Game/PUA: We, the Men, Would Like to Officially and Formally Complain That All You Women Are Driving Us Completely Insane

I always hated the misogynistic line, “If women didn’t have vaginas, no man would ever talk to them.” Just horrible! I would think, “Hey, I like women, come on! What are you, some woman-hater? Screw that. I love women!”

Guess what? Here I am in my 60’s and I finally figure that, as horrible as it sounds, Goddamn it, it’s true.

The only reason we talk to women is because they have pussies and most of us are pussy addicts if not pussy beggars. And they didn’t have vaginas, we wouldn’t even give them the time of day. Why give her the time of day? What for? Why risk it?

That’s for straight men.

Hell, we men bash women all the time, and guys who don’t are suspected cucks, wimps, milquetoasts or pussies. Because any sane, normal man will quickly be driven insane by women.

I always wondered why players and ladies men loved women like crazy like a heroin addict loves his dope, seemed to understand them very well, and nevertheless were very cynical about women.

Then I figured it out. The more you are around women, the more they drive you insane.

The incels should be sane. They never talk to women. Instead they’re wretched, suicidal, furious, and pathetic. Why? Because they don’t have a woman. I don’t get it. Why do they want a woman? So they can get even crazier than they already are? They’re already completely insane. Starting to hang around women will just push a lot of them over the edge. That’s why I think these guys need to calm down and get more stable first, work on building self-esteem, toughness and resilience, personal growth, etc. T

They need to get sane and get their shit together first. Then go out and try to get chicks. Trying to get women when you’re half nuts yourself won’t work and you’ll only get a lot of failure. Which will cause you to go from half nuts to full-blown nuts.

The player is around women all the time, reaping the joy, sex, and love that flows from all of that, and he’s in Pussy Heaven half the time. It’s the finest life any man could ever wish to live. You can die tomorrow with a smile on your face.

On the other hand, you have to pay for those times with the wages of bad times. That’s how life goes. Want good times? Fine, go out and have a bunch of bad times, get paid for them, come to our Life Store, hand in the wages of your tragedy and we’ll trade you 1 to 1 for some times. You purchase good times with bad times.

You pay for good times with bad times. Want good times? Cool. But you will have to pay for them with bad times. They go together. In other words, you can’t really have good times without bad times. Yes you can have bad times without good times if you are miserable enough, but life is cruel, and good times must be paid for with the wages of misery.

I’m a Ladies Man. I’m not calling myself that. That’s what women call me. So I’ll defer to them, ok, so as not to brag. I would like to point out that a Ladies Man is simply a man who prefers the company of women to that of men. A gay man is around women all the time, but he’s not a Ladies Man. He’s one of the gals. Hell, a Ladies Man could be a virgin, but he’s typically not because women don’t like to hang out with virgins.

If they’re letting some straight men hang out all the time, it’s probably because some of them want to fuck him. Otherwise why bring him around? They probably think we drive them nuts as much as the opposite. A Ladies’ Man is often goodlooking. Why? Because women like to hang around with hot guys. They like hot guys who like women, who are successful with women, who are friendly, easy-going, not too pushy and still cool. And yeah. They’re keeping around the Girl Gang all the time because at least one of them wants to fuck him. 100% guar-an-teed.

Most men prefer the company of men and hanging with the boys to the company of women, which they are often associating with mostly to get laid.

There’s this general idea that women drive you crazy. So you hang around with them some limited amount so you can still get laid and hope they don’t drive you too nuts.

But that doesn’t change the fact that women are difficult as Hell, always driving you crazy and cannot be figured out or understand by any known sentient being.

A lot of the time, if I’m feeling bad it’s because some bad thing happened with a woman. If I’m sucking on the Tequila bottle too much it’s because they latest chick went best love affair of my life to worst enemy ever all in a rollercoaster of a couple of days.

Like I’m talking to her on a dating site and things are going smoothly, and I try to escalate just a bit, and I go back the next day and she’s ghosted me and blocked me without a word because I said one sentence she didn’t like. Dating sites have made all of ghosting stuff so much easier.

It was harder back when we had phones and barely had answering machines. You’d know it was over when she was screaming like a banshee into the receiver for God knows what reason. It’s happened more than once and it used to smash my soul like a sledgehammer and send me into days of depression. Now that I’m a goddamned rock I handle it a lot better, but it’s still hard take. You’re crushed for hours, not days.

Sure, when you’re getting along with them, it’s a blast, but they’re flaky and unstable as Hell, totally unpredictable, and can turn on you like a dime for little or no reason.

When you are around women all the time, you are dealing with weirdness, nuttiness, and flakiness all the time. Most of us are putting up with this shit at all for the reward at the bottom of the cereal box: pussy.

Alt Left: Black Identity Politics Seems to Actually Be Bad for Black People

Oneaboveall: On a side note Robert, do you think many American blacks carry a victim mentality that is irritating to you?

Unfortunately, most of them do just that. It’s very unappealing but it’s understandable why they feel that way. It’s hard to admit that your race is fucking up on purpose or can’t get its shit together for some reason.

I wish Blacks would stop identifying with their race. Are you a respectable, accomplished, polite Black woman? Good! We’re not talking about you when we bitch about Blacks. It ain’t about you, honey! We’re talking about all those others of your race that aren’t like that. But see? That real nice, polite, respectable, decent Black woman over there? She’s identifying with those ghetto animals. The good Blacks identify with ghetto Blacks. “They’re my people!”

No they’re not. I wish the Blacks who have their shit together and are decent people would just stop seeing themselves as primarily Black. You’re a Black woman? No, you’re not! You’re a woman, dammit. Just an ordinary woman like all the rest of them. Yeah, you happen to be Black, but so what? Why is that so important? What difference does it make? You’re a woman who just so happens to be Black, and the fact that you are Black doesn’t have a damn thing to do with anything. So quit identifying with it!

See? It’s hard for decent Blacks to say, “I am Black.” It feels shameful because they’re identifying with a group that fucks up so much when the good Blacks don’t have anything to do with that behavior! Yet they feel compelled to defend it.

Stop! Try something different. Instead of saying, “I am Black,” say, “I am a woman!” There. Now doesn’t that feel a lot better? Women aren’t a screw-up problem race that fucks up all the terrible, acts awful, causes a ton of crime, is rude, impolite, crude and mean, and who act and often are stupid. Women aren’t even a race at all. They’re a gender.

Women aren’t any of those things! You can’t think of a lot of terrible things to say about women because women are pretty much ok. So identify with the group that’s got it’s shit together and is pretty much an ok group of folks. That takes the weight off your shoulder of having to identify with a bunch of bad actors when you don’t even act that way yourself!

You’re a Black man? Like Hell you are! You’re a man, just like me, him, and all the rest of us. You are part of the society of men, and that is where your primary allegiance lies. You’re one of the boys! You’re part of our gang, provided you like Whites that is.

When you say, “I am Black,” you are identifying with a fuck-up race, in particular with the men of that race who act much worse than the women, as is the case with most ethnic groups.

Men act bad. White men act bad. But not real bad. Not too bad.

Compared to that, Black men act horrendous, and frankly they are one of the most problematic groups of humans on Earth.

So you’re a Black guy who acts good, is nice, polite, and decent, stays out of jail, and doesn’t fuck up in life. You’re like a typical White guy except you’ve got some dark skin. If you act good, why do you want to identify with all these fuckups who act awful? You don’t even act awful yourself! Your behavior is just fine.

So quit seeing those fuckups as part of “my group.” If it’s hard for a Black woman to say she’s Black, it’s nine times harder for a Black man to say he’s Black. You have to take responsible for a whole shitload of pure awfulness. You are identifying with the worst behaved group of people on Earth. Except possibly Gypsies. Don’t forget the Gypsies! Gypsies are so horrible they make Blacks seem like Norwegians and Japanese. I see Gypsies and I think, “Thank God we just got Blacks! They cause issues but we can deal. It could have been worse. Instead of Blacks, we could have gotten Gypsies!

So quit identifying with them! Instead of saying, “I’m a Black man,” say, “I’m a man! Just like that White guy over there. We’re all the same. We’re just a bunch of guys.”

Doesn’t it feel so much better to say, “I’m a man” than to say “I’m Black?” Who cares if you’re Black anyway? Why is that even important?

When you say, “I’m a man,” you look out there at the entire world of men, and most of us pretty damn good. And even when we fuck up and act bad, most of us don’t act that bad, and even when we do, we usually don’t act that bad (we’re mostly just being rebels or trying to act hard)and as a man, you can identify with some of that IDGAF and bad boy behavior.

Amyl and the Sniffers, “Gacked on Anger”

Amyl and the Sniffers, “Gacked on Anger.”

Again. Well that’s some real punk rock all right. All the way back to 1976 and 1977. Funny all these bands try to reproduce the sound but they just can’t seem to do it, can they? Here I am talking about how all modern music sucks, and this damned band shows up to pour champagne all over my pity party! What’s with you guys? Can’t you let a guy suffer in peace? Why do you have to come along and make me all happy and shit? Geez.

Ok, the rhythm section. Iggy and the Stooges. Obviously. And I know everyone hates them, but does anyone else feel a bit of G. G. Allen’s rhythm section ripping along there? I always like that heavy pounding sound they had. Say what you want about G. G., but at least it was rock and roll, dammit.

Plus some of those other bands – the X-Ray Spex, the Runaways (believe it or not) and I hate to say it but yep, the damned Plasmatics, probably one of the most hated bands of the early 80’s. But maybe they were ok after all?

There ya go. The music video. I usually hate violent bitches, but I think I might like it if this psychobitch was yelling at me like this.

Once she hits me with that damned bottle, it’s all over though. I’d have to beat her ass for that. Of course I’d try to have sex with her after I beat her up. She’d probably do it, too. Women are really insane that way. If you haven’t out the connection women have with violence and sex, well, stick around a few more years. I’m an old-timer. I’d still completely freaked out by how twisted and insane women are when it comes to sex. They’re pretty nuts anyway, but when it comes to the bedroom, just throw out all the  rules. All rationality stops at the bedroom door and sorts of craziness and weirdness begins.

The main problem men have with women is we expect them to be logical like us. They’re not. Their emotionally driven creatures. Most of their behavior is emotionally driven. It’s not that they lack logic – but they have emotional logic, which is not the same thing as intellectual logic. And no matter how nutty a woman acts, if you sit down and think about it, there’s usually some crazy reason, an actual, logical reason, but a crazy one, mind you behind just about everything she does.

If you expect women to make sense according to the rules of men and their logic, you will be angry most of your life. And you will spend a lot of time being angry at women because a lot of their illogic is pretty infuriating.

But the next time a woman does something nutty, sit down and think whether it makes sense in some crazy way. Look for the crazy logic. Screw the sane logic. They don’t play that. There’s a reason in there, in the wilds of her emotional thickets. Once you start to understand her emotional language and logic, you can start piecing together a lot more of her behavior. She’ll even start to make sense. Crazy sense, sure, but sense nevertheless.

Of course I’d grab her and try to fuck her after I let her have a bit of fun with me. I’d have to. No bitch talks to me without getting sexually attacked. If she shoves me away, fine, but if you’re going to talk to a man like that, you better be prepared to get fucked or at least get sexually attacked a bit, dammit. If you don’t want to do it, fine, just shove him away. But when you talk to a man like that, I’ll be damned if you aren’t fucking asking for it.

If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. If you ain’t prepared for the blowback, ladies, don’t even talk to any man like this, ever. If he’s any kind of a man at all, he’s going to jump ya.

But maybe you like that, huh girls? Why did you talk to a man like that in the first place? No woman talks to a man like that unless she wants to get fucked. Get real, dammit.

If you can’t handle that, then forget it. Play it safe. Just call the cops or something, ladies. Don’t push your luck!

Game/PUA: Are Asian Men Cucked? Are They Alphas or Betas?

Vicmund the Han:  Hey Rob, are Asian men cucked? Are they Alphas?

Asian men are pigs! Nah, they’re not cucked at all, and in Asia, they have set up a system where they are seen as Alphas by the women.

However, the mass Beta-ization of young Japanese men in the form of the Hikkimoris and their inevitable rejection by Japanese women seems to be grinding a hole in that model.

Here in the West, I am not sure. The older men are complete pigs and act very Alpha. The younger men still act quite Alpha if they remain deep within their traditional cultures. I went to some Asian markets in Mountain View when I was there a few years ago. These markets were filled with young Chinese men and women. The young men were very masculine, almost stoic, and the women followed suit, being very feminine and falling submissively behind their Alpha boyfriends. As the world is meant to be. But these Chinese young people were still very deep in Chinese culture, still speaking the language, possibly being immigrants, etc.

For the rest of Asian men who are more assimilated, they have an Alpha mindset due to their pig cultures, but to their women, they seem Beta physically compared to White and Black men. Many of their women are marrying out either due to seeing their men as Beta in the West or disgust over the pig nature of so many Asian men: “White men treat us better.”

I don’t think they’re cucked at all, though. Hell no. Their cultures are too piggish to get cucked, and that is something I respect about Asian men very much. For White men, cuckdom was sadly a pretty natural fit after decades of Beta-ization by White feminized and feminist culture. Black and Hispanic men will be very late to cuckdom too, if they ever go over at all.

The Asian, Black, and Hispanic men will be some of last men to be felled by feminist societal lumberjacks sawing down the titans of patriarchy to go crashing down into the woods where the former giants lie in pathetic Betatude on the floor of the world to be walked over by any and all who stroll their way.

Alt Left: Updated: How the Armed Colombian Left (the FARC and the ELN) Came to Be

I just updated this post with a lot of information about the assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán in 1948 which led to the massive riots called The Bogotazo, after which a decade of mass killings called La Violencia took place. The assassination of Gaitan, even more than the banana workers strike, jump-started the movement of the armed Colombian Left in the form of the Colombian guerrillas.

In 1948 in Colombia, a very popular presidential candidate, Jorge Eliécer Gaitán of the Liberal Party, was assassinated for the same reason that given for the overthrow of Arbenz of Guatemala seven years later. The Liberal Party was one of two fascist parties of the oligarchy, along with the Conservative Party. See below for more on them.

The Liberal Party was anything but. Yet Gaitán was an interesting figure, part of a socialist movement in the party who advocated very popular candidate who promised major changes in Colombian society a battle against social, political, and economic inequality. He was also a feminist who advocated the uplift of the status of Colombian woman in society. In addition, he broached the subject of land reform, a hot button issue in Colombia.

In fact, as in so many other places in Latin America such as Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador, the endless Leftist guerrilla war against the government is more of a fight over land than anything else. To this day, the Colombian oligarchy has refused to do a land reform, in part because this is where most of their money comes from.

Even Venezuela has had only partial success at a land reform, as it has proven too difficult to break up the big estates or latifundias. Instead, since much of the land lies idle and fallow, peasants have conducted land invasions of fallowed land in the latifundias, which has resulted in a lot of conflict.

Death squads funded by the latifundia oligarchs have murdered over 150 peasant leaders since Chavez came in over the last 20 years. Parts of the Chavista Movement have been aligned with the rural rich for whatever reason, and they have been involved in repressing these peasant movements also.

He was murdered by the Colombian oligarchy or ruling class, which has stayed in power by mass murder for 75 years now. They were even massacring people earlier, as there was a mass slaughter of striking workers at banana plantations in the northwest in a place called La Magdalena in 1928.

Even this early, the US was waging a Cold War against the USSR. The US became very alarmed by the strike, as the plantations were owned by the US United Fruit Company. United Fruit and the US government described the strikers as subversives and Communists. The US threatened to invade if the strike was not put down by the Colombian government.

Under orders from United Fruit, the Colombian military attacked the workers. Many striking workers were killed. The event was memorialized by Gabriel Garcia Marquez in his famous novel 100 Years of Solitude. The event was a watershed in Colombian politics, as an actual Colombian Left was formed around this time.

Gaitan was an excellent speaker and his rallies drew large crowds of union members and poor people. He was characterized as a demagogue, like Juan Peron, who was already rising to power in Argentina. He was also a budding nationalist. He was criticized by the Conservative Party, the right wing of the Liberal Party, and even the Communist Party, which regarded him as a competitor for the interests of the workers.

In 1933, he split with the Liberal Party and formed the Unión Nacional Izquierdista Revolucionaria (National Leftist Revolutionary Union). In 1946, he proposed a Gaitanista Program. It advocated many things:

Development agencies for the advancement of the social, political, and economic advancement of peasants in the countryside. Policies to redistribute wealth in Colombia. Nationalization of public services, a progressive income tax, and the development of a national economy. A land reform and new pro-labor laws.

In terms of foreign policy, it advocated an economic union of Latin American countries so they could serve the interests of their people instead of that of the oligarchies and foreign carpetbagging corporations. His project could be best described as anti-plutocratic and anti-imperialist.

He was assassinated in 1948 by a “lone gunman,” Juan Roa Sierra, along the lines of Lee Harvey Oswald. Two ex-CIA agents have confessed that it was really the CIA that was behind the operation. The assassin took orders from two named CIA agents and the assassination plan was called Operation Pantomime.

This was probably one of the first of countless assassinations of liberal and leftwing figures the world over by the CIA undertaken as part of the Cold War. Sierra visited Gaitan in his office in  the morning and at 1 PM, he shot Gaitan dead.

An enraged mob then set upon Sierra, who was protected by an Army colonel. He was chased to a store where  he holed up. The mob smashed into the store and dragged him outside. He was beaten and stabbed so many times that his corpse was unrecognizable.

At the time of his assassination, a meeting of the Pan-American Conference led by US Secretary of State George Marshall. At this meeting, all members of the group agreed that fighting Communism was their number one concern.

The despicable Organization of American States or OAS, a fake organization of Latin American countries that is actually run by the US and serves to promote the interests of the US and its neo-colonies in Latin America.

At the same time, the Latin American Youth Congress was taking place. It been organized by Fidel Castro of Cuba and was funded by Juan Peron of Argentina. A young Gabriel Garcia Marquez was a law student at the time and was eating lunch at the time  Gaitan was killed. He rushed to the scene and arrived just in time to see Sierra lynched by the mob. He memorialized the event in his book, Living to Tell the Tale.

It is possible that Gaitan, like Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray, was a patsy for an assassination carried out by the US Deep State in the case of the former and by the FBI itself in the case of Ray.

Gaitan suffered from schizophrenia, could not fire a gun properly, the gun in his hand was not capable of firing accurately, and he was standing quite a distance away from Gaitan while the murder occurred at a short distance. Further, Sierra was not seen anywhere near the assassination. The first time  he was spotted, he was in between two police officers.

The Colombian government quickly blamed the USSR and the Colombian Communist Party for the murder. They also tied in the young Fidel Castro with the plot. This version seems very unlikely.

Notice that this CIA assassination took place under “liberal Democrat” Harry Truman.

The murder of this candidate was followed by a wild  riot known as the Bogotazo. Many of the rioters were armed and the riots left much of downtown Bogota in ruins. The riots left 1,800 people dead. This was part of a larger reign of violence in the countryside which had started in 1930. By 1948, Bogota was full of peasants fleeing the violence in the countryside.

The Bogotazo led eventually to La Violencia, a truly crazy 10 year period from 1954-1964 in which Liberals and Conservatives, which ideologically are both simply fascist parties, with the Liberals masquerading as social democrats to the extent that they are even members of the Socialist International, massacred each other in huge numbers for no particular reason at all.

The Liberals and Conservatives typically trade off running the country. Although they hated each other to the point of slaughtering hundreds of thousands of each other, the odd thing is that despite their names, ideologically and in governance, there is little difference between. They are both far rightwing parties of the oligarchy.

The armed Left in the form of the ELN, which was created in 1964, theorizes that La Violencia was simply a way for the elite to slaughter the politically active working class.

After La Violencia ended in 1964, a small group of people tired of being massacred settled in some property in West-Central Colombia and declared themselves a semi-autonomous republic. They were also heavily armed. They said that and armed themselves mostly to keep from being massacred. And they did set it up as a “Communist republic” but it was only a small patch of land of no particular consequence and the group’s numbers never numbered greater than 200.

They named this place Marquetalia. Manuel “Sure Shot” Marulanda, the leader of the FARC for the next 40 years, was one of the founders of this commune. The Colombian government became very alarmed that 200 people had called themselves Communists and settled some lands that they freaked out and called for Uncle Sam to come help.

This was under the “liberal Democrat” Johnson Administration. The US also became very alarmed and we sent several generals and a troop of Green Berets down there.

At this time, the Green Berets were advising the Guatemalan government in putting down a Left insurgency that began there in 1960. They put it down via massacres of the civilian population. There’s nothing noble about the Green Berets. They’re simply the US government version of a Latin American death squad.

Anyway, a significant army detachment was mobilized and Marquetalia was attacked with US advisors by their side. There are suggestions that the US and Colombia even used chemical weapons against the commune.

The Marquetalians fought back but were defeated, suffering many casualties. The survivors retreated into the mountains of Colombia. These are really mountain jungles as the mountains are covered in a jungle-like near-rainforest and it’s impossible to find anyone or anything in there.

There they decided that all peaceful attempts at change, including setting up a semi-autonomous commune, were impossible, so they could either sit in the villages and wait for the government to come murder them or they could take up arms so they could at least fight back when the army and death squads came.

The group was called the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), and they are still active to this day, 56 years later. At one time around 2000, they controlled ~50% of Colombia and formed an actual threat to the regime.

The ELN (National Liberation Army) was formed at the same time, in 1964, in Eastern Colombia under obscure circumstances that I’m not aware of.

The original philosophy was Liberation Theology and their leader was Camilo Torres, the original “priest with a machine gun.” Liberation theology can be thought of as “Jesus with a machine gun” and in fact there are murals in Latin America showing exactly this. The idea is that Jesus supported “the preferential option for the poor” and that even armed struggle to achieve this goal was not only valid but very Christian.

One of the original theorists was an educator named Paulo Friere in Brazil who published a famous book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed – also published in the same year that the ELN and the FARC were formed in 1964 -along these lines, advocating a liberation theology component to be the focus of the curriculum in Latin America. Theologian Gustavo Gutierrez could be considered the father of Liberation Theology. He wrote a book called The Theology of Liberation around this same time.

To this day, although the ELN are Leftists, they are still officially a Christian organization and they have many supporters among the Catholic clergy in Colombia, as does the officially atheist FARC.

Repost: A Look at the Cluster B Personality Disorders: Narcissistic, Psychopathic, Borderline and Histrionic Personality Disorders

This is an old post that people are commenting on. I just reread it and it’s so good that I thought it was good for a repost. I’m actually shocked at how good it is. I’m reading it and I’m thinking, “Wait. I wrote this? No way, forget it. I’m not that good.” But maybe so, eh?

Rahul: Have you met someone with multiple Cluster B personality disorders?

Nope. I have never even met one person with a diagnosed Cluster B disorder, much less multiple ones. Each disorder is its own syndrome, and I doubt if many people get diagnosed with multiple Cluster B disorders.

But I have met people who I thought were psychopaths or had psychopathic traits or Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD).

I’ve met people with obvious Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD).

I’ve never met anyone with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), but I have met people who I believe had it, and my friends and relatives knew people who had it.

I’ve never met a Histrionic Personality Disorder (HPD) or anyone who I thought had it.

These are the “Insufferable Asshole/Total Fucking Bitch” Personality Disorders. They can also be called the “Satanic Monster Straight from Hell” Disorders. For the most part, from my vantage as an introvert, most all of these people are anywhere from lousy to out and out horrible people. All the men are assholes. And all the women are psychobitches.

The common denominator in the Cluster B disorders is drama and chaos. All of these disorders generate large amounts of both. Another common trend is profound selfishness or self-centeredness. A lot don’t care much about most other people. And even when they do, they typically don’t treat them very well.

Cluster B types are extremely crafty, and many hazy Borderline women with Borderline traits without the full disorder are able to function quite well in society, albeit their personal lives are typically mired in drama and chaos, the two hallmarks of BPD.

These women are called “High-Conflict Women,” and they are literally everywhere, walking landmines stalking our society in plunging necklines and yoga pants. They’re bait, the flashing lure of the femme fatale darting through the human current, daring you to bite.

A female psychologist runs a website warning men about these psychobitches. The page I saw ran to 500 pages. These women typically hook up with good, decent, nice men. These men are very good people. I suppose you could call them nice guys except that the term has been so abused nowadays. These bitches attach to these men like remoras and literally suck the life out of them like any parasite does.

The therapist states that there is basically no cure for High-Conflict Women, or if they do get cured, you never know when it might happen, so you should not hang around suffering for a day that may never come. Recovery, if at all, may be decades into the future.

Why they attach to these good, kind, decent men is unknown, but they probably think these guys are suckers or doormats for their abuse. Face it, very few hard masculine men are going to cotton to these harridans. These women don’t end up with typical macho men because most of these guys would probably just kill these fucking bitches.

These Cluster B types can be very crafty and are often able to control their behavior very well. They are like the boss who sucks up to her superiors and then turns around and beats up her underlings.

Many Cluster B’s are “controlled” Cluster B’s such as “controlled psychopaths,” etc. The controlled psychopath type spends their life riding on the edge of the law, sometimes barely slipping over. Yet old studies show that most psychopaths never spend a day in a jail or prison. Instead they are what I would call “legal criminals.” They’re slippery as eels and oily as kerosene.

“Legal criminals” as in, say, our President for instance, who is absolutely a case of severe NPD. In fact he has a malign variety of NPD called Malignant Narcissism, the most extreme type of NPD. This is narcissism that has gone so far off the rails that it is moving out of narcissism and heading off towards psychopathy.

One famous clinician from the psychoanalytic days described Malignant Narcissism as “pure evil.” Indeed, a few serial killers have been Malignant Narcissists. I think the best diagnosis for Ted Bundy is not psychopathy but Malignant Narcissism, and I am not alone.

So our great MAGA president has literally the exact same mental disorder as Ted Bundy has. Let that sink in. Donald Trump is Ted Bundy. Granted, Trump is a controlled variety, a “legal criminal,” and Bundy was a severely uncontrolled variety, but they both have the same disorder.

Oh one more thing. It is universally acknowledged among clinicians that if Malignant Narcissists are anything, they are dangerous. Every one of them, no exceptions. So Mr. Trump is a dangerous man, but most Americans can probably figure that out by now.

The two disorders, narcissism and psychopathy, are on a continuum, with one view having psychopathy as an extreme version of narcissism.

Histrionic PD has typically been thought of as “psychopathy in the female.” This is correct as psychopathy in women is not nearly as bad as it is in men, and it typically results in this lousy woman called “the whore.”

Indeed, 45% of all female prostitutes are diagnosed psychopaths, which should not surprise you if you know anything about these women. Most prostitutes are a step away from being out and out thieves, and quite a few of them actually are small time thieves. A thief and a whore, same thing in my book! But the thievery occurs in the context of sex and a lot of alcohol and drug abuse, and charges are rarely filed.

They’re the bitches you go out on a date with, and when it’s over, you are $50 poorer (which you had no intention to spend – she just weaseled it out of you), and you didn’t even get laid. And yes, that sentence is autobiographical.

An argument has been made recently that BPD is simply psychopathy in the female. Traditionally it was thought of as “narcissism in the female.” Men get NPD, women get BPD, but it’s the same disorder just presenting differently between the sexes. As I alluded above, HPD has often been thought of as “psychopathy in the female.” Men get psychopathy, women get HPD,  but once again it’s the same animal varying by gender. This HPD female psychopath is the femme fatale or the basic “whore” personality.

They’re bad human beings, but psychopathy in the male is so much worse because psychopathic men are so much more physically dangerous, whereas women are not particularly violent physically. Psychopathic men cause far more damage to society than psychopathic women do. Women can be verbally and spiritually violent, and they can kill a man’s soul if he doesn’t toughen up enough, but they are typically not physically violent. Women almost seem to have an inborn aversion to physical violence. They nearly recoil at the mention of it.

Whores just lighten your wallet, often unsuspectingly. Male psychopaths, at least the uncontrolled type, are often literally monsters who commit a tremendous amount of aggression; abuse other humans wantonly, callously, and habitually; and feel not one iota of guilt about any of it. A female psychopath might take your money, but a male psychopath might take your life.

Cluster B folks are extremely manipulative, so they are often able to hide their disorder while at work. Narcissists are experts at this, and psychopaths are always hiding their illness by the very nature of the condition. They don’t call it the “mask of sanity” for nothing. Poor functioning BPD’s often cannot work at all. But some very bad ones are able to control the illness the whole time they are at work, yet the minute they get home, the psychobitch comes out to play, and they abuse, manipulate, gaslight, and generally drive insane any other main person in their lives, typically a husband or boyfriend.

I had a female physician client like this. She had an extremely kind face, and she rescued stray animals, especially cats. She was a good doctor and a model of sanity at the hospital, but the minute she got home, the human black widow spider leaped out and sucked her husband into her devious crazy-making nightmare of a web.

That’s why I don’t have a lot of sympathy for these “Asshole/Bitch Disorders.” When I realized that they could control it completely for eight hours at work only to unleash their terror and entropy the moment they walk into the front door to come home, I lost sympathy for them.

I thought, “They can control it. They’re just choosing not to.” And indeed, most Cluster B’s very much enjoy being horrible. They get a kick out of it.

Narcissists love to be assholey jerks. It’s entertainment to them.

Psychopaths of course live to prey on other humans, often abusing them sadistically for sheer kicks.

BPD women can be profoundly mean, and I think they might get off on being superbitches. They also seem to actually enjoy being crazy. I had a BPD client, the most severe case of BPD I have ever seen, who honestly didn’t want to give up her disorder. I finally concluded that she actually enjoyed being nuts. Maybe it’s exciting? My sister knows BPD’s very well, as she has dealt with many of them as part of an outpatient program she goes to. She affirmed to me that BPD women very much enjoy being crazy.

Female Histrionic PD femme fatales and Mata Hari types exploit, manipulate, connive, con, and in one way or another steal from others, particularly their male partners who are driven to Hell and back. I’ve never known one, but I imagine they get a lot of kicks out of this wild, sadistic, exploitative, and at times psychotic condition. They certainly lead “wild lives.” They probably get about as much fun out of being wicked HPD’s as male psychopaths get out of being sociopathic. Apparently a sociopathic lifestyle is quite a kick.

I believe that what women want most in life is “peak emotional experiences.” So I just answered Freud’s baffled question. The emotions can be good, bad, or ugly; up, down, or all around, this way or that way; forwards, backwards, or standsill. It doesn’t particularly matter.

They’re all peak experiences, either good or bad, and this dramatic feral behavior seems to provide women with what they desire most in life.

If you think about it, women are like drug users. What are “peak emotional experiences?” They are “rushes.” So the woman lives for the rush, up or down doesn’t particularly matter, it’s all wildness and living life to the fullest as they see it.

And what happens when we take drugs? “Rushes.” They can be good, bad, or six ways from Sunday, especially when you get into the hallucinogens, but face it, it’s always a rush one way or another when you are high on dope. Without the rush, dope isn’t even dope. It’s nothing, a handful of leaves, sand, or water in your hands. Dope is literally the rush itself.

Rushes don’t have to be good. Even bad rushes can be good if you like it wild. The fear of the bad trip is part of the rush. Live dangerously. Roll your own cigarettes. Drink your scotch straight. Die with your boots on. These are the ways that men live wild lives, but women have their own version, which is more based on wild emotions themselves as described above.

Bottom line is that Cluster B people get along great in our society because they are extroverted and often successful. Many have excellent people skills. They are expert manipulators and they can get a lot done and achieve a lot of things, albeit sometimes via nefarious means. I would say that our culture itself is essentially a Sociopathic or Cluster B Culture. So America is a Cluster B country then.

Despite their success it’s obvious to me that almost all Cluster B’s are either an insufferable assholes, sheer monsters, or psychobitches from Hell at least part the time if not most of the time. They’re not very nice people, to put it mildly.

But our society likes angry, aggressive, Type A extroverted assholes. We are an “asshole society.” Look at our president. Real close. Trump is is us, me and you and him and her. He’s our reflection in the mirror. He’s all around us every day, everywhere we go. Trump is the quintessential American – the good, the bad, and the ugly, the whole nine yards.

You would think that being a total bitch or a huge raging asshole would get you fired from a few jobs here and there, and sometimes Cluster B’s do lose jobs.

Borderlines can be so disturbed that they can’t work at all.

Almost all narcissists can work and they often rise to high levels in society.

Controlled psychopaths can work and often rise to very high levels. They do tend to get fired more than average, but they usually land on their feet and bounce right back like nothing happened.

Histrionics can definitely work, albeit often at shady jobs. Many prostitutes, porn stars, cam girls, strippers, and so on have Histrionic PD. And if you study the life history of a lot of these women, many of them are lousy people.

Never get involved with a whore or a prostitute. It’s one of the worst mistakes you can make as a man. Some strippers are ok, but even those are often moody and nutty. And they tend to be huge prick teasers. A lot of HPD’s have the callous exploitative character of the prostitute.

A lot of female porn stars seem to be horrible human beings. On the other end, I’ve never known a female porn star. But reading around, many act very bad, and they are often arrested and are in and out of jail, especially after they leave the industry. Many have serious drug problems while working and afterwards. Suicides are surprisingly common. I would not get involved with a porn star if I were you.

Many prostitutes, strippers, and porn stars are low level thieves. Callous, hard, cold thieving bitches. All of these prostitute types are exploitative, mercenary women who regard men as walking ATM’s, and, like all “whore” types, are out to drain your wallet and bank account, run up all your credit cards, and then leave you high and dry, spinning in a circle, feeling like a hurricane just hit you, and thinking, “What was that?” This is exactly the experience many victims of male psychopaths also describe.

Alt Left: Four Types of Transgender People

Interesting post from Claudius about transgenderism. I don’t completely agree with it, but it’s more right than wrong.

Transgenderism is mostly a fad because not all gay men who “transition” become hookers. In fact, many are too ugly and masculine for straight men. These I would call “fad trannies.” Not technically insane though the cult itself is suffering from collective insanity, mostly as a form of political and emotional rebellion against conservatives.

So there are four groups:

  • Gay hookers
  • SJW gay fags
  • Autogynephiliacs
  • The vanishingly small number of people truly suffering from gender dysphoria

The latter two groups are truly insane, but only the last one is deserving of our sympathy and collective medical and legal effort, to wit, they should be legally considered the gender they feel like and actually be encouraged to take hormones and chop off their dick. I doubt even 0.1% of the population would meet the criteria for real gender dysphoria.

Autogynephiliacs should not be legally considered their gender of choice under any circumstances. Why? Because they are straight and thus attracted to the opposite gender. These trannies are potential rapists of women, although I don’t think they pose an overall large threat to anybody save themselves. But you’re right about them having many comorbid paraphilias. These are truly sick fuckers. Look at ContraPoints’s YouTube channel..

“She” is a lesbian tranny. Lolz.

Also note that the first group, gay hookers, don’t chop off their dick. Almost all tranny prostitutes here, in Thailand, or wherever keep their dick because men like to play with it and sometimes be fucked by it. The economic incentive is quite strong, casting doubt as to whether these tranny hookers ever even had gender dysphoria in the first place.

From what I’ve read, men with gender dysphoria are appalled by their own penis and truly want to get rid of it. The prospect of keeping it to make a few bucks on the side by forming non-emotional relationships with straight men doesn’t add up.

RL: It seems to be an extreme form of homosexuality, and their brains are actually female-shifted. That is, they don’t have female brains or male brains.”

I didn’t know this. Interesting. It matches up with what I said. They are just super-duper gay. I like these trannies. They seem very nice, albeit a bit gold-diggerish, but whatever. I could be friends with these people.

Psychotic autogynephiliacs like ContraPoints or Caitlyn Jenner who killed someone with “her” SUV while escaping paparazzi, Hell no! BTW it was an accident, the SUV crash, but still.

Alt Left: Repost: 35,000 White Women A Year Are Raped by Blacks!

This was posted quite some time ago, but it’s getting some new comments, so I thought it might be time for a repost. Feel free to let us know what you think.

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 rapes of White women a day 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.

First of all, it looks like Black men may commit 233,000 rapes a year. Of those, yes, 35,000 are White women. But almost all of the rest – 198,000 of them – are Black women. And if there are 100 rapes of White women a day by these men, there are 638 rapes of women period by these same men. So Black criminals commit 100 rapes of White women a day, but they also commit 538 rapes of Black women per day.

Which seems to be the greater problem? It looks like a lot of Black criminals just like to rape women period! Any women out there wandering around in society may get raped by them. And if Black men are such a danger to White women that they must be kept away from them, aren’t they an even greater danger to Black women? Shouldn’t Black women be protected from these men too?

The rape of a White woman by a Black man is no worse than the rape of a Black woman by a Black man. You can’t say we have to protect one set of victims while leaving the much larger set of victims to their fate. For better or for worse, we all have to bear the brunt of possible victimhood simply by living in a free and fair society. Anyway, even if we protected White women from Black rapists, I assure you that there are plenty of White rapists out there who would gladly take up the slack and rape these women themselves.

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 and other non-Black women are 15% of the victims.

If these rapists were simply picking women of these two races at random to rape, 64% of their victims would be White women, and only 13% 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.

Masculine and Feminine Characters: An Inquiry into Essential Forms

I published this earlier but I may as well republish it. Let me know what you think.

Masculine and Feminine Characters: An Inquiry into Essential Forms

By Robert Lindsay

In June 1903, the Austrian philosopher Otto Weininger published a great book called Sex and Character – A Fundamental Investigation. He was 23 years old, a mere boy. The book did not receive negative reviews, but it caused little interest either.

Weininger was attacked Paul Julius Mobius, who accused Weininger of plagiarism. Depressed, Weininger left for Italy. He returned to his parents’ house in late September and stayed there for five days.

On October 3, 1903, Weininger checked himself into the building where Beethoven had died, now a small inn. At 3 AM the next morning on October 4, Otto Weininger pointed a pistol at his chest and put a bullet in his heart.

Weininger’s dramatic death quickly made him a cause célèbre in Vienna, inspired several imitation suicides and roused quite a bit of interest in the book.

It was roundly praised, even by Sigmund Freud. Freud had met Weininger the year before. Freud stated that Weininger has a striking air of “genius” about him. Ludwig Wittgenstein also praised the book and stated that it was an influence on his early writings. It was also praised by August Strindberg and even James Joyce

Weininger’s book created quite a stir, and Weininger has been accused of being both a misogynist and a Jewish anti-Semite or self-hating Jew. Both characterizations are probably innacurate.

Nearly 100 years later, Weininger’s book still has its champions, while his reputation has suffered in the era of the Political Correctness and the Cultural Left in the West. Nevertheless, Weininger’s place on the canon of great philosophers seems secure.

Weininger felt that there were two essential characters in human beings, the masculine aspect and the feminine aspect. He felt that both aspects were present in all humans.

In the chart below, I lay out scores of human characterological variables and how the Masculine and Feminine Characters represent each one.

The first five variables are by Otto Weininger, but the last 56 are by me. Please note that I don’t necessarily agree with Weininger’s five variables in total, only that it is a good starting place. I have also used the terms Masculine Principle and Feminine Principle to refer to these terms.

Characters         Masculine*           Feminine* 


Principles

Activity             Active                 Passive

Consciousness Conscious           Unconscious 

Thinking           Objective            Subjective

Genius              Yes                      No

Productivity      Productive         Nonproductive

Awareness          Conscious Mind    Unconscious Mind

Energy               Generative           Receptive

Mind                  Thinking               Feeling

Emotion             Stoic                    Moody

Tactile                Callous                Sensitive

Humor               Slapstick              Irony

Weather             Calm                   Unsettled

Temperature       Cold                    Warm

Graph                Linear                  Scatterplot

Empathy            Poor                     Rich

Pain                   Inflict                   Receive

Confrontation     Forward                Withdrawal

Reaction            Contemplative       Reactive

Style                 Deliberative           Unthinking
 
Intensity            Concentration        Distraction

Denial style        Projection              Fantasy

Egotism style      Narcissism            Histrionic

Pathology           Sociopath              Borderline

Defense             Anger                    Denial

Ego desire          Expansion              Dissolution

Destructive         Other                    Self 

Annihilation        Totalizing               Self only

Depression         Projection              Introjection

Survival             Self                       Others

Reliance             Self                       Others

Criminality         Dangerous             Petty thief

Psychopathy      Violent menace       Prostitute

Compassion       Indifference            Mercy

Wakefulness      Aware                     Unaware

Alertness           Wide Awake            Sleepwalking

Planning            Methodical              Conspiring

Morality             Strict                      Contingent

Aggression         Direct                     Subterfuge

Violence             External                  Internal

Warfare              Bully                      Victim

Hierarchy            Dominant               Submissive

Force                  Blunt                      Subtle

Texture               Harsh                     Smooth

Resistance           Extreme                 Yielding

Linear                 Straight                  Jagged

Presentation        Forthright               Devious

Surface               Clear                      Opaque

Understand         Simple                    Complicated
 
Logic                  Linear                      Circular

Analysis              Logic                       Intuition

Strategy             Straightforward         Wily 

Movement          Stiff                          Flowing

Grain                 Coarse                      Fine

Essence             Sky                           Earth

Instrument         Blunt                        Subtle

Transport           Highway                    Stream

Route                A to B                       Roundabout

Tour                  Autobahn                  Scenic route

Flight                Soar                          Flutter

Hobby               Monomania                Dilettante

Truths               Multiple                     Singular

Theory              Branching                  Obsessive

Fact                  Durable                     Momentary

Interpretation    Nonpersonal              Personal

Manichean         Grey area                 Black and White

Systematics       Categorizing             Noncategorizing

Science             Empirical                  Intuitive

Philosophy         Tough                      Dream State

Ubermensch      More common           Less common

Body                 Hard                        Soft

Tissue               Sinewy                     Fatty

Signal               Weathervane            Antenna

Telepathy           Poor                        Mindreader

Broadcast          Subwoofer                Subliminal 

Travel                Itinerary                   Lark  

Decision            Plotted                      Whimsy

Confusion          Certainty                   Perplexed

Party                 Kegger                      Cocktail  

Social                Optional                    Mandatory

Sex                   Compulsion                Choice

Intellectual         Paradise                    Boredom

Bird                   Hawk                        Hummingbird 
 
Birdsong            Crow                         Warbler 

Love                  Auxiliary                    Requirement 

Danger              Physical                     Psychological 

Grudge              Discard                      Retain  

Jealousy            Weak                         Strong

Armistice           Reconciliation             Cold Peace

Storm               Thunderstorm             Spring Shower

Bipolar              Mania                         Depressive

Alt Left: Civilized and Less Civilized Cultures: Differences in Impulsiveness, Forward Planning (Thinking Ahead), and Deferment to Higher Orders of Logic

Polar Bear: Of course, letting women dominate men is worse. Men should play the role of loving father to women but be damn sure not to let her hold the reigns.

Men have to dominate. Or at least they have to be seen as dominant. Or at the very least, as masculine. One thing I will never do is seriously insult a man’s masculinity. I won’t call a man gay either. I never do that. I don’t call men faggots, even if they are. If they are, it’s just mean, and I don’t torment homosexuals. If they’re not, no matter how wimpy they are, they might attack me. Any man, if you call him a homosexual or attack his masculinity and say he’s not a man, is liable to hit you, or perhaps worse. It’s a perfectly natural, normal, logical, and sensible reaction.

That it’s illegal doesn’t matter. A lot of perfectly normal and sensible reactions are highly illegal. Quite a few of them might land you in prison for life. That’s why you don’t act normal and sensible all the time. At times we must submit to a higher law or at least a higher level of logic. Of course it’s logical to assault or even kill a man who attacks your masculinity or calls you gay! What could be more reasonable than that? On the other hand, if we do that, then a higher level of logic comes in – the logic of the law and society.

And in this case the logic of the law and society trumps the logic of the primal man of which we are no longer. The higher logic says that if we do that, we will probably get caught and sent to jail or possibly prison, maybe for a long time. So in this case, the higher logic predominates.

Probably the main difference between civilized societies and less civilized or uncivilized societies is that the more civilized societies, men tend to defer to the higher law more often.

In a more primitive society a man simply acts on his whims as the primal man inside of him demands. There are few or no higher orders of society or law to constrain him. This is why you see so much crime, violence, homicide, and general disorder in such places. Too much primal, low-level thinking and not enough civilized, higher-level thinking.

This also has to do with impulsiveness. In less civilized places, people are more impulsive. One of the best things that civilization brings is a decrease in impulsiveness. Instead of just getting an impulse and acting on it, people in more civilized places tend to think it over, at least a bit, before they decide whether to act on it or not.

They think, “Suppose I act on this impulse, what will happen then?” If something bad will happen to them if they act on the impulse that is worse than acting on the impulse, then they often will not act on it. This is called forward thinking, thinking ahead, planning, or thinking for tomorrow.

The less civilized people are, the less they think of tomorrow. They can think maybe 24 hours ahead and that’s it, if they can even think for that long. Increased forward planning and thinking ahead is associated with more civilized peoples. Perhaps the most civilized people on Earth, the Asians, think ahead not just in terms of years or even decades, but in terms of centuries or even millennia! Compare that to an Amazonian jungle tribe, perhaps the least civilized people on Earth, where no one thinks beyond the next 24 hours, if that long.

Women Have a Hard Time Believing the Truth about Men Because the Truth Will Break Their Hearts

With a lot of us men, even those of us who may be wimpy, soft, or not particularly masculine, it’s as much of an insult to attack our masculinity as it is any he-man, but people can’t seem to figure that out. That’s probably because our internal sense of ourselves as masculine men is different from the image we are putting out there to the world. I’ll wager that most men have an internal view of themselves as masculine men no matter what they act like on the outside.

Women will never understand this, but none of them ever understand men very well anyway. I will say that after age 40, a lot of women start growing a brain and finally figuring us out. I guess after decades of observation, the trends become clear. I think the problem is that we men are not a pretty picture in a lot of ways.

The truth about us men is cruel, brutal, unpleasant, awful, and very hard to swallow. Further, it smashes a lot of women’s fairy tale dreams about us. They want to love us but they can only love us if we fit this fairy tale dream world version of ourselves they’ve set up. The truth about us would crush their dreams and break their hearts. A lot would probably just go lesbian separatist. I think by age 40, a lot of women have just decided that they’re heterosexual, they love us no matter what, that we do have our good sides, at least collectively, and they just accept reality. Men are men, sad but true.

Why Do Goodlooking Men Tend to Have Goodlooking Male Friends?

Why have so many of my male friends so often very goodlooking men? I don’t get it. When younger, I was said to be very goodlooking myself, and I think there may be a tendency for goodlooking men to befriend each other and seek each other out, not because they are secretly gay like the SJW scum and the gay solipsists would say but because birds of a feather and all that.

Do beautiful women tend to have beautiful friends too?

Plus, a goodlooking friend helps you get women. Not only that but if two goodlooking guys are out together, it’s quite possible that you might meet two pretty girls who just maybe want to go off with both of you! It’s happened to me a few times, though I have to admit it’s pretty weird because there’s a tendency to all end up naked together in the same house, even worse room, and worst of all, bed. Not that that’s bad per se, but like I said, it puts you on the spot, and you better perform or else, dammit. I don’t like being put on the spot performance-wise like that. I’ve never been a group sex type, not even a threesome guy.

Closest I ever got was two couples on a bed at once, but we didn’t swap. We each fucked one hottie and watched the other guy fuck the other hottie. It was in a mansion of some Hollywood hotshot guy we were house-sitting for the weekend.

The “Happy Place” for Women is Femininity and Submissiveness

Women really get off sexually on submission, even to the point of enjoying what boils down to degradation and humiliation during sex. One could argue that calling women degrading names is degrading or humiliating behavior, but women sure seem to get off on that. In my experience, it seems to turn them into raving, wild-eyed, half-psychotic, cum-drunk nymphos.

Not to mention the popularity of a lot of sex acts. Sucking cock, getting fucked in the ass (and maybe even getting fucked period), and the popularity of newer acts like slapping, spanking, hair-pulling and especially facials, spitting and choking seem to be obviously degrading and humiliating if not outright misogynistic sex acts. Nevertheless, women are taking to all this new perverted sex like fish to water or at least a lot of them are anyway.

It’s like they hit their sweet spot. Femininity and submission are the sweet spots for women. Once they settle in and get comfortable, they’ve found their happy place. With men, it’s masculinity and dominance. Men who are not very masculine are usually not very happy. Anyone ever noticed that?

As are bitchy, ball-breaking women who domineer sadistically over their cowering husbands. There seems to be an essential unhappiness about them too. There’s also the tendency of the men to rebel and also the idea that they are solidifying the limitation that only wimps will be interested in them, as any real man would just kill the bitch LOL. Besides, even most women like that have an interior submissiveness that they really get off on if they’ll only let themselves succumb to it. Trust me, I’ve met enough of these bitches to know.

Black Women Would Do Well to Act Less Masculine and More Feminine

Alpha Unit: Generally, Black American culture is more accepting of directness and confrontation than middle-class White American culture. Whites seem more conflict-averse. Of course, being confrontational can be self-sabotaging in a lot of situations. Plenty of Black women know this (or find out the hard way).

That excess testosterone they have doesn’t exactly help matters. I wonder if a testosterone-lowering drug came out, would Black women take it? The only benefit it gives women is an increased sex drive, but lowering Black women’s sex drive to the level of White women’s would not be a catastrophe for them, as a lot of White women are slavering insatiable nymphomaniacs. The whole idea of taking a drug for this problem might be insulting to Black women though.

I’ve long thought that the less masculine and more feminine and even submissive that Black women act, the better off they will be.

I can’t see why any human would get off on being submissive. I sure don’t. But it seems to be an essential aspect of the Feminine Character as opposed to the Female Character (notice how many gay men get off on being bottoms as opposed to tops) and especially in terms of sexuality.

A Look at Transmen and “Lesbian” Transwomen

RL: It seems to be an extreme form of homosexuality, and their brains are actually female-shifted. That is, they don’t have female brains or male brains.”

Claudius: I didn’t know this. Interesting. It matches up with what I said. They are just super-duper gay. I like these trannies. They seem very nice, albeit a bit gold-diggerish, but whatever. I could be friends with these people.

I like the real, true, pure trannies too. I’ve heard this group makes up 11% of the tranny population. The other 89% are all autogynyphiliacs, and yes, they are statistically more dangerous to women than CIS men. In one cohort, I think over half of them had a record for sex crimes! I’m serious. They put them in women’s prisons, and a number of them have raped women in there. They go to women’s shelters when they are homeless and tend to make the real women really uncomfortable.

The lesbian trannies are a pretty large group because most of the autogynyphiliacs are straight or at least bisexual. So a lot of this group are attracted to women and call themselves lesbians, except real lesbians absolutely despise them and say they are creepy men pretending to be women. These real lesbians even lead movements against the lesbian trannies, for example, a number of the radical feminist TERF’s are like this.

The lesbian trannies has started to rail against the “cotton ceiling,” by which they mean the real female lesbians who refuse to date the fake female tranny lesbians. They’ve even held demonstrations against this ceiling, and they like to crash lesbian and ultra-feminist gatherings (same thing).

The Michigan Womyn’s Festival, for example, a radfem feminist gathering of mostly lesbian women, got invaded by lesbian trannies a while back. They cracked down hard on them a couple of years ago, and now all lesbian trannies are banned from the festival. I have no idea about how the women running the festival feel about transmen.

A lot of TERF’s feel sorry for transmen and say they are victims of patriarchy, which makes it so miserable to be a woman that a lot of women just say, “Screw it. I’m going over to the enemy. I’m going to be a man and cash in on all the male privilege.” Because of course any problems a woman has with anything on Earth are clearly the fault of us men, right?

Except most real men are probably not real fond of transmen. I’ve known a few of them and even talked to a couple and am even considering fucking one if she still has a womanly body.

A lot of transmen are straight women and when they go tranny, they call themselves gay men. The ones who become really masculine usually end up getting fucked by regular gay men, who don’t seem to care that transmen mostly still have vaginas. To gay men, it’s just a gay man with a vagina. Big deal. Gay guys will screw anything anyway, and this looks enough like a man for them, so they’re down.

The really masculine transmen often have their tits chopped off, which sickens me, and their faces develop a male appearance. They often get a lot of facial hair hair all over their bodies too. So it looks like a dude with a pussy basically.

A lot of them are horny as Hell and looking to get fucked by anyone, mostly guys I guess, but most men seem to be doing a hard pass on these freaks. I sure as Hell would. I wouldn’t fuck a guy with a pussy with a ten foot pole and an 11 foot extension. I’m homophobic as it is in the true sense of the word and that would feel so gay to me, I just could not handle it. It would feel like fucking a guy, and that would set off my homophobic alarm pretty bad.

The Drive to Annihilation in the Masculine (Homicidal) and Feminine (Suicidal) Characters

The Annihilatory or Destructive Drive at the Core of the Human Character

Both males and females have a drive to destruction as part of their core Characters. This is obviously a downside of any human’s character, but both the Masculine and Feminine  Characters are probably 50% good and 50% bad. Think of the good side as the bright side of the moon you see at night. The bad side of the Character is like the dark side of the moon and hopefully it acts like it. You know full well it’s there even though you never see it.

At other times you see it in spades, and many people, especially as they get older, turn the mirror around and only show the back side of it to people. All you see is the bad aspects of the Character. The good side is probably still there in most of them, and you may even see it peek out some of the time.

Both males and females have a drive to destruction as part of their core Characters. This is obviously a downside of any human’s character, but both the Masculine and Feminine  Characters are probably 50% good and 50% bad.

Think of the good side as the bright side of the moon you see at night. The bad side of the Character/Gender is like the dark side of the moon and hopefully it acts like it. You know full well it’s there even there even though you never see it.

The Annihilatory or Destructive Component in  the Masculine Character

In the male the drive to destruction is projected outwards, which is what males do with most destructive emotions. Sending negative emotions inside of yourself is considered to be pussy, weak, female, acting like a bitch, etc. “Manning up” usually means nothing more than projecting your crap outwards as opposed to inwards.

The Masculine Character has a destructive aspect, and it is dark indeed. It is frankly homicidal and most men are homicidal either consciously or consciously or at least they were as boys, when they projected their murderousness onto non-human creatures and converted it to fistfights with the males they are around.

However, it is very hard for a boy to be truly homicidal and murder another human being, either another boy or a man. Something stops them. This is odd because they spend a lot of time killing non-human things like bugs, and they physically fight each other regularly. Yet the fights seldom end in serious damage and always stop short of homicide.

So in the boy, the homicidal impulse is there most of the time, but it is transformed into playing with army men and toy guns, berry and dirt clod wars with other teams of boys (this mirrors small-scale tribal warfare), physical fighting which causes little damage, and murder of non-human lower-level creatures.

Yet as a boy grows into a man he is supposed to abandon this overt destruction and sadism of boyhood, as retaining is seen as acting like a boy, not a man. Such a young man will be told to “Grow up!” by other men. The sadistic boyhood monster begins being berated in adolescence, and at some point the blows may become physical. In this way, the core destructive sadism of the boy is transformed into the calm and controlled man.

Nevertheless, I don’t think the homicidality ever goes away. I spent most of my young adulthood in a homicidal frame of mind, directed at my enemies of course, always other men. Yet I scarcely harmed a soul and only acted on it once when I tried to kill a man who was trying, frankly, to kill me! And that was not fun. It was the worst experience of my life.

So even younger men who feel homicidal most of the time, which is practically normal, will almost never act on it, and if they ever do, they are quickly transported to the 9th circle of Hell. The homicidality is meant to be fantasy only. It’s supposed to go away in middle age, but I suspect that it just goes into hiding. I know my Killer Maniac is in me, as I feel him regularly. Yet he’s locked in a maximum security prison in my gut, and like Hell he will ever feel the light of day.

At its worst, the other-destructive aspect of the Masculine Character is truly black and horrible and actually manifests as a desire to destroy on a significant basis either objects, animals, or other humans. It’s an “obliterating” tendency. At its core, this black desire seems to be a desire to destroy the entire world and everything in it. Truly awful, but no man will come close to realizing it.

Radical feminists have done a good job of portraying the bad side of men, and the best of them have commented precisely about this homicidal character and in particular about its totalizing obliterative tendency. I’ve seen it described as a desire to obliterate the entire universe. That is when I knew that this particular radfem truly had her finger on the male pulse.

The Annihilatory or Destructive Component in  the Feminine Character

Men project their pain outwards onto others, and women push it inwards into the self. This manifests in all sorts of ways that I assume the reader is more than familiar with.

Freud even suggested that the female, at her core, is essentially a masochist. This may be true that the aspect of her destructive character is masochistic. This follows from the description above describing the male, at his core, is essentially a sadist.

Indeed, many women behave in variations of a masochistic manner in bed, and masochism is deeply tied into female sexuality. It’s usually milder than the truly hardcore masochism seem in female submissives, sex slaves, etc. involved in sick relationships with sadistic male dominants or doms, but the BD/SM dynamic is simply the basic male/female human dynamic taken to its logical extreme. Most folks are not BD/SM’ers, but a mild form of it is virtually normal in the sexuality of both genders.

This destructive nature in the female is pushed inwards, hence women are rarely homicidal, and they are terrible killers anyway due to their physical weakness. Further, women seem to have an almost genetic aversion to engaging in physical violence, probably evolved for good reasons.

A woman can and will kill you psychologically, spiritually, and verbally and the results are often severe. But she will probably not kill you.

Whereas another man can murder you at just about any time and place. Most men understand this, hence their cautious, excessively friendly, and solicitous attitude towards other men. The message behind this groveling is usually something like, “Please don’t punch me in the face! Place don’t murder me, sir!” Any man who has not developed a healthy terror of other men will surely die young and will often meet a violent end.

The landscape of love is littered with the broken souls of men who have been frankly destroyed by females in this manner in the course of a relationship. One of the most important things to learn as a man is to toughen up enough so much that it is difficult if not impossible for a woman to commit soul-murder against you, since if you have any success with women at all, some will attempt this.

The more women you get involved with, the more attempts at soul murder are launched against you, hence Chads and Alphas are often quite cynical about women, having seen the bad side of the female in spades (in addition to ample heaps of the good side too). The player simply thinks that the punishments are the price you pay for the considerable rewards. Most players have had quite a few women launch elaborate, often long-term and severe attempts at soul murder against them.

If they can’t tough it out and take it, these men simply stop the playboy game, marry up, and go more or less monogamous. Those still in the game have been targeted many times and have plenty of war stories to tell.

The destructive aspect of the female character then is self-destructive. We see this in elevated rates of depression, eating disorders, self-harm including cutting, and the high rate of suicide attempts. Females attempt suicide five times more than men, but are usually unsuccessful and most attempts are theatrical and not intended to succeed. It’s more of a cry for attention to her pain from others.

But I am convinced that the drive to suicidality is at the core of the Feminine Character. I’ve seen far too many women, even those very close to me, become suicidal at some point in their lives. My own mother was for a while.

At one time very recently, every woman I had dated recently, which added up to four or five, were all either actively suicidal or had recently attempted (usually theatrical) suicide. The attempters were older women age ~50, and the fantasists were younger ones, 18 and 19 year old teenage girls and a 27 year old woman.

I assume the suicidality acquires a more serious and lethal character as the woman ages. Notably, all three of the older women had never had children. Having living children is one thing that keeps many or most women from ending their lives. They are literally staying alive for their children. If a female has no children, she literally has no reason to be on this Earth, such is the intensity of the maternal instinct.

Furthermore, in the women above, I noticed that there seemed to be an actual love of suicidality as if they were in a love affair with this feeling. Hence I came to see it as an “essential drive” in women’s lives. Most women never suicide but the drive is probably there off and on throughout life.

Lesser forms of this include the extreme forms of self-sacrifice women engage in for others which is related to this remora-like attachment they form with others. The extreme attachment may not be for a husband or boyfriend alone but may instead be of the  mother in the case of a teenage girl or for her children in the case of an mother.

The female of many mammal will literally sacrifice her life to save others, most particularly her children. You see this same suicidal destructiveness to defend the offspring from threats in many lower mammals. It is especially prominent and can even be lethal in bears.

It’s even present in lower life forms such as birds. A section of trail in the Sierra Nevada had to be closed because the trail went by a Cooper’s Hawk’s nest, and the female kept dive-bombing hikers and aiming the talons at their heads.

Once I was fishing on the Eel River in California near Dos Rios where they Middle Fork enters the stream. If you ever want to o to a truly beautiful part of the US, go there. Across from me on the other side of the river was a large bird that looked like an eagle. It was extremely agitated the whole time I was there, flying haphazardly in small circles and squawking incessantly. I later figured out that this was a nesting female Osprey. Apparently I was too close to her nest, and this was making her agitated.

The self-destructive nature of the Feminine Character can be tied into the intense attachment they form for others. There are many cases on record in warfare of women avenging the deaths of their men in suicidal charges. A notable one occurred among Taiwanese aborigines when 100 women of a tribe suicidally attacked a Japanese contingent that had killed their men. As they charged, they yelled, “You have killed all of our men, now you will have to kill all of us!” All of the women died, but there may have been some Japanese casualties.

As we see above the female will give her life for others, especially her children or even her husband. Most human mothers will sacrifice themselves for their children or at least they say they will. And they have no fear of the death that will result.

I recently dated an 18 year old girl who had formed a severe attachment to her mother, whom she worshiped with reverence. One time she told me of this elaborate, bizarre fantasy of hers, which involved killing herself, except that the suicide would be done somehow to protect her mother. She seemed to be a state of rapture when she described this plan to me. She was in love with this plan. This desire to kill herself to protect her mother seemed to be one of the most important and beloved themes in her life.

A Core Aspect of the Female Character: Solipsism and Strong Attachment to a Loved Other

Joe Bob: So if females are basically solipsistic, does this mean their natural tendency is to objectify men or see them as mere objects and not as subjects too?

The solipsism at the core of the Female Character is simply the  human drive for self-love or self-centeredness that we all have. Solipsism is the female form of this variable and narcissism is the male form. I think I’d rather deal with a solipsistic female than a narcissitic male though.

In response to the question though, hmm, I’m not sure. They do love us though, I’ll give them that much. They attach to us like remoras and they call this love. This is the most important thing in a woman’s life and in the Female Character. Men can take love or leave it, but for the woman, love is nearly as important as air or water. A woman without love can survive but she is a shell of herself.

The solipsism of the female just means she is all wrapped up in herself. It’s associated with vanity in the sense of staring in front of the mirror for long periods of time, but on the other hand, they also often hate themselves. Look at all the selfies women take and put up on Facebook. Look at how many of them are vainglorious sorts of poses almost like a model or an actress. Women often make faces in these selfies too – sometimes funny faces, but they often display a variety of different emotions in these faces, so these are “emotional portraits” in a way.

This same vanity and vaingloriousness is seen in women’s utter obsession with appearances, particularly their own. They spend huge amounts of time making themselves up, doing their hair in this way or that, adorning themselves with jewelry and wearing all manner of outfits. This sort of obsession with personal appearance is absolutely an aspect of the Female Character.

Females decorate themselves elaborately in every society that has ever been studied. In a way, they are “painting themselves” – they serve as walking painted pictures or portraits and the often see themselves as actual paintings on a wall except that they are moving around and conscious.

They compare themselves obsessively to other women and take what seems to men a near-psychotic obsession for the personal appearance of other women, of which they are more often critical than complimentary – “That hair looks awful!…Why is she wearing that dress?!…Boy she really botched that plastic surgery job, didn’t she?…She’s really let herself fall to pieces – look at how fat she is!”

The obsession comparison with other, combined with commenting on their features in an often harshly critical way, seems to be a way of competing with female rivals. The rivals are for men’s attention because no other sort of rivalry exists in women.

Women compete over men and little else and their competition over men can be absolutely vicious. They specialize and often delight in stealing men away from other men, and frequently do not trust other women around their men because they understand that all women are man-thieves.

Hence if they think they have a prize man (Chad) a woman will become fiercely jealous and protective of him to the point where she doesn’t even want to hear about past women in his life as even some woman from 20 years ago is still somehow fighting her and trying to steal her man away from her. A lot of fighting between women and hatred of women for other women derives directly from this competition for men.

When was the last time you saw a woman point to a picture of a woman and point out how beautiful and perfect she looked? When a woman sees a beautiful woman in a photo, she often gets angry and sees her as a competitor who might better her.

How many times have you had a (young) woman show you a beautiful woman’s photograph and then ask you who is more beautiful, the woman in the picture or the one talking to you?

Don’t fall for it! She will always only be satisfied with being a 10 on a 1-10 scale as anything less than a 10 feels may as well be a 1 to her. There is no possibility of any other woman on Earth being more beautiful than she is and pointing this out is a supreme insult! How dare you say she looks better than I do! Tears or rage may result. There’s no such thing as “Well, you’re both beautiful but she’s a bit moreso is all.” Nope. It’s either win the gold or nothing.

Solipsism is not narcissism. The solipsist cares about other people and the narcissist does not. It’s just that the solipsist simply does not have the time and energy to think (or care much) about others because they are too busy doing the equivalent of staring in the mirror. It’s not that they don’t care about others. It’s more that they have no time or energy to think about it!

A lot of women’s focus is absolutely other-oriented and women often live their lives through others to the point of almost taking on their personalities. A teenage girl may strongly identify with her such that you wonder where the girl ends and the mother begins. And you better not talk shit about her Mom! She will never forgive you.

More traditional women attach themselves to the men they fall in love (in a near-remoralike manner as discussed above). They’re not parasitical as in a remora and their not sucking energy out of the man, although he may feel that she is due to the strength of her attachment. I’ve called girlfriends “Klingons” and “remoras” before.

This hurts their feelings a lot, but if you have a woman like this, you’re in love. She has literally attached herself to you. You’re Chad or you’re Alpha or you’re her dream man in any case and you are experiencing something that many men may never experience.

This often results in “stand by your man” behavior, which is absolutely a core characteristic of the female character, not a patriarchal perversion as feminists insist. Call yourself lucky if you have a stand by your man woman. Rest assured that she adores you. Cherish that moment. It may not come again for some time, as in years.

This also results in “living her life through you” or being “the woman behind the man,” as the traditional woman wishes to be.

A traditional woman will get you up in the morning, fix you up in front of the mirror, direct you to the closet to pick out your clothes for you and maybe even try them on you. She will gladly fix your breakfast and it’s for you, not her.

When you come home, she will sit, fascinated, as you tell her about your day at work. If you talk to her about your work at all, she stops all other functions and listens raptly as if her life depended on it. She will even research your work interests even if she has no understanding of them. That doesn’t matter at all. It will just leave her in awe. Not only does she have Chad, but Chad’s a goddamned genius to boot.

There Is a Strong Link Between Narcissism and Male Homosexuality

Polar Bear: I suspect some are just obsessed with themselves.

The link between male homosexuality and narcissism is as old as Time itself and has been remarked on endlessly. Perhaps many things have basic Characters or Principles, not just the main races or the (only) two genders but also, say, Gay Men and Lesbians. Anyway, there is classic Gay Male Personality that is stable over time. Go back and read the old psychoanalytic literature about Male Homosexuality. They thought it was a mental disorder at the time, in part because it actually does look like one. Instead of a disorder, I think it is a “syndrome.”

A syndrome with some predictable characteristics and a classic personality structure. But those old articles are amazing because they could have been written yesterday. I remember I talked to my paternal grandmother a few times about men. She was born in the 1890’s and died in  the 1990’s. How much does someone who grew up during World War 1 know about gay men. But the things she said about them would have been noted by a sociologist studying West Hollywood in 1984. There’s a basic Gay Male Personality, and it’s relatively timeless like so many things about us two-legged monkeys.

No one quite knows why gay men are so narcissistic. Hypothesis: Gay men have cocks and a male body. Gay men are turned on by cock and male bodies. So gay men are in love with themselves and in a sense, when they fuck, they are literally fucking themselves also?

Curiously, there’s no link between lesbianism and narcissism, possibly because females are just not that narcissistic. The correlate of narcissism in the Female Character is “solipsism.” Until you figure out that females are solipsistic at their core, raw, primal nature, you will always have an incomplete picture of them.

Alt Left: Female Rule, November 2020 Edition

Polar Bear: I’ve tried talking to the tranny I knew as a man. He always used to laugh at my jokes, but now that he’s in a woman’s body, she’ll he seems distracted. A part of him seems not with it or even there.

Female hormones? A lot of women act like that. I call the mindset of the pure, primal Female Character as “dream state.” Not that that’s a bad thing, but you know, someone’s got to take out the trash.

There are societies on Earth that are Matriarchies. I can think of one in Africa of all places.

It’s almost a Utopia. There’s little crime, aggression, or violence. I don’t know if the women doling out sex to calm the guys down or what, but the men are pretty neutered, in a good sense. Everyone’s happy, kicks back all day, endless party and good times, except…not a whole lot gets done. But no one cares about that either because, you know, they’re too busy having fun. Party people would rather play than work. Also, oddly, education is very much de-emphasized and not a lot of learning or progress occurs. But no one cares about that either because, you know, in Utopias, people tend to be irresponsible.

I guess this is what Female Rule looks like in its raw, natural, benevolent form. You can see that it kinda doesn’t work though, even when its pleasant.

I figure Female Rule was tried at various times in the past. Men don’t want to do all the work. I figure a few times they just gave it up and said, “Fine! You ladies don’t like it? You do it!” Hence they had Female Rule. It’s particularly chaotic and dysfunctional in its negative form, and the men start getting pissed off because they’re not allowed to be guys anymore, so it’s really Nature Herself getting angry, not the men themselves.

But it doesn’t even work in its benevolent form. Instead of chaos, it just causes stasis. Men’s brains aren’t likely to cotton to either one.

Hypothesis: Female Rule may well have been tried numerous times in the past. Present day experiments indicate that it clearly doesn’t work, even when it’s kindhearted. Every time in the past, the men probably said, “All right ladies, party’s over! Sometimes you need a man to step in! Now you all hurry along now. We’re taking over. You women got a problem?”

The women all said, “Hell no,” because otherwise the men would have killed them.

And the group went back to Male Rule, whether in its negative or benevolent patriarchal form, because even though Patriarchy doesn’t work that great, it works better than all the alternatives, as they say about democracy. The group developed a tradition that women were great at a lot of things, but running things wasn’t one of them. Hey, women can’t do everything. So Patriarchy, pleasant or not, was instituted and came to be unquestioned.

Here we are the damned 21st Century, probably repeating the same retard experiments of our more primitive past, and we’re doomed to experience the exact same failures of History. Some people never learn.

There are only a certain number of ways to run a human society, and most of the functional ones have already been tried. Yet every new generation thinks it invents the wheel all over again. History is a process. It tends to proceed down paths already trod by our ancestors. Maybe it was done first in Babylonia 3,000 BC,  maybe in 1500’s Venice, or maybe in 1835 New England, but if it’s a form of Politics, no doubt it’s been done before. Forms of Politics tend to proceed in the same way every time every time they play and to the same conclusions as before. Hence their predictive nature.

The Joycean “cyclic view of history” springs from this endless, clockwork-like repetition. Historical processes are as formulative as the seasons and tend to proceed in a familiar and similar cycling form.

There’s nothing (more correctly: not much) new under the sun. Your forefathers were a lot smarter than you think they were. And we’re a lot dumber than we think we are.

Alt Left: More on Trannies, November 2020 Edition

Claudius: They (trannies) are gay hookers fighting for their libertarian right to transition so they can get straight male sugar daddies and clients. It’s a booming business. Just look at Thai ladyboys making a living off sex tourists.

That’s only 11% and it does look like some biological disorder. It seems to be an extreme form of homosexuality, and their brains are actually female-shifted. That is, they don’t have female brains or male brains.

Their male brains are shifted halfway towards the female brain structure, so in the areas where male and female brains differ, these men have brains halfway between male and female brains.

It’s absolutely a biological syndrome and I would give them the right to transition. There’s something clearly off with their brains. Also this type of tranny is very nice and even a lot of the TERF radical feminists don’t like them too much. They’re appalled by the belligerent and menacing behavior of the autogynophile kooks. Also, they love the word tranny. They call each other trannies all the time. They think it’s a funny word. It’s the autogynophile snowflakes that have decided that tranny is some evil bigoted slur that means you’re a Nazi.

But no one is born in the wrong body. No man is born with a female brain and stuck in the wrong male body and no woman is born with a male brain and stuck in the wrong female body. That’s just part of the crazy lying tranny propaganda, but a large percentage of the population actually believes this bullshit.

Claudius: The only crazy trannies are the straight males who are turned on by cross-dressing, the so called autogynephiliacs.

Yeah, but that’s 89% of them. Those are the nuttiest of all of them. They have more mental disorders than any other group we see clinically. They have very high levels of other paraphilias, and they commit sex crimes at a high rate. Many are on area sex offender lists. A fair number of them are actually dangerous.

They are also extremely loud, belligerent, and vindictive and even aggressive and menacing. They have taken over whole corporations. For instance, the Twitter moderation team has been infiltrated by this type of tranny and this person(s) uses their power to ban people from Twitter. We even know their names. This is the guy that got me banned from Twitter for life for telling the truth about trannies:

RL: There’s no such thing as transgender people. They’re all just mentally ill.

That’s what I said. For that crime, I now have a lifetime ban from Twitter thanks to some crazy autogynophile tranny piece of shit.

Do Very Handsome or “Pretty Boy” Men Elicit Odd Feelings From Straight Men?

I used to say men either acted like they wanted to beat me up or fuck me, or sometimes both at the same time.

I was said to be very handsome when young. Actually even young women say I still am (a 23 year old lesbian, of all things, was gushing wildly about my looks the other day), but lot of good it does me at this age.

So maybe this is what goodlooking men get from other men. John F. Kennedy, one Hell of a looker himself, complained that very handsome men are often thought to be homosexuals. And this was in 1960! I guess I’m not the first one who figured this out. None of us are, with anything. Think about it next time you feel like a Goddamned genius.

Perhaps they’re attracted to us a bit on some level and they either project that away: “I’m not gay. You’re gay. I’m not attracted to you. You’re attracted to me, fag! I’m going to kick your ass, faggot!” or they just feel it, “Damn, I’m not even 1% gay, but you sure are sexy! You’re as pretty as woman!” I can’t tell you how many straight men have hit on me. It’s so weird.

It’s like I bring the fag out of men. I still trying to figure out why that is. I don’t mind that much though. When I was young, all the women and girls wanted to fuck me. Unfortunately, all the gay men wanted to fuck me too (even more than the women did), and even some of the straight men wanted to fuck me! I could develop a complex about it, or I could just say, “Dammit, I’m so fucking  hot, everyone wants to fuck me. Women want to fuck me. Everyone wants to fuck me. The whole world wants to fuck me!”

Of course now I’m 63 and no one wants to fuck me. Unless I pay them first, that is, which is really insulting! A young gay man recently informed me that “hot older men like me,” as he put it, are a hot commodity in the gay community. He suggested that if women turned a cold shoulder, I could get a lot of affection from hot young gays looking for a Daddy. I was slightly tempted, but I think I’ll pass. Maybe next lifetime I’ll come back as a fag, and I can make their wishes come true.

I think pretty boy men who look like women and are often as pretty or beautiful as women maybe do elicit a lot of weird feelings from straight men.

After all, straight men aren’t exactly “Chicks turn me on and guys don’t.” They’re more like “things that look and act like women (feminine objects, if you will) turn me on, and things that look and act like men (masculine objects, let’s call ’em) don’t.” Pretty boys, trannys of all sorts, and even gay men join women in the former, and bull dykes join men in the latter.

No man is turned on by a bull dyke, but I’m shocked at how many straight men will have sex with a tranny of some sort. For a long time I thought it was weird, but now I get it. Guys don’t care about cocks. They don’t like cock, but they don’t hate it either. Hell, they even have a cock themselves, and I doubt if many guys hate their own dick!

A tranny is just a woman with a dick! But guys don’t care about dick, so they just pretend it’s not there. Fucking a tranny is about like fucking a woman! Just pretend that cock’s not there, ok? Maybe it’s really the biggest clit you’ve ever seen? Sure, why not. If you have to believe that do it, it makes sense.

Alt Left: Childhood Never Ends: Why Large Groups of Adults Continue To Engage in Childish Games of Sadistic Dominance of Hated Inferiors

Alpha Unit: OK, Jim Crow laws were proposed as a solution to a problem: White Southerners were being ordered to treat newly freed slaves (and free Black people) as equals, when it was clear that newly freed Black people were in no position to live as their equals.

Their solution? Forget all this “equality” stuff; it’s costing us too much. Let’s bring back the old, tried-and-true way we used to do things: Blacks subordinate to Whites and kept in their place. We’ll make sure it’s “legal.”

Occam’s razor. Look for the simplest explanation. This makes the most sense to me. The whole idea that Claudius is putting forward that White folks are just too nice to do this sort of thing, well, nope. Humans have a need to dominate others. The strong dominate the weak and the weak dominate the weaker. See countless works of literature, drama, and cinema, or, Hell, just read Nietzsche if he makes sense to you.

Also there are different types of sadism.

The First Type of Sadism – the Raw Animal Lust for Cruelty and Love of Humiliating Others Seen Most Prominently in Boys

I’m thinking this type is genetic or biological. This is a pure sadism that can be seen in boys, non-human mammals, and in  adults, most especially in Black adults, especially African Blacks (US Blacks have had a lot of it enculturated out of them, but you still see it a lot).

Sure, all the other races display this raw sadism too, especially in times of war, but you see it most prominently in Blacks to the point where some feel it is an essential aspect of the Black Character, Personality, or perhaps, I would argue, Black Principle (if Black is a Principle like Masculine and Feminine are Principles).

This is extremely prominent in Black children, especially boys, and they are much more sadistic than White boys (Yes, I know all boys are sadists). It gets slowly enculturated out of Black boys as they grow up as with most of us males, but you still see it a lot in the ghetto types in young adult men and even women sometimes, where the basic Black Personality is at its rawest and least enculturated.

This is a raw delight in torture, torment, inflicting pain, violence, and even death on a suffering and tormented Other. It includes the love of observing a victim’s suffering.

Of course, you also see this same sadism in young White men (college boys in particular can be terribly cruel), but it’s just not as prominent as in Blacks.

Also, White culture profoundly dislikes displays of childish sadism in White adults. As an man, you’re supposed to have grown out that boyhood crap or had it beaten out of you if you were particularly diabolical.

In some ways, this sadism can be fun. I recall a Black man I knew named Michael. He hung out with this other Black artist, William, who was very introverted and odd. He couldn’t get laid with God’s help. His name was Charles and he had a university degree in art.

The cool guy’s name was Michael and he was a White-acting Black artist with a university degree in art. I was over at a mutual friend’s house and our friend commented that William had a date.

William was a very shy guy with low-self esteem and a hurt and somewhat confused expression on his face. I believe also had a strange high-pitched voice. He was extremely weird but completely harmless, and once you figured out how harmless he was, you mostly just wanted to laugh at him because he was such a nerd that he was a laughingstock, a comical figure.

He also couldn’t get laid with God’s help, even though he was quite straight. I’d never known him to have a girlfriend or even a date. At age 29, he was not only undoubtedly a virgin, but he’d probably never even been kissed.

I was absolutely dumbfounded.

“What?!” I nearly shouted across the room. “No way does William have a date! No way! That’s not even possible! Tell me you’re joking!”

This was a pretty mean thing for me to say, but I can be a dick. The Black guy, Micheal, roared with laughter so hard he nearly rolled on the floor for ten minutes. As you can see, he was laughing his ass off at the cruelty of my comment.

So Blacks can be a lot of fun if you want to get down with some mean, no-holds-barred humor. A lot of humor is cruel – face it – but Whites’ distaste for sadism limits their potential for humor a lot. We see this especially in the dour, party-pooper, no-fun SJW crowd, where every other joke is an evil bigoted crime that someone needs to get fired over.

In many ways, Idi Amin was the ultimate primal Black man. He displayed most of the raw material of the Black personality to an exaggerated degree. Not all of it is bad. He was wildly extroverted, always smiling and happy, had a nearly inborn sense of humor to the point of being a natural humorist, loved to party and have fun, and had a tremendous love of promiscuous sex. Idi Amin was a good time! As long as you were on his good side, that is.

And then there was his bad side, also in spades.

Whites and most other races probably used to be like this too, but centuries of civilization may have bred it out of us culturally and genetically. We can surely see a lot of examples of horrific sadism in Whites and Asians only centuries ago. One argument is that for a thousand years of civilization, most White criminals were quickly killed, often by public hanging. The idea is that this bred a lot of the criminal genes out of us.

Blacks from Africa, never having good through this process of weeding out criminal genes by execution, didn’t experience such a cleansing. On the other hand, perhaps White and Asian cultures have also accelerated so much in civilizational terms that this behavior is enculturated out of us.

That this love of sadism and cruelty appears so normally and freely in boys of all races suggests that it’s still part of the raw human personality. Although the dramatic morally superiority of US Blacks as opposed to African Blacks suggests that 300 years of exposure to White Christian civilization has had a calming, civilizing, and perhaps eugenically intelligence-increasing effect on US Blacks, which argues for the effects a more advanced civilizing culture can have on a population of a less civilized race.

The Second Type of Sadism – The Dominant Lording It Over Their Brutalized Inferior Victims

I’ve thought about this a lot, and there is another sort of sadism, that of the dominant inflicting their sadistic lordly violence against those they see as inferior.

Look at the delighted faces of those German policemen tormenting Jews in the street. You can say it’s revenge, but isn’t it more than that?

Look very closely at the faces of those Whites at those lynchings – boys, girls, men, women. There’s that same look as you saw in those Nazis above: the wicked gleeful look of the dominant bully inflicting torture and/or death at a contemptuously hated inferior. This poor Black sod’s hanging from a tree with his neck broken in a sickening way, and these Whites who look like your nice White relatives at Thanksgiving are having the Goddamned party of their lives.

What was all that habit of calling Black men boys and Black women girls about?

Why were Black children forced to apologize to White children they bumped into by addressing the White children as Mr. or Mrs. as if the White kids were adults and the Black child was still a child?

Why were the schoolbooks given to Black schools the refuse of the White schools – ripped, torn up, wrecked, and coming with a sticker on them saying that they were too destroyed to be of use to White kids, so they were only worthwhile for Black kids?

What was up with the torching of the Black business district in Tulsa?

Why were Black men lynched and murdered for the crime of standing up to White men and fighting back against them, even if the Whites were trying to kill them? In this case, the message was that of the bully: We will attack you in any way we choose, and if you dare to fight back and hurt one of us, you will die.

Why did White children torment their Black “friends” by forcing them, like slaves, to carry the White kids’ books to and from school for them?

Why did White boys manipulate and laugh behind the backs at their Black male friends and encourage them to commit crimes, so if anyone was caught, the Black would take the blame?

Why were Blacks waited on last in stores, and, even after waiting an hour, passed over again if a White person walked in?

Why did Whites whose land had been sold to Blacks long ago return to their land 50 years later and demand that Blacks hand over the sold land to its original owners, or else?

Why did even White women tell Black men who talked back to them, “I could have you hung from a tree just like that.”? See Of Mice and Men – and this was California in the 30s!

This is all nothing but raw, naked cruelty, and furthermore, there’s a brutal logic behind it: the societal enforcement of White dominance and superiority over Black submission and inferiority. That’s all it is. No need to conjure up fancy theories. Back to Occam’s again.

They did all of this abject and unnecessary cruel stuff because otherwise Blacks would commit a lot of crime? Get out. If anything, such treatments are designed to push people to their limits. Look at how Gypsies are (deservedly) treated in Europe? Does it stop them from committing crimes?

No, all of these punishments were done to enforce the sort of gleeful domination you see on the faces of the schoolyard bullies in 8th grade as they torment their designated victims.

And no, adults are not too mature to regress to childish games of sadistic dominance. I’ve seen so many cases of adults the world over delighting in the sadistic dominance of a hated inferior Other to believe otherwise.

They’re not doing it to stop crime. They’re doing it to get off. To get a rush. To get that glorious sadistic delight in tormenting an innocent victim you remember from boyhood. Remember how fun that was? Remember how tall it made you feel?

Well, those adults are doing the exact same shit for the exact same reasons.

Sorry Folks

Got all wrapped up in the election. Was legitimately so wrapped up in the election that I just couldn’t get it up enough to hop on over here to entertain y’all.

Then after the election, I got depressed for a while. I usually go down pretty hard as soon as the weather and time changes. Seasonal Affective Disorder it’s called. I was down hard for a week or two but now it seems to have lifted. But then we have hard warmer and sunnier weather.

When I was down, I felt pretty funny. I knew I was depressed and I kept telling myself I needed to snap out of it, but my depressed mind kept saying, “Why in the Hell do you want to be happy? Fuck happiness! Happiness is a drag. It’s stupid. Why not just be depressed. This is so much better. Besides, how could you not be depressed anyway.

Last year was the first year for a long time that I did not go down in the winter, but I was on an antidepressant the whole winter, often on a pretty high dose too. Lexapro 20-40 mg (often 30-40 mg.) if you are interested. I also take Wellbutrin  300 mg. every day, but I’m not sure exactly what it does. I do like to keep taking it though.

The Lexapro definitely has side effects I don’t like, but the Wellbutrin doesn’t seem to have any at all. I suppose it can raise your blood pressure, but I take blood pressure pills every day, so I should be all right. I can go up to 450 mg. but it’s a bit of a risk of seizures but not much – it goes up from .1 to .5.  Big deal. Wellbutrin is a very nice speedy non-sedating antidepressant that doesn’t kill your sex drive at all! In fact, it may even increase it. Side effects are pretty much zero for me. If anyone has issues in this area, I can’t recommend this drug highly enough.

Lexapro is nice too, especially at the higher doses of 30-40 mg. It’s sedating and it can kill your dick or orgasm in a variety of ways, depending on your age. But Lexapro is the least dick-killing of the SSRI’s. Not that I worry terribly about killing my dick nowadays. For all I know it’s probably barely alive as it is. Hell, killing it might even be a good thing. Put it out of its damned misery.

Forget about the Long QT or Torsades du points risk for Lexapro. I don’t know much about Torsades du points, but I know a bit about Long QT. It’s pretty much negligible risk unless you already have Long QT for a genetic reason or you are taking a drug that lengthens the QT interval.

Now if you are going to take a handful of them and try to overdose, it’s another matter, but those cases typically survived, and many did not even suffer Long QT.

Not that I recommend trying to kill yourself with a handful of pills. Basically attempting suicide with the new SSRI antidepressants is just stupid. It doesn’t seem to work very well, and all it does is put you in the hospital.

My father tried to kill himself with a handful of Benzodiazepines. He almost succeeded. He took about 40 of them. He almost died but he managed to survive. That’s another lousy drug to OD on.

A former girlfriend took a handful of Xanax benzos and had the cops come bust down her door. She just passed out. Didn’t even come close to dying.

Another girlfriend took a handful of assorted pills but just went to sleep a long time. I made fun of her, “Damn, you’re a loser! You’re such a failure you can’t even kill yourself!” She was Jewish so that was good for a belly-laugh. Self-deprecating humor and all that, Borscht Belt in upstate New York, right? Woody Allen was good at that, but I always liked Lenny Bruce better.

I had another girlfriend who took a handful of tricyclic antidepressants, and you’re damn right those will kill you. She was in a coma for three days.

In the last few years I dated a few young women. Three were suicidal, aged 18, 19, and 27. I’m starting to wonder how many young women nowadays are not suicidal. Are there any?

I am also starting to think  that Suicidality, that is, the urge towards self-annihilation, is an essential part of the Feminine Character. If you think  that’s bad, the correlate in  the Masculine  Character is a homicidal drive to annihilate the other. Neither is optimal but I think I’d rather live next door to the suicidal chick than the homicidal dude, all things considered.

Alt Left: Why Identity Politics Is Alive, Has an Individual Ego, Does Not Wish to Die, and Is Essentially Fascistic at Its Core

Polar Bear: The Social Left is more loony and emotional than ever. “Whites need to be silent but we also need to end White silence.”

Sure, I work in mental health, and I assure you that the Social Left is essentially mental disorder spread out over an entire movement. People don’t understand. They think only individuals get mentally ill. It’s not so.

Entire groups of people get mentally ill at once. We call it a shared disorder. Entire ethnic groups or societies can become mentally ill, and the disorder looks exactly like it does in an individual. In that sense, groups themselves actually have egos, psyches, etc.

What is an individual? An ego. What is a group of individuals? A mass of egos all together. As an individual can become egotistical, paranoid, projecting, etc., so can a group. In that case the amassing of individual egos creates something like a “group ego.”

So we can see entire ethnic groups and nation states as having “individual” egos, defense mechanisms, projections, psyches, and mental disorders. Every part of an individual’s psyche can probably become part of the group psyche. In this sense, entire ethnic groups and even nations are like “people” or can be constructed as a person, the way turn of the century cartoons had avatars that represented entire countries, for instance, France represented as Beatrice.

And this is why nationalism  is so dangerous. All Identity Politics is just nationalism and suffers from all of the problems(and I would argue mentally disordered thinking) that goes along with nationalism. For Identity Politics is just the “nationalism” of whoever your identity nation is.

Normal nationalists may be Syrians, Turks, Russians, Chinese, or whatever, but in IdPol, people are members of the Female Nation, the Gay Nation, the Black Nation, the Jewish nation (although this blurs with actual nationalism), the Woke Nation, and even, yes, the White Nation because White nationalism is just as insipid and mentally disordered as any other IdPol, except it’s probably worse because the hatred is so severe, on the surface, and often acted out with violence.

Politics can become nations. Communists are often members of the “Communist nation,” being all Communists. Antifa adherents are members of the Antifa Nation, to the extent such a thing can exist at all with anarchists. Even politics now, ordinary Left and Right, seems like forms of nationalism. Democrats are members of the Liberal Nation or Democratic Nation. Republicans are members of the Conservative Nation or Republican Nation.

What is interesting is that all of these IdPol groups will behave precisely like the nationalisms of ethnic groups or nation-states. Look at how nationalists act, especially ultranationalists, which is another word for fascists. Look at the similarities with IdPol.

This is how IdPol in its extremes seems fascistic.

Feminazis anyone? But feminazis often call themselves socialists. Ever heard of Gay Nazis? Black and Hispanic nationalists can seem fascistic, though they often call themselves Communists. Look at Farrakhan (a “Black Nazi”) and the Azteca Movement (“Hispanic Nazis”). Both look surprisingly fascistic, all the way down to the typical antisemitism of so many fascist movements.

In this way, a lot of “Communists” in the imperial core are actually fascists. Any “Communist” who supports separatisms such as female or lesbian separatism, Black separatism with a Black state in the South, or Hispanic separatism with an Aztlan state in the West is really just a fascist. If you were a real Communist, you wouldn’t be shutting the door to other workers just because they’re White or men or whatever.

Communism and Left Populism tends to be inclusive and led by the oppressed or underdogs.

Fascism and Right Populism tends to be exclusive and led by privileged or ruling groups who bizarrely say they are being discriminated against by their own minorities! Mostly they are afraid of losing their power due to some economic, political or demographic threat.

Hence, “Communism” in the imperial core, with its support for the various mental disorders known as Black, Hispanic, female, and lesbian separatism, has always been more fascist than Communist. This is probably one reason why it has failed so badly. It demonizes far too many proletarians for having the wrong skin color or genitals.

White nationalists of course have always been true fascists and often more or less Nazis in one way or another.

Although they really aren’t, conservatives call Antifa fascists. They’re more Communists but you can see above how these fascist movements often cloak themselves in the colors of socialism and Communism because they see themselves as oppressed.

Antifa is exclusive as it deliberately excludes and discriminates against Whites in some places like the Autonomous Zone in Seattle, and their “fascism of the oppressed; i.e. Western Leftism” is really not a whole lot different from the true fascism of a ruling group threatened with the loss of its power either politically, economically, or demographically. For an example, see American White nationalists. They’re coming from completely different places, and they typically want to murder each other, but really they’re more alike than different.

Zionazis? Ever heard of people calling Israelis fascists? Israel is indeed a fascist country, especially now under Netanyahu, a classic fascist on the model of the fascism of the 1920’s, which is he reduplicating via his heir Jabotinsky. See The Iron Wall by Jabotinsky, 1921. Not only does Jabotinsky express admiration for existing fascists, he lays the blueprint for a Jewish fascist state. And the project in the book looks like a printout of the Likud Party’s positions.

The group is alive. All groups are alive. As individuals don’t want to die, groups often don’t want to die either. That’s why movements like feminism and gay rights won’t just disband and take off already even though they’ve gotten most of what they want.

“Feminism” is like an individual person; the movement itself is “alive” like a person is alive. In addition, many mentally disordered people (this is especially prominent in feminism where almost all of the women are disordered) gain a sense of identity or even have their entire identity tied up in the movement.

Furthermore, the movement, while being an extension of their own disorder, also needs to stick around in order to keep the disorder going. Typically the disorders in movements like these are characterological, and at any rate, they are very ego-syntonic. No woman is wailing about how some part of her is forcing her to become a feminist against her wishes. That would be a neurosis or ego-dystonic anxiety disorder.

Without the movement, these people tend to flounder. They are quite characterologically disordered, so this gets in the way of a lot of real relationships in actual Meatspace, itself being different from the “space” inhabited by the movement. They get quite lost and typically start looking around for another movement to attach themselves to gain a sense of purpose in what is now a purposeless life.

They  often grab the nearest movement that comes along, even one in complete contradiction to their previous one, to attach to like a remora onto a shark. This is why you see people flipping from fascist to communist and vice versa (the turn from Far Left in university to Far Right at 40 is typical of many upper class Latin Americans). You see feminists becoming radical anti-feminists. You see far Leftists like David Horowitz and many other neocons doing complete flips and becoming raving reactionaries, albeit with a Wilsonian window dressing to cover their “humanitarian massacres.”

How to Tell If People Don’t Like You and What to Do about It, If Anything

If people are giving you stone faces and one word or one sentence answers, bottom line is they don’t like you. I’ve almost never had anyone who started out cold like that start liking me after a while. Almost always people start out hating you and they just keep hating you forever. I’m not sure why this except that first impressions are very important.

I’ve tried everything with haters. I’ve been nice to them, kissed their asses, never fought back against them, always smiled, thanked them – it was all completely worthless. You are just going to have to realize that a certain number of people are just always going to hate you.

A lot of it is probably just discrimination. Now that I am an older man, women in general and young women in particular are quite shitty to me. They’re almost all somewhat cold. It was the opposite when I was younger. Only difference now is age. I act exactly the same and in fact, my Game is better than ever. Lot of good it does me at age 62 though.

So they are just prejudiced against me because of my age. Apparently most women and especially young women really hate men my age.

Problem is if you tell people about people who seem like they hate you or don’t like you, everyone will just say that they’re fine but you are doing or saying things that are making them hate you. I wondered for a long time why people do that. I now think it is just another defense. When you tell someone that someone or people hate you, that’s a scary thought. Most people like to walk around the world with this stupid attitude of, “I like everyone and everyone likes me!” Well, I’ve got news for you. It’s not true.

There are always assholes who don’t like you, and it’s almost always totally fruitless to try to figure out why. I have gone round and round about this my whole life trying to figure out why some hater acts that way, but I’ve almost never been able to figure it out. You can try to put together clues, but haters usually don’t give you clues about why they hate you. So it’s probably pointless to wonder why because you’ll never find out anyway.

If you confront them about it, they will always deny that they are angry or that they hate you and make up some dumb excuse instead. Then they will always say you are paranoid or hypersensitive.

So don’t go around asking haters why they hate you. Maybe you can ask someone else who also knows them, but that might not work either. I did that once and mutual friend said that the guy who I thought hated me, my boss, actually liked me! “He likes you because he thinks you’re a punk, a punker, a punk rocker,” he said.

I’m probably the most inoffensive person on Earth. It’s a mystery why anyone would hate me, but a lot of people sure do. I find this as baffling as I ever have.

On the other hand, I get along fairly well with men of all sorts of ages these days. This is a good clue that there’s probably nothing wrong with me. Men are treating me well, but women are treating me like crap. First of all, do I have any issues with women. Believe it or not, I don’t. When I interact with women, I am usually very friendly with them because, well, I like women. I love women. The sexual attraction or fondness takes over and everything else goes by the wayside.

You hear me talking shit about women on here sometimes like any real man does, but I never think things like that when I’m dealing with real life women. Walking around with an obviously misogynistic attitude just doesn’t work. I went through a phase like that decades ago and all I got were women fighting back against me all day. One scratched up my briefcase! Another put a piece of chalk in my coffee cup!

So there’s nothing wrong with my attitude towards women. I treat them just like I treat men. But the women are being hostile while the men are being friendly. That means there’s something wrong with the women, probably the prejudice I discussed above. Because if there was a global problem with my behavior, the men wouldn’t be nice to me either.

If you are getting bad vibes from people, the first thing to do is look around and try to analyze it. First of all, you need to look at yourself with the clear light of reason. Lying to yourself does no good here. Was there a time recently when you acted just like you are now but a lot of people liked you? Do you act any different now? There’s  probably nothing wrong with you.

Do a lot of people still like you and act friendly and it’s just some who are shits? There’s probably nothing wrong with you there either because if there’s something badly wrong with you, just about nobody’s going to be nice. That’s how you can tell that the problem is you.

You have to analyze all of this stuff and you have to be objective.

Bottom line is if you are seriously screwing up in life (in my case, 35-40 yearss ago, basically an anxiety breakdown with a full-blown anxiety disorder that lasted years), people are going to let you know. In fact they will let you know exactly how you are screwing up.

If you’re too sad, they’ll let you know. If you’re too mad, they’ll let you know. If you’re too nervous, they will definitely let you know.

Not only that but you will keep hearing the same message over and over, albeit in different ways. If your problem is sadness, you will keep hearing people commenting on your obvious depression in various ways. If your problem is anxiety, you will keep hearing people remarking about nervousness. Often when people make these remarks, they are very oblique about it, so you have to have good social skills to pick up on it.

Often they won’t comment on you specifically. They will talk in a roundabout way, maybe about someone else, but they will be looking at you the whole time they are saying it. You’re supposed to figure out if they are really talking about you and pretending to talk about this other person. And no, it’s not paranoid to do this because people definitely comment on others to their face in this oblique, hard to figure out way.

I remember one time I was in a park 35 years ago talking to a group of people, and one guy kept talking about “someone else.”

Yeah, he’s really fried, he’s really weird, he’s really nervous, he’s really crazy.

I was in pretty bad shape then, albeit only with an anxiety disorder, but when anxiety disorders get bad, people can appear very strange or maybe even appear psychotic, often with odd looks in their eyes like stares, blank stares, thousand-yard stares, etc. So I’m afraid he was definitely talking about me, though it’s painful to admit it and remember it.

Another time when I was breaking up with a girlfriend, she kept bringing up this “Vietnam veteran” she knew. She claimed he hated everyone and everything in the whole world. She was absolutely mystified at how he could be so full of hate and she kept saying,

Well, it’s just a waste of a life, that’s all I think. You’re wasting your life being like that.

Apparently she was saying this is how I felt, and she was also saying that it was a waste of a perfectly good life for me to be this way. It didn’t feel like that at the time, but maybe I did, who knows?

I could go on and on like this forever with all sorts of quite painful examples.

Bottom line is sometimes they are talking about you, either behind your back or otherwise. Sometimes they don’t like you. And on some rare occasions, they may even be out to get you. All these things really happen, and you’re not paranoid if you recognize that. You’re only paranoid if you are imagining things. The trick is figuring out if these fears are really happening, in which case you aren’t nuts but merely observant, or if they’re not, in which case, yeah, you’re being paranoid. Teasing out whether fears are based in reality or paranoid imagination is not such an easy thing to do!

Game/PUA: Go on a Date with Two Women at Once!

These are always fun, sort of chance of a lifetime scores if you can ever pull them off. You don’t even have to have sex with both of them, but there should be some sort of sexual interest or possibility otherwise it’s not much of a date.

I remember once in the mid-80’s, I had what was more or less turning into a date with a fellow teacher at my school. She lived in Hermosa Beach and I went to her place for I have no idea what reason.

We were in the supermarket looking at food to buy for dinner and for some weird reason, she started looking at bananas! I suppose the horniness was already getting started because that had to be a sign. She was going through the bananas and casting some of them aside, saying, “Nah, that one’s too soft, that’s one too soft and wimpish. I want one that is strong, firm, and hard.”

And looking at me while she said it. Well, she was saying that I was a great big puss, but on the other hand, she was also considering having sex with me by even looking at the bananas in the first place. Looking back, this was probably a shit test. It’s important to spot shit tests when they happen and respond to them appropriately. You have to respond different ways according to the test. Sometimes if you get mad, you fail the test. This was probably one of those.

I didn’t fall for it and get mad. I ignored her and refused to rise to the bait, so she dropped it.

We decided not to buy food but to go out for Arabic food with her and this total bitch teacher friend of hers who had come over to the house at some point.

We all three piled into my friend’s van and went to the restaurant. I was making stupid jokes during the whole dinner. I would say, “Can you pass the humus?” instead of, “Can you pass the hummus?” You pronounce the two words quite differently. Humus is dirt. Hummus is an Arabic dip that you put in various things, often felafel burgers.

I was also saying, “Can you please pass me the feel-awful?” instead of, “Can you please pass me the felafel?” Felafel is an substance you use to make veggie burgers out of ground up chickpeas. Feel-awful, of course, does not exist. It’s just a joke on the name of the food.

So basically I was saying the food was crap, and it was making me sick when it wasn’t straight up dirt from the ground. Of course, I didn’t believe it, as the food was great. I was just being silly. I repeated these dumb jokes a few times with an absolutely straight face, and the woman I was with kept laughing and correcting me, “It’s hummus, not humus! Humus is dirt!”

Every time she said it I would act confused and baffled like I didn’t understand what she was talking about. Then I would point my finger in the air, and say, “Ah-hah! Oh, yes! That’s right! It’s hummus, not humus! Thank you for correcting me. I’m sorry! How could I be so stupid!” All with a completely straight face as if I was dead serious.

Then a few minutes later I would ask for humus again with a completely straight face like nothing had happened or I had already forgotten about the previous incident. She would giggle and correct me again, and I would act stunned and apologize for my mistake again as if it were all happening for the first time.

If you’re going to do stupid jokes like this, it’s very important that you do them with a straight face. Also a bit of exaggerated acting helps. Like above where I did the same idiot routine a number of times, each time acting like I was hearing her explanation for the first time, and then making the same dumb apology every time, then of course several minutes later making the same stupid request as if the previous incident never happened.

Obviously this is totally Three Stooges dipshit slapstick type of humor of the lowest quality, but if you are a really get actor, really get into the role, and especially keep a straight face, it can be pretty damn funny.

How to Tell If You’re Making a Woman Horny – She’s Laughing at All Your Stupid Jokes

I’m showing you this incident because I’m pointing out that this woman liked me, and not only that, she was starting to get horny. When a woman starts laughing at every dumb joke you tell, even when you repeat the dumb jokes over and over, bottom line is she wants to fuck. It doesn’t mean she’s going to fuck you, of course.

It just means you’re making her horny. Women get horny all the time all through their lives, and a lot of the time they get horny, they decide not to have sex with the guy. Just because you’re making her horny doesn’t mean she’s going to fuck you! It means she wants to, or her body wants to at least, but her mind may not, and women’s bodies and brains are at war even in the best of times.

No woman who isn’t getting horny, usually to the point of wanting to fuck you, is ever going to act that way towards you. Get them laughing like that, and they are halfway into the bed. It’s up to you to fill out the blanks in the rest of the form.

Then it came time for the bill. They had suggested that we go out  to eat earlier, and I just said, “OK, sure!” Problem was I was broke and I knew it at the time. But I really wanted to eat dinner with these chicks, and if I sprang the empty wallet on them, I figured they’d decide not have to dinner with me. What woman wants to eat with a deadbeat loser, right?

I decided I would tell them my money situation if they asked, but if they didn’t ask, no harm done, right? I figured I would just dumbfoundedly spring the empty wallet on them when we were done, act shocked, apologize profusely, and throw up my hands. I wisely shut up and hoped they didn’t ask me about money when we were done. I have no idea why I was broke, as I was making pretty good money at the time.

Well, it came time for the bill, and the two women got their wallets out and started throwing in bills. They looked at me. I got my wallet out with exaggerated swaggering confidence like it was full of money, and I was going to pay for everyone. Then I opened it and acted shocked, stunned, and embarrassed that there was no money in it. I apologized profusely but I was chuckling a bit as I was doing so. I acted like this was all a hilarious joke.

I said, “Look! I have no money! I’m broke!” The woman I was with asked, “Well, did you know you were broke when we decided to go out to eat?” I said of course I did.

She asked, “Well, why didn’t you tell us?”

I said, “Number one, you never asked me if I had money to go out to eat, and number two, I wanted to eat dinner because I was hungry, and if I told you I was broke, you wouldn’t let me eat with you. So the only smart thing to do was keep quiet.”

That was a completely assholey, dickwad thing to say, but after I said it, I laughed in this subdued, chuckling way. I kept chuckling like that the whole time this scene was going on.

I was sitting there with my empty wallet open laughing right in both of these women’s faces and telling them I didn’t have any money, and they would have to pay my way. I kept shrugging my shoulders with this “innocent little boy who dindu nuffin” look on my face.

When I said, “You never asked me,” I would chuckle right in their faces like an asshole. After a bit the woman I was with started giggling and she couldn’t stop. I was being an asshole, but I was being a funny, arrogant asshole and not being aggressive, and women often like dicks like that. I don’t know how well being an asshole works, but being a funny asshole often works wonders especially if you are not angry or aggressive.

It also seems to work to laugh right in women’s face, once again, not in an angry or aggressive way, more in a dismissive sense, like, “You just a stupid woman. What do you women know anyway. We men laugh right in your faces, you know that? You’ll come to your senses soon enough.” That’s sexist thinking and I don’t necessarily believe it, but women often respond to a certain type of male sexism by getting horny, believe it or not.

When I laugh in their faces, they are often shocked and almost lurch backwards. Then they get this defiant angry look on their faces like you challenged them to a fight. Then for some reason, the expression changes and they seem to like it. This devious little smile comes over her face, and she starts laughing too in this very quiet way.

If you are laughing in her face, you are displaying abundance mentality. Most men are pathetic pussy beggars. They’re pathetic, and women think they are just that. By doing this, you are the opposite of a pussy beggar. You are laughing her face, basically  laughing and saying you don’t care if she sleeps with you or not. Women are often shocked by this mentality because they are so used to pussy beggars and pussywhipped guys who never fight back because they don’t want to cut off the pussy supply.

I’ve had women look at me with wonder as if they were thinking, “Jesus Christ, this guy doesn’t even care if I fuck him or not. He’s laughing right in my face like an asshole, and if I walk out of here right now, he will just say bye and laugh at me some more. That’s amazing.”

A lot of times they seemed to be thinking, “Oh man, you are such an arrogant asshole! I should slap your face!” But then they seemed to think a bit and it’s as if they were saying, “But you know what? I like that.”

Anyway, my teacher friend couldn’t contain her laughter at me for being such an arrogant asshole as to stick them with the bill and then laugh right in their faces and pretty much ask them, “What are you going to do about it?” She was a bit mad at first in a somewhat disgusted and annoyed way, but the more I laughed and clowned it up, the more she started chuckling like she liked this display of humorous assholery.

What I did was completely audacious and most men would be nice guys and honestly say they didn’t have any money before you went out to eat or else act pathetic when they saw that they had no money  in their wallets.

I was being an asshole, but I was being a funny asshole. After all, face it. What I did to those poor women was pretty damn funny, right?

Her friend was some fat bitch teacher, single, probably hadn’t been laid since the last Ice Age. Seemed like a feminist or even a lesbian. My friend told me that her friend really, really hated men and giggled when she said this. I laughed at her friend when the teacher told me that like it was a hilarious joke and commented about what a stupid idiot her manhating bitch friend was. See? I didn’t get mad when told she was a manhating bitch. I just laughed at her and acted like she was an idiot for hating us men.

When she learned I had no money, her bitch friend was totally outraged at my assholery, as it seemed to confirm to her that we men are a bunch of bastards and assholes after all. She sat there stone-faced the whole time, sputtering. “We’re going to make you wash the dishes in this restaurant to pay it off!” Every time I looked at her stone face, I started laughing a little bit.

To get mad would have been a bad idea. After she said that, I laughed right at her and almost fell out of my chair laughing. See? I didn’t act scared when she bitched me out. I just laughed right in her face like she was a harmless, pathetic, and stupid woman, which frankly she was.

Somehow we were in my friend’s van, the three of us. My friend kept saying over and over, “Let’s rent a porn movie!” She was giggling the whole time while she was repeating this. Her friend for some reason was not against this. Of course, I was fine with it.

I was thinking, “Damn, I’m going to get laid tonight!” We went to a video store and I pick out Behind the Green Door Part 3, a really gonzo and dirty movie for that time. I told her I had seen it, and it was great. She acted intrigued that I had seen the movie enough to give a review of it. There were a couple of middle aged Black women looking at porno movies too, and also I recommended it to them. They acted very interested and thanked me very much, probably because I had two chicks with me once.

Any time you have two women with you at once and things are going smoothly, everyone quickly gets real quiet and respectful. The other men give you these looks like, “How the Hell do you do it, anyway?”

Sometimes they quietly try to take you down a peg in a subdued voice. Don’t fall for it. It’s a sort of male shit test. Just act like you didn’t hear him.

When you have the two women with you, don’t act like a showoff or an idiot. Don’t call attention to yourself, ridicule the other men, or act like you are better than they are and they are stupid inferiors. Instead, simply ignore all the other men with the attitude of, “Competition? What competition? I don’t see any competition, do you?” Act nice and friendly. You would be surprised how many men will approach you to talk when you have two women with you.

Another thing to do is to act like this thing, having two women with you, is completely normal, on the level of breathing, walking on the sidewalk, or drinking a glass of water. Act like this is something you do so often that you don’t even think about it anymore. The other men won’t seem to be threatened. If you see any men who look at you in a friendly way, give them a conspiratorial smile and a wink, but don’t act superior. Act like he’s in with the plan somehow.

Any other women around will become extremely interested in the stud who has two chicks with him, so even when you have the two women with you, other women will be staring at  you the whole time.

More than you would think walk right up to you with the two women and start talking to all three of you, often flirting right in the faces of the other women. Women are competitive and they love to fight with other women over men. They also love to steal other women’s men. Women are man-stealers! I assume there is some cavewoman reason why they are like this, but I don’t know what it is.

We rented the movie, got back to the house, settled in on the couches, and put it in the VCR. My friend was giggling like a schoolgirl in this silly, mischievous, playful way the whole time we were doing this. I had no idea why this bitch friend was going along with this plan to watch a porn movie with her friend and a man.

I was wondering what this night was going to be like. I was thinking maybe something might happen sexually with me and my friend, and like a moron, I started worrying that maybe I wouldn’t be able to get it up (Dumb, huh?)

Any time a woman says, “Hey, let’s watch a  porn movie,” I guarantee she wants to fuck. Period. Now she’s not just horny but she actually wants to fuck. You can still blow it of course. You can always blow it at any time in seduction if you are stupid enough, but the deeper the seduction goes and the hornier she gets, the harder it is to screw up, and she will start forgiving or looking the other way at any of your errors.

Why do they do this? Because…guess what? Women like to fuck too! A lot of them really, really like to fuck, almost as much as we do, and many women have sex drives that are so high that you would be shocked. And once they start getting pretty horny, a sense of urgency develops about them where they resolve they are going to have sex one way or another, come Hell or high water.

They will even get mad and impatient if you go too slow or start delaying, which I’ve been doing my whole life. There have been a number of times when women asked, “Are you going to kiss me or what? or “Come on, let’s go!” or “God-damn it. Are you going to fuck me or what?”

Back to the scene in the living room. I was wondering what’s going to happen with the manhating bitch friend. Was she going to get in on the sexual behavior somehow, assuming there was any?

I was thinking somehow I had to try that, that if the teacher and I started getting hot and horny with each other, I was going to look over at the shocked friend and make fun of her for missing out on all the fun and sitting over there all by her lonesome, laugh in her face until she either got mad, in which case I would leave her alone more, or joined us, which could get real weird but also real interesting.

I thought it might be fun to drag this manhating bitch into a threeway with another woman! How the Hell would she act? Was she a dyke? Was my friend bi?

Anyway, the video didn’t work for some reason. The night was over, and I was going home. I went to the door and my friend was still giggling away at the whole absurd evening, and her friend was glaring at me with pure hatred. There wasn’t any sex at all, but it wasn’t a sterile date with no sexual vibes – rather the opposite – It was a lot of fun anyway and way better than sitting at home.

Alt Left: Birth of the Cultural Left Analysis: Did the Black Panthers Hate Whites?

I think the Panthers are still around, but they are not very active. I actually don’t mind them. They did a lot of really cool things like free breakfasts and lunches for school children. They have been superseded by the New Black Panther Party, an explicitly racist organization that actively promotes hatred of Whites. The real Panthers recently criticized the NBP for hating Whites, saying that the original Panthers were never about hating Whites; instead they just wanted equal rights for Blacks.

The rightwing recently has published some articles suggesting that the Panthers hated Whites. To my recollection, they did not. They helped the Weathermen break Tim Leary out of prison, and they visited him in Algeria, where some of them (Kwame Ture nee Eldridge Cleaver of Soul on Ice fame) had also taken refuge. A lot of radical Whites worked hand in hand with the Panthers.

The Panthers were Marxists (actually Maoists) of that particular er, which would coincide with the Cultural Revolution period in China. Think of how culturally conservatives the Chinese Communist Party was at this time. That’s what the Panthers were like.

They were strongly against degeneracy of any type as most Communist parties (CP’s) were at that time. Some Panthers were openly homophobic, saying homosexuality was a bourgeois vice, a popular view among CP’s of that time (See the Cuban leadership’s position on this subject in the 1960’s). They certainly didn’t promote Black crime, drug use, or even irresponsible behavior.

I will say that Farrakhan’s (whom I very much dislike) people are huge on social responsibility too, and I appreciate them for that. They are very much into clean living and non-degeneracy, and they despise Black crime.

I came out of the cultural revolutions of the 1960’s, which is why probably why some people are shocked at how leftwing I am. They’re blown away when they figure that out about me. “Wow, I didn’t realize he was so leftwing!” Well, I am. I’m race realist though and hate the Cultural Left. I’m a “conservative socialist.”

Hell, I was on the mailing list for the Weatherman at one point not even long ago! Well, their above ground organization that is (the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee), which frankly has strong links to this BLM movement right now. So, yes, the present Weathermen (now given up arms as a peaceful organization) are very much behind BLM.

My friends were drug dealers who hung out with Tim Leary and the Brotherhood of Eternal Love in Laguna Canyon in Laguna Beach where the BEL made and distributed millions of tabs of Orange Sunshine LSD.I remember my friends telling me about going to parties in the canyon and how they had lookouts high up in the eucalyptus trees to watch out for cops. I did go to a party in the Canyon once, a real hippie party with real hippie chicks and lots of pot smoking. Love was definitely in the air.

I have supported Latin American guerrilla groups. I actually gave to the “weapons fund” for the Salvadoran guerrillas for some time. So I’m actually a real dyed in the wool terrorist supporter or even financier if you will, although I stopped giving them money long ago.

If I did that now, I would be violating the Patriot Act by giving Material Support for Terrorism (Whatever the Hell that means!), and I could be looking at 10 years. But alas, those were different times. Even the 80’s were far more laid back, relaxed, and anti-authoritarian compared to now when we seem to be on some weird authoritarian trip due to fears over “terrorism” which is about nonexistent in the US.

Anyway, this was a time of peace, love, dope and all that. Everyone was very much into nonviolence to the point of near-passivity. Any aggressive behavior was “uncool.” Every hippie man was your brother, and every hippie woman was your sister. There was magic in the air. And Yoko brought her walrus, don’t forget that.

Plus there was lots of “free love.” I still have fond memories of hippie chicks. I will say it was a lot more loving and friendly than things are nowadays with all this weirdness, antisociality, fear of strangers and single men, “pedophile” hysteria, #metoo insanity, and general fear or even terror of men – and this at a time when major crimes like rape have crashed 63% since  1993.

Sometimes I think the lower the crime rate goes, the more paranoid people get about crime. Don’t ask me to figure it out. I have no idea why humans do whatever irrational thing du jour they happen to be doing.

Bottom line is that humans are basically irrational and illogical at their core and we tend to be driven around all through life by our emotional needs and beliefs, which often seem to be pulling us through life blindly on a leash like a dog ownder, not even why we do or feel certain things.

I can’t tell you how many of my female clients have asked me, “Why do I feel this way?”  The answer was not readily apparent. Obviously it’s happening for a reason, probably an  unconscious one. Then they ask me, “How do I stop feeling  this way (getting dragged through life with their emotions like a dog an a leash)?” It’s hard to answer questions like that. The solutions are there no doubt, but they are more tangled up in the forbidding jungle of the psyche than we want  to admit.

The only answer I would have to taht question would be to develop some “emotional literacy,” to try to develop and cultivate at least some  emotional control. My emotions don’t drag me through life blindly, baffled at why I am doing or feeling  this or that. I

t’s more the opposite. Whereas with many people, including  most women for sure, their emotions are dragging through them through their lives blindly, with me it’s the other way around. I have my emotions on a leash and I drag them around. I’d rather drag my emotions through life in my own leash than the other way around. Control gets a bad rap, but a lot of forms of it

Anyway, the Panthers were just Black hippies. They hung out with the White hippies. Black hippies were “brothers,” or “soul brothers,” if you will. There were some problems with them of course (they are Blacks after all), but most of them were quite well-behaved or at least much  better behaved than they are now. I suspect the demand for nonviolence in the hippie movement weeded out the bad ones. There may have been some self-selection going  on.

Bottom line is I really disagree that the Panthers were White-haters. It’s BS.

Alt Left: How We Got Here: The Origins of Identity Politics and the Modern Cultural Left

There is a ready explanation for all this nonsense.

First is the tendency of Identity Politics to become more radicalized with time.

There has long been an argument on the Left against this BS. Sanders actually came out of that tradition.

The US White Left married with the radical Blacks. After they did that they started heading down this nutty race train track along with all the other IdPol madness.

The entire Left moved away from economics and foreign policy to go down this cultural road instead. Perhaps 1989 was a trigger. The Eastern Bloc collapsed and the US Left was in disarray and didn’t know what to think or even believe. The dictatorship of he proletariat, democratic centralism, it was all up in the air now. Further, it seemed the Communist economics in the East Bloc had not kept pace with socialist social democracy economics on the rest of Europe. A lot of the US Left packed it in on economics and started to focus on cultural BS instead.

The Left now is nothing but pure IdPol. Ever see BLM or Antifa morons say one word about US foreign policy and US imperialism? Course not. Ever hear them say one word about neoliberal economics? Course not. That’s what drives me up the wall. Here is a movement ripe for radicalizing against the US ruling class program of neoliberalism at home and invite the world – invade the word neoconservatism abroad. Let’s call this combined package Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism. That’s a rightwing project any way you slice it.

But at the same time, the ruling class went full left on culture. Hence the Libertarian-type fiscal conservative-social liberal of the upper middle class in the last 40 years. Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism plus the Cultural Left. What a project! It’s literally the worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right! And the upper middle class is proud of this nightmare ideology. Which is one more reason that this class, which always sides with the ruling class against the workers, is no good.

Now that the Left bailed on anti-imperialism and left economics in favor of a pure Cultural Left, what are they doing with this new ideology? Why, they are rioting about nothing at all or at worst for an outright lie. Brilliant!

But if we get police reform out of these riots, it would be good. It’s an ill wind that blows no good.

Thing is the corporations, foundations, media, etc. and both political parties are down with this Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project because they’re businessmen and rich people, and Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism is good for them for reasons I won’t go into here but perhaps you can guess at.

This Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project is how the rich, the corporations, and the U.S. ruling class make all their money. So they oppose Left efforts against Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism such as the 60’s revolutions with all-out ferocity. If such a movement arises, they will sic their media attack dogs on it, smash it to bits, and brainwash the sheep via their media monopoly to go along with this destruction.

The thing is that this is a perfectly safe progressive project. It doesn’t cost them one nickel, and they get groovy hip woke points for jumping on the bandwagon.

How much of the US ruling class are going to lose out on an anti-White project? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an unqualified Black via affirmative action? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an illegal alien on their jobs? 0%. Illegals are great for them – cheap labor, more customers, a guy to mow the lawn, and a nanny to watch the kid. They don’t live with illegals so they don’t have to deal with the civilizational decline that they cause. Pro-immigration is risk-free progressivism for woke points, and what do you know? It stuffs their pocketbook too! Win-win!

Does the US ruling class have to live with the consequences of Black crime and civilizational collapse? Course not. They don’t have to deal with the downside of this crazy movement so they can support it all they want. See?

Also, the US ruling class has been socially liberal and Neoliberal-Neoconservative for a long time now.

The Left won the Culture War.

But so what?

We lost the Economics and Foreign Policy (US imperialism) War. They even defeated the Vietnam War Syndrome, a bad thing because it posed a severe threat to US imperialism.

So what did we win?

Our women have become insane, manhating harridans. If you ask a woman for a date now, it’s sexual harassment and you can be fired. We overthrew Patriarchy but replaced it with something worse – Matriarchy or Female Rule (Feminist Rule) – with all the manhating, war on male sexuality, and horrific puritanism that always goes along with it.

The latter is most painful to me as a 60’s child. One of the revolutions was the Sexual Revolution. Our attitude was “do it in the streets!” Now look. If I ask a woman for her #, it’s sexual harassment and you can get the police called on you. All sexuality has been sucked out of public space by #metoo, so it feels like a sexual desert, which is apparently the way women want it! They actually like to live like this.

And at the same time as this crazy Victorianism, we also have a society drenched in porn. So my personal world is porn saturated, but if you so much as look at a woman, she might act like she’s going to call the cops. How’s that for crazy cognitive dissonance? No wonder incels exist and go on killing sprees. Societies can’t handle grotesque cognitive dissonance. It literally drives people insane and often results in serious violence.

What else did we win? Modern anti-racism – a movement with great roots that has gone insane and is worse than useless.

What else? Depraved, disgusting, and lewd gay pride parades. Great! My favorite!

“Pansexuals,” “queer” as a noun, “genderqueer” and “nonbinary” nonsense, and the insane and depraved transgender cult. It gets sicker and more perverted, weird, and stupid every year. What’s next? Transsexual bathhouses for all ages? Back then, we fought for liberation, not weirdness, sickness, perversion, and deviancy.

Further, these Cultural Left boneheads have badly divided the working class. Check out this great plan they had!

Let’s have a revolution!

Cool! Yay!

But first lets get all the non-White workers to hate the White workers!

Cool! Yay! Oppressors and oppressed!

And while we’re at it, let’s get the woman workers to hate the man workers! Oppressors and oppressed!

Cool! Yay!

Now let’s have a revolution, boys and girls!

Whoops. Whoa! What happened?

No one showed up! That’s what happened.

Why? Because we got them all to hate each other!

Brilliant! You got to hand it to these guys with these genius ideas of theirs.

What I mean is this Cultural Left project is easy for the ruling class to swallow. Many are already decadent, depraved rich people, so the sicko stuff works for them. Rich men get all the sex they want. If a rich man asks a woman for her #, does she threaten to call the cops? Course not.

Homosexuality? The ruling class is always full of gay men and all manner of decadent bisexual libertines. Works for them.

Trannies? Cut into the bottom line? Course not. Support.

The ruling class has been left on social BS and right on economics (neoliberalism) and on foreign policy (US imperialism) for a long time now. It works for them and doesn’t cost them a nickel! Hell, it even makes them bank too!

And you see the outgrowth of this ideology in this destructive BLM movement that makes the Black workers hate the White workers and vice versa.

Brilliant! Way to go, Lefties! Why didn’t I think of that?

The ruling class loves this because they benefit by dividing the workers and getting them all to hate each other so they won’t organize against the Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism bread and butter issues of the ruling class.

It also explains why BLM won’t dare touch economics or US imperialism.

See all those corporate and foundation millions flooding into BLM?

Kiss them all goodbye once BLM goes after neoliberal economics and neoconservative foreign policy, for this is what fills the bank vaults of the corporations and ruling class.

Game/PUA: Miserable? Find Your Gendered “Happy Place”

Femininity is Woman’s “happy place.”

I think women who act masculine do not seem very happy. That is why so many feminists seem so angry and miserable. And why ball-breaking dominatrices who deliberately seek out weak men to beat up(Talk to me about that!) don’t seem very happy. They are sadists who seek out weak male victims to beat up on because no real man will put up with their shit for one minute. Any real man would just kill the bitch.

Like so many misled folks, they think they are getting what they want but really they aren’t. First because they are mistaken about what they want. What they think they want and what makes them happy actually makes them miserable. They can’t see it because the defensive blinders go up and blind them to this truth.

But unlike male sadists, who are reveling in the ultimate Woodstock mud puddle of Masculinity because masculinity is normal for men, the ball-breaking harridan is not happy, probably because masculinity is just not normal for straight women and never will be. She hates her milquetoast husband. And I think she secretly hates having to be an emasculating harpy. The real men that she craves will smack her ass in a New York minute. She’s locked herself into a prison of her own making.

The only men who put up with them are, yeah, wimpy. To which I do throw my former self, sadly. But we’re also pussy-whipped.

For the flip side, ever seen a happy wimpy man who gets his balls busted all the time by his psychobitch wife? Me either.

I also think masculinity is Man’s “happy place.” When you get back into it after having been out of it for quite some time, damn it just feels so right.

Ever seen a cat curled up in some object like this pillows with the round holes in the middle that fit the cat’s body perfectly. That’s what these “happy places” are. They plug right in with our biology and both our minds and Nature Herself see it and think “two thumbs up.”

Just to be fair to the homosexuals out here, I will say that gay men and lesbians and their extreme forms called transsexuals probably do indeed have a similar happy place. For gay men, that happy place may indeed be femininity. I have no idea. For lesbians that happy place may indeed be masculinity. And that’s perfectly normal, natural, correct and maybe even biological with them. It’s obviously not normal, but in a way, if it’s biologically mediated, it’s certainly “normal for them,” and at the end of the day, that’s all that matters: what’s normal for you.

Game/PUA: Why the Treat Em Like Shit” Advice for Men to Deal with Women is Both True and Not True

I was once, long ago in another world, a pussy-whipped idiot. I put up with the occasional abuse to keep the Pussy River flowing. I figured as soon as I started fighting back,  she’d just leave (and some do just that), and then…no more pussy. The river runs dry and now you’re in the desert without a canteen. Good luck with that. Even for a Chad like me, pussy, like money, never grew on trees. It’s actually a lot harder to get than most people think. I mean a good-loooking, sane, halfway intelligent woman.

The line that Chad can get laid any time he wants has never been my experience. Yeah, we do all right, but that’s only because your AFC’s typical single life is nightmare in the desert.

It’s a relative thing, like most everything anyway. Success and failure are not pure concepts any more than any value judgement is. They’re both just continua and based on relative judgement, and hence tend to resist any good definition. What’s success? The opposite of failure. What’s failure? The opposite of success. And so the tautological circle chases its tail.

Funny thing is when I stopped being pussy-whipped and started ripping the Hell out of girlfriends who bitched me out and were totally out of line about it, a funny thing happened. They didn’t leave. They actually stuck around. Some shut up right away, became very feminine, and even started whimpering like whipped dogs and apologizing. Not a few became suddenly very horny.

And I had the wildest, most passionate love affairs of my  entire life. With women who called me “mean,” “a mean, cruel, asshole,” “psycho, scary, dangerous,” etc.

I don’t agree with the “just treat em like shit” philosophy of how to deal with women. Maybe it works, but it never did for me, plus I don’t have it in me to be that evil. I’d have to plug back into my “evil little boy self” again, and he’s safely locked up in maximum security in my gut where he belongs and only let out on extremely rare occasions where he’s absolutely needed.

I’ve thought about this a lot. It’s not that women like assholes or bad or evil men. Sure, maybe 1/3 do, as a former girlfriend said. But the rest don’t. But I think deep down inside, most women want a man who is pretty damned mean and scary now and then, or on occasion, or who shows he can at least be that way and he has it in him.

He can be nice most of the rest of the time, a stereotypical nice guy. But she has to know that he can get real scary real quick, and more importantly, that he’s willing to put some fences around her and not let her get away with murder.

I hate to quote Schopenhauer, but of course women are like children. In a sense.

Ever notice that a kid is always trying to see what he can get away with and he will delightfully get away with murder if you are stupid enough to let him? Well, of course. But ever also notice that at the same time, the kid who screams when you build a “do not cross” fence around him with severe penalties for breaches secretly seems to appreciate the fact that you put some limits on him.

I am convinced that women are the same. She actually wants you to put some limits on her. She expects it. And if you don’t, she may well just run wild for the same reason a child does. And when you throw her in a corral and threaten her if she breaches it, she might throw a fit, just like a child once again. But then again, like the child, she secretly appreciates and respects the fact that you were man enough to put some limits on her wayward ass.

Not only that, but putting limits on them turns them on. Much more than that, I think it triggers the love impulse – the wild, passionate, Hollywood movie, fireworks infatuation, “crazy love” initial phase of passionate love. Which then probably cements into a nice form of mature love 1-2 years later.

Women want to fall madly in love with caveman who may well be nice most of the time but are also willing to put some limits on them and even scare the Hell out of them or terrorize them if they push the limits. And this makes her horny because being ravished by a brute is the core nature of female sexuality.

Women came from cavewomen and 60% of cavemen never bred. The Alpha psychopaths terrorized those men like the Alpha elephant seal terrorizes any men who encroach on his harem. These psychopaths formed harems with the women. So most women come from a collective unconscious and genetic background of being part of a dangerous, scary psychopathic man’s harem – basically a serial killer’s harem. The residue of that, the weight of 40,000 years, echoes with us down through the canyons of time and resounds with us to this day.

Treat em like shit? All the time? I doubt it. It’s never worked for me but supposedly it works for others. As I don’t have it in me to be that evil, I can’t comment on that.

But treat em like shit? Some of the time, every now and then, once in a blue moon, show that you have the extreme capability to do so? At age 62, very late in the game, too late to matter, I conclude that this is indeed true.

Once again, YMMV. I’m not a guru you know. You do you. I’ll do me. I’m not here to tell you what to do. I’m here to throw out ideas and see if they resonate with you. Maybe they will. Maybe they won’t.

But mostly just want you to at least think about what I’m saying and decide what you might think of it. I’m here to give you new stuff to think about. Adopt it, reject it, neither, or anything ion between? It’s all up to you. As a free human with agency, the world is your oyster. Go forth and bake as nice a pearl as  you can out of it.