think that Hispanics (especially Mexicans) are stupid, lazy, hyper-sexualized sub-humans.

        Yeah, and I admit that I harbor some bias towards Hispanics.

        Believe it or not, it doesn’t actually have anything to do with negative personal experiences with them (unlike my views towards blacks), and most of the Hispanic individuals I’ve known have been pretty cool people.

        My bias against them really boils down to a sort of “they’re taking over!” kind of sentiment. And of course, their high fertility rates (which is where the hyper-sexualized Hispanic stereotype comes in) is helping them do just that (at least in places like California). Yeah, let’s just say that as a white person, I’m not looking forward to being dominated by Hispanics.

        Part of my bias against them also stems from their low educational attainment. Yes, just so you know, I have known many educated Hispanics, but sadly, it seems that way too many drop out of high school and are a drag on the country.

        Along with the “they’re taking over” sentiment, the almost purely negative impact that illegal immigration has had on education in places like California informs my biases.

        (and of course, you can’t analyze the impact of illegal Hispanic immigration by solely looking at illegal immigrants themselves. You also have to analyze the anchor babies of illegal immigrants)

        1. @ B.A.G. – I appreciate the response. About 90% of the time I read posts and commentary on this blog, I have no idea whether or not the author is bullshitting or actually trying to create some kind of critically constructive argumentative space.
          I can fully empathize with your sentiments about what you may see as the “Hispanic invasion”. I’ve definitely heard this story, or similar ones, from many non-Hispanic Americans. It’s seems to be something of a unifying rally cry for the rest of the country. The truth of the matter is, our US history is filled with steady waves of similar “invasions”, the legality and morality of which is entirely dependent upon the viewer and their worldview. From that perspective, and I can’t really think of a reason to object to a phenomenon that appears to be (what I see as) a natural human migratory response to socioeconomic conditions.
          I can understand your bias regarding Hispanic educational attainment levels. The answer, I suspect, is far more complex than pure innate intellectual or cultural inadequacy. On this subtopic I am working purely off of discussions I have been privy to regarding public elementary education in several rural, conservative and heavily Republican small towns dominated by Whites. What I have found is that there is a general low level of self-respect among Hispanics living in those areas. Their teachers, families, and communities do not expect them to excel academically. The children internalize low academic expectations and fail to live up to their full potential. However, there are a few cases of children from these areas where a teacher or some other mentor has taken the time to respect them and believe in their potential. These students generally graduate from high school, attend and graduate from college. They usually have to work twice as hard as the other students, because they must overcome linguistic and class barriers related to staying and excelling in school. They generally have a higher rate of college drop-out because they cannot afford the rising cost of tuition, or they must take on extra jobs to feed their parents and siblings. I have experienced some of this, but thankfully not the worst of it.

        2. @ Wickham

          Re: Education

          I don’t think it’s innate, as I’ve never really subscribed to HBD (though I am open to it).

          A lot of it has to do with the nature of the immigration. People frequently speak of Asian American and Indian American academic success (which I’ve seen firsthand). And yes, they certainly do value education and hard work (and, let’s face it, they’re pretty damn smart).

          At the same time, much of it also has to do with selective immigration. Most Asian immigrants who come to the U.S. already have education and money. As a result, their Asian American kids are often raised by middle class, college educated parents, and kids raised by college educated parents generally do well, regardless of race.

          Contrast that with Hispanic immigrants, who come here poor, uneducated, and in many cases barely able to speak English.

          If all the Hispanic immigrants who came to the U.S. were from the educated white elite back in Mexico, then Hispanic kids would probably be very well educated.

          Coming to this country with education and money makes a huge difference.

        3. Gay Area Guy and M Wickham
          Education isn’t everything and I feel there are elements of blue collar culture that are worthy of emulating, such as strong work ethic and rugal life styles. I find educated people to be highly opinionated and judgmental. Many look down on any career that does not involve inteelectualism and feel that their too good for any form of manual labor.

          Being from the East Coast, I haven’t had much experience with Mexicans. Only with Caribbean Hispanics and Brazilians and they are a small minority and harbor little hostility so I do not worry about them “taking over.” I’ve never had any negative experiences with them and have much to admire especially among Brazilians, some of whom have made middle class livings by building businesses centered around their blue collar skills, but are still willing to get their hands dirty. I feel middle class Americans could learn a lot from them.

        4. @ G.S.G. – I also agree with your opinion on the need for blue collar skills. I’m coming from a West Coast and Southwest background, where there is a large quantity of Mexican immigrants. We tend to form insulated communities regarding socially conservative views and religion, but most often try our best to assimilate to American norms as quickly as possible. My parents, who were born in Mexico, were raised in strict Catholic households where education was the top priority, because my grandparents didn’t want their children to eek out a meager living as migrant laborers. My parents were only able to afford college through the affirmative action programs. Otherwise, they would have probably remained in that vicious cycle of abject poverty. My father was taught by his public school teachers to stop speaking Spanish (they would hit him on the hand with a ruler if he spoke Spanish), and he lost his fluency as a child. I grew up in a small rural town completely surrounded by Whites (or Anglos, as we sometimes call them), where Mexicans were shunned (they still are). I was embarrassed of my heritage, and made friends with the preppy White crowd, because I excelled academically. I was the kind of person who hung out in the library because that was the only place I could find refuge from what I perceived as a community vastly different from my household. Later, I came to realize that I have nothing to be ashamed of regarding my ethnic heritage, but I continue to have self-doubts regarding my intellectual capacity, despite real evidence to the contrary. I want to believe I can be as smart as any Anglo out there, and I’ve always given 100% in my academic efforts. It was, and remains, the only thing I’m good at. I try not to look down on those people who have not had a college education, but I do often find it difficult to put myself in their places. I am trying…

      3. @ B.A.G. – I’ll try to further clarify Hispanics’ attitudes about Whiteness. I think a great majority of us don’t understand what it means to be White or not, because Whites don’t really seem to know themselves. I mean, we don’t have a really solid definition to read in a dictionary and think, “Why, yes, I have those behavioral characteristics!” And the average Hispanic person is probably not going to go get their DNA tested. I will be the first to admit I don’t understand what being White means. It is very confusing, because some say it is genetic and others say it is a way you look, think, feel and act. The real evidence is not in the bag on the link between race and DNA. When I think of White, I think of a group of people who look at me and introduce themselves, saying, “Hi, I love your name, it’s so interesting! Where are you originally from? You look so exotic!” So tell me I’m white, B.A.G. But the next White person will think, that girl is definitely a beaner.

        1. @ Wickham

          Personally, I think the term “Hispanic,” and the even dumber term “Latino” should be abolished as a racial category.

          How “Latinos” are racially classified should depend on their racial makeup.

          White Hispanics should be classified as white, and Indian and Mestizo Hispanics should be classified as Indian or Mestizo (radical Chicano nationalist claims that Mestizoism is a myth notwithstanding).

          Jorge Ramos and George Lopez are in NO way members of the same racial group.

          I accept white Hispanics as white (hey, with low white birthrates, we need to enlarge our tent as much as possible!), but sadly, it seems that many of my fellow white Americans think that everyone south of the border is part of some exotic “Latino” race.

          I’m all for abolishing “Latino,” especially since our idiot government uses it to misleadingly inflate white numbers, as well as make the white crime rate look higher by lumping in “Latinos” with whites.

        2. Re: Beaner

          I suppose it depends on how Indian or Mestizo you look, but at least for me, behavior has much to do with it.

          If a Hispanic guy is well dressed, educated, and doesn’t talk like a thug, then I harbor no stereotypical thoughts.

          But if he dresses hip hop/ghetto (ie. like wearing one of those stupid Scarface shirts), talks ghetto (interestingly though, despite observing a good number of ghetto Hispanics, I have NEVER heard a Hispanic guy say “vato” or “ese”), and is overall thuggish/comes across as uneducated, I think to myself, “man, this guy’s a beaner!”

        3. What do you think of poorly dressed and ill mannered whites?

          I see them as a disgrace to the race.

          Although, interestingly enough, I at times prefer them to effete liberal wimps.

        4. @ B.A.G. – I am definitely more confused about my “race” than anyone else in my family. This is because I have a name that actually sounds Mexican, which tips people off that I’m different. The rest of my siblings’ names are easily pronounced in an English accent. My skin color is slightly darker than two of my siblings, who identify as White. All of my siblings have married White people, so their children are quite pale (to me) and will definitely be taller than the rest of my extended family. I have lived in different regions of America, and depending on the location and the viewer, people think I could be any of the following: Asian, Indian, Mexican, or White! I lived in the UK, and that was even more confusing, where they don’t exactly understand that an American of Mexican heritage is any different that someone directly from Mexico. I lived there long enough that without much sun, I lost my usual tan and everyone I met kept thinking I was White. I dated an Indian, who preferred his girlfriends to be paler than most Indian girls because Brahmins are lighter in skin tone. To him, I looked like an upper caste person. When he saw a picture of my father (who is half Canadian), he was very impressed because he looked “just like a Brahmin”. Now I am back in the states, and I have my tan, and the average Mexican on the street will start speaking in Spanish to me because we can recognize each other. The sad part is that I’m not fluent in Spanish!

  3. R.L. – Oh, just to recommend a bit of light reading on what kind of feminism I’m talking about, you can check out the magazine called Bitch. You will doubtless be appalled but I will let you compose your own opinion. http://bitchmagazine.org/

  4. Dota, I disagree with you that feminism is a religion. Religion is an organized spiritual belief system; feminism is a very recent ideological manifestation of the post-industrial society. I have my doubts as to whether it will last very long. I am not religious in the least, although I feel that particular bit of information would not interest you in the slightest. I wonder why you are so vehemently opposed to the idea of feminism? I say this only because the way you have written implies that you abhor it. By chance, are you male? That would explain a few things to me. Can you please define what you mean by “penis envy”? I have heard this derogatory phrase before, but it I find it insightful to ask what the particular meaning holds for the speaker. It is interesting that you think I have taken a women’s studies class. Actually, one of my majors was Ethnic Studies, which is an interdisciplinary field focusing on the intersection of race and ethnicity. My (limited) interest in feminism mostly stems from the way people like you become very heated about feminist issues. Also, I wonder if you have gone to college? I’m simply curious, the last sentence was a bit cryptic. I understand the sarcastic undertones of your writing style, and appreciate it.
    Your post is very interesting and problematic… I find myself wondering so many things! Why do you think feminist women are self-loathing? I would really love to see the empirical evidence that you suggested, and any other evidence you can drudge up to back up your claims.

    1. “”I am not religious in the least, although I feel that particular bit of information would not interest you in the slightest.””

      You might not be religious but you certainly are pedantic. I used the term religion loosely in that both feminism and religion articulate some sort of world view. Gender feminism goes well beyond political/economic equality. It is a worldview and rather flawed one at that.

      “”Why do you think feminist women are self-loathing?””

      Why do (western) women ape men today? Why do they dress like men? Why do they value adjectives such as ‘strong and independent’ which traditionally were always associated with men? Why do they look down upon traditional roles for women? Why do they look down upon the biological function of reproduction? Why are they constantly at war with their bodies? Sounds like penis envy to me.

      1. I had hoped you would define “penis envy” for me. It seems a curious notion to me that a woman would want to have a bit of flesh hanging around that is so easily hurt and very sensitive to pain. I think perhaps the biggest upside of having a penis is the ability to pee anywhere you like.

        1. “M” obviously doesn’t have p-envy.

          So “M” also doesn’t get the whole p-thing?

          If that’s all it was- an annoying fleshy bit that is easily hurt, men would have pudendum envy. But, it isn’t. (that would more describe “balls”, ladies)

          Let me ‘splain it to you girls- take your most sensitive lady parts, turn them inside-out, blow them up like a spear-shaped balloon protruding 7 or 8 inches (bragging) from your body.

          Now, imbue it with an insatiable, mindless drive to rub against or penetrate almost anything (female) that can possibly can. (Almost) instant total gratification ensues (almost) every time (ok, after 60 seconds +). Ha ha.

          Envious now? Maybe not…

        1. 😀 @ M.69 – Sorry, still not envious… It’s great how even on a somewhat intellectually-bent blog, I can be treated to a wonderfully titillating evening of advanced sex ed. 😛 I was trying to get Dota to clearly articulate his arguments, but it’s probably not worth the effort. It was fun while it lasted, though.

        2. BAG

          Yeah we are a rare breed. Problem is, when I debate in real life I’m just as blunt as I am here online. I can’t switch my online self of and have offended a lot of people in my time: Jews, Muslims, Indians, Pakistanis Feminazis and East Asians (I beat them at street fighter and that did it :p)…

          Wickham

          “I was trying to get Dota to clearly articulate his arguments, but it’s probably not worth the effort. ”

          True, since you clearly fail to grasp the concept of a ‘Metaphor .’ I’d rather level up my level 54 Paladin.

    2. Modern feminism strikes me as being very self-serving. It is based now on this newly acquired female economic empowerment and ability to pay for HG TV-propelled kitchen upgrades and sitcom renunciations of their weak, lower-paid husbands. Women no longer set out to be feminists, but back into the “identity” eased by the dearth of strong men. Feminism now is convenient and hollow and they cry it’s not a religion, kinda like those lazy people who say they don’t need to go to church in order to pray.

      1. @ A.U.M. – Now I know why you’re an unmarried man :D. Are you contributing to the “dearth of strong men” phenomenon? I’m not sure why economic empowerment is a bad thing (…unless at the expense of say, third world workers, and the massive extinction of other species on the Earth). And for the record, I stopped going to church both because I was a) lazy and b) sick and tired of some old homophobic White man preaching to me about irrelevant fairy tale stories which lack any real scientific evidence.

        1. Who said female economic empowerment is a bad thing? I’m saying it makes possible the new breed of feminism which I see as being an extension of a very consumerist and status-oriented set of values.

          My church “metaphor” was more a comment on ideological laziness. This “neo-feminism” seems more like an SWPL love-in than anything else.

      2. “Modern feminism strikes me as being very self-serving.”

        There’s a big difference between college feminism and women power. There is a Grand Canyon of bullshit to cross before you can see that college feminism is only a minor outgrowth of female power overall.

        College professors are naturally meek, effete, and have feminine dispositions. They are natural female enablers and are easily cowed into female submission. Of course feminism arose from the university. And it should have stayed in the university, not have become social weapon for every sissy man and female manipulative with or without a college degree. LOL. Oh well. American culture is dead. America is dead. Who cares.

        1. @ Hacienda – What’s wrong with “effete” professors? Some people are just less masculine than others genetically. For the record, all my physical science and math profs (except for the Russian female grad student) were very masculine and intimidating (at first, before you get to know them).

        2. Wickham,

          Physics and math profs along with chemistry are the last boys clubs in college. They’ve seen the other departments get sissified and they act like they are the last men left in academia. When you’re the last boys around, you get extra macho, you pimp more, strut. Chemistry could be on the slippery slope down, it’s messy, busy work, the kind down well by fastidious, moderately smart women. It’s why chemists are always angry, also that it’s a crap, suicidal field looked down upon by math and physics personnel. At least research math. They look down on everybody. LOL. Why? I have no fucking clue. It’s MATH, it’s bullshit, it’s torture. LOL. Beep beep.

        3. @ Hacienda – I really don’t want to agree with you on this (!!!) but I actually have to. I would say you need to be fastidious in chemistry as a woman :D, otherwise all the men sniffing around think you are weak (and the short men have a tendency to have worse short-man-syndrome than in any other field I’ve witnessed). Women have to act macho in chemistry, and it really sickens me. I want to be a feminine woman, that is just the way I am! I’m sick and tired of overly aggressive, masculine female chemists who think they need to adopt male traits in order to advance on the career ladder. Why can’t they just be themselves? I guess I’m assuming that they were very feminine to start out with. I think the field messes with a woman’s brain, honestly, and it’s not just the methanol fumes escaping from a badly repaired hood. I have DEFINITELY noticed that mathematicians of the male variety (ok, and female too) look down on each and every one of the rest of the people in universities (I’ve never encountered a pure mathematician in the workplace. I think they all live at NASA.) Physics isn’t much better, but I think pure physics nerds have a deeply-rooted inferiority complex that they aren’t as smart as the pure or even applied mathematicians. (This is all opinion coming straight out of my derriere).

        4. (This is all opinion coming straight out of my derriere).

          Affordable speculation. Affordable to me because I’m out of it. Not affordable to you since you are still in it. So shit to you, but gold to me.

          Conservative politics – “You sit where you stand.”
          Me – “You shit, where you stood.”

        5. Hacienda

          “Of course feminism arose from the university. And it should have stayed in the university, not have become social weapon for every sissy man and female manipulative with or without a college degree. ”

          Not with the Rockefellers pumping so much money into the movement. Feminism was always an elitist movement. It represented (or pretended to represent) the interests of middle class white women because it was the white male who was marked for disempowerment. Even today feminists are the last bastion of orientalism and racism. Feminism flooded the workplace and hence plummeted wages. It also broadened the tax base. The divorce rates and screwed up family laws that followed ensured that wealth among the middle class would be spread thin, and then siphoned upwards as taxes. Not to mention dragging western civilization into the gutter.

          The problem with silly college girls who enroll in women’s studies courses is that they treat feminism as a religion. They devote themselves to a nonsensical pipe dream of ‘equality’ (as defined by fellow feminists) and anti foundational nonsense which disregards empirical evidence. In some ways feminists remind me of Wahabis and their obsession with the perfect shariah Islamic state and their blindness prevents them from acknowledging the absolute misery and backwardness of places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.

        6. @ Hacienda – This is probably the reason why I am discontent most of the time :). I might have chosen the wrong career for my personality type and gender (in terms of my satisfaction in the workplace), but it rankles me that you need to be male (and aggressively masculine) in order to advance on the career ladder in chemistry. I frequently entertain notions of studying more advanced mathematics just for the hell of it, to see if I can do it (at all or even with success), since I love intellectual challenges. I hesitate to do so because so many mathematicians are elitist. So I just spend some spare time reading up on the field as a pastime, dreaming (in futility) of maybe doing work that would be enjoyable (because I am introverted and simply enjoy abstract concepts). Maybe some day I will have the courage to just take the damn classes regardless of what the men think about me.

        7. “Feminism was always an elitist movement.”

          Partially. Also a reaction to the mechanical violence of the white male.

        8. “Maybe some day I will have the courage to just take the damn classes regardless of what the men think about me.”

          There’s nothing that says math is a man’s field. Mathematicians are socially retarded, anyway. You should never worry about what concerns them outside of math itself.

        9. @ Dota – And you’re right, it doesn’t really matter if my fellow students would be alpha patriarchal males. That’s why I am planning on applying to an undergraduate math program; I would have ~ 1 year left to finish an undergrad math degree and see if a career in that path would be better. I really need to brush up on linear algebra, though, and I should be doing that rather than posting here!

        10. @ Dota

          Damn, good stuff!

          The divorce rates and screwed up family laws that followed ensured that wealth among the middle class would be spread thin, and then siphoned upwards as taxes. Not to mention dragging western civilization into the gutter.

          Indeed. Divorce is definitely a result of feminism.

          Do you have any evidence regarding the plummeting of wages and the siphoning of wealth?

          You know, I always thought that the whole “women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes” was a myth, and I even read somewhere that it was.

          I also noticed that you never see feminists volunteering to take on difficult, blue collar work.

          Feminists don’t want most women to be equal to most men. They just want most women to be equal to the top 1% of men.

      3. @ Hacienda – Thanks for the words of encouragement. If my personality type were that of someone that doesn’t worry constantly, it would be helpful advice :). As it is, since I’m most likely socially retarded (I don’t drink except with friends at bars and clubs, I’m naturally very curious and entranced by libraries and chemical reactions, I’m shy in person, I keep thinking White guys are only attracted to me because they think Mexicans are hot but stupid, I hated the chick who mentored me during undergrad research but just took her crap, etc.), maybe I would do well in math (providing my brain can handle it).

        1. @ Dota – I have taken math up to the level of undergraduate differential equations and linear algebra; university classes beyond that level are not taught online. I would be interested in taking something like partial differential equations and perhaps differential geometry, which are graduate level courses.

        2. M Wickham
          I’ve always felt more comfortable among men in the sciences. It’s the artistic types that I’m most scared of.

  5. Lindsay
    Out of curiousity, what is your interpretation of feminism? As M Wickham said, it can come in many forms. Aside from male bashing, what is it about feminism that you oppose? Are you against women out earning men, or those who are too lazy to be homemakers? Or those who are outspoken on issues unrelated to feminism and don’t behave based on how you would expect a woman to?
    I always thought women could accomplish more if they were more passive and less outspoken about it, and I’m willing to accept that I have to behave a certain way to get what I want, but it might be harder for less feminine women. I’m willing to support certain male rights. That doesn’t mean I’ll give up the hope for female empowerment.

    Dota
    Why do you feel threatened by feminism?

  6. Sometimes I worry that the HBD enthusiasts are correct in their argument that current racial inequalities are to a large extent the product of genetic differences. Maybe individuals of African or Amerindian stock (e.g. Chicanas) really don’t have the same aptitudes on average as Europeans and their descendants. I have to admit that it’s a little difficult for me to imagine Mexican mestizos producing an intellect on the level of, say, Stephen Hawking, or Haitians developing a viable aerospace industry on their own, etc. But who knows what the future holds?

    Still, I’m not really that insecure about the capacities of my own folks – biracials and other mixed race people of an African American ethnic background. After all, we have a long history of producing refined and advanced thinkers (Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, Jean Toomer, Walter Francis White, to name a few). Have Mexican Americans produced a comparable elite. I don’t know.

    1. I think it has more to do with the legacy of linguistic segregation in the education of Mexican Americans. Children who speak primarily Spanish are often placed in “special education” programs with teachers who blatantly show their views that Mexicans are intellectually inferior. It creates a vicious cycle in which children live up to the expectations their educators have of their innate abilities.

  7. I find the comparisons HBD enthusiasts (like Steve Sailer) make between Mexicans and blacks pretty interesting. Many of them seem to regard mestizos as somewhat more intelligent and docile than blacks, though not nearly as bright as whites. On the other hand, they often view Afro-descended people as being much more charismatic and creative than Mexicans.

    There may be some truth to this latter observation. Non-Hispanic black and biracial celebrities and other prominent figures seem to vastly outnumber noteworthy individualss of Hispanic origin, despite the Hispanic population being larger. Even among Hispanics, there appear to be a greater number of famous mulattoes (i.e. from Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, or Cuba) than famous mestizos. The only famous Mexican Americans I can think of off the top of my head are Salma Hayek (half Lebanese) and George Lopez.

      1. I don’t know how much different they are.African Americans who have lived here for generations are typically more intelligent than newly arrived groups.

      2. @ R.L. – Docility as an adjective describing humans is an interesting choice of words. I would use that word more commonly in describing, say, cattle. I have to ask, do you really believe that there is an intelligence hierarchy based on the racial groups you classify, or is that BS? I’ve never met someone in real life that actually professes this. At first, when I began to read this blog I thought the whole thing was a massive joke. I have heard that there are groups of people that actively engage in voicing these beliefs, but I never really put credence to the stories. I thought it was just silly rumors, and that America as a people had moved past that. I must be more sheltered than I thought. I have some Indian friends who have said similar things, and I thought perhaps it was a neurological disease that they suffer from in that region. That said, I hope you don’t block me from posting, as I find this interaction very enlightening. I like to open my mind to other worldviews, and if I continue to mindlessly listen to NPR and nod along like any other sheep, I might as well declare early-onset Alzheimer’s. I had inquired earlier in my posts whether you have published peer-reviewed scholarly articles on this subject, but I don’t think you ever got around to answering me. I ask that question because I find it difficult to understand why someone would say they research something but lack evidence to support this. I would dearly love to read something like that, as I have more experience in studying that kind of document.

  8. I was not suggesting that newly hispanics are genetically predisposed to be less intelligent than American born blacks (I don’t know enough about HBD), just that there is a strong correlation of one’s upbringing and intelligence at later stages in life. One’s upbringing during the first two years of their life are supposed to play a crucial role in one’s intellectual development.

    Charles Murray believes intelligence is 80% hereditary, though there are few established facts in his books, only his opinions.

    1. @ G.S.G. – I think you are right here again. My mother devoted her youth to her children and spent a great deal of time reading to us, from during the womb until grade school (in English). She had been brought up to believe that reading was a lazy activity and that she should do real work (like household chores) instead. So she made sure to encourage reading as a leisure activity in all of us. I’ve also heard (this is a rumor, and if anyone has evidence to support or refute this, please show me :)) that breast-feeding a child for a long time (more than 6 months, say) also encourages the development of intelligence.

      1. My parents always used big words with me and my siblings as young children and engaged us in intellectual conversations which saved me because I was taken for retarded at school (I have mild autism.) I can remember the fall of the Soviet Union even though I was three at the time because my parents spoke to me about it.

        I have seen statistics about breast feeding lowering the risk of breast cancer among mothers. I have heard that breastfeeding lowers the rate of childhood obesity; I don’t know intelligence. I was brain damaged at birth and would not drink anything and had to be fed via IV.

        1. @ G.S.G. – That’s interesting. My uncle was born with severe jaundice (malnutrition from a poor corn harvest in Mexico, I think grandma didn’t have enough breast milk to properly feed during pregnancy) and suffered brain damage. My grandparents couldn’t afford proper medical care that would have prevented it. He is in his 40’s but has the intelligence of perhaps a 6 year old, and has to be in permanent foster care until his death. I think that the ability to have good medical care during pregnancy and birth is such a wonderful aspect of America.

        2. I was referring to pseudo intellectual jerks who find reasons not to clean their houses and can’t balance budgets and overspend their income, but I guess social skills and work loads are important as well. Unfortunately for a woman, appearance is the most important factor in the legal and business world

          I was born at one of the world’s most renowned hospitals and they still managed to botch up my birth. The doctor detected meconium in my water a few days before the hospital ordered my mother in. They should have performed a cesarean section right away as I would not come out, but my mother was in labor for thirty hours before they decided to do it. (It was friday the thirteenth so at that point my mother was begging them not to 🙂

      2. I do respect those who favor practicality over intellectualism.

        Intellectualism is infectious and time consuming and too much of it can take one away from their basic duties. I know highly educated people who are completely dysfunctional.

        1. So true! If I could only be a practical person I think life would have been a considerably more enjoyable for me. All those hours poring over chemistry and math texts while my friends were going out to drink in college could have been so much easier if I wasn’t so obsessed with getting perfect grades. Hindsight is 20/20. I now encourage young people going forward after high school graduation to not worry about grades so much and try to enjoy the college experience while balancing a moderate workload (both employment and school work).

  9. Bravo Robert – Great ode to the latin ladies. There my all time favorite receptacles. Dimwitted, but 100% female.

  10. My main issue is not what percentage of the workforce women make up, but the fact that appearance is always a factor. When a woman runs for office, her appearance and marital and family status are almost always the subject of discussion among the press and the general public.

  11. Although I won’t get on board with NOW, I can fully understand mentality behind such attitudes. They are made up of mostly over educated unattractive women who can not realize success in their fields because of their poor looks. Many dream of being whisked away by Prince Charming. It is harder for women who are not particularly feminine to fit the gender roles and should not be punished for that. The problem I have is that they channel their energy the wrong way.

  12. Gay Area Guy
    In your fantasy world, what would a typical western woman look like?

    M Wickham
    It’s good to find another woman as passionate about math as I am.

  13. Gay Area Guy
    You didn’t answer my question. Simply out of curiosity, what is your vision for the ideal Western Woman?

    1. Sorry, GSG, but I have to go pick up something at Safeway right now, but rest assured, I’ll answer your question.

      However, just to give you a hint, I’m actually not for docile and ultra feminine Western women.

      What I am for, you’ll soon find out.

      1. Okay, GSG, here it is.

        For me, the ideal white/Western woman would be someone who is well educated, refined (ie. no bimboish valley girl swagger), socially aware and well behaved (ie. no drinking, or acting stupid in public).

        I want a woman who will stand up for herself, but not be bitchy, too assertive, or in your face. Especially NO NAGGING.

        And yes, it also goes without saying that I don’t want my ideal white woman to be some leftist feminist, postmodernist, or bleeding heart SWPL liberal type.

        Regarding how they look, I’ll go Nordic and Med. Both Nordic and Med white women are beautiful, in my book. For some reason, I’ve never really been into Slavic women, though.

        1. No I meant, I was referring to western white women as a general rule, not on a personal/romantic level. How would you like white western women to behave? Do you feel that they should be ambitious in their careers? Regardless off what you say, I won’t get offended.

        2. Do you feel that they should be ambitious in their careers? Regardless off what you say, I won’t get offended.

          They should be educated and work, but they also need to increase their fertility rates.

        1. @ Car Guy

          You know, that’s the funny thing. Push comes to shove, and they really don’t look that different.

          I don’t know what it is.

        2. Beg to differ. They only look the same if you go by hair color and eye color. But people with blonde/blue eyes do not look the same, all do not look “Nord”.

          You have to know what to look for, true, it’s not totally obvious to the untrained eye. Lots of Slavs are at least part-Nordicized, too, which makes it murkier in some of them (ex: some Russians). It’s subtle to most people, but I know can spot it- it really stands out in some people.

          In general, Slavs have more rounded, more “Eastern” and “Southern” (N. Asian or Mid Eastern) traits.

          Note: In Americans, it’s usually very hard to tell what’s going on because of a lack of ethnic/racial purity. Once someone is half A and half B (or 1/4, 1/8), its hard to say exactly what someone is from just observing. You’d have to look at Euros to see the real difference- they tend to pure bred, relatively.

  14. BAG

    “”Do you have any evidence regarding the plummeting of wages and the siphoning of wealth?””

    I’d read articles on the subject years ago during my uni years. I’d have to fish them out. The basic gist of the argument is that when women entered the workforce in the 60s and 70s, it caused an over supply of labour which sent wages crashing down. Also bear in mind that the women who began working were not those in poverty, but middle class white women who had no need to work except to strike back at eeeeeevil white patriarchy. This meant that corporate America had no need to offer the sort of health benefits and other perks to entice workers anymore and its been a race to the bottom ever since. Furthermore, with rampant divorce rates shaking up the social landscape, wealth was thinned out through settlements and then further spread out when people re-married and had other children. I’ve seen this with my own eyes here in Canada. I’ve known people who come from broken homes and their financial health is far worse than mine whereas my parents paid all my tuition and rent until I graduated. I plan on doing the same for my kids. But wealth is never lost. It may change hands, but it is never lost. Our elites and governments realise this.

    1. Wow, great post, Dota! You really did your homework on this!

      I guess it’s no coincidence that the Corporatocracy is behind all of these postmodernist abominations, be it Critical Race Theory/the diversity lecture circuit, feminism, etc.

      1. Of course the Corporatocracy would encourage and enable (and fund?) feminism. Feminism is one of the greatest moneymakers for Western Capitalism. When women make enough money that they don’t need men, they can buy shit directly. In the “olden days” their husbands played the middle man part of the transaction. He was the unspoken contractor when it came to buying crap the wife wanted. Such dependent women were not a reliable revenue stream for the oligarchs.

        Give women the ability to earn lots of money independent of a husband’s meddling and now you have yourself a very lucrative consumer base!

        1. @ UM

          Very good points.

          This is another reason why I have a hard time taking anybody seriously whenever they go on about how white men run the country because most CEO’s are white men.

          They act as if corporations actually have souls, as if they somehow care about their race or gender. Corporations care about one thing and one thing only, money. They don’t care about white guys like me.

          Besides, why should feminists want to take control of corporations? By doing so, and inevitably abusing corporate power like everyone else, wouldn’t they be demolishing the myth that women are peaceful and more benevolent?

        2. They don’t need to take control of corporations because the greedy male puppets (who are all married to women) will do their bidding. Corporate CEO’s are high-powered minions. Women have the power to spend recklessly, and these older white men will cut their own balls off for a piece of that profit.

    2. This is exactly correct. Falling real wages can be traced to women entering the work force in huge numbers- mostly middle class white women whose husbands already had good-paying jobs.

      Women (if they are good at math) should be able to figure out that, mathmatically, every cent gain income by women equals a corresponding loss by men’s income. Fine and dandy, they say- but then they still expect men to make more than they do, and to be the primary breadwinners. This is impossible, math-wise, as women approach income equality with men.

      Women will be equal when they do all the dirty, dangerous jobs that men do, and get drafted into the military so they can get their ta-tas blown off. Oh, yeah, and when they drop the whole “man pays for everything” (meaning sex, of course).

      And when they grow thick enough skins to put up with the everyday harshness and abuse that most men have go thru as a part and parcel of being a male.

      In other words, they will never be equal, (because these things won’t happen) so the whole point is moot.

      One defintion of some Feminists, def: women wanting all the good things that come with being a male while taking a pass on all the drawbacks of being male. Wanting it both ways- to their advantage, as some sort of historical “payback” to generations of men who are long dead. All the while, harboring unrealistic expectations and standards for men.

      They want a, neat, clean, strong, sensitive, nice, manly, unmaterialistic guy who makes killer money who is just as comfortable making a gourmet meal or changing a set of brakes. When that fails, they’l settle for anyone with a heartbeat, good insurance and a decent 401k.

      1. @ mott 69 – Do you really think that is what feminism is about? The basic premise of feminism is that women want to be treated like humans, not like cattle that needs to be trained or broken. We don’t want to suffer from widespread domestic violence or rape that never gets prosecuted. We don’t want to be told that we’re idiots, or that our most valuable assets are our located on our bodies instead of inside our brains. We don’t want to be treated like objects that men own. We just want to be respected. Is that really too much to ask for? I think for many feminists, the issue is not about how much money we can make, but just the ordinary treatment we get from someone walking down the street. As a man, do you want women to tell you that the length of your penis is your most valuable asset? Do you want to be afraid of walking alone at night? Do you want to be beaten by your spouse but be too afraid to tell anyone about it?

        1. …women want to be treated like humans, not like cattle that needs to be trained or broken. We don’t want to suffer from widespread domestic violence or rape that never gets prosecuted. We don’t want to be told that we’re idiots, or that our most valuable assets are our located on our bodies instead of inside our brains. We don’t want to be treated like objects that men own. We just want to be respected.

          Is this what feminism is really all about?
          So when things get better on the domestic front and there’s not quite as much to get riled up about, you move to a global perspective because women in the developed West maybe realize they actually have it very good compared to women in the 3rd world. Just keep enlarging that circle.

          I don’t believe second wave feminism through its present form has accomplished squat other than divert attention to women’s gripes. The backbone of women’s so-called progress we witness today and in the past 40 years was well in place before Gloria Steinem burned any bras. Women’s economic progress is a manifestation of an overall evolution in our industrial society as it transformed into this information/service age we live in now. Women AND men have prospered and it’s not something any stupid knock-off liberation movement can call its own. Social roles have changed quite a bit as a result of this economic equality, but it had nothing to do with feminism.

          Kinda like “breast awareness” crap with all the pink symbolism. That has not done shit either, but movement participants like to pat themselves on the back. Cancer mortality has fallen across the board for years, not only for breast cancer. The only movement that is responsible for that is good old scientific progress, not pink ribbons.

          1. M. Wickham makes a good point that for many women, feminism is about respect – not being taken for granted, or not having your views automatically dismissed because you are a woman. The question is, what elicits a man’s respect? I think women tend to assume that men respect the same kinds of things women do, and this is not always the case.

        2. I agree that respect is an integral part of the “movement.” Which precisely goes to my point…do we need a grand social movement for something that is earned on such a personal level? There are women I respect but it has nothing to do with me trying to “right a wrong.”

        3. “what elicits a man’s respect?”

          Love and respect are often at odds. Young women too often opt for one over the other. Having one, you lose the other. And when you lose one, you lose both.

        4. Breast Cancer Awareness month is only
          Breast Cancer mortality rates have decreased but Breast Cancer occurence has almost doubled since the 1960’s. We have to adjust that to the general population increase due to immigration but it’s still pretty significant.

        5. @ M- I specifically clarified that this what SOME women think feminism is, or should be. I don’t disagree with your points on a basic level- those are things that real feminism should hope to acomplish.

          I should have qualified by saying that I am not an anti-Feminist. I just think the “movement” has not been a movement for a long time (in the West) and has gone way too far overboard just like every almost other well-meaning progressive movement. I say this as a progressive myself.

          Like political correctness (aka “white bashing”), historical revisionism (aka “U.S. & Euro-bashing”), alleged feminism just descended into self-indulgent, mindless male-bashing.

          Th granting of rights and relative equality to females has been one of the Western World’s greatest acheivements- compared to all the other societies on Earth.

          The U.S. and the West in general has been ground zero for female rights for hundreds of years- the English and the Dutch had laws granting women rights long before any other major groups. The U.S. was considered from the beginning to be a bastion of relative freedom for females compared to the old world.

          It is ironic that in the modern U.S. and the West, where women have it (and have had it) light-years better than they ever have, the complaining is still some of the loudest.

          As to your latter points- do you think there will ever be a “cure” for abusive spouses and abusive relationships? WIll there be a “cure” for horny guys wolf-whistling? That is not realistic.

          Do you think that only women live in fear of violence, or that only women are abused in relationships? Is “feminist awareness” the cure for stupid, viloent, boorish behavior? Probably not.

          How would you like to be told that the amount of money you make is your most valuable assest? Your turn!

        6. @ Mott

          It is ironic that in the modern U.S. and the West, where women have it (and have had it) light-years better than they ever have, the complaining is still some of the loudest.

          Co-sign!

          Likewise, it’s also ironic that in the U.S., where minority groups have it better than anywhere else in the world (even Ask a Korean has said as much), they’re perpetually aggrieved.

          Like Wade said, I guess it just goes to show that white men need to start learning that no good deed goes unpunished. When you try to be good, people will pounce on you for not being good enough.

          You might as well just be a prick. Or as I like to say, better to be an asshole than a sucker.

          As to your latter points- do you think there will ever be a “cure” for abusive spouses and abusive relationships? WIll there be a “cure” for horny guys wolf-whistling? That is not realistic.

          With regards to spousal abuse, there is direct legal redress for that.

          However, for horny whistling, no. Just like it’s unrealistic for anti-racists to try to purify white peoples’ minds and make sure they harbor absolutely no negative stereotypes about black people, it’s unrealistic for feminists to try to purify mens’ minds.

          Trying to cleanse people of nasty thoughts just won’t do.

          I also am skeptical about the idea of “widespread” violence against women, because that whole “25% of women on college campuses get raped” is bullshit.

        7. I think the legendary Seinfeld character George Costanza put it best when it comes to feminists:

          You know, they want everything to be equal, everything! But when the check comes, where are they?

        8. “(even Ask a Korean has said as much)”

          Why not ask me? I’m Korean. LOL.

          Funny thing, there were lots of black slaves upon being freed didn’t want freedom. Many (don’t know the percentage) wanted to stay in service of their former masters. There was a case where the slaves asked their master to stay their master and when he refused, they killed him. Black people. LOL.

          I walked into a UPS store and I stood behind an attractive white woman. She started to loudly proclaim the inferiority of women and went all on about how women are inferior to men and that the women’s movement was a giant mistake, etc…This was several years ago. Freedom does strange things to people. Total freedom is absurd, and a little freedom to people not used or incapable it is absurd too.

        9. Why not ask me? I’m Korean. LOL.

          Hehe, well, as I’m sure you know, I was referring to the specific blogger, Ask a Korean, who once wrote a post about how the U.S. is the least racist country in the world.

      2. “The basic premise of feminism is that women want to be treated like humans, not like cattle that needs to be trained or broken.”

        I agree with this. But some women need to be trained and broken. Just as some men need to jailed. C’est la vie.

        1. Hacienda’s Harsh Asian Truisms.

          This “college feminism” as I think you referred to it is just an entitled incarnation of modern feminism. Susan B Anthony they are not. American women don’t have much to complain about now but they need to, so they conjure up a cause. They don’t want to acknowledge that life is one big miserable party we ALL partake in.

        2. I feel the same about environMENTAL activists and the culture that surrounds enviornmental activism. They do have some valid points, but cultural do latch onto anything they can find or conjure up something if they lack an argument, because activism and protesting is part of their culture. They are mostly rich kids who have too much time on their hands and they walk around with a holier than thou attitude towards those who are too busy to get involved. Radical activists should stay out climate change and let the government and scientists take care of it.

  15. Gay Area Guy
    Agreed that western women need to increase their fertility rates and breed at younger ages. Conceiving children in your forties and fifties, not only puts them at greater risk for genetic diseases, it can also mean you will not be able to raise the same energy and you could very possibly die during their youth or young adulthood.

    Question How do you feel about males doing domestic work?

    1. Question How do you feel about males doing domestic work?

      I think it would be good for men to help out around the house and do some domestic work, if only for the reason that it would mark the end of the Hispanic maid, and thus one argument in favor of illegal immigration!

      But a stay-at-home dad? Now that’s just plain weird.

      1. When my dad got laid off, my mom got to be the bread winner for a while. It was weird because my dad is the kind of guy who knows every detail about his kids school, interests, and friends and got to be quite intrusive. I’m glad he’s working again.

    1. D
      It’s true that males are over represented among people with genius IQ’s. They are also over represented among profoundly retarded and among developmentally disabled by a 3:5 ratio.

      1. GSG,

        Men pretty much own the hard sciences and math. And are the heads of state. There must be something about testerone that’s like driving a car beyond the speed limit. Gets you there faster, but more crashes. IQ tests are made to conform to the mythical bell curve. The true shape of male intelligence is probably very irregular. Just like men.

        1. Testoserone also causes men to get involved in risky behavior, which may contribute to their premature deaths, which explains the the fact that females are the majority of the population.

        2. I spend a lot of time with techie guys and I don’t mind them so much, the pretentious “artistic” ones are way more perverted.

        3. It only takes a scratch, before women get perverted too, you know. I’ve learned a lot from women. I thank them for it too. I won’t get into to the mass-energy conversion details, but WOW. Einstein was quite the pervert too. E=Mc(squared). Some Jewess schooled him on that.

  16. Mott69
    I agree, though I have little sympathy for Muslim world since they tend to be the biggest defenders of Islam.

    1. I think GSG is trying to say that P.C. feminists tend to defend Islam?

      It’s so ironic that the very same evil white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, Nordic, males that all P.C.r’s and Feminists despise are the same group of males who have, more than any other group of males, bent over backwards for a few hundred years to give women more equality.

      The women’s movement started in the Enlightenment and the Reformation. The most pro-Feminist countries in the world are the dreaded Nordic countries.

      The consequences of giving women the vote are interesting to note. In the U.S.- we got Prohibition (nice going, girls). In Germany, women given voting rights allowed Hitler to be elected (he was considered a lady-killer).

      On an anti-patriotic note: Every time I see a right-wing American female cheer on the U.S. military no matter what they do (who are fighting to “protect” the defenseless wimmen-folk.) I wanna puke. You get out there and get blown to bits, Ms. America.

      Oh, and have a Happy Sept. 11th, everyone!

      Me? I having a barbecue- gonna take two model airplanes fill’em with lighter fluid, and crash ’em into two Leggo buildings- then I’m gonna throw a dead cow and pig onto the whole thing. (sorry if I offended anyone) (/:=))

        1. Amen. Did we really need another flag-waving, mindlessly nationalistic, military-worshipping holiday?

          The last time the U.S. was really attacked (in the miltary sense) was in 1814. And even then, the British had no intention of re-conquering.

          9/11 was not a military attack- it was sabotage, only. And arguably, not very repeatable.

          September 11.01 was the last time I felt patriotic- the aftermath, war on “terr”, and the Neo-Con nonsense destroyed any “patriotism” in me. (I’m still a nationalist, tho)

        2. @ Mott

          I’m an America firster and patriot, but I’m not an American exceptionalist or blind patrioturd.

          Believe it or not, there’s still that distinction.

          But sadly, such people are few and far between. It seems that we’re stuck with either warmongering “my country right or wrong” patrioturds who can’t even accept friendly criticism, or self-loathing “America is responsible for all that’s wrong in the world,” “I’m a citizen of the world,” Americanness is eeeevil leftists.

          Truly patriotic conservatives like Pat Buchanan and truly patriotic left wingers like Ralph Nader are few and far between.

        3. Gay Area Guy
          I don’t think Pat Buchanan is a patriot because he opposed Iraq I and II as jewish wars, but he was the biggest cheerleader for Vietnam (though he was able to evade service because he had Reiter Syndrome, an STD.) 5,000 Americans have died in Iraq, which is tragic but 50,000 died in Vietnam.

        4. @ GSG

          Re: Buchanan

          I recently watched Pat Buchanan be interviewed by Riz Khan on Al Jazeera.

          By his own admission, he was a Cold War, anti-Communist hawk and free trader, but starting in the 90s, as he began to see the harm free trade inspired outsourcing had done to the U.S, he began to grow disillusioned with the Republican party and certain right wing abstractions.

          Now, he’s against globalism and free trade, and opposes all intervention (including Libya).

          Yes, Buchanan, like a lot of paleocons and former Reaganites were warmongers during the Cold War days, but now that the Cold War is over, they are now anti-war.

          I mean, who’s more of an American patriot? Pat Buchanan, who supported the Vietnam War but is now anti-war, or David Horowitz, who opposed the Vietnam War during his Trotskyite days, but is now a fanatic neocon warmonger?

        5. It’s hard to say. If a white gentile group was occupying land in the middle east and surrounding nations were threatening them, Buchanan would probably go to the moon to support them. Buchanan frequently puts his put in his mouth “slavery was the best thing that could have happened to blacks,” which hurts the pro white movemet. On the other hand, Horowitz has never been a patriot.

        6. BAG- yes, there a few. Neither America-always-wrongers or blind patrioturds. Why do you have to be one or the other?

          A real patriot stands and defends his country when actually attacked, but reserves the right to criticize the gov’t and military when appropriate. And to praise it when it does the right thing. That’s patrotism!

        7. BAG- yes, there a few. Neither America-always-wrongers or blind patrioturds. Why do you have to be one or the other?

          Unfortunately, they are very small in number. And no, politicians pandering for votes don’t count.

          Here’s a list of people I have in mind:

          -Pat Buchanan
          -Ralph Nader
          -The late Sam Francis
          -Paul Craig Roberts (at least Paul Craig Roberts during his VDare days. Writing for counterpunch has made him a bit kooky. Well, I suppose being a paleocon writing for a far left publication will do that to you)
          -James Petras
          -John Mearsheimer
          -Stephen Walt (though his bashing of Western civilization following the Norwegian shooting made me give him the side-eye)
          -Blogger Ask a Korean

          People who don’t make the list:

          -Noam Chomsky
          -David Horowitz
          -Tom Hayden
          -Tim Wise
          -Norman Finkelstein (he even came out and said that he’s not an American patriot)
          -Alan Dershowitz
          -All Critical Race Theorists
          -All Tea Partiers

          I’m sure I could add more to the list.

  17. though I have little sympathy for Muslim world since they tend to be the biggest defenders of Islam.

    Not sure what you’re trying to say here, GSG. Why wouldn’t Muslims be the biggest defenders of the Muslim world?

    I’m guessing you meant to say “biggest defenders of the Palestinians

    1. Sorry I meant to say that I have little sympathy for muslim women since they tend to be the biggest deenders of Islam. The muslim men I have met were actually pretty cool. The women were the most arrogant about Islam.

      1. “”Sorry I meant to say that I have little sympathy for muslim women since they tend to be the biggest deenders of Islam””

        This is true. But its hardly a surprise since feminazis tend to infantalize muslim women who choose to wear the veil. Speaking of the veil, how many feminists protested when Muslim women in France were not allowed to wear the hijab in schools? It seems a women’s body is only her own when it conforms to the feminist agenda.

        Mott

        “”It is ironic that in the modern U.S. and the West, where women have it (and have had it) light-years better than they ever have, the complaining is still some of the loudest. “”

        I was going to say the very same thing, but I got distracted by WoW. As Kevin Macdonald writes, western civilization is unique because it has ALWAYS treated women equally. Equal in terms of human worth, if not socio-economically. The Church even enforced monogamy on the aristocracy, no easy task. The feminist claim that women were treated like chattel in the west needs to be refuted and people need to stop buying in to this nonsense.

        1. The feminist claim that women were treated like chattel in the west needs to be refuted and people need to stop buying in to this nonsense.

          Thank you, Dota.

          The claim that patriarchy is a European invention (courtesy of Uncle Tim) also needs to be refuted.

          Overall, consistent claims that Western civilization is uniquely evil and oppressive, needs to stop.

          These postmodernists, feminist jurisprudence types, Critical Race Theorists, etc, ugh, they drive me nuts.

          And unfortunately for me, they infest college campuses.

          Where’s Alexander Solzhenitsyn when you need him?

        2. Dota
          I don’t mind if muslim women wear light headscarves, I have never spoken against it. I come from an Orthodox background so I know many women who do cover their heads. I don’t think they should be allowed to cover their faces because that would mean concealing their identities. Criminals on the run could easily don the veil so as to conceal their identities.

        3. Dota- Yes, even the Catholic Church probably promoted women’s rights in a lot of ways- the emphasis on Mary’importance was seen as a feminist victory- along with the high value placed upon nuns, convents, i.e.: women who were “pure”.

          But I think that modern female rights come from Protestantism- and in Northern Europe, women traditionally had more rights. A Viking thing? (Sorry to go Nordic on ya!)

  18. I meant to say the U.S. proper…the actual States…not far-flung territories.

    To the Japs, Hawaii was just a far-flungl outpost that the U.S.seized about 40 years before- no different than the Phillipines- both of which were considered by Japan to be in their backyard. Hawaii is almost as close to Japan as it is to the U.S., and the Japanese were the largest ethnic group in Hawaii at the time. The Pearl Harbor attack was not designed to be an invasion of the U.S., in order to conquer us.

    People that think that Pearl Harbor was the same as an attack on the U.S.mainland? It’s a lie we’re all taught from birth.

      1. BO would not be able to serve had Hawaii never been admitted.

        Why was it such a bad idea to admit Hawaii as a state?

        1. Well, because Hawaii is a state where non-whites are dominant, and for me, having Hawaii in the union just means more political power for non-whites.

        2. It’s mostly Asian, predominantly Japanese Americans, who have a lot of reason to harbor ill will toward white but choose not to.

        3. U-M.M.- Republicans will never vote to admit 4 million Democrats to the voting franchise. Translation: no statehood for Puerto Rico- ever.

      2. Hawaii might not have been admitted as a state if it hadn’t been attacked, possibly, same goes for Alaska. (Alaska was also attacked in WW II)

        One wonders if Japan had stationed its fleet of warships in Hawaii, instead of us. Woudn’t that be seen as a provocation? We knew full well were provoking the Japs in Manilla and Pearl Harbor, pretty much daring them to attack us.

        I’m not a defender of the WWII-era Japs at all- I just like to get inside their heads and picture what they were thinking. I don’t really buy that “Roosevelt knew when it was coming” conspriracy- but we knew that they wanted us out of the picture in Asia, and that they would attack either Hawaii or the Philppines.

        If the whole German fleet was stationed in, say, the Azores, and us and the British had attacked, what would have been the reaction? A “horrible, dastardly sneak attack”? Pro-active is more like it.

  19. They are honorary Conservatives in American, honorary Whites in South Africa, BAG. They are White. From a Nationalist perspective, they are the least of your worries and will probably assist your agenda as long as you flash your blue eyes at them.

  20. Dota
    I don’t mind what Muslims do in their personal lives and have met some humble muslims that I liked and I don’t mind if they choose to wear Islamic garments as long as their quiet about it. I don’t like it when western muslims prosthelytize, partly because it puts them at risk.

    I believe Iraq was a mistake. I’m not a big fan of Palestinians, but I am willing to say that the creation of a jewish state on their land was an injustice and I would have preferred to have a jewish state elsewhere (I would have like the sparsely populated Western Australia.)

  21. Actually, back to the main point.
    There is definitely something “missing” in the Hispanic cerebrum that distances it from Angloids.

    There is a twist of irony that white people possess that Mexicans do not. In fact, I’ve seen some Central Americans with this. Mexicans are not dumb. They perceive the world differently. There is a rudimentary genetic mechanism that most Mexicans simply do not have. It’s biologically inconsequential, but socially, it’s the kiss of death, because they lack the ability to “click” with white people. If you don’t “click” with white people, you are stupid and better off as a servant.

    1. Of all the Mexican-American females I’ve known, only a certain type seemed as smart as the average Anglo. They all had one thing in common- they were on the average half-Anglo, genetically (1/4 to 3/4), and they behaved like Anglos- they talked like Anglos, they obviously were culturally Anglo, grew up hanging out and identifying with Anglos.

      I’d say it’s not just the Mestizo/Indian blood that holds the others back- it’s their embrace of Barrio/Latino Culture. It’s an anti-intellectual culture- don’t be smart, don’t be a nerd, don’t think for yourself. That’s why they act dumb- they think it’s cooler to be dumb- acting smart = acting white.

      The same mentality holds U.S. blacks back- a dumb-glorifying culture.

      1. @ Mott

        Yes, blacks and Hispanics are on average more anti-intellectual than other groups.

        But sadly, it seems that whites are growing increasingly anti-intellectual as well.

        Even white college students, it seems. For example, someone once made a noise complaint against my white roommate, and after the RA left, he went on a tirade about how Asians need to stop studying all the time, get a life, etc.

        I kind of wanted to smack him. Not because I was offended by his racially charged remarks, but because it reeked of anti-intellectualism.

        You know, I don’t think this country needs to radically reorganize its educational system and model it after the grueling educational systems of East Asia in order to be more “competitive” with China (because as Lafleur once pointed out, in today’s globalist world, it doesn’t matter how “competitive” the U.S. is, as China and India have us beat with numbers alone).

        I think we need to create a popular culture that values intellectualism, and which will encourage people to value academic success. We also need to bring back good blue collar jobs, because college is not for everyone. Since so many blacks, barrio bangers, and white trash (yes, I know how classist this sounds, but sadly, I can’t put it any other way) cannot succeed educationally, they need good blue collar jobs, which used to actually provide a means of living for working class whites and blacks.

        And of course, closing the floodgates to all these uneducated Hispanic illegals, whose (mostly) uneducated anchor babies now comprise 50% of California’s public schools, would also help.

        You know, I wonder how the PISA results would look if we controlled for race? Because the racial breakdown of the results were broken down at least for the reading section (the other sections weren’t released), and by themselves, white and Asian Americans actually did pretty well.

        White Americans scored better than students from most European countries, and with the exception of Shanghai, Asian Americans scored better than students from most Asian countries.

        (and of course, Shanghai is not representative of most of China)

    2. There are so many reasons we can illustrate regarding Mexican under-education…you guys are right on the money. One other thing I’ve witnessed personally twice in my family life is the case of the relatively intelligent teen-aged girl who has grand ambitions to continue her schooling. Her senior year is a frenzy of prep activity, and then…she gets pregnant. Goodbye school, hello changing diapers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.