Alt Left: Where Does the Alt Left Stand on Race Realism at the Moment?

Rahul: Robert, I’m a bit confused about thy political stance.
You’re definitely Fiscally Liberal, but I can’t tell when it comes to social shit. For some shit, your extreme right, and for others you are extreme left (some of this shit is really common sense. I mean, why the fuck should incest not be legal)
RL: Where am I extreme right?
Tulio: Probably on the HBD stuff. Whether it’s true or not, it’s still seen as a right wing position. Or at least it’s only right-wingers/libertarians who tend to openly embrace HBD.

Yes! No one on the liberal – Left buys that and most hate it vociferously. The Alt Left is for socially conservative liberals and Leftists, and race realism was one of the original three pillars of the movement. However, all of the Alt Left wings strongly rejected race realism and wanted nothing to with it, so the Alt Left has dropped the race realism stuff.
Interestingly, most anti-race realist Alt Left people didn’t say race realism wasn’t true. They simply said they were agnostic on the question and didn’t know if it was true or not, but they thought that even supporting race realism at all would make the movement poisonous.

Alt Left: Feminism in Academia and Social Work

Rod Fleming: The trouble is, they’ve infested academia, and the schools of education and social work were the very first to fall. Essentially, all teachers now are Postmodern, ‘intersectional’ feminists and all social workers believe the nuclear family is an abomination and the State is the only body capable of raising children. In other words, that they know better than parents do, how to bring up their own kids.
This is not new; the creeping infestation has been going on for decades. It’s just that the reaction to Trump’s election threw it at the fan and the secret is out. Google the Orkney child-abuse scandal.

Yes, they have infested the academy. They are mostly in the Women’s Studies program, although my field of Linguistics got taken over by the worst SJW’s a long time. Really all of the social sciences have gone SJW, and all universities are hotbeds of SJWism. However, I am acquaintances with two university professors, one in the US and one in Europe. Both of them hate modern SJWism. The American professor is so famous that he has a Wikipedia entry. They both act like they have to be very quiet about this or they might lose their jobs though.
Wait, Rod.
Your Reaction gets in the way of a lot of your otherwise decent theory.
3rd wave intersectional feminists do not want to get rid of the nuclear family. Some 2nd wave radical and other feminists talked about that. These were usually coming from a Hard Left Marxist POV.
You would be hard-pressed to find an “abolish the nuclear family feminist” anywhere now. They don’t exist anymore. And I don’t know anyone, no matter how leftwing, who thinks the state does a better job of raising kids than the family does. They didn’t even believe that in the USSR.
If you work in mental health though, you better be on board with modern feminism. If you’re not and your views get out, the feminists will try to get your license pulled. I could not believe how hard my male therapists sucked up to women. It was actually rather disgusting.  I want a therapist who’s a man, not some cuck.

Alt Left: The Relationship Between Feminism and Marxism and Between Marxism and Identity Politics

Rod Fleming: Hmmm…Gloria Steinem took most of her political thinking straight from Marx, and Steinem is at the root of modern feminism, along with Dworkin, another disgrace to the species and the most overtly sex-negative of the credible 20th-C authors. There were other prominent socialist thinkers than Marx who are also reflected in Steinem but the identitarianism inherent in modern feminism seems to come from Marx. We can argue as to whether their interpretation of Marx was accurate or not, but it’s clear that they are reflecting his influence.
Essentially, Marx depends on identities — proletariat, bourgeoisie –and identities are obviously the core of modern Identitarian or ‘Intersectional’ feminist thinking.
Marx, along with Engels and later Lenin, of course, was a Jew who had left Germany because of antisemitism (specifically, the problems over Jewish emancipation) there. I think it’s likely that the experience of actually being a scapegoat did have an influence on his thinking and the progress of Marxist political philosophy generally. It’s probably not possible to be a Jewish author and not think in identitarian terms, since it is impossible to think outside the Logos and the Jewish Logos is conceived on the notion of an essential and heritable Jewish identity that is independent of belief.
That is why atheist Jews are still Jews; being Jewish is not about theology but about an unimpeachable sense of identity that exists through blood. An interesting sidelight is found in the US, where people whose families, for generations, were born in the US and who are themselves indistinguishable from any other modern white American, still claim to be Scots, even though they would understand hardly a word of any Scottish dialect, archaic or modern and have not a scoobie about Scottish culture. I have never, ever, encountered a person of US birth who claimed to be English. Identitarianism is much deeper than one might think.
Whatever, identitarianism, repackaged by feminists as ‘intersectionality’ is the curse of modern life in the West.

Dworkin never talked much about Marx. She just talked about how much she hated men.  Radical feminists say they are Communists and they are, but they never talk political economics. All they ever talk about is how much they hate men. Incidentally, Socialist Feminists would have thrown Dworkin out of their movement for that because Socialist Feminists forbade feminists from hating men and said men and women workers had to struggle together against capitalism.
I haven’t the faintest idea if any of this is true. I have read quite a bit of those early feminists, and I rarely hear them quote Marx. I have read Steinem quite a bit, and I can’t remember her quoting Marx. More importantly, is Gloria Steinem a Marxist? Hell no.
Radical feminism came out of Marxism in a sense, but they substituted class struggle for the struggle between the sexes. Instead of proletariat and bourgeois, you have women and men, women as an oppressed class and men as an oppressor class.
The Socialist Feminists completely reject Radical Feminists on this question and accuse them of substituting class struggle with gender struggle. For Socialist Feminists, the primary struggle is a class one. Further, both Marxist and Socialist Feminists officially state that men and women workers need to work together to battle capitalism and establish a more just society, so neither wing is much into man-hating, although on the Western Left, you find an awful of lot of quoting of radical feminists. Radical feminism formed the theoretical base on the whole 2nd Wave and much of the 3rd Wave.
Marx was not an Identitarian at all. In fact, many socialists and Marxists have strongly opposed modern Identity Politics as basically bourgeois politics that does nothing but divide the working class. Many of the worst critics of IP have come out of the Left. They really hate dividing the working class into all of these micro-identities.
Marx never discussed IP in any form.
He barely talked about the Woman Question. Engels talked about it more.
Marx and Engels were both backwards on race, and neither liked homosexuals.
Both of them were rather socially conservative men by our standards.
Proletariat and bourgeois are not identities. Those are classes. Identities are generally things you are more or less born with – race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

Rod Fleming: –and identities are obviously the core of modern Identitarian or ‘Intersectional’ feminist thinking.

This is correct.

Rod Fleming: Marx, along with Engels and later Lenin, of course, was a Jew who had left Germany because of antisemitism (specifically, the problems over Jewish emancipation) there.

I don’t think so. Marx was an atheist Jew. In 1844, he wrote a tract called On the Jewish Question which bashed Judaism to Hell and back. It has been labeled an anti-Semitic tract forever now, but I don’t think it was. He didn’t like any religion and he hated Christianity and Islam just as much.
Marx left Germany because he was a journalist and editor of small newspapers and journals and a political organizer who founded some of the first Communist organizations in German or in Europe for that matter. These organizations were shut down and raided, and a number of their members were imprisoned. Marx fled political persecution and imprisonment to Paris and then to London.
I think it’s likely that the experience of actually being a scapegoat did have an influence on his thinking and the progress of Marxist political philosophy generally.
Except that to my knowledge, Marx never experienced much anti-Semitism. As an atheist Jew, Marx had all but left the Jews. Marx also called for the assimilation of the Jews, and many Jews consider that to be antisemitic. There was a not a huge amount of anti-Semitism even in Germany in the 1840’s and 1850’s. People were too busy worrying about other things. Germanic, especially Austrian, antisemitism really took off in the late 1800’s when racial antisemitism first got started with Mars and the rest. Mars founded the first Anti-Semitic League in Germany in ~1880. However, by that time, he had already married and divorced three different Jewish women. Perhaps this is why he turned anti-Semite? Just kidding.

Rod Fleming: It’s probably not possible to be a Jewish author and not think in identitarian terms,

This is probably true but no one gets more outside of the Jews than Jewish Marxists, and no Jews have criticized the Jews as strongly as the Marxist Jews. They are widely considered to be self-haters. For instance, Trotsky, when asked if he were Jewish, described his nationality as “working class.”

Game/PUA: Where Does "Seduction" End and "Sexual Assault" Begin?

Shi: While I agree with the remaining article, I beg to differ with the following paragraph.
RL: Males have this idea that if they just keep grabbing at her over and over, eventually she’s going to cave in. In my experience, it doesn’t work that way. Once she starts batting your hand away like that, you can touch her two, three, five, or 50 more times, and she will just keep pushing your hand away while getting increasingly angry. My experience has been that you won’t eventually break her by continuing to touch her. It doesn’t work that way. So if she’s batting your hand away, quit touching her.
If a girl allows me to touch her 50 frikking times, and still brushes me aside each and every time. Well, I’m definitely taking her to bed.
It is important that she yells at me and creates a scene. I get such an incredible hard-on by that.
HER: “I don’t want you to touch me, pervert. I’ll call my boyfriend/the cops if you do it again.”
ME: “I don’t mind your boyfriend. I’m drunk, baby. Just one more kiss and I will be gone from your life. Forever. Promise. Maybe two kisses.”
I have to be a little drunk or high on something to pull this stunt successfully.
Li’l naughty me expects to be smacked on the face or kicked in the groins before taking a hint.
50 cold shoulder rejections of my handsy self is a rather huge number. There IS A NUMBER OF TIMES by which she should cave in. It’s never gotten that far. Maybe 10-15 rejections on the dance floor at the most. But, not before I got my fingers wrapped around her waist, hips and boobies.
(p.s. – I don’t have much experience with American women as I’ve never been to USA. That might be an extra level of difficulty.)

You can’t do that here in the US. Shi advocates this stuff all the time, but if you try to do what Shi advocates here in the US, you are going to get accused of sexual assault. I am not sure what will happen to you, but most of the #metoo allegations that caused so many men lost jobs and destroyed careers were for doing exactly what Shi is talking about here. Or even less.
Every time you touch her without getting her consent beforehand, it is literally sexual assault. If she likes it, it’s not sexual assault anymore. In the present day US, if you keep grabbing at a woman, and she keeps knocking you away and getting increasingly angry, you are literally sexually assaulting her. And according to all this #metoo shit, you need to be arrested for that. Even after the first time she bats you away, feminists say that’s called “No means no,” and you literally have to not touch her even one more time.
So I am pretty scared to keep grabbing at them when they start pushing me away like that.
Actually it is much worse than that. If you touch her or grab at her even one time without getting permission first and she gets mad and bats you away, you literally just committed sexual assault right there. And the feminists say you need to be arrested on sexual assault charges for doing just that.
The problem is that one of the definitions of sexual assault is “dating.” So by defining sexual assault in this crazy way, the US feminists have succeeded in making dating effectively illegal.
Because at least on every date or similar seduction situation I have ever been in with a female, I started touching her or kissing her in some way or another. I never once asked permission. I just did it. I have literally done this 10,000’s of times now with hundreds of females.

  • If you go on a date with a female, you need to start touching her at some point.
  • Reach out and take her hand in yours as you are walking along.
  • Reach around her waist and put your arm around her as you walk along.
  • Put your arm around your shoulder.
  • Reach down to her leg and put your hand on her upper thigh.
  • Reach over to her arms and start lightly touching her arms with your fingers.
  • If she has a pocket on her dress, ask if you can put your hand in it. When she says yes, do it.
  • If you have something in a jeans or sweater pocket, coyly ask her if she can take the item out of your pocket for you. They will get a twinkle in their eye and do just that.
  • Lean over and kiss her, usually slowly and gently. Put your hands on her softly as you do it.
  • When you are sitting down, reach your arm around her shoulder and put your hand on her tit.
  • Or just jump her. On a car seat next to you, parked in front of her place, just attack her and start kissing her really hard. On a bed at her place, look at her and then just jump her and start kissing her really hard.
  • Grab her and shove her up against a hallway and start kissing her really hard. If after a minute she tells you to back off, do it. Then an hour later, do it again.
  • Each and every one of these actions is a sexual assault except for where you put your hand in her dress pocket. But if she goes for it, it’s not sexual assault anymore. Yet you never know if she is going to go for it or not until you try. The British call this “trying it on.” They call flirting with a woman “chatting her up.”

But if you keep grabbing at her over and over, and she keeps pushing you away while getting angrier, the #metoo movement is definitely calling this sexual assault. On the other hand, your chances of going down on this are about zero because no DA will take such a stupid case. Yet I don’t feel like pestering women.
The problem here is that with women, a lot of the time “no” doesn’t mean “no” at all. Instead, “no” means “try harder.” If females want to know why males act so rapey, it’s for that reason right there – females deliberately promote and encourage rapey behavior in males!
What do you think, guys? Let’s hear your thoughts.

  • How do you feel about touching and kissing women without their permission (something I advocate)?
  • How do you feel about continuing to touch and grab at her as she bats you away and gets increasingly angry (something that gives me a queasy feeling these days).
  • What’s sexual assault?
  • Where does dating end and sexual assault begin?
  • What do you think of the latest feminist consent idiocy where you have to ask permission anytime you want to touch or kiss a female in any way?

Alt Left: I Got Banned by Alternet for Opposing Radical Feminist Idiocy

Chalk up Alternet as one more left site destroyed by feminist fanatics. I think feminuts have taken over pretty much the entire Left at this point. There’s no way to be a liberal or Leftist now without subscribing to radical feminism.
I forget exactly what the article was about, but the discussion descended to Jeffrey Epstein of Pedo Island fame. Epstein recruited mostly legal age teenage girls over the age of 16 to work as models at Pedo Island. They ended up working as prostitutes for Mr. Epstein.
Epstein also had quite a bit of sex with girls younger than that, mostly 14-15, but he is accused of having sex with a 12 and 13 year old girl too. Charges were brought against him for having sex with a number of 14 and 15 year old girls, all of whom he paid for the favor.
So he was accused of having sex with many underage teenage prostitutes. Most took the money, but one 14 year old girl refused to take the money and decided to prosecute. Epstein had paid her an unknown amount for a handjob. He was convicted and sentenced to 13 months in federal prison for this crime.
The article went on to call this Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking, a ridiculous term which makes no sense. The girls Epstein was having sex with were not trafficked. To be trafficked, you have to have a pimp. If you work on your own with no pimp, you are an independent businesswoman, and you’re not being trafficked unless you are trafficking  yourself, which is a bizarre idea.
All of this silliness has been made much worse by radical feminists’ bizarre insistence that all prostitution is somehow “trafficking.” When a man buys a prostitute’s services, he is “trafficking” her. Make sense. Of course not, nothing a radical feminist says is rational, but who cares! Radical feminists don’t logic. Anyway, I attacked this whole ridiculous concept, and the radical feminists at Alternet banned me.

Robert Lindsay
Robert Lindsay Marianne_C 2 months ago
Removed
Marianne (feminist retard): “DMST comes in various forms, including prostitution, pornography, stripping and other sexual acts into which an underage child is forced or enticed by an adult.”
Robert Lindsay: This is semantic abuse, government style.
LOL she wasn’t forced. She did it over her own free will just like all the rest of the little whores. They did it for the money, same as all prostitutes do. No one was forcing anyone to do anything.
“Rape parties” LOL. You’re kidding. Most of those girls were quite willing. A lot of them were coming to his place in New York and they were often 16-17, which is legal in NY. A lot of these girls were being invited down to Pedo Island, and they went there quite willingly.
Epstein did rape some girls, but a lot of them were doing it consensually for money. Consensual sex between an adult man and a teenage girl is hardly rape. The best term for it is “illegal intercourse.”
There were hundreds of girls who came forward and said Epstein paid them for sex, and Epstein paid off every single one of them. The 14 year old would not take the money and filed charges. That’s the only reason he went down at all.
13 months in prison for a handjob from a very willing 14 year old girl sounds about right. It’s hardly the crime of the century.
It’s funny because you abused the term “sex trafficking.”

As you can see, anytime an underage girl sells her ass sexually, she’s being “trafficked”? Trafficked by whom? Who forced her to whore her teen ass out as a high school prostitute? In some cases, no one.

Robert Lindsay
Robert Lindsay Marianne_C 2 months ago
Removed
Marianne (feminist idiot): This is also known as domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST), which is the commercial sexual exploitation of children through buying, selling, or trading the sexual services of American children.
Robert Lindsay: That’s a bullshit definition of sex trafficking. Who made that up? Radical feminists? Every underage prostitute out there (she was quite willing to whore herself to Epstein) is “being trafficked?” WTF. Who’s trafficking them? The men who buy sex from them are “trafficking” them? That’s madness.
I keep seeing these endless references to females being “trafficked,” and I keep wondering what in the Hell they are talking about. Generally the term means the woman is in bondage to someone, say a pimp, and is being moved around the country to prostitute for him, and she’s not making much money out of it either. It’s more or less sex slavery. It’s hard to understand how a teenage girl entrepreneuring as a prostitute is a sex slave.
Now I am getting it. For radical feminists just about every prostitute out there is somehow “being trafficked.” It all adds up now.
Flagged for semantic abuse and word murder by the radical feminuts.

She came back with more nonsense – that Epstein was convicted of sex trafficking for paying a 14 year old girl $200 for a handjob. How the Hell did he “traffic” that girl by giving her a wad of cash for a simple sex act? Radical feminists are murdering language again, but that’s nothing new.

Robert Lindsay
Robert Lindsay Marianne_C 2 months ago
Removed
Robert Lindsay: He didn’t get convicted of sex trafficking. He got convicted of paying a 14 year old girl to give him a handjob lol.

Alt Left: Praise for the Conservative Left

Although the SJW author of the piece that quotes Selbourne in the New Statesman attacks Selbourne, what Selbourne describes is nothing less than the Alt Left itself.
In a very early bulletin board post, a poster described my Alternative Left as conservative Leftists.” When Norman Mailer ran for mayor of New York in 1969, he called himself a left conservative. Mailer has continued to describe himself as a left conservative to this day.
Well, that’s exactly what we are.
We are somewhat socially conservative on the Cultural Left Freakshow, but we are Left on everything else. According to our dispensation, Selbourne would be Alt Left, as he despises the moronic SJW Left. And as he brilliantly points out, the unlimited freedoms (not really unlimited though as look at how SJW Feminism wants to stop heterosexual flirting, dating and sex) to be as weird and crazy as you want are really the freedoms of neoliberalism.
This is radical individualism taken to its ultimate without any regard for the good of society. And radical individualism in Culture goes right along with radical individualism is business and the rest of society. If government has to get out of the lives of all the SJW freaks, then obviously it has to get out of the lives of US business and the rich too, right?

Those who want the right to choose, and who object to moral or social restraint as ‘authoritarian’, cannot logically object to the rights of Capital to do whatever it wants also.

Capitalism runs on a culture of individualism, and radical individualism is the ultimate capitalist society. Capitalists say, “There is no such thing as society.”
And in a Cultural Left world where everyone is running around flying their freak flag du jour, there’s no society either. Everyone has a different hair color. Everyone has a different sexual micro-orientation and gender micro-identity.
Everyone is divided against everyone else. The women workers are egged on to hate the male workers. The Black workers are egged on to hate the White workers. The gay workers are encouraged to hate the straight workers. The tranny workers are prompted to hate the cisgender workers. Everyone hates everyone. No one works together on any societal goals because everyone hates each other too much.
Now that the working class is divided into factions at each other’s throats, society is demolished, all humans are atomized, and the capitalists can go on their merry rapacious way, destroying everything in their path, including whatever is left of society, like they always do.

In fact, we are now landed with a “Left” concept of freedom which is little different from Milton Friedman’s “right to choose”, a Libertarianism that has overshadowed the social in what used to be socialism. It is itself a market freedom; after all, self-restraint has less market worth than self-indulgence.

I like how he describes the Cultural Left as the free market of culture. That’s exactly what it is!

David Selbourne, in the left-of-center New Statesmen, writes::
With socialism at the end of its historical evolution, the “Left” now lacks a coherent sense of what progress is. It has only a ragbag of causes and issues, rational and irrational, urgent and idle: a politics of personal rights and ‘lifestyle choices’, of anti-racism and environmental protection, of multicultural separatism, individual identity and gender, and much else besides.
Neither rhyme nor reason — and certainly not socialist reason — can be made of it, especially when mere transgression is confused with progress.
In fact, we are now landed with a “Left” concept of freedom which is little different from Milton Friedman’s “right to choose”, a Libertarianism that has overshadowed the social in what used to be socialism. It is itself a market freedom; after all, self-restraint has less market worth than self-indulgence. Nor is today’s ‘freedom’n’liberty’, whether Right or ‘Left’, the freedom fought for in the Reformation or in the revolutionary overthrow of the anciens régimes. It is not the freedom for which the 19th-century emancipationists and the suffragettes struggled. It is the freedom to do what one wants and the devil take the hindmost. No wonder that the far Right is advancing.
There is ignorance too in this pseudo-Left Libertarianism. It is reactionary, not progressive, to promote the expansion of individual freedoms without regard to the interests of the social order as a whole. Those who want the right to choose, and who object to moral or social restraint as ‘authoritarian’, cannot logically object to the rights of Capital to do whatever it wants also. The rapacious equity trader has as much right to be free as you or me; these ‘rights’ differ only in scale and consequence, not in essence.

I would actually agree with the following, and this is why I am an extreme statist at heart because face facts, socialism is statism taken to its ultimate ends.
From the Libertarian author:

It grabbed the methods of conservatism, embracing state power as the means of planning permissable changes and preventing others.

We don’t hate the state. We love the state! The state is the people personified as a single governmental entity, acting in the interests of the people to whom it serves, as Mao points out.

“The effort to escape from State control has always been the sign of liberty; the effort to enforce State control has always been the sign of Conservative reaction.” For this reason: “Socialism, in so far as it postulates State control, is Conservative in thought.”
Oliver Brett, Defense of Liberty, 1922

Fine. We are conservatives then. We are the Conservative Left!

Professor E. Harris Harbison of Princeton, concurred: “The truly ‘radical’ movement of the later medieval and early modern period was the growth of economic individualism, not the appearance of a few communistic books, sects, and communities. Against the background of nineteenth century individualism, ‘radical’ is today almost synonymous with ‘socialist’ or ‘communist’. …It is essential to the understanding of utopian socialism to remember that when it first appeared in European history as a fairly consistent theory, it was very largely a reactionary protest against a new, ‘progressive’ and poorly understood economic movement, an appeal to turn the clock backward.”
Socialism and Modern Life, 1952

Fine, not a problem! I was always wondering when the Rightists and Libertarians would reclaim the word liberal.

Walter Lippman wrote: “…I insist that collectivism, which replaces the free market by coercive centralized authority, is reactionary in the exact sense of the word.”
Carl A. Keyser, Spare None: the Federal Octopus: How it Grew and Other Tales, 1972
 

Sounds good.
Liberal historically has never meant anything like US social liberalism. In most of the world, liberal is a dirty word. It’s synonymous with neoliberalism. Liberalism in economics means classical liberal or neoclassical economics. It’s Ricardo and Smith all the way to Mises and Hayek, without stopping.
In the rest of the world, it tends to mean the “free minds and free markets” garbage that American reactionary foreign policy claims to support in their lying propaganda. Note once again the tie-in of social freedoms with freedom of Capital. You want free elections, gay rights, feminism, porn, civil liberties and the rest? Fine, you have to let the market run free with no restictions from the state whatsoever.
According to this nonsense, you can’t have free minds without free markets, and you can’t have free markets without free minds. Any restrictions on the free market are automatically symptomatic of a dictatorship or authoritarian regime.
This is why every Left government on Earth immediately gets called a dictatorship by US foreign policy. Because to the sick American way, socialism in any way,  shape or form is automatically undemocratic and dictatorial by its very nature.
This nonsense places economics over politics as Economics Uber Alles. Here economics determines the nature of the state.
If the market is free, you have a democracy automatically, no questions asked. Never mind the death squads that just murdered 200,000 people and all the peaceful opposition, the election that was just stolen, the US sponsored coup to “restore democracy” that resulted in the 17 year long “democracy saving” dictatorship, the politicized police, army, judiciary, the rich owning all the media and rendering freedom of speech a sick joke, the money-based elections giving rise to the “democracy of the dollar” and the dictatorship over the people.
And if  you have any type of socialism, you automatically have a dictatorship. I suppose Norway and Sweden must be dictatorships then. Never mind that you have the freest and fairest elections on Earth as they have in Venezuela. No matter. Elections can never be free enough in a socialist country. Even if they are the freest and fairest elections on Earth, it’s automatically a dictatorship simply by dint of being socialist.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Alt Left: A Conversation about the Plague Called Modern Feminism

Rod Fleming: The Right in this case are libertarians whereas the Left are authoritarians.

We don’t have any rightwing libertarians in power here in the US. All of our rightwingers, and they are the worst humans on Earth, are the authoritarian Right, and in general, they are part of the anti-male war on sex too. There is an alliance between American conservatives and feminists to stick it to American heterosexual men.
But yes, the rightwingers who are standing up to #metoo garbage are the libertarian sort, like on Spiked.

Rod Fleming: “economically centrist, socially conservative (in that we believe in things like ‘children should be brought up in supportive nuclear families’ ) free-thinking Libertarians,”

Someone like this would not be a libertarian in US culture. All US Libertarians are ultra-right on economics, no exceptions. This person you describe for all intents and purposes does not exist in US politics. There’s no such thing.
But you are correct. Any person with a politics like the above would be driven out of every liberal and Left forum and pilloried as Republicans. It is the “social conservative” part that would get you. Social conservatives of any variety, even mild ones like you describe above, are not allowed anywhere near anything liberal, Left, or Democratic Party in the US. I am banned from many liberal and Left forums on the Net on the grounds that I am a: fascist, racist, sexist, Republican. In fact, I am none of these things! I am practically a Communist!
I am still not on the Right. These leftwing scum keep screaming that I am on the Right, so I took them at their word and wandered around every rightwing movement I could find. I hated every single one of them. I continue to search rightwing sites everywhere and I still hate every single one I see. I have not yet found a rightwing or conservative faction that appeals to me in any way, shape, or form, and I still utterly hate every conservative site or faction that encounter. If I am on the Right like all you leftwing garbage insist, why don’t you kindly point to some rightwing movement or web page somewhere where I can fit in without wanting to punch every conservative I see? I mean show me my movement.
Conservatives are the enemy of all mankind. I am basically a liberal deep down inside. I despise the conservative way of thinking.

Rod Fleming: At the same time, Feminism, which has always been sex-negative, has reached unprecedented levels of influence because of the way that Postmodernist Feminism has infiltrated and corrupted the education system.

What about Third Wave sex-positive feminism? My feeling is that it’s not all that sex-positive!

Rod Fleming: Rabidfems (essentially Postmodernist Feminists who have replaced Marx’s scapegoat, the bourgeoisie, with men, especially white men),

More true of radical feminists. Sort of true about Third Wavers, except most do not have Marxist roots.

Rod Fleming: want to absolutely control the supply of sex, even to the point of policing women’s sexual behavior, because 1) they loathe men and think they can hurt us by stopping us having sex (good luck with that one, hit me up if you want the names of some good bars in Angeles, boys)

Well, women always want to control the supply of sex. But now they have a lobby called feminism where they do this openly and blatantly. In Sweden they made it illegal for men to go overseas to get a foreign bride as a lot of Swedish men have. Sweden is a pure feminist Hell, the most feminist country on Earth. Feminists have actually been running the government for years now. Feminists have completely destroyed that wonderful country.
Is the purpose of modern feminism really to control the supply of sex in society? I mean, women do a pretty good job of that on their own, don’t they, with or without feminism? Why do women need feminism to control the sex supply as they do this as a matter of course anyway?
I am convinced that modern feminism wants to stop straight men from having sex. Gay men can have sex all the men and boys they want. In fact, many feminists would prefer if most or all of us straight men were gay because then we would leave them alone. Many modern feminists hate men looking at them, flirting with them, and asking them out, and if we were all gay, that would end.
The theoretical roots of both 2nd and 3rd Wave feminism lie in the worst man-hating feminism of all – radical feminism via Andrea Dworkin, Katharine McKinnon, and the rest. They were all quite open about wanting to more or less make heterosexual sex impossible or illegal, and this is exactly what they are doing with #metoo garbage and rape hysteria.

Rod Fleming: they think that if they can absolutely monopolize and then control the supply of sex, they can control society.

Women already always monopolize and control the supply of sex, and this has never given them control over society. How will this give them control over society if they do it in the guise of feminism when it never worked earlier?
Feminists want control over society so they can stick it to us men good and hard, that’s what they want. I have said this many times before, but this is paybacks. Feminism is 100% pure revenge against men and 0% anything else. They are mad at what we have done to them, and they are going to make us pay for it.

Rod Fleming: I mean, these are people who want to ban SEX DOLLS because they ‘demean women’s bodies).

Radical feminists hate those stupid dolls, but how do 3rd Wavers feel about them?

Rod Fleming: They torpedoed Milo because he refused to condemn the man who seduced him when he was 13.

Yes, those scum called Milo a pedophile because an older man had sex Milo when Milo was 13! If anything, Milo was a victim of a “molester”. He wasn’t one himself! Let’s call all kids who get molested child molesters then, right, feminists?

Rod Fleming: That would be bad enough, but then we have Rag, Tag and Bob-tail, the Omega-males snuffling round the skirts of the rabidfems, hoping that by backing them up and betraying their brothers, they can pick up some sympathy sex. That right there is the lowest form of human life, of all.

I don’t agree that male feminists are all Omegas, though of course some of them are. A lot are simply Betas. And I think some Alpha men are calling themselves feminists now because you pretty much have to. However, all male feminists are automatically wimps, cucks, girls, girlyboys, soyboys, wusses, and especially faggots. These manginas have gone over to the enemy. The women are for all intents and purposes the enemy nowadays to the extent that they support feminism.
There is something particularly horrific and pathetic about the creature called the Male Feminist, a traitorous cuck to the Brotherhood if there ever was one.

Alt Left: Feminist Cancer Strikes Oxford, Soon Goes Malignant

Feminist poison strikes Oxford, turns many female students into man-scared and man-hating dykes or shut-ins, turns men into terrified incels. 
This is leftwing progress! The Modern Left is pathetic!
[By Damian Thomson, from The Spectator, 13 June 2015] Oxford’s New Feminist Hit Squad: Cute Tumblr. Scary Politics.
“We’re at the tail end of Trinity term at Oxford, when the university finally begins to look like the ‘city of dreaming spires’ depicted in the postcards. The dismal weather cheers up; the quadrangles are soaked in sunlight; and the students — just about to leave for the summer — grab these precious few weeks to do Oxfordy things like punting and slurping Pimm’s.
Even the swots and the lefties are filled with the spirit of Brideshead. Parties spring up on every available lawn; the chatter of gossip and teasing grows louder and louder until the sun goes down, people start throwing up and the college authorities herd the revellers on to the street.
But this year a group of undergraduates — mostly women — will be shunning all this. They will be staying in their college rooms, fingers flying across their keyboards as they scowl at the screen. They are the hard core of a feminist cult that has gripped Oxford and makes life miserable for hundreds of undergraduates across the university. The cult uses Facebook to snoop on students who aren’t ‘proper’ feminists. It tries to force young women to use its extreme rhetoric and denounces them if they don’t.
Its digital tirades can poison college life. One young woman told me that new friends she’d made at Oxford suddenly shunned her in the dining hall after the word went out that she held ‘incorrect’ views on women’s rights. (She was so worried about repercussions that she asked me not to mention which area of women’s rights she felt strongly about.)
I’m going to call the cult ‘Country Living’. That’s not quite accurate: it’s actually spelled without the ‘o’, a gynecological pun that’s the only evidence of a sense of humor you’ll find among its leaders. I reckon calling it Country Living will make them cross. Which, to be fair, is not difficult. These lasses are very, very cross all the time. If there was an Oxford blue for taking offence, they’d be champions.
Country Living is an internet cult that polices behavior both online and offline. Its manifesto can be read by anyone who visits its page on the blogging platform Tumblr, which is mocked up to look like a 1970’s student magazine. Here we learn that anyone can become a C-word, which is a badge of honor, not a term of abuse. Those four letters have been ‘reclaimed’ by the group. (Like feminists everywhere, Country Living does a lot of reclaiming.)
But to earn this honor you must pass tests as severe as the binge-drinking initiation rituals of an all-male Oxford dining society. You must promise to ‘accept that gender is a social construction and embrace its fluidity’. You must ‘recognize your place and privilege within intersectionality’.
And if you fail to do these things, Country Living wants to know. It has spies all over Oxford. They’re not necessarily ‘members’ of the group — as with many religious cults, it’s not clear who is and isn’t a member, and fellow-travelers are often the most snoopy zealots.
A student can be chatting with friends in the Missing Bean, an espresso bar in quaint Turl Street, and say something ‘problematic’ — the Country Living buzzword, meaning anything that deviates from its rigid feminist doctrine, obsessed with transsexual rights. The Country ladies are ferocious earwiggers, and if the student is on the cult’s radar, the remark will find its way back to HQ. Which, bizarrely, is not an office but a Facebook group.
This is where Country Living rules on the correct ideological approach to any current issue. Its Facebook pages are designed as a ‘safe space’ for feminists — meaning an unsafe space for anyone who deviates from the line. As with many sectarian outfits, the smaller the deviation, the bigger the hissy fit. ‘The ultimate crime is not being a Tory man, but being the wrong sort of feminist,’ explains one woman student who, like everyone I talked to, asked not to be named.
The Country set love shutting down debates on their pages. Just after the general election, whose result came as a nasty shock to them, their Facebook administrator Shaina Yang announced that ‘I can’t allow these discussions [about the Tory victory] to continue until we release a clarified statement of what CL rules say is okay and isn’t okay on this topic.’ No wonder that, according to a survey by the Oxford Tab newspaper, a third of Country Living Facebook members were ‘too nervous’ to post in the group.
Such nervousness isn’t confined to Facebook. ‘The influence of CL goes way beyond its membership,’ says one male undergraduate. ‘Girls who come up to Oxford as mild feminists pick up the message that they have to take offence at anything that might be considered misogynistic. So boys have to monitor their own language, pretend to be worked up about trans issues, if they’re to stand any chance of getting laid.’ Something similar happened during the early Seventies heyday of old-style feminism, when guys would denounce patriarchy in order to get laid. But they didn’t have an internet Stasi to worry about.
Adds another student: ‘You see members of the college rugby club glancing around anxiously to see if there are any women present before they can tell a joke. Ironically, they’re the ones who need a safe space.’ I ask him how he can tell the difference between Country sympathizers and the hard core. ‘Weirdly dyed hair is one clue,’ he says. ‘But a better one is “problematic”. The hard core insert it into practically every sentence.’
All this is Oxford at its worst. The university has always been a playground for egomaniacs and control freaks, unlike milder, more studious Cambridge. Although there are Country members in other universities, its origins are no accident.
‘We insist that grammar and spelling are elitist and don’t matter because of a hundred years of linguistic study showing that. When people who insist on hyper-patriotism get language wrong, we use the errors in their language to suggest they aren’t qualified to judge complex matters.’ That’s a comment by one Alyson Cruise on a financial website, bearing the same photograph as the Country Facebook admin Alyson Cruise, a trans woman at St Catherine’s College (who didn’t respond when I contacted her).
If they’re the same person, then it’s bit rich of Cruise to judge errors in language, since her own grasp of syntax on Facebook is pretty rudimentary. But the urge to correct the grammar of the lower orders is very Oxonian. No other university is so intellectually snobbish. Even the Bullingdon Club is at times — look at the proportion of Firsts and future power brokers among its members. Country Living would hate the comparison, but they and the Bullers are both elitist, secretive and enjoy ridiculing people on the basis of linguistic clues. Among the Oxford social elite, letting slip a lower-middle-class word such as ‘lounge’ is what the hyper-feminists would call ‘problematic’. ‘I’d love to see a fights between CL and the Bullingdon,’ muses a student. ‘The feminists would scratch their eyes out before they’d thrown their first chair.’
Unlike the 235-year-old Bullingdon, however, Country Living is unlikely to become a venerable Oxford institution. A backlash is under way. Louisa Manning, an ex-member, has broken ranks to denounce its ‘patronizing, self-righteous tone’ — and revealed that as a mixed-race woman, she had been instructed by the group ‘to identify as white when talking to people of color’. She also accused the administrators of ‘Facebook-stalking members’ profiles’ to determine whether they were ‘legit feminists’.
She also accused the group of spreading a version of politically correct racism. People of mixed race — like herself — felt they were being ‘erased’ because they didn’t fit neatly into an ethnic category. She wrote: ‘Being half Latino, whenever I’ve become involved with threads discussing race, I’ve been accused of “passing privilege” and have been instructed to identify as white when talking to people of color.’
Imagine if allegations of racial bullying were made against a Tory drinking club. The Oxford University authorities would investigate immediately. But Country Living is left-wing, so it is left alone.
Fortunately the group is unstable and beginning to divide into factions. Ordinary undergraduates are finally summoning up the nerve to tease them. The chances are that Country Living — like thousands of cults throughout history — will tear itself apart in an orgy of name-calling, finger-pointing and accusations of heresy. But not before its fanatics have succeeded in spoiling university life for other students — and themselves.”

Alt Left: The Right Are Now the Free Love Sexual Liberationists, and the Left are the Sex-hating Puritanical Prudes

Pathetic!
It is truly pitiful that the only people protesting these sex-hating, sex-banning, Neo-Victorian, man-hating dyke prudes called feminists are the reactionaries. Isn’t that pitiful? Who’s standing up for the Sexual Revolution against the Left’s attempt to bring us back to the Comstock Era. The reactionaries! Who’s standing up for free love? The reactionaries! Who’s standing up for guilt-free flirting, dating, sex and love? The reactionaries!
Since when did reactionary scum ever become sexual liberationists? And what happened to the Left. I am straight out of the free love Sexual Revolution. The Sexual Revolution was one of the great liberation movements of the great 1960’s. And now the Left, the very people who kicked off this revolution in the first place, have become extreme sex-hating Puritans who threaten to get men fired, get their careers destroyed, and arrest, try and imprison them for the crime of flirting with, dating, and having sex with females! Incredible!
The Right are now the great freewheeling sexual liberationists and the Left are the frigid, impotent, sex-hating Puritanical prudes! How sad is that?

Game/PUA: The Big Lie: Trump Admitted to Sexually Assaulting Women

The Left, of which I am unfortunately a part of, just won’t stop repeating this stupid lie.
The Lie goes like this:
When Trump said, “I just grab em in the pussy,” he was admitting to sexual assault. Except he wasn’t and what he described wasn’t sexual assault at all. Trump said and I am paraphrasing:

When you are a famous as I am, you can get away with anything sexually. You can do anything – even grab em in the pussy. And they let you do it because you’re famous.

Ok what Trump admitted to was not grabbing women in the pussy against their will, though he definitely didn’t ask permission before doing this. He said he got away with all sorts of sexual things, all the way up to grabbing women right in the pussy,  and women don’t mind, let him do it, and actually like it because he’s so famous.
So he grabbed women in the pussy, but because he was so famous, they enjoyed it and allowed him to do it to them without objection.
Ok, look. If you grab or touch her and she likes it and lets you do it, it’s not sexual assault. It’s only sexual assault if she doesn’t like it and tries to stop you after you do it.
So Trump confessed to 100% consensual behavior on the part of him and various women in the grab em by the pussy comment.
It’s pretty sickening the way the (Feminist) Left has lied about this comment. Trump is monstrous enough without making up crap about him. Just focus on all of the outrages and atrocities he does commit. We should have our hands full with that. There’s no need to make up lies about him. The truth about him is bad enough.

Sexual Misconduct Charges against Trump: The Run-Down

I believe that Trump did act inappropriately towards women a number of times. He sure pissed off a lot of women with his forward behaviors. I can’t recall most of the cases, but I can comment on a few.
He absolutely beat up and violently raped his ex-wife. There’s no doubt in my mind about that. He definitely broke the following laws: assault (he assaulted her so badly that he actually yanked some of the hair out of her head) and rape (the threw her down to the floor and violently raped her against her will). The ex-wife was paid off and part of the payoff was that she could not talk about the episode.
I also think that he beat and raped a 13 year old girl and a 12 year old girl at Jeffrey Epstein’s apartment in the 1990’s. The victim was named and highly credible. Trump threatened the 13 year old that if she talked, she would end up like Maria, the 12 year old. At the time he said that, Maria had not been seen in some time. The implication was that Trump and/or Epstein had had Maria killed. I feel that he broke the following laws: assault (he punched her in the head), rape (he violently raped her against her will), and laws against sex with a minor (she was 13 years old).
The 13 year old, now in her early 30’s, sued Trump in civil court. The woman finally dropped the case because she was getting a lot of death threats. The case was settled out of court when Trump apparently paid the woman off. As part of the settlement, she was not allowed to talk about the case.
His behavior in going into the locker room where underage teenage girls were changing for his pageants. There were naked 15-17 year old girls in there. He was running the pageant and there was nothing they could do to stop him. He broke no laws here, but this is creepy behavior. I mean come on, people.
I would have to go back over the other charges to see what to make of them, but few if any of them actually rise to the level of criminal sexual assaults. Most are under the murky rubric of sexual misconduct, and no one even knows what that is. Technically they were all sexual assaults, but this sort of thing happens constantly, and police never even arrest on hokey charges like this because if they did, 10 million men would be imprisoned in the first year. Cops have better things to do than cuffing some guy for copping a feel in a bar.
I will say that Trump has left a whole string of women pissed off, even years later, over his excessively aggressive sexual behavior. Trump’s been acting excessively sexually aggro with females for a long time now.

Game/PUA: The Lowdown on Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Harassment, and Sexual Assault

I’ve been flirting with and touching women against their will (without prior permission) my whole life.
According to the new definition, I have committed sexual harassment many times. That is, I have made unwanted sexual advances. In fact, I have made some unwanted sexual advances (sexual harassment by definition) just recently. Ask me if I care.
How on Earth are you supposed to get laid or even date unless you make unwanted sexual advances? A sexual advance is broadly a flirtation. You can’t read women’s minds, so while a lot of your advances might go over well, it’s guaranteed that quite a few won’t. So if you don’t commit sexual harassment, you will die a virgin.
Unwanted sexual advances are not a problem. Sexual harassment means the behavior is repeated, and the female has told the male over and over to stop the advances, but he keeps doing it anyway. That’s sexual harassment. Everything else is just flirting.
Furthermore, I have committed quite a few sexual assaults in my life. If you touch a woman without her permission, and she doesn’t like it, it’s sexual assault. Well, of course I have done this many times, mostly on dates or when I was alone with some female.
Every time you go on a date, you risk sexual assault by merely touching females without obtaining prior consent. Every time you touch her without her consent, you commit sexual assault. However, if she likes it, then it’s not assault anymore. It’s only assault if she doesn’t like it.
If you are as mild and gentle about about touching females as I usually am, she shouldn’t be too outraged.
But if she keeps knocking your hand away, maybe it’s time to stop.
I would like to point out one other thing. If you are on a date with a female, and she’s knocking your hand away or turning away from your attempted kisses, this is a very bad sign. If she likes you at all, she will kiss you back and be happy that you are touching her.
Males have this idea that if they just keep grabbing at her over and over, eventually she’s going to cave in. In my experience, it doesn’t work that way. Once she starts batting your hand away like that, you can touch her two, three, five, or 50 more times, and she will just keep pushing your hand away while getting increasingly angry. My experience has been that you won’t eventually break her by continuing to touch her. It doesn’t work that way. So if she’s batting your hand away, quit touching her.
And furthermore, the date is a dud that’s not going anywhere. After the date is over, don’t call her back. There’s no need for a second date. If she’s that cold on the first date, she won’t warm up on subsequent dates.
I would add that if a female likes you but thinks you are going too fast, she will let you know by smiling and telling you in various ways just that.
Some masked/cryptic conversation or subtle nonverbal behavior follows in which she let’s you know what’s up sexually. Maybe she will have sex on the 3rd or 4th date. Maybe on the 6th or 7th. There will be a conversation about this because she doesn’t want to lose you. If there’s no sex after six or seven dates, get rid of her unless you like to go slow like this. For the record, I usually engage in some sort of sexual behavior, even if it’s only just a make-out session, on the very first date. And I am often a sex on the first date type guy.
If I became famous, I doubt if one woman would come forward and accuse me of sexual assault-type stuff, which is what Trump is being accused of. I’m not a sexually aggro type of guy like he is. I haven’t left a trail of furious, aggrieved, and violated females in my wake like he has. If you are leaving a string of enraged, despondent, injured, and trespassed women in your wake, in my opinion, you’re doing it wrong. Or at least you’re not doing it Robert Lindsay style.

Game/PUA: The Big Lie about Sex with an Intoxicated Woman Being Rape

Tulio: What I also found is that a huge number of reported rapes are actually acquaintance rapes and involve a guy having sex with a woman who drank too much. I’ve had sex with women where we were both heavily intoxicated. If the girl decided to go to the cops the next day and say she was raped, I’d be included in that statistic.

Yes, and police almost always refuse to make an arrest in these cases, which encompass 45% of rape cases.
Like you, I’ve been having sex with intoxicated (on alcohol and other drugs) my whole life. I guess I’ve been raping females my whole life, and I’ve committed thousands of rapes. I’m such a bad boy. Where do I go to turn myself in?
It’s not illegal to have sex with an intoxicated woman, despite what so many (all?) ridiculous women think. So far, every woman I have talked to has told me that if a man has sex with an intoxicated woman, it’s rape. Are there any women who don’t believe this? I mean think about. Women who are drunks or alcoholics get raped virtually every time they have sex.  And if the man is intoxicated too, why isn’t it true that she raped him? Or that they both raped each other?
The legal standard is “incapacitated.” That means either passed out or passing in and out of consciousness. If she’s not so drunk she’s incapacitated, no DA will take the case.
And if she’s so wasted she’s incapacitated as in passed out drunk, DA’s almost never file because there’s no evidence. Especially young men aged 19-23 have sex with women passed out on booze ALL THE TIME. And they almost never go down on it. Actually there are many amateur porn videos uploaded all over the Net showing males doing exactly that – having sex with a passed out woman.
Pro tip to the males reading this blog: If she is passing in and out of consciousness while you are involved in a sexual situation with her, stop the sexual behavior. You’re raping her. And if she is all the way passed out, for Chrissake don’t do anything sexual with her. Not only are you raping her, you’re also a necrophiliac in my opinion.
I am not sure what the standard is if she is falling down or incoherently drunk. Incoherently drunk might meet the standard of incapacitated. You really want to have sex with a woman who’s that wasted? She’ll probably puke in your bed for Chrissake.
But if she’s merely been drinking and she’s not incoherent or passing out, go ahead and have sex with her to your heart’s content. Drunken females are often ravenously horny.

Game/PUA: How to Get Barely Legal Women At Age 60

Tulio: Robert, how the hell are you still banging 19 year olds at age 60? How are you meeting these girls? I couldn’t even bang 19 year olds when I was 19.
Rahul: Yeah Robert, how do you? I can’t seem to properly talk to girls my age, let alone ask them to date me.

I met her on Tinder. Yep you can meet women on Tinder, imagine that. But I have been on there for a while, and mostly it is totally dead for me.
I still date women my age, remember, as in 59 year old women. And I also date women in their late 20’s and early 30’s. Several years ago, I was dating some women around age 50, and that was a great age. I would date women in their 40’s if I had a chance but they have not been around lately. 40’s is a great age for a woman. 30’s are great too. They are far more mature than a woman in her 20’s once they are in their 30’s, and generally they are calmed down and relaxed about sex. Women in their 40’s are even more calmed down and relaxed about sex with the added benefit that they simply don’t care anymore.
I don’t have any particular thing for very young women. They are fun but there are drawbacks to every age of woman and older women are better than younger ones in a lot of ways.

Looks

I have supposedly been very goodlooking my whole life. I think my looks are shot, but older women say I look good, and even some young women do, so maybe I still have some looks. I may be in the Top 20% in my age bracket. So maybe it is still down to my lucking out into fortunate good looks like a lot of it was previously. Blackpill is a great philosophy and it is said how true it is.
Goodlooking men and homely men literally live in two different worlds, and I think goodlooking men and average looking men also live in very different worlds. The things that work for goodlooking men might not work at all for men or average or lower attractiveness.
You literally have to figure out where you are on the 1-10 scale and then carefully craft your Game to your looks number. If you are a 5, run 5 Game. If you are a 3, run 3 Game.
8-10 Chads will usually do very well and some 7 Chadlites can do very well too. 6’s are sometimes called high tier Normies and some can do very well. But even 7’s and certainly 6’s will have to modify their Game, and they will often not be able to run the same Game that Chad runs.
Shi said that he knew some men who were  4’s and 5’s and maybe even 3’s who did fantastic with women, but I am not aware of a lot of that.

The Rest: Power, Money, Status, and Fame

All of these tend to run together except Money, and Money still often runs with some of the others. Money and Fame almost automatically give you Status, but you can have Status with little Money and no Fame. Status and Power tend to go together but not always. Mostly Status simply creates its own Fake Power if you run the proper Game. Fame tends to give you Status automatically.
I have some achievements somehow in my failed life. I am a published author and am published in a book. I publish in academic journals. I have a Master’s. I just got interviewed by Al Jazeera. I had several offers to be on TV. I get interviewed on the radio regularly. I have started my own political movement. So all that adds to the gravitas. I am slightly famous, internet famous.
Lately I am hearing for the first time in my life, “You are the man I have been looking for all my life.” That may be the Fame effect, but boy, it sure feels nice to hear that!

Game

I guess the most important of all is Game. My Game is out of this world. I have been perfecting it for 40 years, and it just keeps getting better and better. I know how to talk sexy, walk sexy, move sexy, sit sexy, stand sexy, hold my coffee cup sexy, etc.
I know how to act around women, such that there is any way to act around them at all. I know how to talk to women, such as there is any way to talk to them at all. I literally seduce them with words and behavior.
I also more or less hypnotize women, and I actually cast magic spells on them, as I fashion myself as a bit of a warlock. What’s weird is I regularly get told by women that I have cast a spell on them, or they ask me if I am a warlock, or they ask, “What have you done to me?” or say I have them under my spell, etc. One 18 year old girl recently said, “Take it off! Take off the spell! Please! I don’t like it.” I laughed and her and said I wouldn’t take it off.
I have no idea if this stuff works or if it operates on some known psychological mechanism.
I think I do well mostly due to Game because I more or less snare them even on the Internet where they have never seen my face and have no idea what I look like. There’s places you can go on the Net to talk dirty to women, etc. Theoretically you can meet women on there, but the problem is they are all over the world – Spain, Netherlands, UK, or more commonly Australia, New Zealand and especially Canada. Mostly you meet women in the US, but they are located all over and most tend to be in the South or on the East Coast. I have met two so far in California but both were 300-500 miles away from me.
I go to those places a lot mostly for an ego boost or to practice my Game, and they send me pics a lot. I get nudes all the time. I got seven nudes from two 18 year old girls in the past two weeks.
A lot of times when I am in these Net places,  I just start talking to them, and very quickly, they say, “I already want you! You’ve hooked me so bad! I want you right now!” I have no idea what I am doing to get them to react that way, but I do know how to talk to women.
One thing I do not do is escalate too fast. I blow it all the time by escalating too fast to this very day, but a lot of the time I can control myself.
You escalate very slowly using the fishing technique. Like the woman is a fish and you are a fisherman. You toss the “lure” to her, which is a slight escalation or flirt, and then you judge her reaction. If you shoots you down, not good. If she likes it, see how much she likes it.
Depending on her reaction, you proceed. You have to watch her reactions very carefully and try to figure what is the best way to proceed after that.  You keep doing that, slowly escalating maybe, or backing off maybe, or just maintaining it at a steady level.
Usually she will start escalating too, and then you take very careful note of that and proceed accordingly. I am extremely cautious almost to the point of paranoia, and by now I have this down to a science.
They could literally offer AA’s, Bachelors, Masters and even PhD’s in Game. It truly is that hard and complex, mostly because women are some of the most complex things on Earth.
The men who are good at this are amazing. They literally walk into a room, and every woman in the room looks up at them with frozen eyes. I have no idea how they do it, but I think it must be Game or some type of magic or hypnotism.
 

Game/PUA: How To Run a Relationship with a Woman or with More Than One Woman

I am actually a pretty nice guy. They say never to apologize to a woman, but I apologize a lot. At some point you can sound too wimpy and pitiful and you have to be careful not to cross that line.
You don’t have to be an asshole. But you need to fight back. Most guys never fight back against a woman. If you fight her hard when she is out of line, she actually falls for you even more, and it actually makes them horny.
Women are like children. Children always love to test parents’ boundaries and women always love to test men’s boundaries to see what they can get away with. I do not mean that women are childish, but they are rather childlike, which is a quality I like. Instead, women are naturally rebellious and mischievous and that is why they like to see what they can get away with like a devious, manipulative, mischievous child.
Women, like kids, actually want you to set some boundaries on them. Women actually like to be confined somewhat to a set of boundaries by a strong, somewhat dominant man and, like a child obeys a parent who sets boundaries on them, a woman will respect a man who sets boundaries on her.  Women also like to be controlled by strong, dominant men like kids like to be controlled by strong, dominant parents.
Women also want a man who is very loving, kind, and wonderful but also somewhat mean or even scary and possibly sociopathic. Dangerous men make women horny as Hell.
When she gets completely out of line, cuss her out like a sailor. Don’t cave in and don’t act like you got your feelings hurt. Laugh right in her face when she tries to insult you.
Laugh in her face when she says she doesn’t want to fuck, and say, “That’s what you think. You all say that. I’ll check back with you in a while and you will change your mind. They always do.” Give her a choice of where to sleep if sex is uncertain. I offer “a bed in a bedroom or the pull out couch.” If she picks the couch, laugh at her and say, “They all do that. I guarantee you will come knocking on my door in the night.” And often they do such that.
They love this and are shocked that a man is offering them a choice. Put it in her hands whether you have sex or not. Women love to be empowered and a lot of the time they decide to seduce you.
Women spend their whole lives fighting off horny men, and they freak out when they meet a man with an abundance mentality who acts like he could care less whether he has sex with them or not.
Also this implies that you have other women waiting in the wings. Always imply that you have other women waiting in the wings. Be mysterious about it.
Act like she is in competition with a lot of other really good women. I had one woman headed down that road, and she said, “There are probably a lot of other good, attractive women after you too. How can I compete with them?” It wasn’t true but I lied and said it was. This will make her feel insecure, but it’s better because now she thinks you are hot property and  she will have to be the best to land you.
Later on, she said, “You should pick me over those other women because I give the best deep throat west of the Mississippi.”
They love to compete with other women, and if they are not the only ones, they will try to be better and even out-fuck and out-kink the other women.
If you have two girlfriends at once, it is very difficult, but if she’s ok with it, occasionally play them off each other. If she acts bad, say, “I should leave you! You are mean to me! The (other woman) is never mean to me like you are!”
She will literally compete to try to beat a better girlfriend and will even say she is going to beat up the other woman, pull a knife on her, etc. If  you have two girlfriends, carefully make them jealous of each other so that they will fight over you. Women love to fight over men, especially men they consider the best men. Women fighting over you is literally Alpha.
Make her jealous of other women by acting like you are hot property so she regards you as a prized possession that she needs to fight off  other women to keep. I had one woman said, “I will cut a bitch with a knife if she tries to take you away from me.” Act like she might need to do just that. Tell her about other women who check you out. That makes you seem like she has to fight over other women to keep you.
Cultivate a bad boy persona and play it up to the hilt. Act like you live just barely outside the law. Play up an outlaw persona. Act like you don’t give a fuck. Brag about any victimless crimes you committed and emphasize how you got away with it. I lived as a criminal as a drug dealer for 14 years, and I never got caught. Women love to hear that and they especially love to hear how I never got caught. For some reason that really turns them on.
Act like you are God’s gift to women. A huge ego is probably one of the best things you can cultivate. I literally think I am King of the World. It’s bullshit, actually I am a pathetic failure, but I don’t care if it’s true or not. Everyone thinks men like that are douchebags, but women love vain, conceited, egotistical men.
But watch the narcissism and don’t go too far off into that, or you lose me. Plus hardcore narcissism like Narcissistic Personality Disorder, while being good Game in a number of ways, in my opinion is simply bad Game in many other ways. To me that behavior is straight up bad Game. You will be the guy everyone loves to hate. That’s automatically bad Game right there.
Do not act desperate! Forget to call her. Blow her off for a week or two. Let her chase you. If you make a date for 1-2 weeks in advance, wait until that time before you contact her. If you contact her in a day or two, you will seem desperate, over-eager and pathetic and she will dump you like a hot potato. I still make this mistake because it’s hard to wait 10 days for a date without contacting her.
Never admit you are falling in love with her. Just go ahead and do it, but keep it secret until she says she is falling for you, and then reveal it. Don’t fall too hard but that is hard to do.
I always keep a bit of a distance even when I am crazy in love. This leads to accusations that I don’t care. I do care, but we men often just don’t show it very much. Don’t act like you don’t care too much though even if that is your style because after a while, she will say you don’t love her and she will dump you on that basis. So show her enough love to seem like you care but not too much to where you a pathetic sop begging for validation every day.
On the other hand, the bit of distance makes her chase you and shows her you are not a desperate, pathetic idiot. No matter how hard you fall for her, never act like a desperate idiot who needs to talk to her all day long. You can say “I love you” especially if you are in the habit of saying that to each other, but don’t say it too much or you sound weak and pathetic. Never ask her if she loves you or not. It’s a dumb question and it makes you seem weak and wimpy. If she says she loves you, then she most likely does, so why ask like a wuss? If she falls out of love with you, she will stop saying “I love you,” guaranteed. Women, especially older women, don’t toss that phrase around.
Never ask her if you are nice or not. That’s pathetic. The main thing to keep in mind is to not act desperate or pathetic no matter what. Don’t reveal any weaknesses at all early on and only discuss strengths. If you have a life history of failure, rewrite it and create a fake history of success for yourself. You are now literally recreating an alternative past for yourself. It’s hard to do but if you are a devious bad boy type, you can probably do it, and plus it will be fun to be literally living a lie, like a spy or undercover agent. Just try to keep your lies straight. Unfortunately this doesn’t work very well and sooner or later people will become suspicious of your shifting stories and start to call you a liar. Laugh when they question your lies  and pretend you forgot or just say you don’t care and maybe you are a liar, ha ha. Try to keep track of which stories you have told to which people, so when you go to embellish you are not telling two different stories to one person. But when you are lying that much, you will get caught sooner or later, so you have to figure out how you will react when she calls you a liar or catches you in a lie. Main thing is to not angry and instead just laugh, make some dumb excuse, admit to being a liar and laugh about it, etc. Try to figure out how you will react in the best way when people catch you in your lies. Try different responses and see how well they work and modify accordingly.
Keep your failures to yourself and never reveal them even to your best girlfriend. After a while, you can slowly release some of the bad things that happened to you. You can even put yourself down and insult yourself a bit, especially if you don’t believe it. You can reveal weaknesses, but do it slowly, don’t cray and don’t act pathetic.
Be careful about revealing your worst Achilles Heels because she will store these in a database in her head and whip them out and start shooting nuclear weapons right at your most ultra-sensitive areas when she gets angry. I call this “trying to get murdered,” and women actually do try to get murdered all the time.
Don’t hit her unless she hits you and then don’t hit back very hard.
Even with a girlfriend, seduce her properly at the right times and appropriate places. Don’t act like you are desperate for sex all the time. Act like you could care less if you have sex with her or not and act like you are leaving it up to her. Make her seduce you.
Have sex with her a lot or all the time, but don’t make a big deal out of it. Treat it like you treat drinking a glass of water. This will rev her up and make her want to do it all the time too. Don’t ask her if she’s horny or not. Never ask her if she wants to have sex. Just start touching her, kissing her or whatever you do. Never ask permission to touch her, kiss her, etc. inside or outside of bed as long as you are doing normal things.
If you want to do specific sex acts, talk about them beforehand and discuss. Say, “If I ever do or say something you don’t like, let me know.” Don’t act too depraved or evil in bed. Don’t hatefuck her, although some like it. Even if you engage in rough sex, tell her it’s just a game and then treat her like she’s a princess you worship outside of bed. Rough stuff is fun in bed, but if you are treating her like shit all the time, you are way off in BD/SM land, and you just lost me.

Game/PUA: Women Love Men Who Love Women, and They Love Men Who Other Women Love Even More

Success literally breeds success with women. I have never married and this brings up inevitable questions. Single men are widely regarded as losers or possible losers in our society, so be careful how you answer this question. Carefully craft your answer, try it out a few times to see how it goes over, and modify it in the future after you see which parts work and which don’t
The only reasons are you were married to your job, you had long common law marriages, you are a pathetic incel who can’t get laid, you are such a loser that no woman keeps you around even if they can get you, or you are a player or playboy.
I am fortunate enough to play the latter role, and actually it is permissible to be unmarried at any age if you are a playboy. Some women will hate it, but a lot of others won’t. They usually want to know some sexual history.
I say, “Well I’ve never married, but I have had girlfriends off and on my whole life, so I lived like a married man most of my life. I’ve dated maybe 200 women and girls in my life. I just never married any of them is all. Women and girls love and won’t leave me alone.”
All of these are true except the last one nowadays, but it’s true historically, so so what. Most women think “playboy” is a valid reason to never marry or be single at any age. That is the one exception they make for single men.
If you have a high lay count, especially in the three figures, don’t reveal it or do so only very casually and obliquely. If she asks, just tell her. She might leave because you’re a male whore, but more often, it will make really horny and she will want to jump you on the spot.
Don’t brag; act like it’s nothing or even like you are slightly ashamed of it (humble brag). Or give your lay count like you are describing drinking a glass of water. As long as you are not saying it in a bragging way, this will just peak people’s interest.
Also it’s rather funny. Playboys are hilarious for some reason. Females 8 to 80 think they are the funniest thing around. Most males 8 to 80 think they are even more hilarious. This new feminist attitude that players are evil scum is new, and all down through history these men have been treated like hilarious heroes.
Females love studs. They love men who get women.  My mother said, “Well they see him with other women and they think, ‘Hmmm what’s he got? He must be special if these other women like him.” My mother also said, “Women like men who like women but they also love men who other women like.” They see you with different women and they think, “Wow women really love this guy! He must be something hot.”
They don’t have much of a chance with playboys, but it turns them on anyway. And the more women you get, the more news ones will come knocking at your door.
On the other hand, remember that with each new woman you have reformed your evil playboy ways and now you are on the straight and narrow and dedicated to monogamy. Or something. Or something close to that. Never say you are incapable of monogamy even if it’s true. If you have had any long lasting relationships (over 6 months), talk about them and play them up, especially if they lasted 1-2 years. 3 years is even better. 5 or 6 years is fantastic.
This will show her that you actually do stick around for a while with some women because this is probably what she wants. If you believe in love and have been in love before, tell her and tell her how much you love to be in love, how sex is better with love, etc. Describe some of your past love affairs as if you were talking about a Hollywood movie or Romeo and Juliet – the ultimate love affair of the century.

Game/PUA: How to Deal with a Seriously Bitchy Girlfriend

If she picks on you half the day and acts mean, try everything in the book to get her to stop. Don’t fight back against the micro-bitch-outs. Try the silent treatment instead. Don’t react when she does her little bitchy sniping. Or say,  “Um hum”, “Oooo kay,” “all right,” or stupid stuff like that. Do it after every pestering remark. Or say “thank you” or “I love you” after every snipe. Don’t act hurt.
You can start to feel mean though. When she is sniping at you half the day, put a cold, evil mindset into your head like you are a serial killer, and you are going to kill her at any minute. Look right at her and think, “I am going to kill you right now, you fucking bitch.” If you can handle thoughts like this without getting violent, do it. It will make you look cold, icy, evil, and very frightening, but this is a bitch who is literally attacking you 1,000 times a day, so she deserves it.
Don’t respond to her minibitches in public. Put that icy mindset on. When someone looks at you like, “Your girl just bitched out! What are you going to do about it? Are you a pussy?” don’t react and instead just look right at the other person and think, “You know what? This cunt is really starting to piss me off, and I swear I am going to kill her when I get home.” This will make you look like a touch, scary, mean and maybe evil man who isn’t backing down or wimping out to your woman’s bitchiness. The other person will probably respect you.
This is very important because if you let your woman bitch you out in public and act hurt, argue with her, or look like a pathetic pussy, it looks very bad, and other people will look at you like, “You wimp! You let your woman bitch you out in public! You pathetic pussy! You’re not a man.” Instead of getting hurt, get angry, but make a slow, cold, evil burning angry like a coldblooded killer instead of hot angry.
If she tries to hit you, do anything you can think of. Block her punches. Laugh in her face. You can hit her back but don’t do it too hard and don’t hit sensitive areas. She will probably threaten to call the cops anyway the moment you hit her even if she tried to hit you 400 times first. Don’t freak out if she threatens to do this. Just act cold and say, “That would be really stupid.” If she gets really mean and angry and vicious with the insults, shrug your shoulders like you don’t care, laugh right in her face, or cuss her out.
If you do something fucked up, bad or wrong, just own up to it right there and apologize profusely while looking ashamed.
 
 
 

Alt Left: How the Feminist Cult Brainwashes Its Adherents

Absolutely superb article by a woman showing exactly what feminism has become – a cult no different from Scientology or the rest of them that brainwashes its members into believing a whole stack of lies and seeing the world in a brand new bizarre way. Women leaving feminism nearly need deprogramming to undo the brainwashing that feminism did to them.
And incidentally, being a Gender Egalitarian is a great thing to be. The problem I have with women calling themselves feminists is that feminism is all about women. It’s not about us men at all. In fact, many feminists say they could care less what happens to any of us men. So the feminist cult member ends up walking around the world constantly asking, “What about the women? What about the women?”
But that’s no way to look at life.
That’s no different from the White nationalists running around saying, “What about the Whites? What about the Whites?” White nationalists are always going on about Black crime against Whites, especially White women. After a while, I realized that this was very offensive. Why should I only care about Whites or White women victimized by Black criminals? Why should I care more if a White woman is attacked by a Black criminal than if a Black woman was attacked by the same type of person. I thought about this a while. Of course it should not matter who to me who got violated by the Black criminal. It was incredibly offensive that I should only care about the White victim and not about the Black victim. The victimization of either was equally bad! 
We’re all human, dammit. The only sensible way a concerned and progressive person should look at the world is, “What about the humans? What about the humans?”
[From Spiked, 10 February 2016, by Catherine Johnson, writer and student] Originally published in Spiked as How I Became a Feminist Victim. An Oxford Student Explains Why Feminism Fails Women.

How I Became a Feminist Victim: An Oxford Student Explains Why Feminism Fails Women

As a female student in a nightclub, I expected to get some unwanted attention. What I didn’t expect was for feminism to turn me into someone so terrified of unwanted attention I stopped going out. In the past, someone groping me would only annoy me for a minute – that would be the extent of it. If they were being really pushy, I’d go to my male friends and stay with them because they’d enjoy making it clear that the guy’s attentions were unwelcome. And yes, other men were more likely to listen to my tall, imposing male friends than me – a shy, skinny 18-year-old. You could call it male privilege, I’d call it the benefit of self-confidence.
And that was all fine. No harm, no foul. That was, until I discovered the (now-infamous) Oxford feminist group Cuntry Living. It was a big thing in Oxford; everyone was talking about it and, curious, I joined. I read the posts, I contributed, and I engaged in discussion about everything from rape culture to misogyny in our curriculum. I learned a lot, and slowly, I transitioned from a nervous, desperate-to-please ‘gender egalitarian’ to a proud, full-blown feminist.
Along with all of this, my view of women changed. I stopped thinking about empowerment and started to see women as vulnerable, mistreated victims. I came to see women as physically fragile, delicate, butterfly-like creatures struggling in the cruel net of patriarchy. I began to see male entitlement everywhere.
The experience also changed my attitude to going out. I would dress more cautiously and opt to stick with female friends in clubs. And, if the usual creeps started bothering me, I became positively terrified. I saw them, not as drunk men with a poor grasp of boundaries and certainly not as misguided optimists who might have misread my behavior but as aggressive probable rapists.
If I was groped by someone, I didn’t give them a scathing look or slap away their hand, and I certainly didn’t tell them to fuck off. Instead, I was scared into inaction. How could I countenance such a violation? How could I possibly process something so awful? After the event, I would go outside and cry.
And then I would leave – feeling traumatized. I saw the incident, not as some idiot being a bit too handsy, but as sexual assault – something scarring to dwell upon. It was something to whisper to friends in a small, hushed voice – something to preface with a trigger warning. And the appropriate action of friends, upon hearing this, was never to question how upsetting the incident had really been. It was to sympathize, express shock and horror, and say things like ‘I don’t know how you coped’. Not support, but pity – anything else would be tantamount to victim-blaming. Any suggestion that such incidents weren’t really that big a deal (and shouldn’t be treated as trauma) was repellent to me.
Victim feminism taught me to see my body as inviolable – any action visited upon it was violence. Eventually, I stopped going out. It wasn’t worth the risk. It took me a long time to realize what had happened. Feminism had not empowered me to take on the world – it had not made me stronger, fiercer or tougher. Irony of ironies, it had turned me into someone who wore long skirts and stayed at home with her girlfriends. Even leaving the house became a minefield. What if a man whistled at me? What if someone looked me up and down? How was I supposed to deal with that? This fearmongering had turned me into a timid, stay-at-home, emotionally fragile bore.
Thankfully, I learned a lot from the experience. Teaching women that we exist as probable victims (to the probable attacks of men) is not freeing or empowering. Modern feminism trains us to see sexism and victimhood in everything – it makes us weaker. It is also anathema to gender equality. How are we to reconcile with our male ‘oppressors’ when we view them as primitive, aggressive beasts? How are we to advance female agency when everything from dancing to dating is deemed traumatic?
The answer to the problems we face as women is not to submit to the embrace of victim feminism but to stand up for ourselves. We must throw off the soft, damp blanket of Safe Space culture and face the world bravely. If we do not do so now, we will consign any prospect of real equality to the ash heap of history.
Catherine Johnson is a student at the University of Oxford.
 

35,000 White Women A Year Are Raped by Blacks!

White nationalists love to toss this headline around to make it seem like Black criminals go out of their way to preferentially select White women to rape, almost as if they were hunting and White women were their prey. The 35,000 alone is shocking and boils down to 100 White women a day being raped by Black criminals. Just reading that figure is almost enough to set off the latent White nationalist in any White person.
I don’t mean to play down such a crime figure. Any high rape figure is appalling.
But that figure is not nearly as shocking as it seems.
For instance, Black women are vastly more likely to be victimized by Black criminals than White women are. Comparing Blacks to Whites, five times as many Black women as White women are raped by Black men. Looking at only those two races, Black women are 85% of the rape victims of Black rapists. White women are 15% of the victims.
If these rapists were simply picking women of these two races at random to rape, 84% of their victims would be White women, and only 16% would be Black women. I don’t know how to do the math here, but it looks like Black women are maybe six times more likely to be raped relative to their population than White women. So Black rapists massively go out of their way to select Black women for rape and go way out of their way to avoid selecting or deselect White women.
But that’s not what you would hear from the White nationalists. Figures don’t lie, but liars sure can figure.

Magic in the Celtic World from Antiquity to the Middle Ages

New from Francis Miville.

Francis Miville: There was a reason why the Celtic cultural world crumbled and was ready to assimilate into the nearest conquering empire passing nearby. Gauls literally begged the Greeks to conquer them, and as they proved too self-interested as merchants, they turned to the Romans as to the second best choice long before Cesar came.
The Celtic world was more and more definitely with the centuries passing a culture based upon the preeminence of magic and of magic of a very malevolent kind. Druidic civilization was no fun at all. Celtic civilization was quite like the Brahmanical one in its worst aspects but without any encompassing universalistic cosmogony.
It was a universe without any power above that of the elite of all-powerful manipulators having been selected through proof of their psychopathic mind before being taught any bit of initiation knowledge. Above the stage of a mere brute, you spent your own life dodging evil spells and casting ones in return.
The only late exceptions which explain their further survival were Ireland, Scotland, and Brittany on both sides of the Channel. This is because it was rather the invention of something radically new by a certain kind of Christians together with a new kind of Celtic languages that bore very little relationship to the original.
But Celtic Christianity as it was called came to be later on considered as heretical from the point of view of more classical theology, as it was based on much magic too, though of a more seductive than warlike kind. In the case of Ireland and Brittany, the magicians proved to be oligarchically-minded to the worst degree as all magicians are. These magicians offered their services to the best payers, that is to say the Norman and French invaders. In exchange, the oligarchs were given as a natural resource the whole populace that the magicians controlled as a  passive herd.
In Scotland the whole people succeeded as magicians to enter the British Empire as mafia-minded dominants of a worse kind than Anglo-Saxons proper, while playing a key role in the setting up of Masonry.
Magical cultures are all social horrors.

Alt Left: High School Girls "Pulling Trains" in the 1970's

Thinking Mouse: Both the porno and having people on a line sound about the same amount of crazy for me. Were those fish girls hot or did they do it to get access to hotter guys easier? Did the girls discriminate depending on how the approaching guy looked? I guess the second question can be answered with alcohol lol. I’ve never been in an party that wasn’t planned by parents or school.

Fish girls?
You didn’t get access to the best guys by being a slut. You got access to them by being hot.
I don’t know any girls who pulled trains, but most of the sluts were hot. I believe most of the girls who pulled trains were hot.
I have heard that if you were part of that train, the room would be dark, and the girl would be cumdrunk out of her head, flopping around on the bed like a fish, and panting like a dog. She couldn’t really see you very well. She would be saying, “More! More! More cock! More cock!”, and she would just welcome you aboard.
Most of the girls who were pulling trains were drunk, but you must understand that a lot of girls would deliberately get blackout or near blackout drunk specifically so they could whore out, be promiscuous, or pull trains or whatever, and then afterwards say they were not responsible because they were drunk and could not remember.
Some of the wildest sex I have had in my life was with high school girls/women, and when I asked them about it afterwards, they said they had no memory of it.
One woman kept yelling out these three other guys’ names while I was in bed with her. I had to keep reminding her, “I’m Bob. I’m not (Ken/(John/Bill, etc.). Remember?” Then she would laugh and say, “Oh that’s right. You’re Bob.” Then back to, “Pant, pant, pant, pant. Fuck me! Fuck me! Fuck me dammit!” etc. etc.
We had a bottle of whiskey mixed with Coca-cola in the bed, and we drank the whole thing that New Years Eve night. I escaped by climbing out the window of her bedroom, as all this was going on at her parents’ house. Later I would go visit her by climbing in the bedroom window and escaping a similar way.
Good times!
She was extremely hot and known to be a serious slut, most of my friends knew her, and some had messed around with her, but none had had sex with her, as she was still rather discriminating. I became a legend by fucking her and was a bit of a hero on campus afterwards. Even many years later, my friend who knew her would look at me in awe and say, ‘Yeah, but you fucked DJ.'” That practically gave me hero for life status right there, just fucking that one hot slut.
Most guys in those lines were the cool guys who were most decent looking or at least macho enough to be hot by most girls’ bad boy standards. The dorky, nerdy or lame ugly guys who girls would not date would not even be in a line like that. They would not even be at that party. Those parties were “cool people only parties – no geeks and dorks allowed.”
Ugly and fat girls simply were not sluts because no one wanted to fuck them.

Alt Left: Who's White? A Caucasian Roundup, or Ultra-Pan-Aryanism

Thinking Mouse: I didn’t read the article and now see you disagree with me, but I’ll explain why I think this category is appropriate.
Since I’m largely anti-HBD (though the African non-African dichotomy might have some merit), especially to the traits affecting many types of social capital, I really just see race as the social constructs and their origin. So when people look different, that could have an affect on the perception people have, and it used to in the past.
I think its that you are raised in America with its diversity, and maybe your lack of racism has made you accept more swarthier people as fulfilling the roles of good citizens, and therefore get an pass to the all so important group. In my view, by your criteria for an race, we might as well say that an Frenchman with dark hair and large nostrils/bulgy nose is Chinese cause they don’t look “that different”. Blue eyes and pink nipples are almost unique to Whites, that’s like indispensable right there.

Of course Arabs are White, especially North Africans like Moroccans and Algerians. However, there are Black people in those countries and they don’t count. Most Libyans are White. So are most Tunisians and most Egyptians. There are non-White Egyptians in the South. I had an Egyptian girlfriend once who would be more properly characterized as a light skinned Black woman. Light Egyptians and Moroccans openly identify as White.
Most Saudis and Yemenis are White. The Yemenis we have here are all White and identify as White. All Syrians are White and the ones here also identify as White. Palestinians, Jordanians, Lebanese, Iraqis and Gulf types are mostly White. However there are a few Blacks among these people in Iraq and the Gulf. Prince Bandar is not a White man.
Of course Persians and most Afghans are White. Afghans even identify as White. The ones I know told me they are Aryans, the original Whites. But some Afghans are Asiatics, like the Hazara. Most Pakistanis are White, and some even identify as White. There are some non-Whites down in the South, but all the ones I have met are as White as I am.
Many but not all North Indians are White, especially Punjabis, many of whom are as White as I am. Quite a few Uighurs and Nepalis are White, but many are not. Groups like the Mansi are similar and you have to look at them on an individual basis.
Of course Chechens, Azeris, Georgians, Armenians and the rest of the people of the Caucasus are White. Also Azeris, Armenians and Chechens at least identify as White.
Most Turkmen, Kyrgyz, Kazakhs, and Uzbeks, etc. and many Siberians from around the Altai are best seen as mixed race. Many Tatars and Bashkirs are also mixed race. All of these groups are so mixed with Asiatics that they can’t really properly be called Whites.
I would look at facial and bone structure. Really all Caucasoids are simply Whites. Look at the face and if the face looks like a White person’s face, no matter the skin color, they are White.

Alt Left: On Brett Kavanaugh, "Gang Rape," and High School Girls Pulling Trains in the 1970's

Regarding the sexual misconduct charges detailed against Brett Kavanaugh below, I am proud to say I’ve never done anything of these things or anything close to them. I’ve done a lot of bad things in my life, but I have never raped a female or even come close to doing it. I like to sleep well at night, and I have to look myself in the mirror every morning.
This horrible man is now facing a third sexual misconduct charge.
The first one involves a charge by a woman, 15 years old at the time, that the then 17 year old Kavanaugh and his creepy friend Mike Judge corralled her into a bedroom at a party while Kavanaugh tried to rape her. Brett threw her down on the bed, tried to rip her clothes off, and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams.
His buddy Judge was laughing the whole time. She literally fought Brett off and thereby prevented herself from getting raped. This was an actual crime called 2nd Degree Sexual Assault, a misdemeanor that calls for 1-3 years in prison. The statute of limitations ran out three years after the crime. I would be inclined to let him off on this considering he was a minor, but I hate him so much that I don’t care what sort of BS they use to hang him from his own petard with.
The second charge, which just came out, is from his time at Yale. Brett was a hard-partying guy, a member of a fraternity subsequently discovered to be a very creepy and rapey organization. This fraternity has been accused of so many sexual assaults that they were actually banned by the university at one point.
Brett was said to be rather shy but could get quite aggressive when drunk. These men are called “mean drunks,” and it is a known type. I have known men who were very nice when sober but quite mean when drunk.
A woman who was a classmate of his at Yale charges that in 1982 there was a drinking party in a dorm. She was there with several young men. I am going to say right now that she was a damned idiot for going to a drinking party with just herself and five or six sketchy, rowdy college boys. What did she think is going to happen? At least bring a girlfriend along, for Chrissake.
Anyway, these boys started whipping out their penises and pointing them in her face and daring her to touch them. The antics also involved the use of a fake penis at one point. The woman was a good Catholic girl at the time, and she said she had never touched a penis before. Well, there’s no time like now, baby! Ah, just kidding, sorry.
Anyway she tried not to touch them, but they kept shoving them in her face. They grabbed her hand and put it on their penises. One of the men who did this to her was Brett Kavanaugh. The woman was traumatized by this and confided in some of her friends. This is legally sexual assault, but no DA will prosecute on a BS charge like this. It is a dick move though, and dick moves deserve a punch in the face in Man World.
The latest charge is that Brett, Judge, and a group of other boys threw regular parties when they were in high school that involved targeting a girl, feeding her enough drinks to get her completely wasted, and then getting her to pull a train or do a gangbang. These are being called gang rapes, but that’s not the way I remember them.
I was around back then. This happened at parties all the time when I was in high school. You would hear this at parties, “She’s pulling a train!” Or they would point to some girl and say she pulled a train at this party last weekend. It was a pretty regular occurrence. My understanding was that all of the girls pulling these trains were drinking of their own free will. I was at many parties like this, and I never once saw boys or men feeding these girls booze. They didn’t need to. The girls went there with the expressed intention of getting wasted on alcohol.
I never participated in one of these trains. The idea was always frightening to me, and I didn’t have much sexual experience in those days. Plus I had performance anxieties.
A high school girl would get drunk off her ass, then get in bed with some guy. I guess they would ask her if she wanted other guys. These were high school girls who wanted to get gangbanged, so they would get drunk in order to have an excuse to do this without being called sluts. Other guys would come in, and the girl would say, “Bring it on!” I never heard that one of these trains was non-consensual or that they were anything resembling gang rape.
I heard that if you went in there at your turn in the train, you would find some ravenous cum-drunk high school in there, her vagina soaked down to her knees along her inner thighs, panting like a dog in summer heat, and flopping around on the bed like a possessed Jodie Foster in The Exorcist. She would be saying something like, “More! More! More cock! More cock! I want more cock!” If you got on top of her, she would look up at you and ask, “A new one?” And then, “Fuck me! Fuck me! Fuck me dammit!”.
Females who are this sexually crazed are obviously getting raped, right? Oh, Hell no. No female acts like that unless the sex is consensual.
Back in those days, just because some horny as Hell high school was pulling a train in some bedroom, that didn’t necessarily mean crap. In no way was it synonymous with gang rape. It was just some high school girl living out her fantasy of getting gangbanged.
Now if Kavanaugh was actually targeting certain girls and deliberately feeding them drinks in order to gangbang them, that was sleazy. But that’s not rape either. No male ever goes down on rape for sex with a drunken female. No DA ever files on a bullshit charge like that. It’s only rape if she’s passing in and out of consciousness, and even then, it’s hardly ever prosecuted. One case that was prosecuted recently was the Steubensville case with a high school girl which was videotaped. The only reason those boys went down was due to the videotape.
If she is so drunk she is literally passed out, yes, it is rape, but hardly anyone goes down on that either because there’s usually no evidence. Sadly, this bullshit happens all the time. Girls and women! Don’t drink yourself black out drunk or even worse passed out drunk. You may well get raped and you have no one but yourself to blame for that.
This is what the college athlete Brock Turner went down on. 95% of the sexual activity he and the girl had was consensual, and it was not sexual assault until she passed out. At that point he was supposed to get off of her, and it became sexual assault as soon as he started messing with her passed out body.
Also it was sexual assault, not rape, due to digital penetration. That woman was another idiot who got herself black out and passed out drunk and then got assaulted. She was with Brock at the party for a long time before they left, and people said she was all over him, practically having sex with him in the main room in front of everyone. When they left and went outside, same thing, she was practically raping him.
I’m just saying that at least in Brock Turner’s case, there is sometimes a lot less to some of these cases than meets the eye.
On the other hand, Kavanaugh and his buddies definitely did what I would call a dick move by feeding these girls drinks and then frankly preying on them when they were wasted. It’s a dick move, not rape. The punishment for dick moves like that in Man World is a punch in the face. That’s exactly what this creep and his friends deserve for pulling this stunt.

A Look at Cluster A Personality Disorders

Cluster A are the odd personality disorders. They’re not so much awful people as they are simply so odd and strange that you can’t have much of a human relationship with them. Their general theme is to drive people away from them in some way or another.
Schizoids are ok, but they are very annoying. It’s generally impossible to have any decent human relationship with someone like this because…well…they don’t do human relationships. I’ve talked to Schizoids but I have never really known one in real life. You are unlikely to run across a Schizoid in life because they are such extreme loners that they simply don’t get involved with other humans at all.
Schizotypals simply have a mild form of schizophrenia and are more or less impossible to deal with in ways that are similar to how schizophrenics can’t be dealt with but on a lesser scale. They are also quite suspicious and paranoid. They have awful social skills and conversations with them degenerate and start getting tangential and strange pretty quickly. They will give off a feeling of alienation and weirdness that would probably make you want to get away from them.
I had a girlfriend who had Schizotypal traits, but she was mostly just a Borderline. When she was off into her schizotypal strangeness, it was like talking to someone from another planet. She would be saying weird and odd things that didn’t make a lot of sense and the conversation had the creepy feel of someone who is way out there and is not really with the rest of us at all. I eventually broke up with her on the grounds that she was too crazy for me. It was like dating a Martian.
I’ve never met or talked to an actual full-blown Schizotypal, so I don’t know much about them. I don’t see how you can have a decent relationship with someone like this. They’re too crazy for that. You usually won’t meet schizotypals because they are extreme loners who don’t do human relationships. They are suspicious, withdrawn and don’t talk much. They give off vibes of trying to drive you away. When at home, they often get quite shut-in and don’t want to go outside.
Paranoids I do not understand very well, but I hear they are hard to deal with too. They can also often be angry. Their constant suspicion drives you crazy and relationships with these people must be hard to deal with. You often won’t meet Paranoids either because, well, they’re too paranoid! They shy away from most relationships too and even if you work with them, they probably won’t reveal much of their disorder. They also give off serious “get away from me” vibes.
None of these people are easy to get along with. It’s going to be hard to have a decent human relationship with any of these people.
Of course Cluster B’s are awful human beings. I’ve gone into them before on this site.
 
 

A Look at Dependent and Avoidant Personality Disorders

Avoidants differ a lot, but you can’t have a relationship with someone like that either. I knew an Avoidant once for two weeks. I lived with him and some other people. Everyone in the house regarded him as a complete asshole. His APD took the form of actually avoiding people to the point of seeming mean. This is how he drove people away from him. They often literally shove people away from them and they can seem hostile or aggressive when they do this.
You are also likely to not run into Avoidants in your life because, well, they avoid other people! Even if you meet one, it will be hard for you or others to figure out that they are Avoidants. There were three other people living in the house I was staying at, and none of them believed that he was APD. They didn’t even know what APD was. The woman who lived there, a girlfriend of mine, actually liked him but realized how screwed up he was. The two men who lived there hated him and described him as an “asshole.” This is because their extreme avoidance can appear mean and sometimes they flat out are mean when they are trying to shove you away.
People with Dependent Personality Disorder are complete wimps and they are often incompetent. The best way to describe is that they are grownup babies. These are adults that never really grew up. Their wimpiness and pathetic dependency drive everyone around them nuts. They are often very nice, kind, decent people. Some DPD are very nice and have a lot of a good relationships with women, including a lot of friendships. Why grown women put up with these wimpy men, I have no idea, but a lot of people like a friendly person. I’ve never met an actual DPD person, nor have I spoken to one.

A Look at Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder

Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder is just horrible. They’re awful people too but it’s hidden most of the time, and you can’t see it. The clue is the word aggression in the name of the disorder. They’re displaying out and out aggression a good part of the time. However, they do so passively, so it is not obvious.
The aggression is not always passive though, and if you get on their case about the car they were supposed to fix in two days but it’s now been three weeks, they blow an Old Faithful geyser through the ceiling.
You are the evil person for “pressuring” them. Their wild, towering rages are a sight to behold. They try to make you feel guilty for pressuring them to, for instance, complete a basic task reasonably on time? But that’s too much to ask. You don’t understand all the pressures they are under except they don’t have any pressures except things they made up. Don’t you realize they didn’t have time to do because they had so many other things to do? Well, they didn’t but this is the lie they tell to themselves. The endless putting off of jobs they are tasked to do is their way of secretly giving you the finger.
They stew in resentment all the time. Life’s not fair. Everybody picks on them. They’re misunderstood. People won’t stop “pressuring” them and “hassling” them, for instance about that car that they said would be done in two days that they now stretched out to three weeks.
They “forget” to do all sorts of things. They’re were going to call you? Whoops! They “forgot.” They were supposed to go to your Dad’s funeral? Whoops! They “forgot” again. They’re not forgetting anything. Their memories are fine. “Forgetting” is another way that they resentfully give you the finger for wronging them in some way or another. They’re getting back at you.
A lot of their passive-aggressive behavior is resent-fueled paybacks and revenge for something you supposedly did to them somehow. Or maybe they’re not mad at you at all. Maybe they’re mad at the world. Who knows? You will never get an answer out of them because they all have zero insight and if you bring up their passive-aggressive behaviors, they blow a 50 amp fuse because you hit too close to home.
Some of them get lost in grandiose fantasies that never come to fruition. You know, that silver mine they were going to open up that would bring in $500,000/year? Or was it millions? Oh yes, that. They were going on about that ten years ago. Nothing ever came of it and nothing ever comes of any of their grandiose schemes. If you bring it up the scheme that never happened you get a fog bank of obfuscation blown your way. What silver mine? There was no silver mine. Anyway, let’s change the subject. They never get much of anything done and are behind on everything all the time. They’re not achievers. They’re anti-achievers. On some level they know this, so this may be why they retreat into grandiose fantasy as a defense against their general failure to get much of anything done in life.
On the surface, they often appear so passive that they seem disgusting. Straight OCPD men can seem so passive that they are often feminine and during times of stress, they can become out and out effeminate to where you would be sure that they are gay. They don’t take initiative. They don’t do well with women for this reason and they tend to hook up with bossy, bitchy women who wear the pants and beat them up and push them around all day. Of course, this just reinforces their general resentment against the world at large. They’re often always right. You can’t correct them or tell them they are wrong. They blow a frustrated fuse that looks like a spouting oil well that struck oil. Their rages have a sense of self-righteousness and frustration about them.
PAPD’s differ a lot. I have only known one PAPD in my life and unfortunately, yes, he’s a monster. You have to walk on eggshells around him all the time. And he’s such a big pussy that it’s disgusting. I knew someone else, now dead, who was also very passive aggressive, but I am not sure he had PAPD. He was a lot nicer, but his wife kicked his ass 24-7 and he could never get anything done. He would still have Christmas cards from several years back that he never opened. He had huge piles of stuff everywhere that “he was going to get around to deal with” except he “never found the time.” He was passive-aggressive, but I am not sure if he was PAPD. I suspect that true PAPD’s are pretty awful people and are quite abrasive, like most personality-disordered people.

A Look at Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder

Obsessive-compulsive PD’s are truly awful people, I am sorry. They just are. I knew my father for over 50 years of my life. They’re not ok.
The problem is because of their extreme conformity, workaholism, and morality, a lot of people who know them they are “fine upstanding people.” Only the people who live with them know what monsters they really are. That’s why no one believed my siblings and I when we talked about what a lousy father my Dad was. All the other adults of his generation thought he was the star of the neighborhood – a classic, fine, upstanding, good, hard-working, moral family man. That’s the face they put on to everyone else. They know exactly what they are doing, and they can control themselves most of the time. They just choose not to control themselves around their loved ones because they can get away with treating loved ones like crap.
OCPD often takes the form of hostility, constant criticism, and rages.
They project all the time and go around pointing out everybody else’s faults. Everyone else is lazy, messy, immoral, and incompetent.
They’re prigs. They’re always calling you evil in some way or another because you are probably inherently immoral.
You’re always a slob, no matter what. They love to go through other people’s stuff and clean it up. They often go through other people’s stuff and throw a lot of the other person’s possessions away.
They work constantly and they never have fun. They try to force everyone around them to do this too and if you don’t, you’re evil or sinful.
Having fun is evil or sinful and you need to be ashamed of yourself. They hate parties. You go on vacations with them, and they spend the whole time working, being uptight, and yelling at people. They are like martyr-saints who believe that life is crap, and life is nothing but suffering. Hence, suffering and constant deliberate deprivation are noble things.
They are frustrated all the time.
They are tightwads. They hate spending money except on necessities and paying off debt. Spending money for fun is literally sinful, and you should be ashamed of yourself. They’re stingy with money. If you need money as a college student, they might grudgingly give you five bucks.
They have no insight whatsoever and they have a defensive structure that is so elaborate that it is like an Escher + Goya painting combined with a Rube Goldberg device. The defenses literally have layers upon layers, trap doors, fake entrances, and the craziest fortifications you have ever seen. If you try to point out their OCPD nonsense, they fly into wild rages because it really hits home.
They can’t delegate any responsibility for any job because everyone else is incompetent, so they have to fix everything themselves. Except they don’t know how to fix anything. They try to get you to help them and then scream at everything you do because everything you do is wrong because you are inherently incompetent.
They are masochistic and are always taking on thankless tasks that other “incompetent” people won’t do. They stay late at work fixing the work of the “incompetents.”
They’re never wrong and they’re always right. Everyone else is always wrong and never right. They’re perfect and everyone else isn’t and needs to be constantly criticized for being such screw-ups.
They are always making long lists of things to do, but then they hardly do any of them. They get lost in the endless planning of the project such that the project itself never really gets going. They can’t see the forest for the trees. They can’t see the big picture.
They put everything off to the last minute, and then they run around frantically, hollering in frustration all the time, doing all the tasks that they put off to the end because now they are in a terrible time bind.
They’re control freaks in a covert way that is not obvious.
They hate change. They are some of the most rigid people you will ever meet. They hate anything new.
They are perfectionists and a lot of their own work is never good enough and needs endless revisions.
They’re always tense and uptight and rarely relax.

A Brief Look at Histrionic Personality Disorder

Rahul: Have you ever been acquainted with someone with Histrionic Personality Disorder. Is so, can you describe your experience?

I never known one of this particular variety of human monster, thank God for that.
Very, very bad. HPD is the personality of “the whore.” Pornstars, prostitutes, strippers, sexworkers of all types. One reason not to date or get involved with prostitute-type women is because this is the personality that most of them have. Get involved with a prostitute and you get involved with a monster, female version.
Mata Hari was the original HPD. The HPD woman is the “femme fatale.” She’s a black widow. She will draw you into her web and kill you one way or another. A lot of people think that HPD is how psychopathy manifests in the female or feminine character. Men become psychopaths; women (and effeminate men) become HPD’s. ~75% of male HPD’s are gay or bisexual. It’s basically a female disorder.
Basically, they’re monsters. Just another group of Cluster B psychos that will ruin your life like the Borderlines, Narcissists, Psychopaths, and the rest of the motley crew.
Similar to other Cluster B personality disorders, Histrionic Personality Disorder forums are often tumultuous and frequently have to be either policed or shut down due to HPD’s coming in, starting fights and making huge scenes.
And also similar to other Cluster B forums, HPD forums usually have few to no HPD’s (because they don’t think there is anything wrong with themselves) and instead are full of the victims of HPD’s, sort of like how Borderline and Narcissistic PD forums are mostly full of the victims of these particular type of monsters. Antisocial PD forums instead are full of psychopaths because psychopaths love being psychopaths and like to run around on stage shouting to the world how cool it is to be a psychopath. Psychopaths literally think being a psychopath is fun. Antisocial behavior is actually their idea of a good time, believe it or not.

Intellectual Cultures Around the World That Are Superior to America's

One thing I have noticed is that people from other cultures acknowledge the existence of intelligence far more than Americans.
Arabs, South Indians, Afghans, Pakistanis, Iranians, Turks, Khmer, and especially Chinese people have extreme reverence for intelligence and education.
If they spend any time with me at all, almost all of them act like they are almost stunned to the point of fainting by the breadth of my knowledge. They simply don’t believe that I learned it all from reading. I must have lived in these countries that I talk about.
Mexicans come from a complete retard culture in Mexico itself, but the less intelligent ones, especially if they were born in Mexico, often acknowledge that some people are wicked smart. If they were born here, they were born into Mexican-American culture, one of the most retarded and ferociously anti-intellectual cultures on Earth. Like I said, even Mexico has a more intellectual culture than US Mexican Americans. Mexico’s higher level culture is even more intellectual than that of America itself.
When you get down to South Americans, they are much more likely to acknowledge that intelligence is a thing and a good thing at at that. This is because South America in places like Colombia, Peru, Chile, Uruguay, and Argentina have retained a lot of the intellectual culture of Old Spain, including a reverence for literature and what my Argentine girlfriend called “men of letters.” Peruvians and Argentines in particular are very intellectual and especially literary.
Brazil’s culture is pretty stupid, but at the higher levels where people are much Whiter, it is highly intellectual and often very educated. In particular they take pride in their knowledge of the Portuguese language, which is not an easy language to completely master at all. The extreme hedonism of Brazilian culture, even among White Brazilians, somewhat masks the intellectual culture of the Whiter Brazilians.

America's Ferociously Anti-Intellectual Culture Is Literally Idiocracy In Practice

Rahul: Robert, Feynman didn’t win the Nobel Prize in Physics because he had a 190 Physics IQ or because he had a 125 IQ. He won it because he was ardently passionate about Physics and Math, and he contributed enough to the betterment of using Physics to serve humanity. That’s why he won the Prize.
I don’t mean to be rude when I say this Robert (hell, this is the case with pretty much any disagreement I have, which is a lot), but this comment was somewhat insulting to Richard Feynman. Really, you’re attributing it to his 190 Physics IQ (which I doubt)?

He was passionate about it and he contributed to using physics to better humanity because he had one of the most brilliant physics minds ever recorded. It’s not insulting to say Feynman had a 190 IQ in Physics. In fact, I bet if I knew him and I said that to him, he would probably laugh and say I was right. The 190 physics IQ is literally proven by having some of the highest physics scores ever recorded on various tests. If you go around the Net, everywhere they talk about Feynman’s IQ, they say just this. No one anywhere says he did it by trying really hard.
You do not get one of the highest Physics scores ever recorded on a widely given test by trying really hard. Fuck that. You get that by being one of the smartest and highest Physics IQ men in history in Physics.
Why are you such an IQ denier? Have you lived in America your whole life?
Because in this idiot, insane culture, the line is, “Anyone can do anything” and “Intelligence doesn’t matter.” And in America, there is a complete denial of intelligence itself. This is shown by contempt for the very concept. In America, “anyone can do anything they want if they give it enough effort” and often you cannot even acknowledge that human beings differ in intelligence at all or that this matters in any way.
I talk like this a lot because intelligence is interesting to me, and I get very politely shut down (they simply disagree with me very politely, mostly by dismissing my argument with a smile) all time.
This Idiocracy culture is so infuriating. We acknowledge frankly intellectual gifts in a whole range of things, even athletics, where “physical intelligence” forms a large part of “athletic genius.” Haven’t you heard athletes who say things like, “Baseball is 90% mental.”? However, your average American usually insists that great athletes simply tried real hard.
We often speak of artistic and musical genius and the implication is that it was inborn, though you often run into resistance to that with countless Americans implying that musical and artistic geniuses simply “tried really hard.” 
Americans simply refuse to believe in the concept of inborn intelligence or intellectual strengths in any way, and that is when they acknowledge that intelligence itself even exists at all.
Many, perhaps most Americans simply insist that “there is no such thing as intelligence,” which is a stunning statement for a human being to utter. Most infuriating of all is that the smartest people are the worst intelligence deniers. Even more infuriating is that the more leftwing people get, they more openly hostile they are to the very concept of intelligence, especially if it is inborn. All I have to say is that an American Left culture that has extreme hatred for the very notion that intelligence exists at all is not one I want to be a part of. It doesn’t sound like one that’s going to be very successful either, or if it is successful, I fear for the country that ends up being run by these overeducated fools.
You start getting down below 100 or especially 90 IQ, they generally agree that some humans are definitely way smarter than other humans. At that level, people are often awestruck by very smart people.
That’s if they are not too stupid. Truly stupid people around 80 IQ often can’t even seem to grasp the concept of intelligence at all or refuse to see how it could be important in any way. This is because they are literally too stupid to even recognize intelligence for what it is.
Further, if you start talking about intelligence even related to jobs in the US, you get shut down almost immediately with, “Oh no, you don’t have to be smart to do that. Anyone can do that.” You even get shut down if you imply that some people are smarter than other people.
Sometimes I talk about how I can tell someone is smart by simply looking at their faces while I interact with them. I usually get completely dismissed when I say that. I can tell how smart someone is by looking into their eyes, listening to how they talk (for instance, speed, comprehension, response speed), and mostly looking for, more than anything else, simply speed of response. Smart people are simply faster than other human beings. And it correlates directly with IQ.
I had a girlfriend with a 140 IQ once, and she was one of the fastest women I have ever known. She got my jokes, bam, immediately, as soon as they hit her brain just like that. And she had a sharp response to the joke almost instantly. She was so fast it almost seemed like she started laughing before the joke was even over. I had another girlfriend with a ~115 IQ, and while she was definitely intelligent, there’s no way on Earth she was that lightning fast.
And I met a woman with an IQ of 156 once who was literally the fastest woman I have ever met in my life. She was faster than the 140 woman, knew more stuff, and picked up completely new topics she knew nothing about very quickly. She would ask me, “What is that?” about some concept that she had no idea what it was. I would start to explain it, and it never took more than 3-5 minutes before she had gobbled up the whole concept and had gotten the gist of it like an expert. I have never met a woman who understood brand new things with so little explanation.
She might even have been faster than I am. Her IQ was ~10 points higher. I didn’t feel outclassed at all though. We were basically on the same level. But I had definitely met my match. She was a real challenge to talk to, but I love challenges.