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.”

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: #believewomen

#believewomen and #ibelievewomen

I can’t think of a more terrible idea than that. I can’t believe how many cucks, I mean male feminists, put that hashtag on everything. Disgusting. No group of people should be automatically believed.

But this is feminism. In feminism, women are never wrong. And men are never right. Women are 100% good and men are 100% bad.

Try this experiment. Try getting a feminist to agree that there women have one even tiny flaw or negative trait. They never will. They will never, ever agree that women are deficient or come in second place to men in just about anything. It’s the most useless and idiotic philosophy out there. Why on Earth should we on the Left have to believe such a ridiculous, anti-scientific, blatantly propagandistic and dishonest philosophy? Give us a reason? And if we don’t believe in this nonsense, that means we hate women?!

Honk! 🤡

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

What It’s Like to Be a Man: Experiences of Transmen or FTM Transsexuals

Talk to a transman, especially one who has gone back. This is the story they will tell you:

When you are a man, it is unbearably lonely. No one cares about you. You can drop dead tomorrow and no one will bat an eye. No one will come up to you and start talking to you. No one will ask you out on a date. You are all alone in a world that cares nothing about you. It’s the most terrifying feeling of loneliness and vulnerability.

I’m not here to bitch. I am a man. I know full well that this is just how it goes. I don’t like it, but I made my peace with it long ago. Don’t fight the things you can’t change that will never go away anyway.

But yep, this is exactly how it is to be a man.

If women had to live the sort of lives we men do, they would not be able to handle it. They’d tolerate it for a while, but then they’d blow their brains out.

Do we get any sympathy for this from women? Why? Because women, like society in general, could care less about us men. This the precise and open statement at the bottom of feminism, which developed as a hate movement against men. Feminism is nothing but female psychology unleashed, decriminalized, and reified. Women are gods, men are devils, and that’s it.

If women were really the compassionate creatures they claim to be, they would not feel this way, nor would they join this vicious hate movement against their brothers.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Men’s Rights View of Pedo Hysteria: It Was Created by Feminists To Demonize Normal Male Sexuality

This is so perfect. I found this on a men’s rights site. It’s brilliant and I think it explains this latest moral panic about pedophilia and child molesting (and more importantly, the sexuality of teenage girls, which is what it is really all about).

The “popular usage” of the term pedophilia is basically the pedo-scare created by feminists to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality as many boys who are either in jail or on sex offender lists have now discovered. How many? We don’t know since there are no federal stats on who is actually on those lists, but some local studies point to a very significant percentage of “sex offenders” being kids just fooling around.

Just like the definitions of “rape,” “assault,” “domestic violence” that have been redefined to include pretty much anything a female finds convenient, “pedophile” now effectively means “any guy who is attracted to a woman younger than me.”

Then why have we suddenly felt the need to protect young females from sex more now that feminists are in charge?

Why has there been a sudden ramping up of the legislation ‘protecting’ teenage girls from “abuse” since feminists started gaining real power at governmental level, particularly since 2000? Isn’t a simple EP explanation that it is in feminists selfish gene reproductive interests to limit sexual competition from younger girls by raising the age of consent and creating pedohysteria memes?

And it was 19th century feminists who largely determined that 14 year olds are children – something that would have been considered ridiculous in most of human history and even in much of Europe before 2000.

Pedophilia got hijacked by feminists, expanded well beyond its clinical definition or even basic common sense (like jailing consenting kids or guys who had no reasonable way of suspecting the age of their partners), criminalized to the point of absurdity (sex offender lists for consenting kids having sex with each other? Really?) and used as a “scarlet letter” that needs no proof (RL: And hence is not falsifiable and is also tautological).

It’s the same strategy that led to do the absurdly broad definitions, lack of due process, and blatantly sexist criminalization of “domestic violence,” “sexual assaults,” or “sexual harassment.” They not only smear an entire gender but also keep individual men in a permanent state of subjugation to women. Note that most men would think twice before arguing against an abusive female because they can easily get expelled from school, or lose their job, or get evicted from their home.

The root is deeper in my opinion: the “men only want one thing” is just a special case of “male sexuality is bad” which itself is coming from “men are evil”.

The decades-old smear campaign of lies spearheaded by feminists has basically left the general public with an appalling opinion of men:

Men are considered as pedophiles. Never mind that being attracted to a healthy fertile female is a perfectly normal behavior, and Romeo and Juliet were 14 yrs old or so.

Men are considered as perverts guilty of sexual harassment for looking at a girl with her tits and ass hanging out, but having your tits and ass hanging out in the workplace is somehow not considered perverted or sexual harassment.

Men are considered dangerous to children. Never mind that biological fathers are protectors of their children and have an absolutely incredibly positive influence on them.

If you redefine male sexuality as evil and perverted, then it becomes a rhetorical question. (RL: Absolutely perfect and immaculate.)

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Just Banned from Reddit Again

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Young Women Are Dumping Me for Not Being Woke Enough on Feminism, Homosexuality, and Transsexualism

First, I’m 62 years old, so I’m even sure why this happens to me at all. But 15, 16, and 17 year old girls (JB’s) all came to me on the Net just recently. And they approached me in every case. I don’t go chasing JB’s. It’s a bit sleazy. If they come to you, fine, obviously they’re doing  what they want to do, but chasing JB’s as an older man leaves me cold. It does seem a bit predatory.

The 16 year old came to me with the  usual line, “Hi Daddy! Wanna fuck  me?” All young women and teenage girls call me Daddy nowadays. WTF is it with this Daddy shit? She didn’t respond back. She was a Black girl from Michigan.

The 15 year old came to talk and told me she liked it really dirty. I was scared to talk to her because I don’t even know if this is legal! We talked a bit, but really she had no personality at all, didn’t know how to flirt or even talk, and she turned me off. This is typical of JB’s.

I haven’t touched one since age 21, but I’ve talked to many of them on the Net. Back in the 1990’s the scene was wide open and there were all these Yahoo chatrooms like “Younger Women for Older Men.” Full of young women of course, but they also had so many JB’s in them you would not even believe it. JB’s like men! Back then nobody cared about any of that.

Most are awkward, don’t know how to talk to me, don’t know how to talk dirty, act robotic during sex games, or just seem extremely naive. For me, that’s a turnoff. I was glad she went away because I’m not sure if this is legal. This Sex Panic gets worse every year. Are these gay cop cucks going to go after us for talking to JB’s now? You can’t talk to other humans? I can’t believe what fags cops are nowadays. You’re going to arrest me for talking to a 16 year old girl? You call yourself a man?  Take off that uniform.

The totally hot 17 year old sent me some pics, but there was nothing illegal in there. She just wanted to talk dirty and talk about sex. I guess that’s legal! She was 7,000 miles away anyway. Come get me, FBI, you penny ante trivial pikers. Why don’t you feds focus on real crime instead of teenage girl bullshit?

But she was dominant and so am I, so we didn’t connect. She wanted to peg me in the ass with a dildo. She also really wanted me to turn bisexual and fuck guys. Those are both pretty gay things, but she probably liked submissive men, and the more submissive the guy is, the more he’s into getting pegged and fucking dudes.

A 30 hot year old woman came to talk to me recently, and she was along the same lines. She said she was bi-curious and she would not mind if I was too. I told her that if a man even touched me in a weird way, I would probably jump backwards. She said correctly that I was a homophobe (after all, I am afraid of that stuff like most straight men) and left me.

I have young women leaving me all the time nowadays because I’m not woke enough. They hate that I’m an MRA and an anti-feminist, or they think I’m a homophobe, or they think I’m a transphobe. They get furious and say, “You’re really closed-minded!” They range in age from 19-30. Two women, age 28 and 30, told me, “I don’t date homophobes.” This is so weird. Growing up you would never have heard of such a thing.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Sex Trafficking: What Is It?

What are the sex trafficking laws all about. You realize that when that term was first invented it referred to people who were prostituted by basically a pimp or a procurer who they work for? Bottom line is they are not free to leave at any point. The employer is keeping them there by threats of violent harm or death if they ever try to leave. They’re basically “sex slaves” in that sense. It’s fairly common.

Girls and women tricked and sent to countries like the US and Israel from Korea, Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe after being promised a legitimate job like waitressing are also being trafficked. Once there, their passports are confiscated, and they are told that there is no waitress job and that they now work in a brothel until they pay off the transport fee. Typically Organized Crime and often has strong links to law enforcement who are presumably paid off.

There is way too much of this bullshit in the prostitution industry, and this is one reason by some feminists have taken up prohibition.

However, there has been gradual language rape concerning the term “sex trafficking” which now cover all sorts of nonsense that the original definition never covered. Some feminists grotesquely abuse this term to say that all prostitutes are “trafficked.” The FBI seems to have been involved in this language abuse. God knows what the Feds or anyone means when they talk about “sex trafficking” these days.

Bottom line: if you are free to leave at any time, you are not being “trafficked.” Lots of prostitutes have pimps who move them around the country, but as they can take off any time they want, they’re not being “trafficked.”

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Your Personal Views on Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Etc. Do Not Necessarily Have Anything to Do with Your Politics

People compared me to this guy for years. He may have started out on the Left but like all such types, he drifted Right after a while. He’s now come out as a full-blown Libertarian. So he’s gone completely rightwing and his cultural views match up with his economic and cultural views, as they do in almost everyone in this retard country.

Sometimes I think I’m the only person in this damned country who is conservative on culture but liberal on economics and everything else. I’m on Reddit all the time, and I see people making political opinions all the time, and I’ve never seen one person like me. Ever. Sure Alt Left/Realist Left types line up with me, but where are they? They must be quite rare.

This is so sad.

If you are leftwing on culture, you generally but not always are leftwing on economics. There are a few odd Libertarians who are very leftwing on culture but rightwing on economics, but they are not common. Anyway they are basically conservatives. They despise the Left and liberals and always vote rightwing or Republican, no exceptions. So their left cultural views do not put them on the Left.

If you are rightwing on culture, you are always and automatically rightwing on economics and everything else in all cases.  The few that are not are Nazbols, Strasserites, and Third Positionists, and I am seriously turned off by all of those Right/Left mixed movements. Even if they are left on economics and everything else, if they have rightwing cultural views, they vote rightwing. Always. No exceptions. They all vote Republican.

I guess economics is just not all that important. It seems utterly asinine but apparently when the vast majority of Moronicans go into the voting booth, they vote on culture, not economics.

If they’re right on culture, they vote Republican.

If they’re Left on culture, they vote Democrat.

I can’t believe how dumb this is. Really? Really? Culture is really the most important thing in your silly little life? Oh you silly person. Mr. Marx would like a talk with you.

Culture is nothing, it’s crap, it’s bullshit. Ultimately it’s not even a politics. It’s more a matter of personal preference or even personality.

A White liberal Democratic man who votes straight Dem (preferably liberal), never votes Republican, supports (preferably liberal) Democratic candidates, and even contributes to (preferably liberal) Democratic campaigns and candidates is simply a liberal Democrat.

Period. That’s his politics. Your politics is who you vote for at the end of the day.  It’s how you devote your time politically by writing, contributing or working for candidates and causes.

Your goddamned personal views about culture don’t mean a hill of beans to anyone but you, your conscience, your pastor, and your God. They don’t necessarily have anything to do with your politics at all.

These are your personal views about social matters.

Now suppose the White liberal Democrat quoted above has some racist views, which, trust me, many liberal Democrats do. In particular they are racist in the SJW sense where every other particle on the universe is apparently racist or evidence of racism.

Hell, he could even be worse than that! I know a Centrist Democrat who is pretty damned racist. He routinely refers to most all Blacks as niggers and has a very low opinion of them,  He also dislikes Hispanics or Mexicans as he calls them. I’m not sure how he feels about Asians. He’s very pro-White, supports White Supremacist views and defends them.

Although if you Black folks met him, I’m sure he would be perfectly nice to you. Furthermore he is a brutally partisan Democrat who despises Republicans and votes straight Democrat. He often supports pro-Black political projects so as you can see, his personal racism doesn’t even extend to his political racism. This is the case with a lot of these people. The personal is not necessarily the political at all. That’s one fat lie.It’s an intellectual racism, not a personal one.

Our commenter from New York recently noted that most of the liberal Democrats in his building harbored out and out racist views, certainly in the SJW sense, mostly aversive racism, but still. This stuff is probably a lot more common than we think.

However it’s perfectly acceptable in the Democratic Party to be racist against Whites.

This White male Democrat may have some sexist views against women. He may even be a misogynist, especially in the insane feminist sense where any sane person can hardly help but not be a misogynist, especially if you believe in facts and truth. I know Centrist Democrats who are out and out misogynists and openly admit to being so. They also say that most men are misogynists. I’m not sure if he’s right or not. He has a girlfriend and he acts like a teddy bear around her, so this is an intellectual sexism or misogyny, not a personal one.

This same White liberal Democratic man have homophobic views. I know people who wouldn’t vote Republican if you paid them who definitely have what are considered to be homophobic views nowadays, which frankly is about half of life according to SJW’s. I know a liberal Democrat who quite regularly refers to gay men as fags and lesbians as dykes. I don’t think he hates them. He’s just a normal heterosexual man.

Most if not all straight men have a dim view of male homosexuality and most are literally homophobic in the sense of being completely phobic about the whole subject. What the Hell do you think keeps straight men from putting a cock in their mouth? It’s their homophobia, dammit. If not for that they’d probably do it. After all most men will fuck anything if you let them.

The degree of revulsion that straight men feel towards male homosexuality is off the charts. A recent study found that straight men showed more disgust towards photos of gay sex than towards actual maggots. Maggots. Gay sex is more disgusting than maggots. Think about that.

What I am saying is that the White liberal Democrat man italicized above is absolutely a liberal Democrat. After all, that’s his politics. Contrary to SJW clowns, your politics does not encompass every second of your life, especially your personal life. A lot of people live lives that are completely outside of politics. They may not even vote. If they don’t vote their politics are irrelevant. Who cares what they think about anything! It’s literally not important!

If this White liberal Democratic man has racist, sexist, misogynist, or homophobic views, that certainly doesn’t make him a conservative for God’s sake. He goes into the voting booth and votes straight Dem for Chrissake! Those are his personal, completely nonpolitical views. Now you may say that him having those views makes him a bad person. Perhaps it does. Maybe it doesn’t. It’s a matter of opinion. But even if he’s a bad person, he’s still a liberal Democrat, dammit. A lot of liberal Democrats are awful people. They’re human after all.

One might also see this as being instead of personal views as personality flaws. You might argue that a racist, sexist, misogynist, or homophobic person has a personality problem. They’ve got a lousy personality, a personality defect. Like being a bad person but not the same thing. They’re not healthy. They’re too full of hate to be healthy. Perhaps they don’t have a personality defect. Perhaps they’re not unhealthy. It’s a matter of opinion.

Your personality type or health or your personal views, moral or immoral, are not necessarily evidence that you are a liberal or conservative. The only way we can figure that out is by how you vote, etc. or which political candidates you support.

You support Democrats, you’re a liberal whether you pull the lever or not.

You support Republicans, you’re a conservative whether you vote or not.

Generally speaking your views on culture are your own views whether they are bigoted or not. They are only political if you politicize them by say voting for, contributing to and working for bigoted candidates. These would probably all be Republicans. If you vote like that, you’re a conservative.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Temporarily Banned from Reddit

I get banned from almost every Reddit I am on, but that’s ok. I also get banned from every single liberal or Left site that I am on, but that’s ok too. It doesn’t mean I’m not liberal-Left. I’m certainly no conservative. I’m right and they’re wrong and that’s it. It’s always been this way.

Banned from r/communism: No misogynists.

Banned from r/debatecommunism: Transphobia.

Banned from r/feminism: No reason given, apparently misogyny. My perfectly reasonable post was brigaded by feminists trying to shoot down attempts to discover the facts, and then deleted. There’s nothing a feminist hates more than truth, facts, or science. In fact, that goes for all Identity Politics. Which is why it’s all shit, and which is why no self-respecting person, especially on the Left, should have anything to do with this truth-hostile, science-hating, irrational, psychopathological political strain.

This is the most popular feminist sub by far and it is said to be moderate and reasonable, but many of the mods are radical feminists and the content is extremely misandric and man-hating. I really don’t think there’s much difference between mainstream, 3rd Wave intersectional “moderate” feminism and radical feminism, although they don’t like each other much (though most of the hatred is the latter hating the former). This is the big lie. That there’s a moderate, sane mainstream feminism, and a lunatic, crazy radical feminism. It’s all crazy, it’s all radical, and it’s all extremely hostile towards us men.

Banned from r/xxchromosomes. Apparently misogyny. Supposed to be about women but is actually a 3rd Wave Intersectional mainstream feminist site. And their man-hatred is off the charts. They differ from radfems only in degree not in theory. No reason given for ban. I asked a perfectly rational question about female sexuality, was brigaded by a horde of hostile women shitting all over me, calling me a liar, saying I don’t understand women’s bodies and sending me to r/badwomensanatomy, a sub.

Banned from r/gendercritical. Misogyny.

Banned from r/politics. Minor sexualization. Promoting pedophilia. LOL. I said it’s normal for an adult man to have sex with a teenage girl while acknowledging it might well be a legal or moral issue.

Banned from r/Epstein. Justifying pedophilia. LOL.

Banned repeatedly but temporarily from r/purplepilldebate. No reason whatsover and all bans were temporary. All bans were by one female mod, a wicked feminist cunt from Hell and all were for no reason at all except she hates me.

Banned temporarily from Reddit. Three days. Minor sexualization. Same thing. I said adult/teen sex was normal, though it may be immoral or illegal, depending on the law and your views.

Banned again from Reddit. Seven days this time. Minor sexualization. Same thing as the r/politics ban above. In fact, I was banned twice for the same post, which was deleted anyway! I sent them a protest mail from my ban for minor sexualization from r/politics, explaining my case in detail. Instead of listening to me, they banned me for my sexualization on the basis of the same post I was protesting about!

I assume I will be banned permanently from Reddit soon. Oh well. I hate it anyway. It’s SJW Hell on steroids.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Mass Exodus of Masculine Men from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party: Blame the Cultural Left

In the 1st World Western countries, Alpha Whites, Hispanics and East Asians are all right-wingers of some sort: Republic, Libertarian and weight-lifting racists.

Yes, Alpha Whites in the US tend to be rightwing and the “men” of the Left are basically all pussies, fags, and cucks. If any of you ever see a real man on the American Left, please let me know, ok? Been looking for one for a while now.

This is due to the Cultural Left of course because the Cultural Left, being primarily feminist, has the effect of feminizing, pussifying, faggotizing, and cucking the men who buy into this profoundly gay and anti-masculine if not outright anti-male philosophy. The only men allowed on the Left nowadays are men who hate men, and those guys are automatically sissies, girlymen, and fags.

In fact, much of the movement of masculine men (real men) towards the Republican Party in recent years is because it is unrepentantly in favor of masculinity and (real) men. The fagged-out Left has a tendency to drive out any real men. Those that are not driven out convert and get a de facto if not de jure sex change, and turn into a bunch of girls.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Some Very Creepy Truths about Adult-Minor Sex

I work in mental health and I specialize in people who have issues around thoughts about sex with children, etc. I’m an expert and I have people coming to me from all over the world.

First of all, no one is going to believe the facts I state are true. Trust me though: I’m right. All studies were done in the lab and have been repeatedly replicated. In fact, they’ve been replicated so many times that it seems stupid to do them again except morons keep demanding it. I guess we’ll be replicating them until the end of time then.

  1. Men are attracted to teenage girls. 100% of straight men react at very high levels, typically maximum, to females 13+. That should not be surprising to any sane person, except that in our Feminist Clown World, those men would be called pedophiles. We can call them any name we want, but we now have to call all straight men pedophiles. Are we comfortable with that?
  2. So much worse than that is the fact is that not only are straight men turned on by teenage girls who look like women, which is not surprising, but that 90-100% of straight men are even turned on by little girls under 13. More on that below.
  3. Yep, that’s right. Straight men are even turned on by little girls under 13. In general, most straight men are attracted to them at a fairly low level, less than they are to mature females, but a measurable attraction is definitely there.
  4. So much, much worse than that even is that 23% (in three studies – 21%, 23%, and 26%) of straight men test “pedophilic.” That means that 1/4 of straight men are pedophiles by our typical understanding of the term, which probably even includes DSM-5 Pedophilia, a garbage diagnosis if there ever was one. What this means is that 23% of all straight men are as attracted or more attracted to little girls under 13 as they are to mature females 13+. Crazy statistic, huh? The question arises why these men don’t run around molesting little girls. Penalties are very harsh if you get caught doing this, and almost all these men have very strong attractions to mature females, so I assume they focus on the prosocial urge and suppress or repress the antisocial pedophilic feelings. In the Current Year, tens of millions of Americans say they want to kill all the pedophiles. Well, that’s just fine. Are they prepared to execute 1/4 of the men in the US, or 25 million men? Let me know when they get those gas chambers running.
  5. Not sure if this is shocking, but .1-1% of straight men are actual, true pedophiles. They are strongly attracted to girl children and have little or no attraction to mature females, which is the only definition of pedophilia that makes sense. Nevertheless, this means there are 110,000-1.1 million full blown, real deal, scary pedophiles in the US. Once again, we say we are going to execute them. Fine. We are going to execute 100,000-1 million American men? Let me know how that goes.
Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Statistical Alphas, Behavioral Alphas, Chads, and Behavioral Alpha and Behavioral Beta Societies

First of all, some basic definitions:

Statistical Alpha: 15-20% of males, attractive to most women most of the time for whatever reason.Probably no more than 15-20% in any society, existing or conceivable.

Behavioral Alpha: Displays “Alpha behavior.” This may vary. In some societies like the Middle East, a majority of the men probably display Alpha behavior. Not limited to 15-20% the population.

Chad: An 8-10 on the 1-10 looks scale. Often does well with women but not necessarily, as certain other variables can mess him up. Mental Chads, Shy Chads, Odd Chads, Introverted Chads, etc. can definitely have problems with women. Sure some woman usually grabs them and rapes them sooner or later, but they can have long incel periods. A Chad could very well be a virgin or an incel. In fact, on incel forums, they discuss the phenomenon of the Chadcel.

Alpha behavior is probably learned, and Alpha behaviors are best acquired early in life, hopefully by high school or at least college age.

Chads are basically genetic. There’s no reason to brag about your Looks. They’re a gift from God. You didn’t do one thing to deserve them. You just lucked out in the genetic lottery is all.

However, I do think that men do better in societies where more men are Behavioral Alphas. They do better with women and male-female relationships are a lot better. There’s not much hypergamy, there aren’t many incels, and women don’t cuck men, monopolize Chads, or marry Beta Buxxers and then shut down the pussy, etc. The men are naturally masculine and the women are naturally feminine and both sexes seem to like each just fine that way. In addition, the men seem to love women (at least they are very sexually attracted to them), and the women seem to love men.

Societies Where Most Men are Behavioral Alphas (Male Rule Outside Northern and Western Europe and the Anglosphere)

On the other hand, these are typically patriarchies, and societies with many Behavioral Alphas are not great for women, face it. Some societies where most men are behavioral Alphas include Spain (though suffering from a wild feminist insurrection and the beginnings of a soyciety, though heavily resisted by the men), Portugal, Italy (feminism failed there, though that may be changing as new reports indicate the possibility of a soyciety arising there of all places), Greece, the Balkans, and frankly Eastern Europe and the Baltics.

Russia, the Caucasus, Turkey, Arabia, Mesopotamia, the Gulf, and the Levant. North Africa too. Of course we must include all of Black Africa. All of Latin America obviously. Micronesia, Melanesia, Polynesia. Central Asia and South Asia – Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, and even India and Nepal. The Stans. I actually think SE Asian men are behaviorally Alpha. And traditional Korean, Japanese and Chinese societies were very behaviorally Alpha, and the older men still are.

Cucked Soycieties Where Most Men Are No Longer Behavioral Alphas (Behavioral Beta Soycieties under Female Rule in the West)

The soycieties where the men are no longer mostly behaviorally Alpha and have become behaviorally Beta are obviously most of the West as in Western Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Asians in the West, especially in the US. These are really the only places where Female Rule (Feminist Rule) has been implemented, though the infection is spreading, not diminishing, and the target is the whole world, as it is with all totalizing ideologies.

The result of Female Rule is an extreme reduction in:

  • Behavioral Alphas.
  • Sex for young single men.
  • Patriarchy.

Obviously all three of these are related.

The latter is often replaced by the rise of an oppressive matriarchy in its place. Why? Because in society just as in the home, someone has to wear the pants. If the women take the pants off the men, they won’t throw them in the corner or burn them as they probably should. They put them on themselves, turn into men, and turn the men into women.

Basic heterosexual behavior always exists. If the norm is toppled, the inverse simply takes its place. Someone’s got to rule and someone’s got to be ruled. Pure equality among the sexes is obviously not possible. Even Gloria Steinem admitted that!

What’s true among the sexes is probably true for society too, as basic sexual behavior is probably mirrored in some odd way in our sociopolitical world. There’s no escaping sex. It never ends, even in your 80’s.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Being Dumb Isn’t the Problem; Being Dangerous Dumb or Dangerously Ignorant Is

I don’t hate lower IQ people. A lot of the people I hate have high IQ’s too. I hate stupid people. Stupid people who don’t think properly. It’s more like ignorance and what I call a “dangerously stupid” attitude. By ignorant I mean it is completely opposed to science and driven more my mass hysteria and emotional societal panics.

Being stupid is one thing. If you are just stupid but you are not dangerously stupid so you might harm me, I don’t hate you 1%. You could have an 85 IQ but if you are smart enough to not get taken in by societal bullshit and intelligent enough to think for yourself and come up with your own answers instead of being a sheep, I love you to death.

An 85 IQ  person need not be an ignorant moron with repulsive and dangerous views. He’s a lot more likely to but that’s not guaranteed. On the other hand, it’s perfectly possible for someone to be high or very high IQ and be dangerously ignorant to where they have attitudes that are dangerous to me and others. A lot of these types are wrapped up in fanatical movements like feminism and SJWism that tend towards wild irrationality or no rationality at all, and contempt for science and logic in favor of emotional reasoning.

It might be hard to connect with you, but IQ’s no reason to hate a man. I guess I should say that what I hate is dangerous ignorance, but ignorance and dangerous, emotion-driven ignorance does tend to be more common as you go down the IQ scale. As you go up the scale, people can shut off their emotions more and see issues in the clear light of pure logic, in which case, they usually arrive at an answer that’s compatible with science and reasonable policy-wise.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Undefined and Undefinable Feminist Definition of Rape

As I noted in another post, my Mom brought me up right. She taught me that under no circumstances was I to rape girls or women. She drilled into my head over and over that rape was force or the threat of force. Her message was, “Don’t do it, dammit!” She pretty much said everything other than that was fair game, which is the only sane view of rape.

My Mom’s a feminist, and a pretty bad one at that, getting worse as she ages. But nowadays feminists (most women) would call my Mom a rape apologist and a handmaiden because of the way the feminists have blown up the definition of rape and the fact that feminism gets increasingly insane every year, as is the case with all Identity Politics.

Of course the feminists and their fag “male” allies have no expanded the definition of rape to about the size of the Indian Ocean. Not only that but apparently no one can even properly define it as it’s as vague and  undecipherable as the Linear B inscriptions.

As it is, if a woman thinks she got raped, she got raped. That’s now the definition of rape!

Women actually believe that crap. When you put women in power, the first thing they do is  make vague, unenforceable laws to bring about their desired utopia.

Of course this never works, therefore all through space and time, whenever women are put into power over men, the result is simply complete chaos. People tire of it after a bit, and pretty soon, the sane people say, “Let’s have some sense here. Let the men take over!

And then some sort of patriarchy, benevolent or otherwise (typically otherwise), is reimposed. Society’s not fair after that, but it wasn’t fair under Female Rule either. Pick your poison. You will either be ruled by women or men.

Look around you at the Anglosphere, the UK, and Scandinavia to see the dystopian chaos of idiocy that ensues under Female Rule.

I’ll pick men any day. Women are incapable of ruling societies.  Women can do a lot of things,  but that’s not one of them. It’s fine really. Hey, women can’t do everything. Sometimes the ladies just need to step aside and let the boys take over.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: After Menopause, All Women Are Born-Again Virgins

As she ages, my Mom is turning into a worse and worse feminist every year. I hardly even knew she was one before.

This is happening in tandem with her increasing puritanism. Same thing: every year, she gets more and more puritanical and weird about sex. She was always like that a bit, but at least you could talk to her about it, and to some extent she was always proud of me in a sort of “my son, the stud” sort of way. She always thought my playboy ways were hilarious and she would almost fall on the floor laughing at my latest exploits. That makes sense as most women, and humans in general (even some little kids) think players are funny as Hell for some reason.

And of course, feminism is intimately tied in with puritanism and has been from day one. It makes sense as feminism is simply female thinking empowered, reified and increasingly legislated to become the ruling force in society. Feminist Rule is nothing but Female Thought in Power. And puritanism, along with, oddly enough, nymphomania, is part of the Female Character.

Her increasing puritanism got me to thinking. Menopause nukes your sex drive. Women with no or low sex drives tend to become puritanical anyway,  and the longer they stay that way, the worse they get. So my theory now is that increasing puritanism is something all postmenopausal women experience. It may well get worse with time too, as so many miserable things do.

Postmenopausal women for all intents and purposes turn into complete prudes and born-again virgins. I’ve seen complete whore to nun conversions, just like that! Snap of the fingers.

Postmenopausal women a few years out of menopause (they stay horny for a couple of years for some reason) are basically insufferable, and I don’t want anything to do with them. I’ve been battling puritanical shitwads my whole life. I’m sick and tired of them and their crap.

Postmenopausal women don’t fuck anyway, so what’s the point? Why even be with a woman if she doesn’t fuck? That’s pretty much the only reason to be with her anyway, right?

I’ve got my porn and my hand, and neither one ever turns me down.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Trash’s Journeys to Return of Kings and Unz

Trashman Returns: Roosh V readers and even Roosh himself read this site.

What? Roosh V and even Roosh himself read my site?

Trashman Returns: But I was often called a “cuck” and “a shill”.

You’re not a cuck.

Trashman Returns: I moved on to an Alt Right site. But here I was called a Leftwing Libertarian-and I’m not Libertarian.

Unz. You’re not a Libertarian. I actually think you are Alternative Left! Maybe the liberal version and not the Leftist one.

Trashman Returns: When I pointed out the harm of neoliberal markets I was accused of being a shill and cuck and all the usual tedious Gen Z tags.

You’re a cuck if you’re against turbo-capitalism? How many times does capitalism have fall on its face before people wise up? Some people never learn.

Trashman Returns: Back came the response from one Unz Poster “Do you realize how f***ing gay that sounds, boss?”

Oh, you were on Unz. So many terrible rightwingers on there. We certainly don’t think being against neoliberalism is gay! We are conservative liberals and leftists, if that makes any sense. We are the Conservative Left! Rather conservative on social issues, but more left on economics and most everything else. In between the Cultural Left and the Republican social conservatives on social stuff.

Trashman Returns: Meanwhile, on RETURN OF KINGS, commentator’s wanted to tell me how “Alpha” they were and what a “Soyboy” I was.

Toxic masculinity. I hate that phrase, but that’s Roosh’s sites, sorry. Hell that’s all PUA sites. I am trying to get away from that here and create a PUA site for ordinary guys.

You’re not a soyboy? You’re for the men, right? Bros before hos! You’re against the manhating Feminist Enemy and you are with your brothers in solidarity against them. Ok, you’re not a soy or a cuck then. The soys and cucks are the male feminists and other fags who have taken up arms against their brothers by lining up with the feminists who wish our destruction.

PS I’m not against gay men here. Gay men are for the men! I usually call straight men gay. Almost all straight men nowadays are male feminists fags. The male feminists who are working against the men to ruin our jobs and careers and put most of us in jail or prison (the goal of modern feminism) – those are the guys that I call cucks, soyboys, fags, wussies, girlymen, etc. I just call them that to humiliate them and attack their masculinity for lining up with the enemy against their brothers. I do this to shame them away from their gay anti-male tactics. Also, if you’re with the women and against the men, you’re not much of a man. You’re a pathetic wuss, a girlyman.

No real man is for the women and against the men. If that’s you, then you’re a fag.

People like Jason think I am against feminine men but I’m really not. I don’t care how masculine or feminine any man is. Hell, a lot of people used to think I was gay! And I’m a pretty soft guy myself and it’s caused me problems with women my whole damned life. I don’t care how masculine you are! You want to be a wimp, knock yourself out, man! I think straight effeminate men are bizarre. Why don’t you just go gay if you’re going to act like that? I’m not against effeminate gay men either. Cats meow, dogs bark, and gay men are effeminate. I dislike effeminate behavior in men, but I understand that it’s normal for gay men to be this way.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Libertarian Topics It’s Ok to Discuss On Here

If you want to talk about Libertarians on metoo, custody courts, affirmative action, and reparations, ok.

These are all areas of government (and corporate) overreach. I would particularly like to see critiques of the carceral system and carceral state, everybody calling the cops for every little problem, and the fact that about half of the things we want to do in life are now actually or effectively illegal. Every year I look at the new laws, and more things I have been doing my whole life are illegal.

Look at speech codes and hate speech codes. Every week I wake up and another word I’ve been using my whole life is banned. Every other sentence is now some sort of bigotry, offense, or insult needing an apology else your career is over.

It’s not the state that’s doing this. It’s our Sanctimonious Nanny State (a word I hate) Culture or Nanny State Culture that’s firing all these guys. Our culture is now run by Church Ladies (Church Lady Culture) and Stern Nuns with Rulers. No fun allowed! Fun is bigotry! Fun is hate! If you’re having fun, you must be hating, preying up, exploiting or hurting some poor vulnerable soul.

How about the increasingly Puritan Left, Comstock Left, Victorian  Left, or Sex-hating Left. Of course all of this is coming right out  of Sex-Negative Feminism. I came out of the revolutions of the 1960’s. One of our mottoes was, “Do it in the streets!” So my whole life, I’ve been a Do it in the streets type guy. A Hugh Hefner liberal.

The Left is now as sex-hating as the Christian Right. Hell, the only sex-positive politics these days is on the Right! Pathetic! I didn’t sign up for this shit, this prudery. The Left is now championing everything we were opposed and fought against.

The whole carceral state (Mommy Cop) is out of control. I want to see it reigned in. Probably half of our laws should be flushed down the toilet. People can pretty easily solve most of their problems themselves without getting Mommy Cop (the Police State).

Any problem nowadays, snowflakes go yelling for Mommy Cop to come rescue them. “Mommy Cop! He hurt me! He called me a name!” Mommy Cop whips out her ticket book and writes a ticket for yet another of a growing list of citation offenses.

If you want to talk any of these things, go for it:

    • Our invasion of privacy or the fact that we have no privacy at all anymore.
    • #metoo, sexual assault and raaaaaaaaape bullshit.
    • The travesty of custody courts.
    • Affirmative action.
    • Reparations.
    • The carceral system or carceral state (Mommy
      Cop).
    • Legal reform, eliminating many stupid, intrusive, anti-freedom, and sanctimonious laws about personal behavior.
    • The fact that people can probably solve a lot of issues now dealt with by Mommy Cop amongst themselves without crying for Mommy Cop.
    • Hate speech and speech codes.
    • Cancel Culture or the Left’s war on free speech and increasingly even free thought.
    • Various sanctimonious party-pooper, no fun, turd in the punchbowl modern Left cultures that could be called such things as Nanny State Culture, Church Lady Culture, or Nuns with Rulers Culture, in other words the punitive aspects of the Cultural Left.
    • The prudish, anti-sex Left cultures variously described the Puritan Left, Comstock Left, Victorian Left, or Sex-hating Left. Also Sex-Negative Feminism.
    • Anti-freedom, Carceral State Feminism.
    • Pedophile Mass Hysteria, the insane abuse of age of consent and statutory rape laws, and the moral panic around the sexuality of teenage girls.
    • The increasing infantilization of society where childhood is dragged out to the day before the 18th birthday and beyond.
    • Females demanding to be permanent infants when it benefits them and then permanent adults when that benefits them.
    • The notion that females are Forever Children who lack agency their entire lives.

Libertarians have excellent views on all this, which is really civil libertarianism. I am a civil libertarian, as in an ACLU-type liberal. Libertarians are with the old ACLU on civil liberties.

The ACLU is now a cucked, fagged-out Cultural Left Shitshow characterized by dishonest legal theory and the abandonment of (male) reason and logic in favor of (female) emotion and bias when it comes to legal matters. But the old ACLU was great, and the Libertarians line right up with the old liberal civil libertarians. So that’s a great commonality with Libertarians that we can talk about.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: More Terrible Advice from Women

On Reddit, women are making posts saying that if a man just wants sex from a woman and nothing else, he should simply make his feelings clear along those lines, and then everything will be groovy. What’s wrong is men lying and stringing women along and using them for sex. As usual with most advice from women, this is completely wrong, and you will only fail if you follow this advice.

This is the stupidest nonsense I’ve heard in a while. If I told women that I just wanted sex, I guarantee I will never get laid again, even one time. And I think if I had walked through life being up front about just wanting sex, I would have had little sex. Possibly none at all.

I was a Chad and even then, being up front about my intentions never worked for me either. Want to get laid? Lie to women. That’s how you do it, boyos. Or at least that’s how it was done back in the day in the 70s and 80s. Maybe things are different now? But I doubt it.

An honest seducer is an oxymoron. You’re either honest or you are seducer. Pick one. You can’t be both. If you wish to lead a lifetime of seduction, prepare to lie with nearly sociopathic intensity with as little guilt as possible. If your morals won’t allow you to debase yourself to this level, fine. Believe me, I understand. Just get yourself a girlfriend or a wife and play it that way.

It’s insane advice like this that shows that women don’t live in reality. I’ll throw pathetic male feminist soys into the mix. Male feminists are men who have adopted the insane worldview of women and claim that delusional worldview is actual reality. They are men who have adopted female thinking. They no longer think like men. That’s if they ever did in the first place.

Never take advice from women about any of this stuff. Why would you take advice from someone who doesn’t live in reality?

At the end of the day this is just more female solipsism. How can a woman best get sex? Be up front with her intentions! So obviously it must be true for men too. Women can’t see the world through any eyes not their own.

Solipsism is the curse of womanhood.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: A Bit about the Finer Points of Social Rules and Communication

SHI: How’s it going nowadays with your rotten little SJW fruitcakes, the ones with a major entitlement acquired after a lifetime of feminist brainwashing?

Oh, I am going to a new Fagbucks now and everything is pretty much all right.

If People Act Shitty, Act Shitty Right Back to Them

If they’re shitty to me, I’m kind of shitty right back to them. I am doing this in other places too. Sometimes I even get aggressive with people. Some people totally back down and kiss my ass when I get aggro with them. So weird. I’m usually scared to fight back against people because I am afraid of a scene or a ban, so I don’t do it, but it really does work. You do need to fight back against people!

And I am learning new social rules bullshit. I mean you keep learning this stuff your whole life, really. I had blown off a lot of the rules that I thought were moronic (most of them) for most of my life, but I am finding that life really does go a lot smoother if you follow more of those rules.

The rules are extremely subtle and hard to figure out, but if you’re smart, you can do it. Now, I am quite socially aware, but I can see how an autist would go completely insane with this stuff. I mean they cannot even understand normal human communication, much less this weird, undercover, near-subliminal stuff.

Be Careful How You Talk to or Even Look at Young Women, Especially If You Are Older

One thing I am doing is being very careful about talking to young women.

How to Look at Hotties without Staring

Or even looking at them. I don’t even look at them all that much. And I am careful about looking at the baristas. If there’s one that’s hot, I look at her a bit, then I look away for a bit, then I look back for a bit. That’s the only way to do it. Otherwise you are staring. I learned this from a PUA site post on social communication. This actually works pretty well.

Or you can look above them or to the side of them. You can’t see them perfectly because you are not focusing on them, but you can see them fairly well.

You can actually look at a whole room this way by just looking at a spot on the wall over everyone’s heads. You can’t see anyone well but you can still actually see everyone in the whole room all at once in a panorama view, albeit a bit off-focused, so if anybody did anything odd, you would see it right away. I guess cops, soldiers, etc. need to monitor groups or crowds like this.

You can meditate or just let your mind go blank while you look at the spot on the wall. I guess some Normies might think it’s weird, but so what? Fuck em. People will throw you out of a store for looking at a spot on a wall and meditating? WTF. What, you hurt the wall’s feelings?

Wait for an IOI, Especially with Young Women

With young women, I don’t say one word to them unless they give me an IOI. They have to look at me and smile, maybe even more than once. If I say something and get a cold response, I don’t say anything more.

Punish People for Blatant Assholery

I was next to a hostile young woman who refused to look at me the other day. I was in front of her in line. I deliberately took my time in line putting my stuff away very slowly so the bitch would have to wait extra longer. She and the barista both gave me these very puzzled looks. I just smiled a bit to myself and thought, “Hey bitch! If you take that hate look off your stupid face, I’d put my stuff away a lot quicker!”

Don’t Even Look at Bitches Who Hate You No Matter How Hot They Are

The young women who hate me, I mostly refuse to look at them, or I look to the side of them with this really evil, mean look. I’m not looking at anything really – just a window or nothing at all a bit to the side of or over their heads. It looks like you are looking angrily at a window or wall, and no one really cares. But they seem to get the message.

Before, I kept looking at a chick if I thought she was hot even if she hated me, which many of them do. Now I don’t do that anymore.

Beware of the “Unconscious Cope” We Men Have about Women

Also, if I get what might be an IOI – like a stare – I think again and consider maybe it wasn’t done for a friendly reason, so I am not interpreting everything as an IOI anymore.

This is a good idea as we men have unconscious bias which is sort of an unconscious cope where we always tend to think positively in terms of “this chick likes me” no matter what she does. I think our minds just do this unconsciously as some unconscious cope or optimism bias, but it pays to be aware of it because it makes you think women like you even if they don’t, and it misconstrues innocuous or even unfriendly behavior as friendly. Which results in creep-shaming.

To Women, Every Comment, Remark, Question, or Joke said to Them by a Man Means “Want to Fuck?”

I complimented a barista on her makeup the other day as she had changed it. She took this as a come-on. We’ve known each other for years.

She’s fat and I wouldn’t fuck her with my worst enemy’s dick, but you say hi to a stupid woman, and to them that means, “Want to fuck?” It’s  narcissistic and self-centered of them to assume that all these guys want to fuck them when half of us wouldn’t touch their fat asses with a 10 foot pole and an 11 foot extension.

Now that she did that (interpreting my makeup comment as an inappropriate come-on), I am cold, often refuse to tip, and don’t look at her, and definitely won’t say anymore stuff about clothes or makeup.

Make a Point of Acting Particularly Friendly to People Who Are Nice to You, Especially in Front of Hostiles, to Send a Message to the Hostiles “Look What Happens When You Act Nice”

Baristas who are friendly get the tips I saved up from the hostiles, often with a compliment like, “This is for good service. You always give me good service” (with a pointed emphasis on the “you” and the “good service”). See how that works?

You Can’t Go Around Starting Questions with Everyone

Basically, you can’t start conversations with everyone. Especially if a woman is next to you and refusing to look at you with a cold look on her face, a conversation is probably not going to work out. Don’t try to talk to bitches who have cold, shut-down faces. Those faces mean “Don’t talk to me, asshole.”

Figure out When a Conversation Is Being Shut Down and End It

There’s a guy I know there who I have talked to a few times. He’s a fat pig and he’s quite unfriendly for some reason I never understood and never will. I tried to talk to him again recently, and he gave me the same thing. Now I am never going to talk to him again. You need to punish people for being assholes, not just keep coming back for more punches.

One thing I need to do is to shut down conversations that seem a bit hostile. If you say something, and you get a one-sentence answer, and they turn away, it’s a shut-down. They don’t like you or they don’t want to talk to you. Warm, friendly, two-way conversations don’t work like that.

We tend to keep talking to them because a  subconscious cope in favor of “thinking people like us versus thinking that they don’t” comes into play, and we keep thinking they will get nice if we just talk to them a bit more. Hate to say it but nope.

Also, it is quite insulting when you try to talk to someone, and they act like they don’t want to talk to you. It’s an insult and your mind does not want to believe this insulting, rude response is actually true because it’s hurtful to think this person dislikes you so much they won’t even talk to you. So this subconscious cope comes in where your mind simply refuses to see this as an insult, as it hurts your ego to be insulted. So your ego says it wasn’t an insult after all! See how it works?

If They Don’t Like You at First, They Won’t Change Their Minds Later on

In other words, haters never change. Once again, this is unconscious optimism – “She was a dick before, but this time, she’s going to like me because I really am a cool, good person.” Nope, if someone acts like doesn’t like you, they don’t like you. Period. You keep trying over and over to see if they will change their mind, and basically they just never do. So just stop. Recognize the subconscious cope here and nip it in the bud.

Figure out the Fake “I Didn’t Hear You” Message

I am also getting better about this weird subliminal communication where you say something, and the person hears you but pretends not to hear you. People do this crap a lot, and I always think they didn’t hear me, so I repeat myself, sometimes more than once. Apparently this is a social faux pas. A very tricky, high-level one but a social faux pas nonetheless.

Another thing they might do which is a bit easier to figure out is to respond to your speech with an angry, outraged and often rather loud, “What!?” that means, “Um, I didn’t hear that!” I don’t always get that either, and sometimes I repeat my words. It’s always a bad idea, as their response, if they have one, only gets worse.

They also might put up both arms up in the air and wave them back and forth while saying, “Ain’t gonna go there.” They might smile as they do that. End that line of talk right then and there. You’re not going to convince them to “go there” by continuing the line of conversation, which I tend to do sometimes.

It doesn’t really work to repeat the statement, as they just act annoyed and don’t answer or give some weird and also very subliminal response that is hard to figure out, as it’s all coded and masked. The response tends to say something like, “I didn’t hear that (but I really did)!” or, “I really don’t want to talk about this!”

If you say something and it seems like they should have heard you but act like they didn’t, figure out that they are playing this “I didn’t hear you” game and don’t ask again. In particular, think about what you said said or asked. Is it the sort of thing that might seem sensitive, and the person might not want to discuss it because they see it as inappropriate, insulting, or a come-on? Usually you can figure out how they might not want to answer due to the nature of the statement or question.

Certainly don’t say it again more than once. When people do this, by not answering, they are saying, “That question is annoying, inappropriate, or possibly racist/banned, etc.,  – i.e., something I don’t want to talk about, so I am pretending that I didn’t hear you.” In my 60’s, I am just figuring this out for the first time, though I have somehow known for a long time that people do this.

It’s a bit hostile and dicky. It’s better to say that you’d rather not discuss that or something along those lines with a smile, but people like to be dicky. I do this myself sometimes if someone asks me a retarded question that’s meaningless or silly, especially if asked in a hostile tone. I simply don’t respond. I never did that before but I am starting to do it now.

This is a real tough one from a social communication point of view because the automatic tendency is to assume that the person didn’t hear you and repeat the comment, except if you do that, it’s a social error.

I talked to my Mom and she said that if it seems like they are doing that, don’t say it a second time and don’t say it on another occasion, as it’s some sort of banned question or statement.

And anyway, we both agreed, even if they didn’t hear it, then obviously they were not too concerned about what you were saying as they weren’t listening to you, so why should you repeat it for someone who won’t even give you the dignity of listening to you? She also said that it’s a bit shitty and hostile (she called people who do this “jerks”) to do the “pretend I didn’t hear you” thing. She said it’s more polite just to say you’d rather not discuss it.

In case you all didn’t know about this weird social rule, here you go. I know all of you have experienced this before, so maybe you want to take notes.

Comments to Non-Native English Speakers about Their Linguistic History

I asked a barista recently if he spoke another language, as he definitely has an accent (I didn’t mention the accent, of course). He really did not want to answer that, as maybe he found it insulting or inappropriate or whatever.

Most people tend to answer that question if you ask it nicely enough. If someone has an accent or speaks broken English, and you wish to discuss it, it’s best to ask, “Do you speak another language?” other than bring up the fact of their accent or their broken English, which they might see as an insult.

If their English is nevertheless excellent, after they explain to you that they speak another language and English was not their first language, you can compliment them on their English to soften the blow a bit because in the US, it’s seen as a possible racist insult to imply someone doesn’t speak English as a first language.

You can also ask them how old they were when they came here, and most will answer. I usually throw in the bit where I am a linguist who is fascinated by languages, and they relax and stop thinking I might be a racist.

Sometimes I might notice that they have an accent, but I will shrug, smile, and downplay it and say that if you come after age 8, you just get an accent, and that’s all there is to it. Most people don’t mind this conversation, since you are asking them about their life as if it is interesting, and most people love to talk about themselves.

Always try to shrug, smile, or downplay any comment or question that could possibly be taken as an insult especially if the other person act a a bit taken aback by it. I find that this generally calms them down, and they stop feeling possibly insulted.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: We Men in the West Lost Control of Our Women and Let Them Run Wild

Pantheist: What if you convince women to stop acting like children the same way we convinced some Blacks to “Whiten up”. Transcend their nature.

Sure, they did it in my Mom’s time, but that time is over. All women are feminists now, and most of them are feral.

We’ve let our women run loose by not controlling them like we should have. The results are not pretty and are all around us.

The new generations of women do not want to transcend their nature. Feminism has told them that it’s cool to act crazy and attack, fight, scream at, hate, humiliate, and emasculate men.

Modern women like to do all of these things, and feminism has even encouraged them to act crazy because when they act crazy, it’s never their fault. It’s all the fault of men. So women have permission to go completely crazy, fall apart, act wild, and wage war on men. Modern women actually enjoy doing all of these things because female nature wants to act like this.

Women in my Mom’s generation were taught that you didn’t do these things unless you had a damned good reason.

In answer to the commenter’s question about women acting like children, women wish to act like children because this is their nature. Also, feminism completely infantalizes women and treats them like children who lack agency and can be convinced by evil men to do just about anything.

How many times have we heard “that’s not consent?” We say that teenage girls are too young to consent to sex because they are not mature enough (which is bullshit), but we treat grown women in the exact same way.

Feminism says women lack agency and are just puppets or marionettes that can be manipulted by evil men into doing things they don’t want to do even though they say they do because these nonhuman muppets are incapable of saying no or stopping sexual advances.

That’s why we have crazy new cases where

  • where we men have to read woman’s minds to figure out if she wants to have sex or not
  • where women consent but they didn’t really “mean it,” so it’s not consent
  • where women can be talked or pressured into sex despite their consent which means that they lack agency and it’s not consent
  • where drunk or loaded women are not responsible for anything they do, so any sexual decisions they make are not consent
  • where women consent to sex but then regret it the next morning so that’s not consent retroactively
  • where women get to decide 10-20 after they consented to a sex act whether they really and truly and for real consented and they can decide that it wasn’t really consent

and all sort of other crazy nonsense.

In all of these cases, women are being treated like children who are too immature to consent to sex and hence lack agency.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Standard Antisemitism Is Rightwing and Has Nothing to Offer Me or Any Other Liberal or Progressive Person

Other than the role of Israel in US politics and foreign policy, which is truly malign, as far as any other beefs against Jews that antisemites have, I’m not really into them. Those arguments just don’t resonate with me. I don’t particularly care what Jews do in my country outside of the Israel thing. Who cares!

Antisemitism is rightwing anyway. I get annoyed at Jews’ bullshit, and I like to talk about how they annoy me, but that’s not a matter of hatred. I don’t hate annoying people. They’re not contemptible; they’re just annoying. Two different things.

But as far as the Jews’ bullshit, games, and scams, that’s just them being silly.  All of the rest of us are morons for falling for these silly ethnic games they are playing on us. And if we are falling for their crap, oh well. We deserve whatever we get.

I’m not into Jews’ Endless Victim trip, which is really just Jewish Identity Politics. And I’ll bash Jewish IP on here like I bash any other IP. But I bash all retarded IP’s. Jewish IP isn’t anymore idiotic and nonsensical than all the others. All the IP’s are really the same at the end of the day.

Anyway I don’t hate professional victims. I just think they are complete idiots, and I laugh at them. What sort of a moron spends his whole life wailing about what a victim he is? I hate to use the word, but that’s what a loser does. So all the victim addicts are losers in a sense. They lack the basic pride needed to love themselves enough to not fall into the pathetic victim trap.

Now if your people really are getting fucked over, ok, well, you don’t have much choice. The victim role has been shoved upon you, and owning it is just facing facts.

The classic antisemitic beef has always been rightwing.

I will go over the standard anti-Semitic line as it has been forged for the last 150 years or so, but first I will discuss other things. Prior to that, antisemitism was based on other things.

Some were silly things like Jews killed Jesus. Except Jesus himself was a Jew, and Christians are literally worshiping this Jewish dude as their hero, but never mind that. It’s really sad how many Jews were probably killed for this BS.

Another silly reason was that Jews refused to convert to Christianity. I don’t understand why that’s important at all much, less a reason to kill a man. Obviously this doesn’t resonate with me.

Others were tragic lies like Jews being accused of poisoning village wells during the plague. That’s just made-up BS; it’s not even true. Sadly, many Jews were murdered for this nasty lie.

In the Middle Ages, Jews were often persecuted due to being the visible face of feudal rule. No one saw the feudal lords. The only face of feudal rule your average serf saw were Jewish tax collectors.

Logically, Jews tended to get killed when the usual peasant rebellions took place, except they pretty much deserved it for collecting taxes for the lords, although the Jewish women, children,  old men, and those who were not working for the lords should have been spared. Anti-Jewish pogroms were very ugly things. You don’t even want to know the details.

The modern form of antisemitism is a racial antisemitism which was founded by a German man named Marr in the 1870’s  who founded the Anti-Semitic League. Yep, that’s where we get the term that everyone likes to take apart as being irrational.

Except words and phrases get to be irrational in terms of etymology. Does “You’re pulling my leg literally mean that?” No? Ok, then why say it? In Spanish, you say, “You’re pulling my hair?” Does that make any more sense? Of course not. See what I mean? Words and phrases don’t have to literally make sense. They only have to mean whatever the people who use them say that they mean. #1 rule of a subfield of Linguistics called Semantics.

Oddly enough, Marr had previously married and divorced three separate wives, all Jewish. Hell, that’s probably why he hated Jews right there, ha ha. The general argument of these “new antisemites” or “modern antisemites” was that Jews are anti-nationalists and basically traitors to the homeland. I’m not sure how valid that argument was or is. The Dreyfus Affair is a case in point of this argument.

A lot of Jews fought nobly in World War 1. During Kristallnacht, many Jews put on their WW1 uniforms and went out and stood in front of their shops to try to protect them on the grounds that people would respect the fact that they were patriots. It didn’t work. They got beat up and their stores got burned down anyway. That’s so sad.

There was an argument that a lot of Jews tried to get out of World War 2, but I’m not sure how valid that is. That’s rather low if they did considering that in Europe anyway, we fought on their behalf.

But my father had two close Jewish friends who he met during World War 2.

One man served in the Pacific with my father in Okinawa and then went to China with him after the war. That trip to China was one of the peaks of my father’s life. He talked about it a lot. It was like this wild adventure.

Another served on the European front in Italy and then in Germany with the Liberation. He was there when the death camps were liberated. The US military said that Jewish soldiers didn’t have to go see the death camps if they didn’t want to, but my father’s friend went anyway. It was bad, real bad. No words to describe how bad it was. So two of my father’s Jewish friends served in the war. Doesn’t sound like a lot of them got out of it.

Later, other forms of rightwing antisemitism formed in the 20th Century with these basic arguments.

  1. Jews are Communists and Jews led the Bolshevik Revolution that killed 90 million billion zillion gazillion Russian Christians!!

This one is funny. I supported the Bolshevik Revolution. I’m practically a Goddamned Commie. Jews led the Bolshevik Revolution? Ha ha, thank you very much, Jews! Jews are a bunch of Commies? It’s not true anyway but if it’s true, thank you very much, Jews!

2. Jews push racemixing and are trying to genocide the White race. There’s actually some truth to this. Jews in the US have indeed been trying to make Whites a minority in the US,  or at least some of them have. Some of them have anyway. As one Jew said, “When we get Whites down below 50%, a Nazi government can never come to rise in the US.” See what they are doing? It’s all about self-preservation. They’re not just doing it be evil.

I don’t particularly care about this either than to note that the Jews are engaging in sleazy double standards as usual.

1. Jews all have to marry other Jews and no mixing is allowed or they go extinct.

2. But Whites need panmixia!

So promote racial fidelity for your own group while promoting racial suicide and mixture for  your enemies. Sleazy. But hey, that’s the way they are.

I figure that if Whites are so stupid as to be conned by this by pissant little tribe of humans called Jews (who are no more important than any other pissant tribe like Chechens, Burushaski, Dinka, Tuareg, or what have you) then we deserve whatever they con us into. I have no sympathy for morons. And if we Whites want to mix away and go extinct out of own own free will, which is apparently the case, well then, that’s own choice.

3. Jews promote racial hatred against Whites,  make Whites out to be the bad guys, and promote non-Whites as glorious, perfect people while promoting Whites as devils. Well, that’s awful rich of the Jews to do that considering that they’re obviously White themselves, except they lie as usual and say they’re not.

This is just a stupid Jewish game:

We’re not White (though we are), and we are non-Whites (except we’re not) along with the glorious Browns, Blacks, and Yellows, all fighting the evil White oppressor (which is actually us because we’re White). Except that Jews won’t date or marry these glorious non-Whites they throw themselves in with. Hell, they won’t even live in the same neighborhood with them.

It doesn’t even make sense logically, but a lot of Jewish arguments are like that.

So, more Jewish scamming, double standards, tribal thinking  – the usual crap. But this game is so stupid. I mean if we Whites really cared, we could probably raise a fuss about all this anti-White hatred, except the Jews and their non-White pals call us Nazis when we Whites ask people to please, pretty please not be racist against us.

Well, the Jews are definitely playing a real low game here all right, but I don’t particularly care about White-bashing and anti-White racism. I hardly deal with it, and I just laugh at any non-White who acts racist towards me because, I hate to say it, I actually do feel superior to them deep down inside at that point when they are bashing my race.

But I can see why any racially aware White person, certainly a White nationalist, would have a huge beef against Jews. They have a right to that beef because from these Whites’ POV, Jews are definitely screwing over their people.

Except I’m not a racially aware White or a White nationalist, so I don’t care.

4. Jews promote civil rights, feminism, gay rights, tranny rights, and all sorts of other civil rights stuff to weaken the moral fiber of White society so the Jews can take over and out-compete the Whites. Well, all of those movements were good ideas at least in  theory, so good on the Jews. And I doubt if they did it to weaken us. They probably just did it out of a strong sense of social justice, which Jews have had for a long time now, and that is very noble of them.

The argument also says that Jews promote these divide and conquer movements among Whites while sparing their own kind. Well, that’s not true. Jewish society is full of some of the worst feminists of them all. And it didn’t use to be, but gay and lesbian Jews are on just about every corner. I assume there are plenty of Jewish trannies too, as Jews seem to go in for anything sexually perverse for some reason.

But then you have (((George Soros))) who goes around to White Gentile countries promoting all of these rights moments, including a truly insane feminist group called Femen, which is his baby. Femen is raising the usual Hell that femikooks anywhere raise, mostly in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, when Femen tried to set up a chapter in Israel, (((Soros))) refused to fund it.

Now I am very suspicious of this man!

His game:

White Gentile societies need the most divisive radical feminism to turn the men and women against each other (Why do they need this?), while we Jews wouldn’t dare subject our own people to this divisive bullshit.

Ok, this is the sort of thing that the Elders of Zion do in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Promote all this junk for their enemies to divide them while sparing their own kind.

So congratulations Mr. (((Soros)))! You succeeded in being a living example of the worst anti-Jewish stereotypes of all! In fact, you appear to have walked right out of the pages of the Protocols, one of the most anti-Jewish books ever written! Brilliant!

Jews act out the worst anti-Jewish stereotypes and then they are shocked! Shocked! When antisemitism logically follows that. They create antisemitism, then they scream and yell about it. That’s dumb, but that’s not a reason to hate them. That’s just these foolish Jews bringing in down on themselves. Why should I hate someone for being self-destructive?

In general, I don’t care that Jews push all these SJW movements, but Mr. (((Soros)))’ behavior is extremely uncool. At any rate, (((Soros))) is not even good for the Jews. The guy’s a one man Antisemitism Manufacturing Plant in the form of a human.

Another thing I want to point out is that the SJW’s are on autopilot now. I doubt if feminism, gay rights, civil rights, tranny rights, and whatever else rights need Jews to push their causes anymore. All the US Jews could take off for Israel or the moon tomorrow, and I am pretty sure that these movements would charge right ahead. That’s because the leadership and bases of these movements is swarming with Gentiles.

5. Jews own the media. Yeah, they do, sort of. And they took it over on purpose. Not to be evil but to protect themselves. And the consequence of this Jewish media is…? What? Other than the Israel-firster stuff, not much.

Further, I do not think the media needs Jews anymore either. The other day, I saw a Canadian paper formerly owned by (((Izzy Asper))), an Israel-firster billionaire who was also a real ratfuck, as you might expect. The paper, The  National Post, is now run by Gentiles.

Well, if you go read that paper, you would think that (((Asper))) never left because the paper reads exactly like it did when (((Asper))) ran it. Still a full-blown Israel-firster paper, but now the Israel-firster articles are all written by Gentiles!

I have seen other papers go from Jewish to Gentile ownership, and not one single thing changes. So I think there is just a “media elite” politics in North America which is shared by all owners, editors, and writers for the MSM, Jews and  Gentiles both. They both push wild SJWism, bash Whites, uphold non-Whites as glorious, and are fanatical Israel-firsters.

6. Jews own Hollywood. Yes, and? Granted, it’s not very democratic, but Hollywood is not nearly as Jewish as it used to be. Many directors and producers now are Gentiles. The Jews still own a lot of the studios, but Gentiles have been forming their own studios lately – Coppola is an excellent example.

Supposedly Jews use Hollywood movies and TV (which is still very Jewish, granted) to push the same stuff – SJWism, anti-White propaganda, reverence for glorious non-Whites, etc. Except Hollywood doesn’t really go along with the Israel-firster stuff, and a number of directors don’t even go along with US imperialism.

And once again, the Gentile directors and producers push all the same themes that the Jewish ones do.  There is a Hollywood elite that has a similar politics shared by both  Jews and Gentiles.

7. Jews make porn. They do. But there are an awful lot of Gentiles making porn now too, right? The industry used to be extremely Jewish in the 1970’s and 80’s – now it is much less so.

But let’s try a thought experiment. All the  US Jews take off for Israel, the moon, Atlantis, wherever. No more Jews. You think the porn industry will go under? Hell no. All the outlets owned by sleazy Jews will be immediately taken over by sleazy Gentiles. Isn’t that obvious? And the Gentiles in porn push all the same sleazy crap: racemixing, Blacks cucking Whites, or whatever.

7. Jews are aggressive, rude, tight, and don’t like non-Jews. A lot of them are. This is particularly the case with the Orthodox and Super Jews like you find in Israel. The more “Jewish” the person is, the more they act in this “Jewy” way. The more assimilated the Jew is, the less they act that way. A lot of Jewish men can definitely be pretty aggressive. The women seem to be less so. After all, they are females.

But that’s not really important. Anyway, exactly how many people actually hate Jews because they are like this? Hell, I know wild Judeophiles who laugh and openly admit that the Jews are obnoxious. And these are people who love Jews.

I’ve also read thousands of antisemites on the web over the years. I haven’t found one yet who actually hated Jews because a lot of them are not real nice. So few if any people are actual antisemites for that reason. I’m sure Jews will call these people antisemites, but they all everyone that.

As far as my opinion goes, at the end of the day, this is just not important. That’s just the petty sociological behavior of a single ethnic group.

Lots of ethnic groups have funny ways of behaving, both good and bad. In many cases, ethnic behavior isn’t important as long as they don’t break the law or seriously disrupt society. Being annoying is nothing. I’m not going to hate some whole race of humans because a lot of them act annoying. That’s a petty issue. It’s hardly a reason to hate a whole ethnic group or race. I imagine most people who feel that Jews act this way feel the same way.

It should be clear now that standard antisemitism is rightwing and has always been rightwing. There’s nothing here for liberals, Leftists, or progressive people.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Nope, Sexual Harassment Was Not a Big Deal from 1975-2005, Sorry

In Jason’s recent article, he says that gawking and crudeness (sexual come-ons) have never been acceptable at school or at work at any time going all the way back to the 1950’s. Well, I was around in the 1970’s, 80’s, and 90’s. I do not remember even one case of a woman complaining of sexual harassment back then.

I do not remember one case of a woman complaining that a man was staring at her. I do not remember one case of a woman complaining that a man made a crude remark to her. Certainly I cannot remember one case when I was ever seriously accused of any of these things.

I didn’t start hearing about it until 2005, when I was 48 years old. I was told that I was staring at the baristas and making them uncomfortable. But I was doing the same thing I’ve done my whole life, not even 1% different.

It’s just that I had gotten older, and as you get older, suddenly the behavior that they tolerate without batting an eye when a young man does it is somehow illegal when an older man does it. It took me a while to figure out the new rules of middle aged man and young women, which is something I am still figuring out by the way.

Wasn’t SJWism getting going pretty good around 2005? Anyway, it is only in the past 14 years from 2005-2019 that I have heard one thing about staring, sexual harassment, harassment period, illegal talking to other humans, or any of this insane bullshit.

My conclusion is that this is a modern phenomenon of the Current Year being brought on by Peak Modern Feminism, which gets nuttier and nuttier every year like all forms of Identity Politics. So in any given Current Year, modern feminism will be a bit more insane, weird, and demanding in the previous year.

It seems like I have been looking at women my whole life. I never gave any thought to whether I was staring or not, so I have no idea if I was doing it! But women and girls have been staring at me most of my life since age 17 or so. Often I stared at them and they stared back at me. Or they stared at me and I didn’t stare back. Or I stared at them and they didn’t stare back at me. It wall no matter because no one cared.

I remember in college, one friend of mine said, “I know you like to rape women with your eyes, Bob.” He said it as a joke. This was before feminists made it illegal for most men to look at women at all, much less stare at them.

So all through my whole life, I looked at women with absolutely zero problems. And they stared at me a lot, I mean a lot.

Once I was in a library at Santa Ana College in 1985 (age 27), and I looked up and every single woman in the whole damned library in front of me was looking right at me with those weird blank zombie robot stares.

Once I walked into the Roxy nightclub in 1982 (age 24). As soon as I stepped in the door, I swear to God, every single woman in that club stared at me. It actually frightened me a bit, and I sort of shuddered. I don’t know why I found it frightening, but it is a bit unnerving. Try it sometime. Walk into a nightclub and if every woman in the club looks right at you, see how it makes you feel. You might find it if not unnerving, at least somewhat frightening.

I worked at all sorts of jobs all over the place, and I never heard one complaint of me staring at women or being creepy or any of that crap. I was at college and university for many years, including advanced degree study, from 1975-1984, then 1991-1994. That’s 12 years post-secondary education. No one complained one time that I stared at women or acted creepy around women. Not even one time, ever.

When a woman stares at you, generally speaking, it means she likes you. If a woman doesn’t like you, she simply ignores you. Women who hate you usually do not stare at you.

Now and again a woman who hates you may stare at you. In that case, the stare would look hostile or like “What the Hell is the matter with you anyway?” This doesn’t happen very often.

Generally speaking, the blank dead robot stare means she likes you, like really likes you, like wants to do something sexual or romantic with you. A woman in love with you often stares at you for long periods of time with an utterly blank look on her face. Often a little Mona Lisa mystery smile, almost on the edge of bare laughter, appears.

I remember having staring contests with girlfriends.

We would be in the front room of a house she was house-sitting at. For 15 minutes we just sat there and stared at each other with funny little smiles on our faces. Neither or us said one damned word and the room was quiet as a mouse.

It was actually a nice experience, rather pure in the way that religious novitiates try for silence, work, and prayer. Life bared down to meagerest sensory output. Silent and looking. Praying and meditating into each other’s eyes. And not one word. Pure as a monastery.

So staring is quite helpful for men. It tells us when a woman is interested in us. I hate to think that women would stop staring at us because then it would be hard to tell if they liked us or not.

Gay men are extremely creepy and they stare at each other in very creepy ways constantly. And they stare at straight men they like in that same creepy, unnerving way. They also harass each other constantly with rude, crude, sexual remarks and often a lot of out and out grabbing of other men’s bodies in various ways.

In other words, gay men treat other men exactly the way straight men treat women, except 5-10X worse. This gives the lie to the insane feminist idea that sexual harassment is based on sexism, misogyny, aggression, hostility and even violence against women. Yes, these lunatics actually say that sexual harassment (guys trying to get laid or get a date) is a form of violence against women. It’s as bad as hitting her over the head.

Obviously then gay men’s sexual harassment of other gay men is based on hatred of men (misandry), hostility, aggression, and even violence against other gay men. Gay men harass each other because they hate other gay men, or they hate men, or something, or this or that, or whatnot, or whatever. Does that even make any sense at all? Of course not. Yet this is the only logical conclusion we can draw from feminism’s lunatic definition of sexual harassment.

Obviously all of this is complete nonsense. Men sexually harass women for the same reason that men consensually flirt with women and for the same reason that gay men sexually harass each other in epidemic fashion. Men do these things because they’re horny. They do them because they’re horny and they’re trying to get laid. They’re trying to attract a woman for dating, sexual activities, or romance.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Why Identity Politics Gets Crazier Every Year, and Why It Has To

Every year things get a little bit better for all of these groups, so they are less oppressed. Instead of throwing a party like they should, they jump up and down even harder and yell that they are oppressed more than ever.

And all the while the move the Oppression Goalposts a bit further away and declare a number of behaviors and  speech forms which were previously harmless now forms of hate and hate speech. The need to continually be oppressed even while their lives get better and better is the reason that IP gets a little bit more insane every year.

Do you follow?

Obviously feminism in the Current Year is more insane than it’s ever been. Black IP is nuttier and more extremist than it’s ever been. Gay IP has never been crazier. Pretty soon we will be homophobes if we refuse to put a cock in our mouths.

I’m already seeing a few signs of this mindset here and there with Gay IP people saying that being a heterosexual man is inherently homophobic in and of itself. The only way to stop being a mean homophobe gay hating Nazi and be nice to teh geyz is to go find yourself a nearby penis and put it between your lips, I guess. That way you’re bisexual which is now the only way not to be a homophobic bigot, I suppose.

Of course the trannies are more nuts than ever. Their particular form of IP is new, so the goalposts are flying away faster than you can run. This is typical of any newly created IP which needs to go into overproduction mode to catch up to all of the more advanced forms of oppression who have gathering grudges and insults for decades.

It’s true that the older fave oppressions don’t grow nearly as quickly because they’ve already concluded that half of daily life by the oppressive Other somehow oppresses them in some way or other. In other words, they’re running out of things to complain about. The only solution is to start complaining about nuttier and nuttier things, to get even more sensitive, and to increase the crazy demands on the evil oppressor Other a bit more.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Tammy Wynette, “Stand by Your Man”

Tammy Wynette, “Stand by Your Man,” from 1968! One of the greatest country songs ever written!

Lyrics, simple but just perfect:

Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman
Giving all your love to just one man
You’ll have bad times
And he’ll have good times
Doin’ things that you don’t understand
But if you love him you’ll forgive him
Even though he’s hard to understand
And if you love him oh be proud of him
‘Cause after all he’s just a man

Stand by your man
Give him two arms to cling to
And something warm to come to
When nights are cold and lonely

Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man

Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man

Tammy Wynette,  “Stand by Your Man” Live. A bit later in her career.

She wasn’t very famous before this, but after this, she was a superstar.

Tammy once said:

I spent 15 minutes writing this song and an entire lifetime defending it.

Exactly.

And isn’t that why this song is just so great?

In 2010, this song was selected by the Library of Congress to add to the National Recording Registry, for songs that “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” In other words, that Registry is for the greatest songs ever written in America!

The Alt Left officially endorses this song, by the way. After all, we are the “Conservative Left” – liberals and Leftists who are at least somewhat conservative on social issues. I’m sure feminists hate the idea of this song, but they can go pound sand! I never knew how great this song was before.

Like most Leftists, I hated this song because it was anti-feminist and oppressed women and all that crap. It was a song for Republican social conservatives. Except it’s not and it wasn’t.

But that was before I had a few girlfriends who actually, literally, stood by their man, meaning me, that is. One was Jewish! Would you expect a Jewish woman to do that? Well, who knows?

The feeling of having a woman who will stand by your side through thick and thin and especially to live her life through yours is one of the greatest highs a man can experience in this life. Better than sex. Better than love. Well, it’s love with an extra helping of chocolate syrup on top, let’s put it that way. But what a syrup that is!

The strange thing is that a woman who truly loves you actually wants to be like this. She wants to stand by her man. She wants to live her life through you. She wants to be dead jealous of you.

I had one girlfriend who was so jealous of me that she used to say, “I will cut a bitch! No woman is getting near my man!” Stand by your man!

She told me she had a tattoo on her ankle, and I told her I didn’t like tattoos. She immediately resolved to remove the tattoo! If my man wants my tattoo off, it’s coming off! Stand by your man!

Hey, I like that! She wants to dress you in the morning, pick your clothes and cologne, watch you shave, iron your shirts, and listen intently to how your day went when you come home. Stand by your man!

I think most of you men on here really do want a “stand by your man” woman. Trust me, there’s no better kind.

This must be a deep-rooted need in women, in tandem with femininity, submission, a need to be dominated, ferocious jealousy in keeping other women away from her prized man. It’s got to be genetic.

If you have ever seen a woman dissolve into femininity (often because she is madly in love with you or very turned on by you sexually) you will see that she seems to melt in place right there. You can tell that she’s in her special place; she’s hitting her sweet spot. Deep down inside, this is where most women truly long to be.

Feminism is a lie. It tells women that femininity is evil and oppressive. Like Hell it is. It’s the life blood of womankind. Take it away and they go nuts. Look at modern women. Look at how nuts they are. They’re having their femininity taken away from them. Of course they’re going nuts. How else would they act? They think this is what they want because feminism lied to them and told them that and believed and fell for it. Of course it was a lie.

Once again, the Cultural Left goes to bat against Nature and the weight of 200,000 years. And once again, Mother Nature on the mound mows down another row of the Left’s pathetic pinch-hitters.

Mother Nature 200,000,  Cultural Left 0.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Janet Fiamengo, “Feminists Play Fast and Loose with Data Again”

Feminist messing with rape data and blowing the rape rate far higher than it actually is. The latest fake feminist study.

Ever heard the figure that 20% of women get raped at university? Sure you have. Well, it’s a lie. The definition of rape includes everything from guys grabbing you in sexual ways. Sorry baby, that don’t count. It’s not nice behavior, but it’s not rape.

So how many women really get raped at university? Try 2.3%

Ever seen the figure of how many women get raped over a lifetime? I forget the figure but it’s more fakery. What’s the real figure? Try 16%. That’s one out of six, but it includes date rape, the majority of rape, which, while nasty, isn’t the same thing and the stranger in a ski mask with a knife in his hand jumping out of the bushes and dragging you off to rape you at knife-point. That’s called stranger rape, and it’s a lot more dangerous.

How many rape claims are false? Feminist claim it is 2-8%, but no one knows where that data comes from. The question has only been surveyed twice in good studies, both in university towns in the Midwest in the 1970’s and 1980. The studies found false report rates of 42% and 50%. There you go. 46% of rape cases filed with the police are false. I don’t think we should persecute women who falsely report rape because we want them to admit it if they fake it.

You hear crazy figures like out of every 1,000 rape cases, only 6 result in a conviction and incarceration.

Well, I know a cop. He told me that in his city, they throw out 90% of rape cases women file immediately. In half of them, the woman can’t keep her story straight, so bye bye. The other half are cases involving live in or married couples where the woman is accusing the man of rape amidst a background of heavy drinking, drug use, or both. Those cases are all gone too. The cops just throw up their hands. Who can you believe?

There are also some fairly valid reasons why the rest of rape cases that are actually filed – 100 out of 1,000 – eventually filter down to 6 out of 1,000.

Actually most rapists are not particularly dangerous. The truly dangerous rapists are the sadistic rapists. Feminists will say all rapists are sadistic, but really only 5-10% qualify. Can they kill? Oh Hell yeah, and hurt you too. They don’t necessarily kill you, but they do threaten you and may well hurt you. These guys get off hurting, torturing and even killing other humans. Get off as in sexually.

There are other rapists, two categories having to do with power. One is called power reassurance. This man feels he is inadequate and rapes to make himself feel like a man again. These are often the “gentleman rapist” types. They really exist. They won’t hurt you and they often apologize to the woman after it’s over.

There is the power-anger rapist. This man is angry at women for whatever reason, which could be due to all sorts of things. He hates women or at least is very angry with them. They usually don’t kill but they can, especially if the woman puts up a fight.

In those cases, he can indeed hurt the woman and sometimes even kill her. If he kills her, he feels bad about and leaves soon afterwards. They often do hurt women though because roughness, beatings, etc. may accompany the rape due to his rage at women.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Late Middle Aged Men (age 55-62) Dating Young Women (age 18-28): A Rundown

I am currently 62 years old, and in the past two years I have dated a number of women from 18-28.

One 18 year old totally fell in love with me, and there was a rollercoaster love affair that ended. She had never been kissed before she met me.

I had one date with a 19 year old girl, and at the end of the date (she spent most of the day at my place), she asked me if she could move into my place. WTH. Is it normal for a woman have one fucking date with a guy and then ask to move in? Because it’s never happened to before even once in my life.

However, getting women this age, or even ones in their 20’s, at my age is extremely difficult for any man of my age, not just me. It was a lot easier when I was younger, even in my 40’s. Face it, the vast majority of 18-19 year old girls do not wish to date men my age. They might have a Daddy fetish, but I doubt if many have a Grampa fetish.

Furthermore, for all the older women panicking out there, I hardly know any other man my age around here who has pulled this off. I’m almost the only one. I figure the vast majority of men my age could never pull this off. Most don’t even try. Thing is, I am not an ordinary man though.

A lot of the girls I dated had huge Daddy issues but not all of them. You would be surprised how many girls who do this have good relationships with their fathers, so it’s not all about that.

I do remember that one had a father who left her at age 13, and another had a very hostile father who she hated.

I had another who never knew her father and had been molested by her uncle at an early age of 12. Apparently this turns a certain number of lot of the girls who get molested like this into huge sluts, and a lot of them end up with massive older man fetishes.

Actually turning into a massive slut, stripper, porn star, or prostitute is a pretty typical adult reaction to getting molested as girls. If you read studies about child abuse, this is listed as a common sequalae for girls who get molested. Don’t ask me what’s going on in their heads.

I guess they are reliving what happened to them when they were girls and older men were having sex with them.

It’s fun to have a young woman at my age though. You turn into her mentor and you end up teaching her all about life and everything in it! I do not mean sexual stuff, though you usually end up tutoring them in that area too. I am a former schoolteacher.

It’s such a delight to see a young women learning so many new things every day – new words, concepts, facts about everything. You can also see her gaining a lot of wisdom because you are explaining a lot of things about life, especially social issues, that they don’t understand, and you are explaining to them how it works. You get a lot of, “Ohhhhhh, I see. Ok, now I get it. Ahhhhh, ok.”

They usually think I am very wise or smart, and they even say so. An 18 year old girl told me after we broke up and were still friends:

Ever since I met you, everyone I meet seems stupid.

I’ll take that compliment.

You can watch them climb this vast learning curve right in front of your eyes. When the girl or young woman leaves you (and she will leave), she is ahead of most of her peers because she understands life so much better than everyone else her age who are still figuring it out on their own.

The girls and young women complain that men their age are pigs and lousy or rapey in bed (they call them fuckboys), and they say I’m not like that at all. They say that these young men only care about their own pleasure and care nothing whatsoever about the woman’s pleasure. It’s all about getting off.

Some young men are freaked out and take off if the young woman acts slutty. Others complain that young men either date rape or grey rape them.

I don’t really care what people think about the  fact that I do this, and honestly other men usually treat me like a hero or a God when I pull this off. The respect they give me is incredible.

A few are outraged. One man hung up on me and ended our friendship when he heard I was dating women this age. He’s befriended me again, but it’s not the same. He’s a physician aged 55. Physicians are very status- and social rules-conscious.

There’s two kinds of women – real women and feminists. I love real women. Feminists can go pound sand, and that’s when I am in a kind-hearted mood.

A lot of women of all ages- real women that is, not feminists – actually react pretty well to me doing this and say something along the lines of:

How do you do it, stud?

Even women my age are impressed.

Hey if you still got it, go for it!…Hey, some men have just got it.

Of course there’s a few people who don’t dig it, and I do get called pedophile sometimes, mostly by millennial fucktards, including a large percentage of “men” that age, but I don’t care. What the Hell is wrong with this fagged out and cucked out generation of “men”, anyway? They’re all feminists! I cant’ believe what pussies so many millennial men are. I don’t get it. Were they fed soy milk as babies? Did someone put estrogen in the water?

To any millennial guys reading this, please don’t take offense. I’m not accusing you of acting this way. In fact, if you’re reading here, you probably don’t act this way at all. I’m just pointing out that there’s something wrong with a lot of men in your generation, that’s all.

I still get a lot of dating offers from young women around this age – usually from 5-20 a week – but they almost all want a sugar daddy, and I’m not rich. There’s not a lot of young women who will date me for free. And being a sugar daddy costs from $1,000-2,000/month for her “allowance.” Usually she gives him sex in return, but in some cases, she doesn’t even give him that.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Attack My Masculinity and I’ll Kill You

Nothing makes men more furious that being dominated in a cruel way by women or having their masculinity attacked by them. It actually literally makes us want to kill them. I had several girlfriends in the past who more or less attacked my masculinity, even gleefully.

Others had other  men at the time we were together (although we were in an open relationship) but they deliberately did so in an open and outrageous way as if they were actually trying to provoke me. Yes, they were actually trying to make me murder them. But women do this all the time. Many women delight in provoking men to such an extent that as far as I am concerned, they are trying to get murdered.

Because they do things to men that in Man World would immediately get you hit, if not out and out murdered. Women try to push us men to our limits or even beyond them. It is very stupid (and dangerous) of women to do this, but they keep doing it.

Feminism has made this female behavior dramatically more common. In my mother’s generation, women were  terrified to attack their husband’s masculinity. My mother even told that she didn’t want to do that. I asked her why she didn’t do something one time, and she said, “Oh he will see that as attacking his masculinity. I don’t want to attack his masculinity.”

Her attitude was more that doing such things was gross, unladylike, and undignified. My mother would see that sort of behavior as common with working class women and Black and Hispanic women. That’s what low class women do – provoke their husbands, bitch at them for no reason, and pick fights with them.

My mother’s coterie of White middle to upper class women simply didn’t act that way – you would be acting like those low class and non-White women they looked down on.

I knew a Colombian woman once. The worst insult you could say to a woman in her society  was that she was “a woman of the streets.” To her, there was nothing lower than that. She was from an upper middle class background in the north of Bogota.

I remembered those damned girlfriends who attacked me that way. In some cases, I forgot all the fun we had, and when I reminisced, all I would think of was those times when they deliberately tried to cut my balls off with words, sometimes in public, sometimes in front of other men and women. Public humiliation. I remembered those incidents for decades.

And for decades, I literally wanted to kill every one of those women who attacked my masculinity like that. I’ve gotten over it now and I feel better with this off my shoulders. But nevertheless, my first and immediate instinct to a woman wantonly and even gleefully attacking my masculinity was, “You’re going to die for that, bitch. No forgiveness. Ever.”

Of course I never killed any of those women. I never even tried to, seriously considered it, or hatched any plan or anything. It was just a violent fantasy that never got implemented. So what! Who cares!

Not only that, but I am almost ashamed to say I never even hit or did anything violent to any of those women. Even worse than that, I rarely even fought back against these attacks. I just sat there and took it like a big, fat pussy.

Why? Because my Mom taught us that you never fight a woman.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Some Examples of Permanently Flawed Utopian Rules and Laws Under Feminism: Domestic Violence, Assault and Battery, and Statutory Rape

As I have mentioned before a number of times, Female Rule (feminist rule) is always doomed to fail. It’s not so much that it’s evil (though it is a bit evil, especially towards us men) but more that it simply causes chaos. Any attempt to enforce and legislate rules and laws that go against human nature is doomed to cause chaos and eventually fail.

Because Mother Nature bats last, that’s why. She also always gets the last laugh, don’t forget.

Female Rule is failing horribly right now in Sweden, probably the best example of Female Rule on Earth.

The UK is increasingly under Female Rule, and the results seem to be the usual chaos.

The US is increasingly coming under Female Rule, and the result is the usual criminalization of much normal male behavior; increased arrests and jailings of men for simply being men; utopian and often irrational or even grossly unjust, preposterous, and unworkable laws; extreme injustice in divorce courts, etc.

Domestic violence laws are now profoundly unjust. Defend yourself against a physical attack by a woman, and you are going to jail. This law is extremely biased on favor or women and very oppressive to men.

Female Rule has now been extended to conflicts between men, something which women know nothing about. These new laws lack common sense. The ancient rules of Man World – the rules of the “fair fight” – are now gone, and when two men get into a physical fight for any reason, both of them are always going to jail.

This is profoundly unjust but a woman will tell that this is justice! “We can’t figure out who started it,” the woman will say. “So we have to put them both in jail.” Somehow this is just!  Actually it is unbelievable unjust for the man who was defending himself.

Many to most men only act decent primarily or perhaps only because in Man World, if you act aggressive in a number of ways, someone is going to hit you. Punch you in the face. Man World runs on the threat of a punch in the face.

Most men are aware of this, are terrified of other men, and do everything they can to not get penalized. Now women have taken this form of law away from us, when it was one of the main things that held male society together and made it halfway calm and peaceful. Now that the punch in the face penalty will send even the umpire to jail, male society is much more dangerous and chaotic.

Only women would come up with something so insane as to say that a woman who has been drinking alcohol or taking drugs cannot consent to sex. How on Earth can she not consent? Of course she can consent! If this Female Rule law were actually enforced, most men would be jailed within the year.

Only women would come up with the idiotic notion that a teenage girl cannot consent to sex. Except that in most states she can definitely consent to having legal sex with an underage teenage boy. Women will say that somehow this precious flower of Ultimate Purity can consent to have sex with a boy her age (How? I thought she can’t consent?) but somehow, automagically, when he turns 18 or above, she’s not able to consent anymore!

Women will say this is completely logical and just. Of course it’s not. It’s not even sensible. It’s downright preposterous, illogical, and idiotic.

Now, there are reasons that especially older men (say past early 20’s) should be kept away from these girls for both their own good and the good of the girl. I definitely prefer for it to be illegal for me to touch those young girls. I fear for myself if we get rid of the law. And those girls need to be protected from me and especially other men less scrupulous than I. It’s good for us and it’s good for them. It protects us from ourselves and it protects them from us.

But of course those girls can consent! They can consent to have sex with any man of any age, really. I would just like to keep statutory rape illegal to hold up basic societal rules and in order to avoid what looks like excessively exploitative relationships. But not because they can’t consent! What are they? Retarded? Schizophrenic? Deaf, blind and dumb?

I challenge these women to produce a philosophical argument proving that these girls can somehow be unable consent some of the time and yet able to consent at other times.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Fallacy of Feminism: Trying to Create Utopian Universal Justice in an Inherently Unjust World

Female Rule (feminist rule) tries to create universal justice in an inherently unjust world.

Obviously that’s a fool’s errand. Female Rule always tries to rewrite and even criminalize human nature (mostly male nature) because women dislike human nature and especially male nature. They think our natural male behavior sucks, and they want to make it against the law.

Whenever women take power in the world, the first few things they usually do is outlaw pornography, gambling, and alcohol. You know, the three things that keep most of us guys from blowing our brains out.

Women tried to outlaw porn in the West and failed badly. Gambling is becoming legal in the West again. And of course, it was idiot women who were behind the utopian Prohibition which failed so miserably.

The attempt to create Utopia and Universal Justice by ignoring or criminalizing basic human and especially male nature is why Female Rule always seems to fail.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Feminism Is Shoveling Sand against 100,000 Years of Tide

The fact that Players are typically treated as heroes in most societies by both genders and across age groups is another reason why feminism goes against human nature.

That is why this new feminist reaction that somehow Players are evil, scumbags , pedophiles (!), creeps (!), losers (!), criminals (!), and deserving of contempt and increasingly arrest and imprisonment for the crime of being a male mammal is bizarre. Feminists are part of the Cultural Left. As usual, the feminists, as part of the SJW Left, are trying to destroy human nature.

They are acting like 100,000 years of human history of continuous biological behavioral trends either never happened or are irrelevant. You hear feminists say over and over, “But we are modern now. We have decided you can’t be that way anymore,” about this or that. Feminists, like all SJW’s, are trying like the Communists to create a New Man, in the Communists’ case free of capitalism and selfishness and in the SJW’s case liberated from 100,000 years of evolution.

We are supposed to shrug off a hundred millennia of biological habit as if it never occurred. We are supposed to create a New SJW Man torn free from the roots of his past.

Feminists are also trying to create some New SJW Woman or at least they are lying about the basic nature of women, which is extremely consistent across thousands of cultures and over millennia of written record.

According to feminists, and the Cultural Left in general:

  • Everything your grandfather taught you is wrong.
  • Every human society that ever existed was wrong.

The New Feminist Woman is not working out. Women are simply being women just like they always have in spite of the feminists. Feminists are reacting to the intractable nature of female behavior by both denying it is happening now and denying that it ever existed in the first place.

In other words, feminists are lying like all SJW’s  and IP types. Since all SJW’s and IP types are about denying everything negative about whatever identity they are about, all SJW and IP movements are characterized by constant lying of nearly tidal wave proportions.

The new hatred and even criminalization of Players goes against 100,000 years of human evolution and ultimately shows that Female Rule fails, probably because Female Rule ends up being utopian and based on universal justice when unfortunately, there is no such thing.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20