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

Game/PUA: “All Bitches Are Crazy,” Part 2

Roy: Perhaps most all women are crazy, my own mother is far better than most women but still crazier than most men.

All women are nuts, pretty much. My Mom is pretty stable though. But she is still a lot more emotional than I am.

I have a female relative with a severe mood disorder that she has had most of her life. Major Depression. At first I thought she was faking it and was just lazy in order to get out of working and being independent, but recently I saw her crash far downwards for a couple of years.

Trigger? Her cat got out of her house and ran away and disappeared. No big deal, right? Nope, it put her out of commission for two years, or it set off an episode that lasted two years. In that episode I finally saw that there is something terribly wrong with my relative. She really is disabled when she is like that. There’s no way she could work. She can barely even talk, for Chrissake.

It’s pretty hard to describe severe Major Depression but once you have seen it, it seems so weird and bizarre that it almost seems in the category of schizophrenia and acute mania. They’re crazy. Yep, you can be so depressed that you are frankly completely nuts.

When I saw her like that, I realized that she was completely pitiful, and I no longer thought she was faking her illness. Thing is when she is not having an episode, she seems pretty normal, and you get mad at her and think she is faking her illness. Supposedly even in these times she is ill, but you really can’t see it.

She is bizarrely moody though, even for a flaky female. You are walking on eggshells the whole time you around her. She gets upset by any little thing and blows up into huge tantrums. You have to watch your words extremely carefully and try not to insult her or bring up any of her trigger issues.

I finally figured out that you can’t criticize feminism because she is a full-blown feminazi. My Mom is also a hardcore feminist, but I could not figure it out until she was ~75 years old. Or maybe she got worse.

You also cannot criticize or say anything remotely negative about women in any way, shape, or form with my Mom or this relative. Women are perfect and men are all seriously flawed.

All feminists believe exactly that, and it took me until a few years ago to finally figure that out. In fact that is one of the core hard beliefs of feminism: Women are perfect; men are anywhere from seriously flawed to pure evil. The only women they hate are the “traitors” who side with the men against the feminists on some of their issues.

Of course this proves that feminism is just another form of Identity Politics idiocy.

I think women are just sensitive. Sensitivity means emotionality and to us men that seems crazy or flaky because a highly emo man is seen as crazy/flaky.

I have seen comments about men describing them as having “almost female levels of flake.” These guys were PUA’s who probably had some Cluster B stuff going on at some level like most players.

There is a site on the Manosphere which is too misogynistic for my tastes, but nevertheless had some of the finest insights on women that I have ever seen. One guy who writes for the site said:

LOL All bitches are crazy. Don’t even try to figure them out!

That’s actually excellent advice. I don’t agree with referring to all women as bitches, but from the male point of view, most women definitely seem crazy to us. This craziness is seen in its full extent if you get involved with them sexually or as a close friend. As a close friend you will see how unstable she is, and as a lover she will direct a lot of her pent-up instability towards you.

On the other hand if you only know a woman informally as a landlord, relative, store owner, worker, or coworker, you may never see much instability. Women have an amazing ability to compartmentalize their instability.

I never found that the women I knew as casual acquaintances were unstable. I have never found my female coworkers to be unstable in any job. Hell, the men were more unstable at some jobs. Gay men in particular can be dramatically unstable and flaky at work, sometimes far worse than women.

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

Alt Left: All Identity Politics Groups are “IP Nazis”

All Identity Politics groups divide the world into followers of the IP (the good people) and opponents of the IP (the haters or traitors). They are extremely quick to throw people into the hater/traitor group because like all forms of IP, they are paranoid and see enemies everywhere, even though 80% of the people they say are enemies are innocent.

You see this even in Jews, and in fact, most Jews practice what boils down to Jewish Identity Politics. Some might say that Jews were the original IP group. I doubt that because I believe all IP is just tribalism. All IP also resembles any nationalism or ultranationalism, and that is why when IP groups get extreme, people start calling them Nazis.

All IP is really just tribalism, and that’s why all IP resembles nationalism or ultranationalism because all nationalism is just tribalism, and all ultranationalism is just fascism. To the extent that it is human nature to be tribal, we are all nationalistic in one way or another, and many to most of us probably have fascist tendencies.

Because most indigenous human tribes were extremely racist and were frankly fascists. The tribe’s rules are there are the good people (us and may be a few allies) and everyone else is an enemy. All the other tribes and the non-tribalists in your own group, who are called the traitors.

Starting to see  how feminism, etc. looks exactly like nationalism and tribalism? Starting  to see how all forms of IP look like ultranationalism and tribalism? Since tribalism and ultranationalism are two of the plagues on the human race, why on Earth should any decent human or especially anyone on the Earth support IP at all? They shouldn’t.

If you oppose  tribalism and ultranationalism (fascism) as any good person on the Left should, then you must also hate all forms of IP.

This is where the antifas who hate fascism and ultranationalism don’t make sense. Sure they hate ultranationalism and a few forms of IP such as the IP of the “enemies.” So they hate White IP, Men’s Rights IP, and even Straight IP if it exists. Those are all evil and must be wiped off the face of the Earth.  They’re all “fascism.”

Nevertheless, all antifa support feminazis, gay Nazis, tranny fascists, Black fascists, etc. They hate Jewish IP but Palestinian or Arab IP  (Arab nationalism) is just fine, when really those are just two types of fascism, Jewish fascism and Arab fascism.  So some fascists are ok (the marginalized or oppressed fascists) and other fascists are evil and must be exterminated (the ruling or oppressor fascists).

Obviously this is incoherent. A fascist is a fascist. A true antifa would hate all forms of ultranationalism and also all the fake nationalisms or IP’s (Identity Nazis):

Feminazis.

Gay Nazis. Many of the anti-gays are remarking that the Gay Politics types are increasingly acting like fascists, and they are correct.

Jewish Nazis (Zionists).

Black Nazis (Black separatists, Nation of Islam).

White IP (White nationalists are obviously real Nazis).

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

Alt Left: My Actual Position on Sexual Harassment and #metoo

SHI: 2- I think I’m more pro-feminism in Identity Politics mold. Robert’s more of a pro-masculinist I believe, which is fine. My Dad is like that and many others. I think it’s a generation thing.

For example, I support #MeToo although it’s slightly hypocritical of me, as I have violated many women while accosting them for sex. Why do I do it? I think a lot of powerful men exploit women, which I find very disturbing. The world is already masculinist (maybe California isn’t). I like to cede some more political and social space to women.

Essentially, if you’re a broke man and making a move on a hot woman, I would look the other way. I’ll even buy you a beer later because I admire your guts.

But if you’re a rich businessman exploiting a prostitute just because you paid for her services, I’ll stand with the prostitute and protect her. And I have done that before. I was in a resort in Goa, and in the next room, a businessman was abusing a female escort. She was begging him to stop and go gentle on her, but he seemed a perverted BDSM freak.

I alerted the hotel staff and knocked on his door telling him to stop what he was doing. He yelled back at me to “mind my own business”. Soon the hotel staff came and opened the door. The girl was half-naked and chained to a window sill. He apparently wanted to use some blunt instruments on her.

Apparently the businessman had paid a lot of money for that suite, and he was shameless enough to scream at the hotel manager that he would “complain” and whatever he was doing to the poor girl was “consensual”. After they unchained her, she immediately ran towards me, and I hugged her.

Of course he wasn’t arrested or anything. That hotel was well-known for attracting perverted guests like him. At least that girl left. She even refused to take money, but I convinced her that she needs to take the money, as she deserved it for harassment.

I also asked her to file a police complaint. The businessman just laughed: he was on good terms with the corrupt cops and knew a prostitute never stood a chance with her.

I saw how vulnerable the poor girl really was. She immediately bolted and left. Unfortunately, she has to be back on the streets someday and will meet more such sadist clients.

This is an extreme example but good way to highlight that #MeToo is justified in many such instances where powerful men exploit girls.

I actually support the girl in this case, so maybe Shi and I are not different at all. I even support the notion of sexual harassment. I just think the new definition of it is insane. The official US government definition is reasonable: Sexual harassment that is so severe, persistent, and repeated that the person is unable to function at work or school.

I absolutely support a notion of sexual harassment along those lines! Not to mention I support the notion of quid pro quo sexual harassment.

It’s just that the #metoo psychos have taken this to mean “any unwanted sexual advance is sexual harassment.” I’m sorry but that’s completely insane! No it isn’t! See those words “severe”, “persistent”, and “repeated”? Sexual harassment is when she communicates to the guy to knock it off and he keeps on keeping on. It’s fine to go after chumps like this for sexual harassment in my book.

But other than that, I agree with the French actress Katharine Deneuve: “Men have a right to hit on women.” Damn right we do. My own mother objected to that comment, so you can see how deep this feminist insanity goes.

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

Alt Left: Two Types of Masculism

This blog definitely supports masculism, which is simply support for the normal sexual and non-sexual behaviors of regular, everyday heterosexual men. We don’t think masculinity is toxic. This is a feminist notion that we reject. We  don’t think that male heterosexual sexuality is automatically toxic, dangerous, and needs to be attacked: this is a feminist position.

A lot of you probably don’t know what masculism is. While it holds the potential, like any IP, to be toxic and senseless, there is a good case to be made that normal masculine behavior and normal male heterosexual sexuality are things that should be safeguarded and not attacked as the enemy, which is what the feminists are doing. In that sense, masculism is a valid position.

From Wikipedia:

Christensen differentiates between “progressive masculism” and an “extremist version”. The former welcomes many of the societal changes promoted by feminists, while regretting that some measures reducing sexism against women have increased it against men.

The extremist version promotes male supremacy to some degree and is generally based on a belief in women’s inferiority. Nicholas Davidson, in his book The Failure of Feminism, describes an extremist version of masculism which he termed “virism”: “What ails society is ‘effeminacy’. The improvement of society requires that the influence of female values be decreased and the influence of male values increased…

The more progressive version sounds better to me. I don’t believe in male chauvinism, and I don’t believe that women are inferior. There is definitely a problem of our society in general being taken over by female thinking (feminism), with the result being a mass pussification of American “men,” most of whom have become the equivalent of gender traitors.

I also don’t believe that society should be run on the basis of female thinking. It’s too chauvinist and irrational to serve as philosophical basis for society and its laws, mores, and rules. Female Rule doesn’t work, sorry. I’m not sure how many times we have to prove this until people start believing it.

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

Face It: A Lot of Young People of Both Genders and a Lot of Races Act Pretty Bad

Polar Bear: Black female morality: A local Italian place has cheap food that didn’t sell during the day, so I stopped by a little bit ago. Me and another White man get their first but let all the ladies go first. A fairly diverse bunch of women take their food before us – fine.

A black lady takes as many plates as she can carry, so me and the other gentlemen get none. Me and the other guy looked at each other and both thought of a word.

That word you were both thinking of is exactly what this lousy women is, sorry. If Blacks don’t want to be called words like that, just act decent and civilized, and most of us won’t abuse you with slurs. If you act terrible you deserve every slur hurled your way.

Blacks do this sort of thing a lot, far more than any other race I can think of. The one adjective I think of when I think of a certain type of Black person is “inconsiderate.” Very inconsiderate and self-centered. You’re either not there or you don’t matter. All that matters is them getting whatever the need, come Hell or high water. Other people are either nonexistent or in the way.

In fact, I would say that most of a certain type of Black women are like this. I think there is something wrong with a certain type of Black person. You all know exactly who I am talking about. I’m not surely what exactly is wrong with them and why they act this way, but one of the purposes of this site is to explore questions like that.

And yes, it is typically a Black woman who is trying to more or less scam or semi-scam, thieve or semi-thieve, this way. I don’t know about the extent to which Black men engage in this behavior, as I really don’t deal with them.

On the other hand, it’s not just Black women. This thing: low level more or less thievery or at least very inconsiderate behavior, is very common among women of all races. It is mostly young women who pull this shit. In my opinion, 1/3 of young women are basically thieves. And the people they steal from are men.

Many young women age 18-30 are virtually psychopathic. There’s something terribly wrong with them. I don’t understand why so many young women act this way.

After age 30, women do a lot less thieving. And whoring for that matter. Thieving (from men) and whoring are a young women’s game, and they excel at both of these things. The thieving is often tied in with sex in a way or at least that is used as an enticement. After age 30, women seem to have a lot more morals. Things they would have done without a thought when they were young now elicit frowns of disapproval and statements like, “That’s wrong.”

I really don’t get why but young men are pretty horrific too. Sure, Black men have an extremely high crime rate, but the Black men doing that are mostly 13-33.  After age 33, Black testosterone levels return to White levels or even lower, and an awful lot of Black men who used to act really bad calm down.

Really though, Hispanic and even White men age 18-30 don’t act real great. The vast majority of male crime in both Hispanics and Whites is committed by this cohort. I suppose you could say that a lot of young men period are almost psychopaths.

Youth is the time for a Hell of a lot of fun, potentially anyway, but young people of both sexes seem deficient in morality, and quite a few of them act pretty damn bad. Both males and females calm down after age 30-33 and even seem to grow a sense of morality where little existed before.

It’s also our society, as I talked to a man from Yemen, and he said that no woman would ever steal one dime from a man in his country. It’s simply unheard of.

These feminists wonder why some men pine for patriarchy, vicious as it is. If you offered me a society to live in where female thieves and thieving whores were basically nonexistent, I would probably want to impose a society like that.

For us men the benefits of such a system are obvious. It’s not just we get to be cruel and lord it over the ladies. I don’t care for that part of it. But a serious patriarchy cuts way down on the thieving and whoring tendencies of women, especially young women, so it spares us men from being victims of whole armies of predatory and amoral females who specialize in victimizing us.

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

Game/PUA: The Natural Tendency of Women Is to Act Like Children or Adolescents

“The woman is always the most responsible teenager in the house.”

– Arthur Schopenhauer

First, a couple of definitions. Female Rule is effectively Feminism in Power, or Feminist Rule. You can have women in the high positions of society, even the highest, and as long as they do not  impose feminism, you don’t have Female Rule. Instead you just have women in high positions ruling on the basis of logic and reason. Women can think and rule on this basis if they are forced to (by men).

Women just don’t like objective thinking because they think it is cold and cruel. But they are capable of thinking that way as long as men say that this is the only thinking we will put up with from women.

My mother graduated second in her class at Hastings Law School in Berkeley. She is certainly capable of seeing the world through the keen, cold eye of pure objective reason. I think she just prefers not to think that way because she thinks it leads to unfairness, particularly for women.

Women are utopians. They are out to cure all the unfairness in the world. My Mom, as smart as she is (150 IQ), still believes that we can have a world where rape and woman beating will be completely eliminated. That’s not a position based on reason. That position is based purely on feels.

My Mom’s emotions tell her that this is the only just society, so she thinks it is possible. Women resent men’s notion that dream worlds and utopias are not possible. They think it is vicious, cold, and pessimistic.

Women are starry-eyed dreamers, and the utopias that women imagine are indeed often very nice places. It’s just that they’re not possible to achieve. Anyone with a logical mind can see that. That’s pretty depressing, but that’s just how life is. Life sucks. Life’s a bitch and then you die.

RL: What do you mean that women are not punished for being wusses? Explain.

Jason: Girls are not encouraged to outgrow childishness. Maybe they’re also put on a pedestal by their parents.

That’s feminism. Feminism promotes the idea that women should be terminal adolescents til the day they die. Feminism treats women like little children. The problem with that is that a lot of women like to act like children or adolescents. It’s sort of their natural tendency.

One of the tasks of society is to reign in this natural tendency of women. Patriarchy, while it was often cruel, told women that their childishness and adolescent behavior would not be tolerated while it threatened them if they disobeyed. Further, there was extreme pressure on women to act like grownups or else.

When you have societal strictures like this in place, women’s natural tendency towards childishness and adolescent behavior will be restrained as it was in my mother’s generation. Women in her generation were expected to be grownups, so they did just that.

I know that Alpha does not act like a child or an adolescent. She acts like a grownup. She has no patience will this feminist craziness. I figure Alpha acts this way because she got it drummed  into her head at an early age as a girl that women were expected to be grownups and not act like children their whole lives. Probably most of the women in her extended family got the same message. Black men don’t seem like they will put up with much foolishness from their women.

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

Alt Left: Take Your Pick: Patriarchy or Female Rule (Feminism in Power)

You have two choices. Either Feminism in power (Female Rule) or patriarchy. Keep in mind that patriarchy could be extremely benign and kind to women. We could even have women in power running this benign patriarchy.

I don’t object to women in power in society. You can have as many women in power in society as you wish – it’s fine with me. I just don’t want them imposing feminism is all.

You really can’t let women run loose and run wild. Feral women destroy logic and reason and the societies that are based on such. In its place is law and rule by emotion and unreason. Society becomes ruled by feelings and emotions instead of steady, cold, objective logic and reason.

I figure most societies probably tried Female Rule  that at some point and realized that it causes nothing but chaos. That’s why patriarchy is and was the norm all over the world.

My Mom says, “Why have men ruled almost all societies? Men are bigger, men are stronger, so they just lorded it over women.” That’s an interesting theory, but we men are also lazy as Hell. A lot of us would probably like to let the ladies take over so we can kick back, have a beer, watch the football game, and become part of the couch.

Letting women run the show was probably tried in the past in most societies, and the results were the same every time. Patriarchy for all its faults is at least a functional system. Female Rule doesn’t even work. You get something that almost looks like societal failure or societal collapse.

All around the world almost all societies were ruled by the laws, rules, mores, values, and thinking styles of men. Logic and reason were valued over unreason and emotionalism. There’s got to be a reason for that instead of just “Evil men were mean to women!” I’m not really buying that.

Modern society makes it clear that Female Rule always fails, and only rule by male values and rules, logic and reason allows for a functional society. We think we are so much smarter than our ancestors, but that’s a conceit. They were about as smart as we were, especially about basic things like that.

At some point in most of our ancestors’ history, Female Rule may have been tried. The guaranteed result every time is going to be failure and chaos. So Female Rule was revoked and patriarchy was imposed.

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

Alt Left: Janice Fiamengo, “The Monstrous Male Gaze”

This male gaze nonsense is truly idiotic. I am a Leftist, but once again, why should the men of the Left or anyone on the Left have to go along with this rank nonsense? It doesn’t even make sense, and that’s aside from the blatant pathological man hatred from which it springs.

I never knew much about where this silliness came from. The originator of this theory is a woman named Mulvey, a film theorist, who came up with this in the mid-70’s. I had had no idea where this batty idea came from.

Janice has some photos of her here, and all I could tell is that she was quite homely. Of course there’s nothing wrong with that, but have you ever noticed how many feminists are homely, fat, or both? Think that’s a coincidence? Think again.

I invite you to come up with your own explanations – mine are obvious: they’re homely and/or fat, so men are rejecting and not very nice to them, so they start hating men and move into feminism as a logical destination from the man-hating highway.

Mulvey is also – surprise! A lesbian! How did you guess? The percentage of major feminist figures who are out and out man-hating dykes is shocking. Lesbians are only 1% of women, but lesbians or one type or another are ~1/3-1/2 of major feminist figures.

That shows you right there that feminism is a completely abnormal movement and it doesn’t represent most women at all and therefore it has no right to bear the banner of the women’s rights movement. Any proper women’s rights movements would mirror the female population. In other words, in a sane women’s rights movement, 1% of activists would be lesbians. Right?

Anyway this Mulroney came up with this theory not because it is such a profound theoretical truth. Instead as with most things, its origins are quite mundane if not insipid. Mulvey was sick and tired of being triggered every time she saw straight couples making out in the films she watched ans studied.

And this lies at the heart of another painful truth about feminism: feminism has always been about hatred for heterosexual relations, especially heterosexual male sexuality. Straight women get off the hook as feminists just say they are brainwashed, but in general, feminists think that heterosexuality is crap at best and nearly demonic at worst. So feminism has in a sense been a jihad against heterosexual sex.

Some prominent feminists have actually come right out and admitted that. See Andrea Dworkin. And she’s not the only one.

We see this hatred of heterosexual sex again in the insane #metoo movement which has now potentially outlawed all straight flirting. Its corollary in the anti-sexual assault movement has now potentially outlawed all touching between straights and all straight dating. The corresponding rape hysteria movement, ongoing for decades in feminism dating back to Brownmiller and her ilk, potentially makes all heterosexual sex rape.

I doubt if this is accidental. It’s part of feminism’s war on heterosexual sex. If you notice that ~40% of major feminist theorists have been man-hating lesbians with an extreme hatred of heterosexual sex, the #metoo nonsense starts to make sense – they are trying to drive men and women apart and make it more difficult for heterosexual sex to occur. Obviously if you hate heterosexual sex, this is a great thing.

I also notice an awful lot of lesbians are fat and/or homely. I have no idea why this is either, as many gay men are quite handsome if not extremely handsome. So whatever it is, it’s not related to homosexuality per se.

In fact there’s probably not a lot of things that male and female homosexuality have in common. They’re like ducks and geese, similar but also completely different. The only thing they have in common is a lack of interest in the opposite sex, a strong interest in their own sex, and I would add, a tendency to imitate heterosexual sexual relations (which they supposedly despise) in their relationships.

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

Alt Left: The Fiamengo File, “The TERF War”

I watched this one recently too. I recall a bit of what it is about. Mostly that radical feminists are perfectly correct in their critique of transsexualism, but they’re right for all the wrong reasons. As usual.

Every one of her videos I have ever watched is a masterpiece.

Janice gives us an excellent reason to reject modern feminism – it’s completely irrational and doesn’t even make one bit of sense! Why should we on the Left support a nonsensical project that consists of nothing but hate and lies?

I mean I support women’s rights (and so does Janice) but modern feminism goes way beyond that. Anyway you can support women’s rights without being a feminist idiot. Just call yourself a humanist or an equalist. There. Wa-la! Now you can support women’s rights while rejecting hateful, insane feminism.

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

Alt Left: Fiamengo Files, “The Big Lie of Feminism”

I watched this recently but I cannot recall what exactly it was about. Sorry folks. But I assure you it was great. Every one of you might want to check out Janice’s videos. Also, Janice is a former feminist, and a former radical feminist at that! While I sometimes feel she goes a bit overboard, in general, her critique of feminism is masterful.

Enjoy.

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