Alt Left: Book Review: “The Negro in Jamaica: : Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London”

Book Review: The Negro in Jamaica: Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London, by Bedford Pim. 1868. London: Trubner & Company.

Great for the first half, the second half is rather boring. It concerns a report to a British anthropological society about the uprisings of the Blacks in Jamaica in the 1800’s when it was a British colony. The portrayal of Blacks here is not complementary at all, and it would be called racist in modern terms.

However, this portrayal is not racist at all. I believe it was simply observational with keen eye of objectivity. The Black man in the Caribbean and in Africa for that matter was a forlorn specimen, barbarous and savage in the worst possible way.

I will briefly add that the book is racist in the way it patronizingly defends colonialism and says the Blacks of Jamaica were not mistreated when obviously they were. The report also says that Blacks cannot govern themselves, which is dubious.  They can govern themselves. Not very well, but they can do it. They do it in the Caribbean, in Africa and even in large US cities. The only solution to this problem then was that Blacks should be put under permanent supervision of Whites until they had gradually become civilized.

By the way, this was also the colonially stated beneficent rationale for apartheid. For all I know, they may have been honest about it. South African Whites felt that Blacks had to be held under apartheid bondage until such time as they had achieved civilization enough to live on equal terms with Whites.

Be that as it may, apartheid was still immoral and had to be done away. Why? Because it was simply the right thing to do and for no other reason. The fact that South Africa has gone seriously downhill under Black rule is irrelevant. Humans have a right to self-rule, and whether they do so well or not so well is strictly up to them.

The solution advocated in this book is to continue to bring Blacks from Africa and work them on five year contracts for White plantation owners, after which they would be returned to Africa. One cannot help but notice that the endless insistence here that the Black man cannot rule himself just so happens to provide a rationale for Britain to retain the colonial possession of Jamaica. Wink win.

Although of course you can see shadows of this barbarous behavior in modern day Africa, the Caribbean and the US Black underclass, what is shocking is the growth of the Black middle class since the Civil Rights era and how they do not resemble the degraded race portrayed here in any way, shape, or form. A large percentage of the Blacks have become, in a word, civilized. The problem was not so much genetic or biological as cultural.

Via exposure to White society over 150+ years, a large percentage of Blacks, the Black middle class, have become civilized people. They bear no resemblance to the barbarous brutes in this book at all. One would be shocked if they were told that they were of the same race. Indeed the difference is so profound that the only sane conclusion is that we are talking about two different races, which is of course not true.

The message here is that integration is the way to go. The deficiencies of Blacks are not so much biological as cultural. All Blacks needed was the guiding hand of the civilizing impulse, as is the case with so many other human groups.

The other message is that White people are good for Blacks. I should amend this to say that good White people are good for Blacks. Obviously, White slavers or enforcers of Jim Crow in the US and elsewhere in the Americas was not good for Blacks, athough this book tries to make the case that it is.

It’s good for Blacks to mix with good, decent Whites or even to marry with said Whites. Left on their own to congregate in large cities, they act like crabs in a barrel, pulling down anyone who tries to escape and driving each other down to the lowest common denominator in a race for the bottom behaviorally. Large groups of Black people don’t seem to work. Blacks act best as a rather small minority, 20% or less, in a larger group of Whites, Hispanics, or Asians.

The Blacks don’t have any numbers, so they don’t influence each other much. Further, the same Blacks who would obviously degrade quickly in the hood do much better when integrated, as they try to mimic the behavior of the races around them, races which tend to set the bar higher behaviorally.

Integration works. The way to ameliorate the Black problem in the US or any other land is to thoroughly mix them in small numbers with Whites, Hispanics or Asians. This brings out the best in the Blacks. It’s good for us, for them, and for society. Everyone wins.

Integration today, integration tomorrow, integration forever!

Down with Franchises!

No kidding.  Well, myself, I know why people like franchises – and why people shell out – usually $50,000 to a million to get one.   It’s simply cause customers are suckers for franchises.  They trust franchises.

However…  the landscape is dotted with these maggot franchises – ranging from McDonalds to Wal-Mart.  I mean, isn’t it nice to eat at a restaurant like – Main Street Pizza every once in a while – or shop at a store called Center Street Hardware?

Anyway, some people have made a success without a franchise, though.   They make it a success cause they simply have really good stuff and they try to throw in a personal touch to what they’re doing, try to connect to the customer.

Normal guy culture – is NOT Stormfront culture

Well, I mean, there was some sweathogs back in high school (in Southern Appalachia) etc..  We joked around  – but it was nothing like you’d see among white supremacists – or this sub-group, found in public schools etc. – of really trashy/psycho white people.

Anyway, the SJW left wants to make a culture that’s so sensitive – that guys cannot even breathe!  Even though, back in the day, most normal guys were ALWAYS disgusted with hardcore racists/misogynists/bigots.   They came across as psycho – assholes, pussies  trying to get even for being losers, uptight.

But now white identity politics is trying to make it SEEM LIKE white supremacist thinking – IS normal guy thinking!

Fuck the South – I didn’t write this article – lol

Well, actually I would want to FUCK the SOUTH; it has HOT WOMEN – no joke!

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment? Who do you think those wig-wearing, lacy-shirt-sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

(above) Yeah, quite a bit of irony there!

Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate, you marriage-hyping dickwads? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: Nine of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? Ten out of 10 are fucking red-ass, we’re-so-fucking-moral states.

Hypocritical Christians are the reason.

The next dickwad who says, “It’s your money, not the government’s money” is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the 10 states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least… can you guess? That’s right, motherfucker, they’re red states. And 8 of the 10 states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy. They’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: Buy your own fucking stop signs, asshole.

I don’t necessarily agree with what he’s saying here.  Well, a lot of democrat-voting blacks are in the south (In fact, the BLACK BELT); he left that out!  Well, sure there a lot of white welfare bums too, though – as in the north.

Classicism against white trash justified?

Well, looking at my article, yes:

A Barbaric Culture – is the South USA

Considering how they act/talk – these days – it’s totally justified.

But the snobbish – but often very justifiable hatred against poor whites is nothing new.  It amazes from the following article what snobs and racists – the great leaders and thinkers in the US and elsewhere were regarding the topic (a lot of the fallout from the eugenics movement):

In his classic study, Democracy in America (1835), French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville sees the state of poor white southerners as being one of the effects of the slave system. He describes them as ignorant, idle, prideful, self-indulgent, and weak, and writes about southern whites in general:

From birth, the southern American is invested with a kind of domestic dictatorship … and the first habit he learns is that of effortless domination … [which turns] the southern American into a haughty, hasty, irascible, violent man, passionate in his desires and irritated by obstacles. But he is easily discouraged if he fails to succeed at his first attempt.[16]

Another theory held that the degraded condition of poor white southerners was the result of their living in such close proximity to blacks and Native Americans. Samuel Stanhope Smith, a minister and educator who was the seventh president of Princeton College, wrote in 1810 that poor white southerners lived in “a state of absolute savagism,” which caused them to resemble Indians in the color of their skin and their clothing, a belief that was endemic in the 18th and early 19th century. Smith saw them as a stumbling block in the evolution of mainstream American whites,[17] a view that had previously been expressed by Michel-Guillaume-Jean de Crèvecoeur in his 1782 book, Letters from an American Farmer. Crèvecoeur, a French soldier-diplomat who resettled in the United States and changed his name to J. Hector St. John, considered poor white southerners to be “not … a very pleasing spectacle” and inferior to the prototypical American he celebrated in his book, but still hopes that the effects of progress would improve the condition of these mongrelized, untamed, half-savage drunken people who exhibit “the most hideous parts of our society.”[18]

For Ralph Waldo Emerson, the transcendentalist and pre-eminant American lecturer, writer and philosopher of the mid-nineteenth century, poor people of all kinds – including poor white Southerners – lived in poverty because of inherent traits in their nature. The poor were “ferried over the Atlantic & carted to America to ditch & to drudge, to make the land fertile … and then to lie down prematurely to make a spot of greener grass…” These people Emerson referred to as “guano” were fated to inhabit the lowest niches of society, and he specifically excluded them from his definition of what an American was. Emerson’s “American” was of Saxon heritage, descended from the Danes, Norsemen, Saxons and Anglo-Saxons, known for their “excess of virility”, their “beastly ferocity”, and – at least in Emerson’s eyes – their beauty. These were not traits which were shared by the poor white Southerner. Americans may have degenerated somewhat in comparison to their ancestors, one of the weakening effects of civilization, but they still maintained their superiority over other “races”, and white Southerners of all kinds, but especially poor ones, were themselves inferior to their countrymen from New England and the north.[19]

Some, such a Theodore Roosevelt, saw poor “degenerate” whites – as well as the mass of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe (those from northern Europe having been accepted in the Ango-Saxon white race) – as being a major part of the problem of “race suicide“, the concept that poor whites and unwanted immigrants would eventually out-procreate those of the dominant and superior white “race”, causing it to die out or be supplanted, to the detriment of the country.[20]

Blacks have always had loathing toward them, first, because they (the white trash) are NOT very nice to them – and second, because – like anyone else – they get off on feeling superior to someone  (probably the same situation exists now with Mexicans).

Poor white trash were generally only able to locate themselves on the worst land in the South, since the best land was taken by the slaveholders, large and small. They lived and attempted to survive on land that was sandy or swampy or covered in scrub pine and not suited for agriculture; for this they became known as “sandhillers” and “pineys”.[12] These “hard-scratch” inhabitants were seen to match their surroundings: they were “stony, stumpy, and shrubby, as they land they lived on.”[13]

Restricted from holding political office due to property qualifications, their ability to vote at the mercy of the courts which were controlled by the slave-holding planters, poor whites had few advocates within the political system or the dominant social hierarchy. Although many were tenant farmers or day laborers, other white trash people were forced to live as scavengers, thieves and vagrants, but all, employed or not, were socially ostracized by “proper” white society by being forced to use the back door when entering “proper” homes. Even slaves looked down on them: when poor whites came begging for food, the slaves called them “stray goats.”[14]

However, like the Irish – the poor whites were simply not getting beat with bullwhips, having their wives raped, their men emasculated.  Later on, they were not getting lynched – hideously tortured (burned alive etc.) – officially segregated against, persecuted with a double-standard regarding sexual relations.

A Barbaric Culture – is the South USA

Yep, you heard it.  But that’s not saying the majority is that way – but only some “bad apples” ruin the bunch.

Like I remember high school – where this guy, otherwise a pretty cool dude, wanted me to yell “Nigger!” at a black actor doing a play!  I refused – cause it was beyond even a high-schooler’s taste.

Now this is the tip of the iceberg, though, as many remark after remark – I had to endure (in my life) – and my disgust is justified – it’s not “The Care Bears” throwing a hissy fit.

Stuff like trailer trash wanting to “cook a niggers head” or “own slaves in modern times”.  How about being called a nigger whenever you show violence?  Oh, of course, these people, though cowards to actual black people’s faces – are always cutting down anyone black – or anything that IS black – the hair, the skin color, the rap – you name it.  😆  “Oh, Color Me Badd are a bunch of nigger queers ha ha”

Now, how is this sweathog “kidding around”?  It isn’t.  The joking around I had when some decent blokes (even tough sweathogs) never got this vulgar or retarded – and I’m totally justified in hating swamp-running illiterate white trash.

Well, my family dismisses them as “idiots” – but we all know the type – and they probably exist outside of the south.  Also, they’re are equally ignorant non-whites out there – whole countries of them!!!

Let’s go thru the Hall of Shame:

  • Pussy nigger  – (directed at white or black)
  • Nigger queers (Color me Badd) – I have to chuckle at the retarded-ness
  • C0ok a Niggers Head
  • Gook Lover
  • (Looking at scars) You must have been cut up by some niggers (a compliment)
  • Afro-American hairdo (white being called that)
  • “Oh look a  Nigger Mickey Mouse”  😆
  • Nigger Lips
  • You Suck Nigger (addressed to white person)


Laughed at – Instead of Laughed With

As I mentioned on one post, I had a fun time in this one class (high school), a small engine class.  The guys were these sweathogs – you know, kind of like off “Welcome Back Kotter” or something.   Anyway, we would cut up, insult each other – but nobody took it really serious.

However, though, my situation now (over two decades later) – is not the same.  Basically I’m being made out to be a punk – and that’s not cool!

The problem, though, I feel – isn’t my doing.  Well, it sounds whiny or blame-ish – but I’ll tell you the story.

See, these guys were cool when being un-PC in high school – but now they’ve become very preachy/irritating. They’re always on social media blasting meme after meme on “being a man” – along with the fact we should totally surrender ourselves to capitalism and white identity politics.

Now, me going against this has lead to labels – of cocksucker, bitch, cunt – most of the name thrown at SJWs – when I am by  – no means, anything like that!

I’m just a guy – just like this other – actually popular cool dude (on Facebook) just trying to stand up for truth – a kind of truth, in-between SJW idiocy and white identity idiocy.

There is no reason why I have to be a racist/extreme misogynist jerk-wad to be a man.

So basically, social media has simply allowed me to speak opinions – not in line with what’s popular – and simply assumed to be SJW crybaby stuff.

Alt Left: SJW’s Have Declared War on Normal People and Normal Behavior


The whole “macho thing” depends on the occupation. @Robert Lindsay might disagree – but there’s a world of difference from James Taylor singing “Shower Me People” to an auto mechanic crying. One is permissible, the other isn’t.

Anyway, obviously, being sensitive doesn’t work in the teaching, correctional jobs, construction, auto repair – a host of other occupations.

Well, the thing is that apparently I am not macho at all, but I can fake it enough that I have worked in extremely macho workplaces, and those men all pretty much accepted me. You just look at how the other guys act and talk and try to imitate them. If you already have some masculine core from your youth, you can plug into it. It’s not that hard, guys.

Of course women pretty much didn’t accept me because women are far more demanding than men when it comes to masculinity. Toxic masculinity is 100% women’s fault. Men display toxic masculinity because women demand it and won’t accept anything even 1% less. As long as women demand it, men will do it.

At those workplaces, you talk the talk and walk the walk, and everyone will be ok with you. And go along with the general vibes. At this security guard job I had where the atmosphere was extremely macho, the subject of homosexuality came up, and I said, “Fuck fags,” in a sort of disgusted, dismissive, but soft tone of voice. Most of the other guys said, “Yeah. Fuck fags.”

One man said, “Hey, you know in Laguna Beach, they got a fag mayor now! Can you believe that? A fag mayor!” I just shook my head as if to say, “That’s bullshit.” This was 1984, 35 years ago, and it was much more ok to talk like that then than it is now. I was also a lot more homophobic than I am now. I’m not sure I would say that now.

You don’t have to believe the things you say, but it helps to play the part. There aren’t any gay men around, so no one gets hurt. And that talk won’t get anyone hurt because any man who talks that way already is not keen on male homosexuality.

I remember at that same job, this Jamaican guy was walking with me, and I had tied my sweater around my waist. He said, “Damn! You’re embarrassing me!” So I tied it around my neck, and he said, “That’s better.” Apparently he thought tying your sweater around your waist was gay. Maybe it looks like a dress. Sure that’s homophobic but so what? If you are working with a bunch of homophobic guys, you have to play along. You don’t really have a choice.

I sort of agreed with him anyway. From that day on, I never wear my sweater around my waist. I always wear it around my neck instead. I don’t want to look faggy. Hell with that.

One time I was talking about sex with my girlfriend at the time, and I said she stuck her finger up my ass. This caused loud guffaws. One of the guys recoiled and said, “That’s gay! No woman is going to stick her finger up my ass!” I just laughed and said, “So what? I’m getting laid.”

Then another guy (the same guy who talked about the gay mayor) made a huge smile and said, “Is that some good pussy, Bob?” I said, “Yep, real good pussy!” and they all started laughing and saying, “Good pussy!” and slapping each other on the back and giving thumbs up signs.

Of course all of this conversation is banned now as Nazism and evil hatred of women and gays, but the thing is, this is how real masculine man talk and have always talked. And if you go anywhere on Earth, you will find that masculine straight men act approximately this exact same way.

These insane SJW’s are coding what has been normal behavior for thousands of years as evil, hatred, fascism, bigotry, and Nazism. It isn’t any of those things. It’s just the way normal, straight, masculine men normally talk and act, always have, and presumably always will.

I remember back in the wide open 1970’s when things were very liberal and wild, almost all straight men acted exactly like this, and no one cared. There were a few SJW thought police around, but most of the hip people hated them as the killjoys, party-poopers,  prudes, and churchladies that they are. SJW’s are like a dour-faced guy who raids your party and drops a turd in the punch bowl while yelling, “Party’s over!”

Back then, the world would have laughed if SJW’s said, “Mick Jagger said the word bitch. He’s a misogynist and we must boycott all his records!”

If they said, “Johnny Rotten said the words cunt and fag. He’s a misogynist and a homophobe. Everyone boycott his records,” everyone, including every punk on Earth would have laughed right in their faces.

Leftwing men have turned into the most pathetic bunch of sissified girlymen on Earth.

SJW’s have declared war on people, especially men, acting normal.

Alt Left: Can You Change Your Sexual Orientation?


Robert have you heard of shift in sexual identity.

I have been studying this issue for years now. Frankly there are hardly any people studying this issue and almost everything you hear about sexual orientation is nonsensical lie. Research into this matter is being held up by Gay Identity Politics. I am probably one of the few people in this country who is actually studying this issue.

You mean sexual orientation, right? It doesn’t happen in men, except maybe in prepubertal boys. Men don’t change at all. Sexual orientation in men is frozen at age 15, if not sooner. We know this because many males have tried to change their sexual orientation in lab over many decades. All efforts to increase heterosexual attraction and decrease homosexual attraction failed. So not only could gays not be turned straight, but a 10-90 couldn’t even turn into a 20-80.

We don’t know if straight men can turn gay  because no one ever shows up in the lab wanting to do that, but it doesn’t seem like it. There was a case in the Archives of Sexual Behavior about a college man who desperately wanted to turn gay but was utterly failing to do so. He had tried everything and was at his wit’s end when he showed up for therapy.

It would seem that heterosexual attraction cannot be decreased, and homosexual attraction cannot be increased. We men are SOL. Whatever you are, you are. Be happy with your orientation. You probably didn’t create it, and you can’t change it. And let’s quit beating up on men for things they can’t change!

I’m not sure about women. Women seem to be able to add on a new attraction. Many straight women add on a bi attraction. Many lesbians cannot seem to change at all for some reason. There are women who claim that they change from lesbian to straight. No one really knows what is going on with them, but in one case I am aware of, Bill DiBlasio’s wife, her sexual orientation did not change. There are straight women who claim to go lesbian, often due to feminism, but many lesbian feminists do not have sex, which implies that their true orientation did not change.

It looks like once an attraction is acquired in a certain strength by a certain age, it cannot be reduced or eliminated. It’s just stuck for life. The question revolves around whether new attractions can be created on increased or eliminated if they already exist. The jury is open on that, but in men it looks like it’s not possible.

Probably straight women cannot turn lesbian because a hard attraction to men will be for life. Probably a lesbian cannot turn straight because a hard attraction to women is for life. I have talked to a few lesbians who were having sex with men, and they told me that their orientations had not changed (10-90’s) in the few years they had been having sex with men. One told me, “I can’t help it.” It’s time we show kindness to true biological homosexuals.

Sexual activity, identification and orientation are not the same. 95% of all gay men are biologically gay and cannot be changed. However, I am aware of a few cases of straight men living a gay lifestyle simply because women did not like them. I am also aware of cases where men with an apparent bisexual orientation and a lot of experience with women until college decided to live a gay lifestyle.

So most gay men are biologically gay, but a few are straight or bisexual men who have simply chosen to live a gay lifestyle.

Traditional Christianity – Basically False

Well, I’m not the most religious person.  However, I can attest to the fact traditional Christianity is basically false – basically meaning people who rebel against it are highly justified.  I mean, why shouldn’t music artists worship the devil or favor other non-conformist attitudes?

Why is it not justified? Well, it all seems subjective, but really think about it:

  • The traditional idea of hell is against God’s loving nature.  I mean, the world sucks enough as it is – but then torture someone from eternity – not even a billion years – LOL?  And this even being done – not only to child rapists, but also just bearded hipsters (just kidding).
  • Eternal Hell provides no real correction.  I mean, even prison government agencies are called “Departments of Correction”.
  • Why should anyone love and worship such a being?  And notice how FAKE Christians are – it’s not surprising – look at the theology.
  • A lot of people had never heard of the gospel message.  However, according to traditional Christians, their ignorance – justifies ETERNAL DAMNATION. 😆
  • Babies and Mentally Disabled People in Hell?  Apparently, old-school Christians would justify this.  For instance, Catholics demanded babies be baptized or else – ETERNAL DAMNATION
  • No consistency in Protestant thinking.  I mean, if Catholics were wrong about the Pope according to them – why wouldn’t also THE WHOLE CATHOLIC THING – be wrong?  The Hell idea came from the Catholics!
  • No eternal security for many denominations including Catholic – the largest one.   This basically means – committing any mortal sin – which is any fun one – when dying – commits you to ETERNAL HELL
  • Some people actually believe in Double Predestination – which basically says “God chooses who goes to heaven and hell – and those who complain are – guess this – being whiny!
  • Hell has actual flames – that are never-ending, when simple boredom experienced in a prison (in real life) is verified torture.

Why do people hold on to traditional religion? Well, apparently Christians think God has to be this hyper-masculine monster who tortures people  in hell FOR ETERNITY.

Also, they hold to doctrines where – thinking is discouraged, so nobody questions what they say – even if, taken logically, to come to pure bullshit.

What is the truth?

I think hell is of a temporary nature – humane and just – until someone is cleansed of sin.  The Bible – taken in it’s true translation backs this.  No time for specifics, you can look it up!  However, I don’t think “all ways to God” are right – but I think there is some mercy in finding “the one true way”.

Bearded Hipsters Who Can’t Change a Tire?

This is unbelievable!

Anyway, I know this is a pro-hyper-masculine blog – but, honestly, so much of this stuff is “bandwagon”.  It’s just as dumb as disco suits or sporting a Chicago Bulls hat (in the 90s).

Well, one problem I have with these bozos – is that they really haven’t deserved the honor of a beard – even if they can do manly things.  I mean, did they lose their legs like Lieutenant Dan (in Forrest Gump)?

Come on!  These guys look like Eddie Munster with a beard.  You can’t even tell who the 18 year old guys are these days!  Oh, whose the professor, is he sitting in the class or on the podium?

Prison Sexuality

Who would truly be strong enough to resist “punking out” in a prison?  Well, actually the dominant ones aren’t considered punk – but they’re – just as gay.

From 1931 research:

These are families women create in prison that provide them support, bonds and relationships, like a traditional family would. Typically, only the main couple in the family has sexual relations. The women take on masculine and feminine roles to mimic a real family. “Mammy” or “mumsy” is given to the older, maternal woman in the family, while “Popsy” is given to the dominant woman, who is least feminine. These “parents” are typically older and are seen as mentors to younger inmates. Roles within pseudofamilies are flexible and can change with time.[6]


In homosexual relationships, sexual types for women include: “butch” or “daddy” refers to the masculine female who is dominant. The “femme” or “mommy” is the submissive one. A “trick” is a girl who allows herself to be used by others. A “commissary hustler” is manipulative. “Cherries” have never had lesbian experiences and a “square” will not take part in homosexual acts.[4]


Heterosexual men in prison view their homosexual acts as being “situation specific” and may not consider themselves bisexual. These men often describe how they imagine being with a woman while taking part in sexual activity with a male inmate. During masturbation, they picture past sexual experiences with women.[9] They take part in homosexual activity due to having no “heterosexual outlets”.[6]

A dominant sexual partner in prison is called “daddy” while their submissive partner is called “kid” or “girl”. The dominant partner has their mate take on the feminine role in order to feel more masculine and powerful.[10]

Charleston’s Slave Markets

My meanderings are punctuated by churches. Charleston’s picturesque peninsula was a refuge for nonconformist Christians, as well as Jews, and “The Holy City” still hosts a multitude of Christian buildings of diverse architecture and denomination, as well as a historic synagogue.

Certainly the WNs will focus on the synagogue – LOL.

Non-conformist Christian as in what? Satanist? 😆

Yeah, all the “southern-ish” bearded hipsters now in coffee shops – but slave shops back in the day!   Well, I’m not shocked!

But it’s the innocent-looking information boards on the ground floor that lodge in my brain: they describe the busy auctions that took place in the now-quiet square – auctions of enslaved people. “Some 40 per cent of the estimated 388,000 Africans brought to America as slaves came through this city,” says historian Ruth Miller, my knowledgeable guide. “Odds are, almost every African American can trace blood lines back to Charleston”.

Also, oddly enough, the Civil War started there.

This small museum of personal testimonies and evocative objects (including manacles) occupies the site of the indoor slave market that replaced the one at the Old Exchange. Christine holds a poster for a sale here in 1860. A 12-year-old boy was sold (alone) for $940 (about $24,000 today), a 15-year-old girl for $1,275. “I honour my ancestors by talking about them as people, not property,” she says. “My great-grandparents were enslaved… they survived this for me.”

It’s amazing how African-Americans fell in value to from a new car each (an average new car in today’s terms – to being utter pests – so despised by conservatives, WNs etc..)

“You see, it isn’t just history,” sighs Christine Mitchell, welcoming me to Charleston’s Old Slave Mart Museum. Whitewashing is still a big problem, she says, and (though legally ended in 1968) segregation is alive and kicking. Certainly, I have seen a minuscule number of the black people who make up 40 per cent of the city’s population.

It’s certainly not a culturally integrated city – unofficially.  But – I think it’s due to the blacks – not the whites (to a large degree).

The Jews Owning Slaves – and Other Lies

In more of the “blame game”, racists now want to say Jews owned slaves – to deflect criticism – much as they also want to do the same with The Holly-Hoax – lol.

However,the fact remains that the Southern Whites were not dupes in a Jewish scheme. They fought whole-heartily for the preservation of slavery and also highly supported future African-American oppression.

Now as for other lies – some white nationalists want to present the image that skid-row whites or white racist elitists have views – that represent those of current working class whites.  Nope!  Not the case, homey!!

Who are white racist elitists?

Well, I have mentioned them a few times.  They range from David Duke – to stupid punks at a community college.  Anyhow, these people – are without excuse. It’s not like with certain skid-row whites – where bad experiences/poverty allow for justifiable hate/racism.

Beats me as to why they (white racist elitists) are they way they are. I take it that it’s mostly culture (privileged culture) combined with ignorance – and well, they’ve just never experienced what it’s like being fucked – as opposed to fucking.

No Future for Black State

Well, at least not for poor blacks.  However, this is the “wet dream” of white nationalists and others.  And, of course, they criticize – even race realist liberals, as “bourgeois liberals” – a polite term for “liberal elitists” or “mini-Mr. Drummonds” from Different Strokes (the TV show) – lol.

However, the fact is that poor blacks cannot succeed on their own. In fact, the slaveholders of past centuries were totally right about it.   So the fact of the matter is that typical white racists have no working solution for poor blacks – and also, of course, traditional liberals don’t.  The right is totally correct in showing how Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society failed – how “poor blacks given money” has only destroyed poor Black America.

Well, one alternate solution given by white racists – is to put the poor blacks under the care of richer blacks in a segregated state (black-a-block among blacks).  But would that really work?  Well, there is simply too many poor blacks for the small black middle/upper class.   In that case, you’d just have a repeat of Haiti – with a large black underclass – and a heartless mulatto elite.

Anyway of course, the real reason that racists hate @Robert Lindsay’s Black a Block theory- is because they HATE black people.  They deny it, but it’s obvious.  They cannot even tolerate a place like Appalachia or Portugal – where the blacks are spread out to where – they’re practically invisible!

But this figures for skid-row whites or white racist elitists.

Autistic People in the Hate Movement

Why are autistic people – some of them – drawn toward misogyny, racism etc.?  Well, I suspect this hate comes from bad experiences – and I especially think it comes from anti-disabled prejudice.  In other words, certain women and blacks etc.. are not understanding of the disabled.  They bully the disabled.  An autistic person, whose behavior triggers it (gawking) or maybe not, gets on the bad side of people.

I mean, come on!  People don’t hate for no reason.  More than not, there was bad experiences.  However, though, I do admit I’ve seen some elitist jerks (at colleges, military etc..) who are simply are in a hyper-right-wing culture – and the way to fit in is to be bigoted.

Triggering the Sexual Harassment

@Robert Lindsay is hung up on bitches at work etc. and I can’t blame him.  Nonetheless, some behavior triggers these women – and that behavior is not acceptable.  For instance, I used to stare at women.  In fact, it probably triggered a lot of the hate I experienced.  Now don’t get me wrong.  The environments I was in were full of injustice.  I mean, these women were racist, anti-American, anti-disabled.  However, it took my gawking to trigger their bad side.

This is usually how it is. People are shit, but they don’t reveal themselves until they’re triggered and the starting-off point is often something truly justifiable to the asshole/bitch.

It depends on whose saying it!

Yes, @Robert Lindsay has a point when he says that cool, in-crowd people can do whatever they want, but others cannot do the same.  In other words, if he says, “Spread the blacks outside the ghetto.”, he’s a NAZI monster, but if Obama says it, it’s all groovy.

I’ve also seen this in life – where the most vile people weasel their way in – by simply being a normie.  In fact, it seems to be more the case – that being normie is valued – above being just.


PUA/Game: My Definitions of Alphas, Chads, Etc.

Chad to me is a physically attractive man – 8-10 on the scale. He doesn’t have to get laid at all. He could be a virgin. Same applies to the rest of the categories. Success with women is irrelevant. Chadlites are 7’s on the scale. High-tier normies are 6’s. Normies are 4-5’s. Omegas, incels, subhumans or whatever appropriate term they wish to call themselves are 1-3’s.
Statistical Alphas are the men who are most attractive to women/ get the most women. These are the top 20% of men who get most of the women for whatever reason – aggression, bad boy game, criminality, sociopathy, looks, game, money, status, fame, power, whatever. Many Alphas are assholes. They are typically very aggressive towards other men and often seem to be starting fights with other men they regard as competitors to eliminate a rival. Alphas fight all the men and fuck all the women, basically, or at least they try to.
They are dominant even in their body language. Some Alphas are pretty nice to other men. They tend to be natural leaders. It’s not possible for an Alpha to be unsuccessful with women unless he’s incarcerated – that contradicts the definition.
Behavioral Alphas are men who act in the stereotypical Alpha manner. While statistical Alphas can be no more than 20% by definition, you can have whole countries full of hypermasculine behavioral Alphas as in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, the Caucasus, Russia, the Mediterranean, Latin America, Thailand, the Philippines, perhaps Africa.
Even there you have statistical Alphas too who do what they always do, but in countries where most men are behavioral Alphas, I believe male-female relations are better because the women are typically very feminine and submissive and don’t fight the men much.
You can’t necessarily get laid a lot because in a number of those countries, you pretty much have to get married to get a woman, but once you get a woman, you are in like Flynn. You get a woman in those countries, and you can pretty much fuck her all you want because she thinks it’s her duty. I believe that most men can benefit by behaving more Alpha, so to speak.
Chads are the best looking men.
Statistical Alphas are the guys who women want the most or who get the most women. One definition of an Alpha is a three figure lay count. If you have had sex with 100 females, you are automatically an Alpha by this definition. 6% of men have three figure lay counts.
Alphas, Betas, and Omegas:
Statistical Alphas attract most of the women most of the time.
Statistical Betas attract some of the women some of the time.
Statistical Omegas attract almost none of the women almost all the time.

PUA/Game: Game Minus Looks Is Worthless

Incel forums are great PUA/Game zones because incels usually have PUA/Game down. Incels are super experts on PUA/Game. Lot of good that’s doing them. This goes to show that just knowing Game stuff doesn’t get you laid.

You need the Looks or something else – Status, Money, Power, Fame to attach the Game onto otherwise it’s not worth a thing. Game minus Looks strikes me as quite useless and possibly even dangerous as now you have essentially an arrogant Omega, which is a #metoo trainwreck waiting to happen.

PUA/Game: The Value of Incel Sites

People don’t realize this but not everyone on incel sites are virgins or even incels. Many “incels” have had sexual experience ranging from a bit to a lot. On one of the most popular posters, Chadfisherman, was 35 years old and had had sex with 33 women. But he hadn’t been laid in three years, so he figured he was an incel.  By the traditional definition, he was an incel. The definition is no sex in the last six months. Hell, that’s probably most single people right there.

There are so many Normies and even Alphas and believe it or not Chads on incel forums, it is amazing. In fact the Normie flood in incel sites is such a huge issue that many incel sites have had to initiate policies to deal with it. Some allow incels only to varying degrees. is completely insane on this issue.

They ban anyone with any sexual experience at all. An incel gets a make-out session with a woman, and he’s got to leave. This is crazy as you are throwing out the best and most successful men and ensuring that only the worst and most failed men are in the forums. Of course this leads these forums to be endless purveyors of gloom and doom where incels egg each other on with negativity, self-hatred and rage.

If you are looking for PUA advice there’s not many places to go. I despise PUA/Game forums and blogs for the reason listed below. Even any incel site that does not ban successful men quickly gets infiltrated by Alphas and even Chads. I wonder why a lot of these men are even on these forums. I suspect some are there to brag and feel better than the incels. This is one of the main reasons that bragging is banned on some incel forums – it will make the incels feel even worse than they already feel.

So where else to go? Nowhere if you want to avoid swaggering braggarts and showoffs. There’s now a site called Failed Normies, but you pretty much have to be 1-6 in Looks to be there. These are ordinary guys who have had some degree of sexual experience but are now going through a dry spell or incel period. I don’t mind the atmosphere but I’m not exactly a failed Normie. More like a Chad that got bombed with a B-52 of an Agepill.

So where do you go? Incel sites are great for PUA/Game advice, as I will show below.

I like incel forums because there are fewer swaggering braggart Alphas and Chads. PUA type forums, even Lookism, get quickly infiltrated by serious braggarts who are like, “I fucked five chicks in the last two weeks. And they were all HB-10’s.” For all I know these guys might be telling the truth. I mean guys like that exist. But even with my rather illustrious history, guys like that make me feel small. They make me feel like a damned truecel.

Most guys are down to Earth at best and self-hating at worst. At least you won’t feel small.

Korean-American Crowdfunding (Kye)

I suppose it’s also the same Indians.  I mean, how do they get to own everything – sheesh?

Anyway, you don’t see this thing with white Americans – apart from the recent Kickstarter/Indegogo thing.

O.K. the Korean crowdfunding thing basically means that immigrants come in, all the family and some others chip in and buy a business.  Of course, there is a string attached of “paying back with interest” – but apparently they have more faith in the borrowers than banks do.

Skid Row Whites – vs Working Class Whites

In the articles about “putting blacks on every corner” as a means of charity – my comments seemed to suggest poor white Americans were dysfunctional. Well, actually, I was talking about skid-row whites – and possibly also their psychotic white rich supporters.   Those people are definitely dysfunctional – either cause of poverty and/or (in the case of the rich) mental issues.

Now, lower working class whites actually don’t hate blacks as much as you’d think.  For instance, I know of women with decent manager jobs at restaurants – and they have married blacks – and they’re case examples of how the “black on every block” thing works.

Now, note these relationships aren’t perfect – and often the black men take off – but the benefit to the children is off-the-charts.

Game/PUA: Chads Versus Incels: Women’s Double Standards

Shy, very quiet, or brooding Chad is regarded as a “project” by women who are determined to “pull Chad out of his shell.” Other women find him mysteriously attractive. They look at him. “The quiet one,” they say with an amazed, fascinated and possibly horny look on their faces.

Shy Chad somehow can fuck for hours at a time because, well, being Chad does that to you. “Still waters run deep,” she says, shaking her head after she got fucked by “shy Chad” for two hours straight.

The strange, serious, brooding, mysterious, somewhat dangerous Chad is an object of fascination by the women he dates. “Look at this brooding man. He’s so fascinating and mysterious. He reminds me of a university professor I used to date,” She says, homing in on him, fascinated, like a cruise missile.

Others find it touching. “Aw,” his new girlfriend says, “Chad is shy,” like she was talking about a 6 year old boy. Chad’s shyness is cute, endearing, boyish, sensitive, heartwarming.

Incels are quiet, and it’s “When is he going to whip out the guns and start shooting!?” Incels brood and they are dangerous creeps, to be avoided, the next mall shooter. On the other hand, if incels stop being quiet and shy and try to talk to women, now they are dangerously weird and creepy, and it’s #metoo time. Incels are screwed. Damned if they are quiet, damned if they come out of their shells.

Incels are immature. “Why don’t you incels grow up!”

Chad is exactly the same as the immature incels, except Chad is “boyish”. “There’s something boyish about you, like a little boy,” the new woman says, delight dancing in her eyes. “I love it.”


America cannot save the Philippines (no more mail-order)

We have too many black Americans, trapped in the US to help (in that fashion).  Anyway, if the Filipinos want white genes, there are a host of other white nations to get them from.

Also, the Philippines needs restructuring at home – and just bringing in mail-order money – or more immigrant money (Filipinos working in other nations) isn’t the solution.


Adopt a Poor Black American?

Well, among whites with a steady good job or better yet, Mr. Drummond on Different Strokes – it works wonders.  Well, I don’t mean necessarily adoption, but rather marrying a black, letting some blacks in the neighborhood etc..

Well, anyway, the premise operates like the “mail-order” bride thing.  Note, when some American marries a Filipina – the effect in the Philippines is off-the-charts.  Everything back home improves!

Anyway, in my home town, there are ladies who have married black men – maybe they were even dumped by them – normally, lol.  However, these women have been a massive positive effect for the kids.  The kids are not only  richer – but usually, because of genetics, they have a higher IQ.  Also, these kids go on to create, at the least, decent families (my guess).  It’s an end to the dead-end cycle of “being poor black”.

O.K. who hates these race-mixers?  Poor whites do – possibly cause their culture has taught them to hate other races from fear and also they’re probably jealous.  Well, typically they view race-mixers as whores, people wanting non-white pets, people who live in a shell (Yes, having money beyond a ghetto existence is a shell of sorts!), effeminate pansies, poor losers (in the case of poor whites wanting to be with blacks).

Anyway, the white racist movement has a steady supply of poor people with the backers often being richer white bigots.  Yes, a good number of richer Americans – for whatever reason, also hate non-whites.  I take the reason to be machismo, conservative politics, military experience, a recent background in being poor in the past etc..

Alt Left: Modern Feminism as a Psychopathic Movement?

I am starting to think feminists are psychopaths or at least modern feminism is a psychopathic movement. All feminists have told me flat out that women have a right to hit us men all the want to. In fact, they take delight in hitting us. There have been many articles in feminist press about hitting men. These are filled with comments from gleeful feminists talking about the men they have hit or assaulted and how fun it was. The rest of the comments are, “You go, girl. Hit those men! Beat those men! LOL!”

I asked every feminist I know if we ever had a right to hit them back, and they all said no. Ok, that’s psychopathic. They get to hit us all they want to, but it’s illegal for us to hit back. That’s how a psychopath thinks.

When women are unrepresented in like anything but even 1% they scream and yell and carry on and demand equality of outcome at all costs. In a number of cases now though, women are beating men. More women in college, more women getting degrees, more women in all sorts of high paying professions.

So men are now underrepresented in all sorts of fields, in school, etc. Response of feminists? Crickets! Women can’t be underrepresented 1% in anything and we have to force equal representation for women, but women get to beat men and over-represent them in anything, and that’s wonderful.

Incidentally, there have been many gloating articles in the feminist press about how women are kicking men’s asses in some field or other or in school, and the women are all cheering it on. They’re chortling and carrying on like it’s a party. “Beat those men!”, they scream with delight. They get to beat us in everything, and we can’t beat them in one thing. That’s psychopathy. That’s how a psychopath thinks.

I sincerely believe that feminism is a psychopathic movement.

Alt Left: 80% of US Women Refuse to Identify As Feminists

Studies of millennial women appear to show that 20% of them identify as feminists. Not sure if that’s a good figure, as it was hard to find the actual survey, and I averaged together the rates for the different races of women, Asian, Hispanic, Black, and White. When I averaged together the rates of the four races, I got 20%. The link for those figures was to a page doing surveys on millenials. An article saying 20% of women identify as feminists linked to a page doing surveys on millenials.

In addition, an average of only 27% of European women identify as feminists. So 73% of European women reject modern feminism.

On the other hand, most said that they were full equal rights for women, maybe 80% support that. So you can argue that they support feminist goals while rejecting identification with the modern feminist movement.

In surveys, young women say that they associate feminism with lesbianism, man-hatred, and attacks on femininity. Bottom line: feminism has a bad name. Why? They’re fanatics. Case in point: your average feminist, wild eyes, danger hair and the rest.

The 3rd wave sites I have been on are not so dykey and anti-feminine as the truly insane radical feminist sites where the women are nearly diagnostically psychotic, but the man-hating BS is definitely still there, though quite a bit toned down.

Plus a lot of 3rd wavers are heterosexual, really like to have sex with men, and are often horny as Hell. Feminist men almost get mobbed on those sites.